Karen Reed has been through 2 lengthy trials. Legal fees must have been astronomical. While I don’t know anything about her, it’s hard to imagine she could could have come up with that amount of money. Anyone know who paid?
It’s Karen Read
Here is the background
So selling house and retirement assets, public fundraising from supporters and perhaps reduced fees from attorneys (because of the PR value).
She was just acquitted of all charges except for DUI.
Massachusetts tried her twice. First was a hung jury. The second resulted in acquittal on the two serious charges. Seems only fair the state should reimburse for most of her legal fees.
That’s not the way the law works. In a civil suit, lawyers fees might be awarded. In a criminal trial, however, the state makes its case. They didn’t get a conviction. Oh well.
Good luck with that. Unless you can demonstrate clear prosecutorial misconduct—and prosecutors have a very broad range of authority in deciding how to investigate and who to prosecute—the state can claim sovereign immunity against any civil actions.
The officers who may well have lied on the stand, however, are not so covered for perjury or actions that did not occur in the line of duty. However, Read also acknowledged mistruths in her testimony, which would indicate against her integrity as a witness, and in a civil trial with the standard of ‘preponderance of evidence’ that’s going to be a large hurdle to overcome.
Stranger
I have no idea as to whether she did the crime or not. Apparently most on the jury didn’t know, either.
I watched the first trial and would have been unable to convict based on the evidence provided in court. I didn’t watch the second, appears the outcome was the same.
Personally I think she did it, but there just isn’t enough evidence.
Whatever she got from a civil suit might be more than balanced by what she’d conceivably be asked to pay herself.
A civil jury might not be sympathetic to the Vast Police Conspiracy defense.
She could be a defendant in a civil suit from the family of the dead cop.
I think the OP has been answered, but found this re her attorneys for the second trial from the wiki link above:
Two additional lawyers joined her defense team: Robert Alessi and Victoria George, an alternate juror in Read’s first trial.
That’s a pretty neat tactic.
Genius. Who has better insight on what worked and didn’t work?
During the first trial I went out for drinks with a bunch of former co-workers. We very much live in the neighborhood of where all this is happening, and a large part of the conversation was the in and outs of that trial. I had followed none of it, but was amazed at how fervently people had a feeling one way or another. Vague shades of the OJ trial a million years ago, though I’m not sure how this one became so big.
There’s also a billboard up on Route 1 somewhere reading “Free Karen Read!” or somesuch.
People love this stuff. If there isn’t a gofundme or whatever, she could easily do one.
Plenty of marks out there to donate more money, buy her book (if she writes one), pay to hear her speak etc.
Huh, I’d have thought that that would fall under conflict of interest rules.
I honestly had heard of it until the verdict yesterday. I’m also not sure why it’s national news.
Never mind…
I’m only vaguely familiar with it. I’ve read an article, but it kind of assumed I was already familiar with the case. Could someone give me a quick recap of why the prosecution’s case failed?
So I’ve obviously seen this in the news everywhere lately but I didn’t follow the case when it happened. Based on the wiki here, I’m struggling to see how this even went to trial. The injuries don’t seem at all consistent with a broken tail light. Am I missing anything?