LIVE | Karen Read Defense's New Filing. 4 Jurors speak, what happens next. TikTok Psychic won't stop
Unlock all features
FREE: Get instant access to 10 AI summaries, chats, or transcripts per day.
Unlock all features
FREE: Get instant access to 10 AI summaries, chats, or transcripts per day.
Unlock all features
FREE: Get instant access to 10 AI summaries, chats, or transcripts per day.
Unlock all features
FREE: Get instant access to 10 AI summaries, chats, or transcripts per day.
Unlock all features
FREE: Get instant access to 10 AI summaries, chats, or transcripts per day.
Related videos
Taylor Frankie Paul Not Charged. What Happens now? Plus TikTok Psychic keeps objecting.
Emily D. Baker
51.8k views
LIVE TRIAL | UT v. Kouri Richins - Trial Day 7 - What is gonna happen today?!?
Emily D. Baker
178.6k views
LIVE COURT | Karen Read Civil Discovery Hearings & Wild New Proctor Problems
Emily D. Baker
107.6k views
LIVE COURT | Nick Reiner Arraignment Hearing. Alan Jackson Withdraws as Counsel, what happens now?
Emily D. Baker
102.8k views
Karen Read Grand Juror Charged with leaking information?
Emily D. Baker
193.6k views
Karen Read Post Trial. The Jury Foreperson Speaks & Juror Interviews
Emily D. Baker
189.3k views
Ma v. Karen Read Retrial - Day 34 Verdict Watch - Defense Motion Denied. Jury Deliberations.
Emily D. Baker
245.2k views
LIVE COURT | Legal Coverage Karen Read Motions Hearing.
Emily D. Baker
197.7k views
LIVE COURT | Karen Read Pre-Trial Hearing, Motions and New Rulings.
Emily D. Baker
211.1k views
Live | Trooper Proctor FIRED! Will Karen Read's Docuseries hurt her case??
Emily D. Baker
186.4k views
Top Comments (10)
I’m angry for Karen Read. The court should have been more forthcoming. As a layperson who has served on a jury, I wouldn’t know to ask or think to—especially with how off-handed Bev was. Also, her instructions were over an hour long. I would not have been able to follow that personally. The court seemed to bend over backwards for the protection of the case—without protecting Karen Read’s constitutional rights or her right to “innocent until proven guilty”
Juries don't know how things work so the court should be more responsible with holding their hands and be proactive in asking these questions to ensure everyone is on the same page.
And I wonder if the judge’s verbal instruction that they should consider Karen guilty if her actions LEAD to John’s death, so the jury MIGHT consider her guilty because she dropped him off. Which is ridiculous.
I’m not a lawyer but as a “ jury person “ I thought Judge Bev said don’t fill out the jury slip until they finish all. This is a Judge issue not a jury issue. In my opinion.
I honestly think if the CW doesn’t dismiss the charges, and if the judge doesn’t hold a hearing, the jurors will go to the media - likely as a cohesive unit. I know I would.
Everyone is presuming these ordinary citizens understood the nuances of trial procedure and law. They THOUGHT they would be sent back because they EXPECTED the judge to make the inquiry as to where they were. To penalize the defendant because the ordinary citizen didn’t understand the unwritten rules (unwritten for them) is a travesty.
So lemme get this right...the commonwealth is saying that the defense waived their right by not asking for the jury to be asked about the split/polling the jury BUT ALSO states that doing that exact thing is coercion and isn't allowed...
I think Bev created an environment where the jurors didn’t feel comfortable asking. He strict time cut offs and the semi-condescending way she spoke to the jurors made it feel like, to me, that no one should speak unless spoken to. The attorneys have dealt with it and even they were hesitant at times.
But bev TOLD them not to give anyone OR even her her ANY information about count until they were unanimous. She did not say unanimous on all or some but they were following those instructions.
The fact that Yanetti asked for a hung jury to be announced, doesn't mean that defense didn't want/expect a judge to poll on charges. Bev just said "mistrial" and sent off the jury. ???
Unlock the Data Inside
Turn Videos into Knowledge
- Get FREE 10/day: transcripts, summaries, chats
- Chat with videos, export text & PDF
- $1 free API credit for RAG, chatbots & research
Free forever plan • All features unlocked
Top Comments (10)
I’m angry for Karen Read. The court should have been more forthcoming. As a layperson who has served on a jury, I wouldn’t know to ask or think to—especially with how off-handed Bev was. Also, her instructions were over an hour long. I would not have been able to follow that personally. The court seemed to bend over backwards for the protection of the case—without protecting Karen Read’s constitutional rights or her right to “innocent until proven guilty”
Juries don't know how things work so the court should be more responsible with holding their hands and be proactive in asking these questions to ensure everyone is on the same page.
And I wonder if the judge’s verbal instruction that they should consider Karen guilty if her actions LEAD to John’s death, so the jury MIGHT consider her guilty because she dropped him off. Which is ridiculous.
I’m not a lawyer but as a “ jury person “ I thought Judge Bev said don’t fill out the jury slip until they finish all. This is a Judge issue not a jury issue. In my opinion.
I honestly think if the CW doesn’t dismiss the charges, and if the judge doesn’t hold a hearing, the jurors will go to the media - likely as a cohesive unit. I know I would.
Everyone is presuming these ordinary citizens understood the nuances of trial procedure and law. They THOUGHT they would be sent back because they EXPECTED the judge to make the inquiry as to where they were. To penalize the defendant because the ordinary citizen didn’t understand the unwritten rules (unwritten for them) is a travesty.
So lemme get this right...the commonwealth is saying that the defense waived their right by not asking for the jury to be asked about the split/polling the jury BUT ALSO states that doing that exact thing is coercion and isn't allowed...
I think Bev created an environment where the jurors didn’t feel comfortable asking. He strict time cut offs and the semi-condescending way she spoke to the jurors made it feel like, to me, that no one should speak unless spoken to. The attorneys have dealt with it and even they were hesitant at times.
But bev TOLD them not to give anyone OR even her her ANY information about count until they were unanimous. She did not say unanimous on all or some but they were following those instructions.
The fact that Yanetti asked for a hung jury to be announced, doesn't mean that defense didn't want/expect a judge to poll on charges. Bev just said "mistrial" and sent off the jury. ???