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”

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...

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.

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.

Honestly... as clear as their last note was, it's not the jury's job to know the procedure and it's also not their job to make sure everything was done in order. The fact that the judge did not even ask if they were divided on *all* charges is baffling to me, and was during the trial too... I just don't know how they are going to rectify this... But it is infuriating. This is not justice served...

It should not be up to the jury to know how things work in the courtroom. It was up to the judge to ask, not for the jury to know, to ask or to say in their notes. The stakes were too high and Bev was in too big of a hurry.

What I don't understand is while arguing, the judge said if there's anything that differs on that paperwork from what I've said just go by what I've said. She definitely made a point to make it known that she did not want them talking to anybody about their decision until they reached a unanimous decision. Those two things in my opinion are confusing

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.

Bev should have asked if they had reached a verdict on any of the counts like any other judge would do.

They should make it mandatory to fill out all the forms even with deadlocks. They should have a deadlocked box.

What baffles me is that with as high profile and contentious as this case was, why wouldn’t the court make sure everything was documented to the highest level? Just in case the verdict was in dispute, like it is 🤦‍♀️

How many times did we hear Bev say This is how we do it here.

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.

IT SHOULDN'T BE UP TO THE JURY TO SAY! OR ASK! OR WONDER!

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. ???

Judge Bev: "aw, screw it, mistrial." You'd think after a couple month trial a bit more care should have been taken, instead of "kthxbye".

When did Defence get time to object or question, the judge declared mistrial??

This is the longest lasting slow motion train wreck I've ever seen!

I understand not enquiring into a juries deliberations but if potential jurors start to assume that any verdicts they may reach will be for want of a better term “ignored” then there is no faith in what is essentially the foundation of the legal system, a jury of peers.

This is not on the jurors. This is 100% on the judge for not helping them in a situation they're new to and confused by. Her instructions pushed them in the wrong direction, and she didn't help them out of it. Cannone messed this up, and the responsibility is on her. It seems pretty horrific for a judge to be able to rush through declaring a mistrial and nobody having *any* remedy for a judicial error like that.

Hi to all my lawnerds friends. Replay crew from Ireland. 🇮🇪 🇮🇪

So, I see this as a failure on the side of the legal system to properly instruct the laypeople (jury). I find it interesting that, when this happened in the Baldwin case, remedy was swift and in strong favor of the defendant. Essentially, regardless of who was at fault or intentionality, the system was held responsible for executing their job perfectly. Here, it also seems the system has failed the defendant. It's concerning to me that there's not a legal remedy in this situation. Surely this can't be a novel situation.

Judge Bev had no problem asking Lally if you needed to object during the whole trial so she couldn’t ask the defense if they objected on the miss trial she even asked them she did it very very quickly and the fourth jury told the judge what they voted on so she did know the informationdoesn’t the defendant have a right to know what they voted on each charge why didn’t they go down each charge? The judge made it sound like they were hung up on all charges

I'm happy the Baldwin case was dismissed. I think he probably acted like an arrogant star on the set but I don't think he deserved to go to jail. I think living with it for the rest of his life is punishment in itself & the husband & child have at least been financial compensated even though that fixes nothing at least they don't have to worry about money which may relieve some type of stress. Very sad all the way around.

Apparently some said they were swayed by the taillight “embedded” in the shirt - which wasn’t evidence. It was only in Lally’s opening & closing and I didn’t think they were meant to consider openings & closing as evidence? I guess we’ll find out eventually.

Bad instructions in, bad process and judge, bad results out. Asking for Allan charge is not consent to mistrial, just as asking the judge to poll the jury does not imply consent to NOT appeal. There’s a reason legal language should be explicit. This judge said mistrial, kicked out the jury, and never once addressed either party in that process in open court. It also should NOT be on the lawyers to ask the judge to question whether the jury is deadlocked on ALL charges. That is PROCESS. The judge should do that regardless. Here’s a small correction the law would allow. Prior to declaration of mistrial - “jurors, I am about to declare a mistrial based on your findings. Do you have any questions for me about the process or forms before we adjourn court and mistrial this case?” May have helped. Maybe not but it would not hurt.

