KRISTIN KAY

Legal Consultant and commentator with 20+ years experience specializing in Criminal, Family, Civil and Civil Rights Law.

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@deblanc_jenna @GlammaSooz @suspiciousauce @KyleSharkey8 @BrotherCounsel @AttorneyMyers @BoozeyBeauty @LawyerYouKnow @defense_diaries @GrantSmithEllis @TheEmilySee @SleuthieGoosie Here ya go!

https://t.co/wScGeHH8gu

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@Olson1503 Good ol boys system…

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

“I can see why people would think that”

🤦🏼‍♀️ NO SIR we KNEW it then and we KNOW IT now!

This hit different now that the world knows you are a racist LIAR!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

But that argument goes both ways and if someone can’t see that, then I don’t know what to tell them! Not a single thing that they say can be trusted in joking about planting evidence means that they are fully capable of doing. It means that the thought actually crossed their mind!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

THIS!!!! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

[Adam Deitch for District Attorney @adamdeitch]

In light of today’s horrifying text message revelations, I am calling for Norfolk County District Attorney Michael Morrisey to resign effective immediately. Racism, bigotry, misogyny, and antisemitism have absolutely no place in the Massachusetts State Police and the Norfolk County District Attorney’s Office. They are appalling and shocking and, under my leadership, will never be tolerated.

Read the full statement at https://t.co/NwjLFk4tlx

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

I can’t edit it let me correct something on this I say with prejudice unless they find the missing SD card, which I doubt will happen that is why I said with prejudice the verbiage with prejudice it is not in the order however unless they find that missing SD card they would not be able to bring the charges against Aaron again that is my interpretation. I have reached out to Aaron’s attorney and she agrees with that assessment so I just wanna make sure I correct that.

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

AARON SPENCERS CASE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE!!!! GOD IS GOOD!

The court granted Aaron Spencer’s motion to dismiss, finding that law enforcement’s handling of critical dash camera evidence violated his due process rights under both the United States and Arkansas Constitutions. The court concluded that the State lost or destroyed potentially exculpatory evidence, acted in bad faith, and deprived Spencer of a fair trial.

According to the order, the missing evidence involved a dash camera and SD memory card recovered from Michael Fosler’s truck after the October 8, 2024 incident. The court found numerous failures by law enforcement in collecting, preserving, documenting, and tracking that evidence. Among other things, the court found that:

• The dash camera was removed from the vehicle without being properly photographed, documented, or logged into evidence.
• The SD card was removed from the camera before forensic examination.
• The camera and memory card were not properly preserved according to Lonoke County Sheriff’s Office policies.
• The camera was reportedly stored in a detective’s personal office rather than being entered into the evidence system.
• The evidence was not formally logged for over a year.
• The Arkansas Attorney General’s Office eventually received the camera but did not receive the SD card containing the data.
• The SD card ultimately could not be located and was presumed lost or destroyed.

Here is the full Order of the court!!!

https://t.co/Q1lYGfBQB4

@defense_diaries @AlilawMotta

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@guinnessstache Guarantee that’s the case! These situations don’t just happen one time! It is infuriating!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

I don’t care what side of the Karen Read case you’re on. Read these messages for yourself.

This isn’t about politics. It isn’t about personalities. It’s about the fact that people entrusted with investigating crimes and putting people in prison were allegedly sending messages filled with racism, sexism, antisemitism, and comments about violence for years.

The same people who decide who to believe, who to investigate, who to charge, and who to testify against.

Nobody should be comfortable with that. Not if you’re pro-Karen, anti-Karen, or somewhere in the middle.

Public trust in law enforcement depends on the belief that investigations are conducted fairly and without bias. Messages like these destroy that trust.

That’s the real issue. Not the language itself, but what it says about the mindset of the people behind the badge.

If you after reading this still defend the actions of these officers, you are the problem! These people need to be sanitized from society! This is beyond gross!

