Ines🏴‍☠️

Just me, I like truth and Trust. #MichaelPatrickKelly - always my favorite music 🎵 #defendingtheTruth
#testify2490

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@DoctorTurtleboy @MamaLama43 I'd actually advise you to retreat into your shell and keep a low profile, little turtle, but it's kind of fun to sit back and watch you self-destruct while making Karen's life miserable in the process. Has she called you and yelled at you yet?

[Mama Llama @MamaLama43]

He clearly got word that not only are Karen Read and her attorneys throwing him under the bus, but now his “source” has been outed with this security camera photo he published.

He is spiraling-posting one preposterous claim after another.

He is such a Fkn LIAR. 🤣

[Rose @riversedgg]

Aidan Kearney - I'm a tough guy. Sue me. I can't wait to get on the stand.

Oops. Pleads the fifth.

https://t.co/h59rfWGfLb

[mabbe8 @mabbe_8]

#FKR, the jig is up already.

Before you post the next misdirection, half-truth, or bogus story, take a second to think about the devastation Karen Read has unleashed with your help.

And no, I’m not talking about Michael Proctor’s or Sean Goode’s text messages. Those deserve criticism on their own.

I’m talking about Colin Albert, Brian Albert, Brian Higgins, Jen McCabe, Matt McCabe, Julie Nagel, and so many others who have spent the last four years being publicly accused of murder, conspiracy, and covering up the death of a Boston police officer. Their reputations have been dragged through the mud, their families have been harassed, and the trajectory of their lives has been permanently changed.

For what?

If Karen had accepted responsibility from the beginning, she likely could have avoided prison altogether. She might still have her job at Fidelity, still be teaching night classes for Bill Read, and still be living in her home.

I also have it on good authority that the O’Keefes were fond of Karen and may have eventually forgiven her if she had shown genuine remorse and accepted responsibility. Instead, the strategy became preserving her "reputation" by accusing nearly everyone else.

Ironically, that strategy accomplished the exact opposite.

Her reputation is now defined by years of conspiracy theories, false accusations, and finger-pointing that have forever altered the lives of innocent people.

And just take the Brian Higgins theory and think about it for half a second. It may be the most implausible of them all.

We’re supposed to believe that after roughly 10 days of texting and one awkward garage kiss initiated by Karen, Higgins became so consumed with jealousy that he murdered his friend, framed the woman he supposedly wanted to be with, and then relied on numerous other people to help cover it all up?

He loses his friend. He loses the girl. He risks his career, pension, decades in prison, and entire future.

What exactly was the upside for him, again?

After two trials, there is still no evidence placing John O’Keefe inside 34 Fairview after 12:32 a.m., and no coherent explanation for how the “John died in the house” theory fits the digital or physical evidence.

At some point, you have to stop asking whether a conspiracy is theoretically possible and start asking whether it is actually supported by evidence.

Those are two very different questions.

[Snarky Sticky @SnarkySticky]

Julie Albert matters to Karen’s narrative because she sits inside the Albert family circle and had repeated contact with Courtney Proctor, the sister of lead investigator Michael Proctor. That gives the defense a way to argue “cozy relationships” and raise questions about investigative optics.

But that is the limit of it.

The records show calls. They do not show what was said. They do not prove Julie was coached, that Courtney passed along case information, or that anyone coordinated testimony. At most, Exhibit 4 supports scrutiny of relationships and investigative judgment. It does not supply proof of murder, a dog attack, or a coverup.

[Snarky Sticky @SnarkySticky]

🚨 ANTI SLAPP EXHIBITS 2 AND 3: Suspicion built from fragments

Exhibit 2 contains call records involving Brian Higgins and Brian Albert. The records establish that calls occurred. They do not reveal a single word of conversation, what was discussed, or whether the calls had anything to do with John O’Keefe. Contact is not evidence of coordination, much less murder or a coverup.