Would love you to go through some of the pre trail stuff from the Read trial and explain how judge Bev was allowed to make some of the decisions she did

Frightening to think your life can be in hands of these Jurors, reasonable doubt at every turn in KR case

I'm shocked the jury didn't acquit of all charges in about 10 mins. Were they not watching the same trial as the rest of us??? 🙄🙄 The defense repeatedly proved John wasn't hit by a car, which is way above the standard of just creating reasonable doubt. I don't get it. Stupid

This case should have been thrown out right from the start. How do you continue a case when the investigation wasn’t done correctly when they were all kinds of violations and investigation where it was biased where they didn’t do a proper investigation that enough should Loan be thrown out just on that fact alone and then to withholdinformation from karen to let her know that two of the verdict were 12 to 0. The judge knew the judge knows what’s going on karen we had a write to know the verdict information they made it sound like they were hung up on all the verdict and that was not the case, the judge didn’t do a good job, she violated her rights once again.

I interpret "consensus" to mean "unanimous on all charges". I think the jury felt confident they could not meet that definition of consensus. The issue here was not that the jury had questions, they and the court had a miscommunication about the definition of "consensus" 1:12:25

The judge brought the jury back and told them that there were some changes to the jury instructions that were sent back, so she was going to read the corrected ones. Before she started reading them, she told them that what she said now was to take priority over any other notes or jury instructions they had in the deliberation room. The shock and idea of having multiple jurors remembering parts of both instructions broke my brain. 🤯 The next thing I realized, the judge was halfway through the new instructions, and I felt helpless. I can't imagine how they felt. 😢

The only issue that I take with all of the read stuff, well, I have a lot of issues with it, but with the jury thing. Nobody at all. The judge, the lawyers, nobody made it clear that they could in fact come back with an answer on two and not three. They they never were told that. The way that the statue is worded, it's they need to come back with everything, not some or all that I think is where the issue is. But really there's no remedy for that besides the state not bringing those two charges again.

Am I the only one who recalls argument from the defence that the wording of count 2 Jury instructions left room for error?

During the initial jury instructions, they were told to not give details about deliberations. The first 2 times the jury said they were deadlocked, they were brought back into the room and they were given instructions by the judge. It makes sense to me that they expected instructions the third time they were brought back into the room after sending a note. Why would it be bad to poll the jury of their opinion at that point in time, at this time? Specify that it is their opinion at that moment in time, not now, and have them say it under oath. I feel like that could be just, it’s frustrating that the jury was left confused.

The fact that the TikToc psychic can continue to file motion after motion is insanity.

Could legislature make a law that says all hung juries should be polled on the record? This way, it's on the books and the rights of the accused are protected in the future. Is that even a possibility??

There is no way these lawyers don’t watch this coverage by other lawyers. This is free advice.

Someone needs to tell Tik-Tok girl that her rights end where the rights’ of others begin. Simply put. What is going to happen if she just continues this willfully defiant behaviors? This poor professor, I can’t even imagine the frustration.🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

Thank you Emily D Baker for interrogating the conflicting arguments. I feel so honored to work in the court system in my state. This shit is important and hard.

EDB. The jury could of been only confused on process, i.e. the verdict form. The note addressed the fact that they couldn't reach a unanimous verdict on all counts, not the verdict form, they should have been polled.

Good luck to finding a new unbiased jury Commonwealth! Love your channel Emily ♥️

Is there a way to complain about the Judge? I feel like she is the source for this confusion. WE were all just in shock and it was done! Judge Bev was very vague from the very beginning when AJ was questioning the instructions.

We need merch with “That Ship has Sailed” and/or “There are Boundaries!” 🤣🤣

If they retry k.r. trial, the prosecution isn't going to have any better evidence, or witnesses...it would kind of be foolishness to walk down that road again ....unless they have new evidence.