🧵1/2

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

🧵3/3

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

🧵2/3

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@suspiciousauce @ghoulia @KyleSharkey8 @BrotherCounsel @AttorneyMyers @BoozeyBeauty @GlammaSooz @LawyerYouKnow @defense_diaries @GrantSmithEllis @TheEmilySee So F gross!!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@jewels_Jewels77 @Randall145695 Oh, I just love when they cannot come with any factual information and when they cannot support their ridiculous claims they hit that block button so damn quick 😂🤣 gotta love it!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

The Alberts and the McCabes did interviews with the media as well. The only individuals that did not are Colin and Brian Higgins. They can in fact be treated differently in this case. Typically Status is determined plaintiff by plaintiff and his issue specific! A court is not required to treat all plaintiffs in a multi plaintiff, action the same. They would then determine if the individual is a public official, a general purpose public figure, a limited purpose public figure, or if the plaintiff is a private individual!

By your own argument, they sought out interviews and therefore they would be considered a limited public figure now that legal standard is not as cut and dry as just making it out to be but again by your own argument because they did media interviews also they would be considered a limited public figure.

As far as Karen goes, she was innocent until proven guilty. fun fact, she was never proven guilty of anything other than OUI therefore she is still innocent and again by your own argument, calling her a murderer which you guys consistently do is in fact defamatory!

The hypocrisy is absolutely wild and I can promise you if it was you we would be having a completely different discussion! And that is the problem that all of us have with this case. These. “Witnesses” you are fiercely protecting for whatever reason were never treated as suspects which they should have been from the beginning. They should never have had the opportunity to destroy their phones or do their own phone extraction or upgrade their phones get rid of their phones or even have a single discussion with each other, especially considering they were family or close friends.

[Masshole Mafia @MafiaMasshole]

#1 Karen Read is, undeniably, a limited-purpose public figure. She voluntarily (and repeatedly) interjected herself into a public controversy and assumed a prominent role in influencing the outcome of that controversy.
It's not that she was criminally charged. It's that she actively sold a narrative to the public surrounding that charge. News stations, magazine articles, a documentary film, podcasts, puppeteering Aidan Kearney and the entire "Free Karen Read" movement.
So she'd have to prove "actual malice". First and foremost.
Which then leads to the question- is there a good faith basis to call her a killer? Even murderer?
There is an extensive court record that establishes that good faith basis. She was charged, arrested, indicted and had several motions to dismiss denied. She was tried - twice. Those trials broadcast a mountain of inculpatory evidence.
Compare this to the witnesses, who never sought media coverage, did not do dozens of highly publicized interviews, were never charged with any crimes by any law enforcement agent whatsoever relating, even after a federal grand jury was convened to look for evidence of conspiracy or corruption.

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

That’s not how the courts view it! Publicly defending yourself as a criminal defendant to assert innocence does not make you a limited purpose public figure! Show me a case that says that doing media interviews and even a documentary to assert innocence makes you a limited purpose public figure…

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

That is not what she said at all! the way you guys spin that out of context is wild, but you had Brennan’s help with that…that slimy piece of shit stood there an open court and misrepresented a documentary clip to the jury! thank God they saw through the bullshit!

“Did I hit him, could I have hit him I know I said I hit him but could I have clipped him”

She was talking about scenarios that she was playing through her head trying to figure out what happened, but here’s the reality….The injuries are inconsistent with being hit by a vehicle. Therefore, anything that was said is 100% irrelevant. People tend to ask themselves questions when they are trying to figure out what happened to one of their loved ones. Asking a question is in no way shape or form admission of anything and taking it out of context and misrepresenting it to the court is just gross unethical and was a deliberate and desperate attempt to convict an innocent woman!

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@TheEmilySee @shazlick79 Omg they cannot honestly believe this 🤣😂 🤦🏼‍♀️

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

@jewels_Jewels77 @p_e_a_c_e5566 @Randall145695 Says the Internet mouth 🤦🏼‍♀️

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

I’m not incorrect actually they should have been treated as suspects and in any other situation they would’ve been and anyone else in that same situation would have been but because they were given professional courtesy a thorough investigation was not done therefore evidence that may have existed was not investigated. That’s the entire point.

[KRISTIN KAY @benchslappedtv]

Thank you for proving my point see kate said that Karen would be considered a limited purpose public figure because she did interviews and that’s just not the case so if you read what I actually wrote you would realize that I made that comment in response to the ridiculous statements that kate made about Karen!