Exhibit 3 is even more damaging to Karen's argument because it contains Ian Whiffin’s Cellebrite testimony about the infamous 2:27 a.m. timestamp.

Whiffin’s conclusion was that 2:27:40 a.m. was not the time Jennifer McCabe performed the “hos long to die in cold” search. He explained that the timestamp came from browser state database activity and placed the relevant searches at approximately 6:23 and 6:24 a.m.

That does not mean Jennifer performed no search or browser activity at 2:27. She may well have been researching something entirely ordinary. It means the record does not support Karen’s specific and inflammatory accusation that Jennifer searched how long John would take to die hours before he was found.

The “deleted” label does not save that theory either. Whiffin explained that a record marked deleted does not necessarily mean the user manually deleted it. It can result from automatic database cleanup. He also found no missing sequential records in the relevant history database indicating that Jennifer manually erased that search.

That is the problem with Karen’s use of these exhibits in her Anti SLAPP motion. She presents unexplained calls and a technical database artifact as factual support for grave accusations against real people.

But the call records contain no content, and the Cellebrite expert rejected the meaning assigned to the 2:27 timestamp.

[Snarky Sticky @SnarkySticky]

🚨 EXHIBIT 1: WHAT THE MEDICAL TESTIMONY ACTUALLY SAID

Karen offers selected medical testimony to suggest that her public accusations had factual support. But the testimony does not identify Brian Albert, Colin Albert, Jennifer McCabe, Chloe, or anyone else as the cause of John O’Keefe’s injuries.

At most, the doctors left open several possible mechanisms of injury. To be fair, they acknowledged that some findings could be consistent with a fall, a punch, defensive wounds, or an animal-related injury. But “could be” is not a medical conclusion that any of those things actually happened.

The examiner did not know what caused the scratches on John’s arm. She neither identified Chloe, nor did she say John fought Brian or Colin Albert. She didn't say the injuries occurred inside the house.

She didn't rule out a vehicle-related event.

And, when the defense tried to package the injuries as proof of a physical altercation, that conclusion did not come into evidence.

The strongest affirmative finding was simply that John’s head contacted a blunt object. That says nothing about who caused the impact or where it occurred.

That is the weakness in Karen’s Anti-SLAPP use of this exhibit. She is treating medical uncertainty as factual support for very specific public accusations against named individuals.

Sorry, Karen. Uncertainty is not identification, and possibility is not proof. An attorney's alternative theory is not evidence that these plaintiffs committed murder or participated in a fantastical conspiracy.

Example: “Based on the facts that were presented to you, you don’t know what caused those significant scratches on Mr. O’Keefe’s right arm?”

“I do not.”

The doctors recognized medical possibilities, as is their job. They did not validate wild accusations that these plaintiffs murdered John, used Chloe in an attack, or participated in a coverup!

[Snarky Sticky @SnarkySticky]

Things are starting to become clearer to me. Counting is not that difficult, but filing an affidavit requires attention to detail.
How much is she paying per hour?🧐

[Earl “Pink Crying Lady” Grey @NoodleMom1983]

Aidan Kearney just ranted for an hour about how he and Martin Luther King, Jr., are basically one and the same.

That’s rich, Aidan, considering that you literally make money by relentlessly selling hate.

You and Dr. King are absolutely nothing alike, and anyone who supports you should be appalled at you attempting to draw parallels between the two of you.

You’ve incredibly sunk to an all time new low. @DoctorTurtleboy

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot Don‘t understand the point?

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot Maybe one clock is off?

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot Can someone explain what is he talking about?

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot What is she talking about?

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot Deitsch did know about these text for years!

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot They didn’t talk about the county ?

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot So the system in Germany can not work? Because there are no jury’s.

[Ines🏴‍☠️ @ines4truth]

@bishalot I think no system is perfekt🤷🏼‍♀️

[Renata Love @RenataPatientz]

Straight from Karen’s defense teams mouth. Aidan doesn’t use that word 🤣😂🤣