Replay crew here: The note from the Read jury is not ambiguous. However, if they understood they were to be unanimous on every count in order to be unanimous, what they said is accurate. They may not have understood they could be unanimous on some counts and deadlocked on others. They were simply ignorant. Maybe they didn't know what they didn't know, so they didn't ask. They didn't realize that is actually *was* a lack of understanding. Maybe? I'd hate for her to be tried again on those counts. This trial was ridiculous, at least how it was prosecuted was, and I would hope the CW would give serious consideration to retrying on the murder or manslaughter charges. The more they push it, the more they keep the questionable and unethical investigation of the case in the limelight. I feel for the O'Keefe family, but this case is a mess.

This is Bev's second mistrial within 18 months.

This whole trial was ridiculous. I have never seen so many inept witnesses on the prosecution side. Lally does not adhere to his Duties as set by the ABA Standard Functions and Duties, to seek justice, not merely to convict.

At the very least the jury should be vudired to learn where the break down happened for court learning purposes to ensure it doesn't happen again, and hasn't happened in past cases, especially since they weren't televised allowing this stuff to come up.

Hi, replay crew here. I remember Jackson arguing with the judge about the instructions. I remember him saying “I don’t care how it’s done in MA.”

Emily the defense told the court the jury forms were confusing, then they came back twice dead locked. When the court accepted the mistrial she did not poll the jury. The judge dismissed the jury and scheduling for a new trial

I hope the court and lawyers get that the average person does NOT know you can split things. I never did understand the second charges…

I think that the jury both believed they understood the jury instructions and misinterpreted the jury instructions. I think both can be true at the same time. At the time of the deadlock, I think they truly believed that they were right in declaring themselves hopelessly deadlocked - IF they believed that they could not produce a verdict unanimously on ALL counts. That would make them, in their minds, deadlocked. Love all the LawTubers, but law has a lot of legalese that you spend your entire lives in. We “regular people” do not always understand, which is why it’s nice that you and others sit here and explain it all to us! 😊 I completely think that the jury should be polled and the judge was too quick to declare a mistrial. Not because I believe Karen Read is not guilty (which I do), but because not all the information was gathered - which is scary to me.

I believe the jury was very deliberate in its wording. They never wrote they were in disagreement over the "Counts," just the "Charges." The only "charges" were in Count 2; therefore, Bev owed it to the jurors and the defendant to inquire about Counts 1 and 3. She did not, however. In fact, it was Bev who declared deliberations were over, not the jurors. This is all Bev's fault! Regardless, the CW shouldn't have prosecuted this case, the Judge should have dismissed this case, and the jury should have had the opportunity to acquit KR in this case (at least on 2 of the 3 Counts). The System failed KR once again!

I don't understand how the court system takes so long to do anything, yet the jury instructions were so incredibly hard to understand as a layperson. Team JD explained them so clearly, but I now wonder if it's because it was a civil case.

Jury’s statement letter gave the impression they were 💯 clear on being in disagreement. They acted as though they knew they had ZERO options by way of not asking any questions

I 💜 the way you put Legality is not the same as morality.

I don't think the jury felt like they had an open communication with judge Bev. It felt more like she made the calls and they went along including, I've given you all the evidence you're going to get

If it’s the jury that is willing to talk and testify with no pressure. It should be up to each one to decide if they want to talk. I don’t think saying I voted not guilty here and we were split here is going into it personally

Maybe they wrote the note like that because they felt like they couldn’t tell unless they agreed on all. Maybe.

I mean, what to say a judge sees a verdict they dont like and just declares a mistrial unprompted? What recourse is there at that point. The judge wasn't asked to declare the mistrial, the jury didn't get to speak up whether they managed to find any of the charges. So its a free try again for the prosecution?

Scariest part, whats happening to Karen Read can happen to ANY ONE OF US!!! Thats a frightening prospect.

How could they not ask, if they were unsure, whether or not they could render not guilty on some counts but not others? Were they all just extremely shy? That is insane...? A woman's life is on the line for Christ's sake.

Jury instructions that take an hour for a judge to read are outrageous, I don't care if the parties and judge agreed to them or not. The "build your own conviction" of count 2 is also outrageous. Yeah, I get "lesser includeds", but only because I'm a slight law nerd. The jury is supposed to be finder of fact, not deducer of the fine print. All the lawyers who think this remotely makes sense need to step out of the coffee house. There shouldn't be a section of the verdict slip that reads like a pizza topping menu. It really SHOULD be guilty/not guilty.

Was the jury told not to tell anyone the jury diliberations , the split and so on? That is what it seems like to me.

But the judge said at the end if my verbal instructions are different than the written my verbal instructions you will follow my verbal instructions.

Isn't having jury consider multiple verdicts for same crime, such as in Reed case, double jeopardy?

I think if the defense in the Karen Read teial can call judge Bev as a witness, that will then mean she can't oversea the next trial... doesn't it ?? That's a win right there !!

Great report Emily.

Replay Crew here Emily, you are accompanying me to my Dr appointment, the Vet appointment and then the shopping. Thank you for your time, I love your channel and this community 💚☘️🇮🇪

@Emily D. Baker. TY for all you do and covering trial that mean so much to us❤❤❤❤

I've been driving for hours and yelling at the livestream. Bev explicitly told the jury that they were not.tonfill out the verdict formS until they had reached a unanimous verdict. My thoughts are 1. Is this on the written jury instructions, or merely a verbal instruction? In any event Bev told the jury verbal instructions win over written instructions. 2. That statement is what distinguishes cited cases from the current situation, and gives a clear reason why no form was filled out by the jury and handed over.

I can see an appeal court overturning the mistrial. Not because of these jurors saying there was consensus on other charges, but because the defence wasn't given any consultation or chance to object before she declared it and dismissed the jury. I know you said emily that 'we all knew what you meant' when he pushed for the tuey rodriguez charge, as in, we all know he was in favour of a mistrial. But 'what we think you meant' is not legal grounds. And it's not legal grounds for Bev to make that ruling without consulting. The defendant could have changed her mind between those two events IMO and she wasn't given a chance. THAT is a fundamental error imo

I wonder how much of the wording of the note was influenced by the foreman’s knowledge of the court system, since it seems pretty commonly rumored that he was a cop. It feels like the jury not asking about a split verdict might’ve been a combination of hesitancy because of the judge’s response to the one question they asked and a confident foreman asserting that the court would address their position about the various counts before dismissing them.

'I don't know what to do if I am not in trial?' literally me right now. i miss it already.... I am so angry on the behalf of the jurors for KR!!! Also, there is SO MUCH FLUFF in these motions

You know what would have been helpful? If the lawyers had spent time explaining the jury instructions in final arguments.

Maybe the jury should have used less high dollar words and just said what they mean.

Why can’t they just say are you deadlocked on all counts?? Easy answer- yes or no

Does the law only follow past cases? How is anything new created?

I'm so confused as to why the prosecution in the KR case has dug in so hard. Like why? You're not supposed to be seeking Ws, you're supposed to be seeking JUSTICE.

Thanks!

There really needs to be some way to prevent situations like what is happening to the professor from continuing to occurring.

If they were inclined to drop the charges, they wouldn't bring the case considering we all saw how bad it is.

love the T-shirt Emily. Aussie's represent!

You got a prosecutor in the Baldwin case who was determined to win at all costs and made gerself the decider of fact .

Idk why I’m so invested in tik tok psychic case, but I am. Thanks for covering it.

All I know for sure is that I'm thankful that I'll never have to sit as a jury member on a trial in the U.S. There service is not over when it's over, they will be dragged back in to legal wrangling regardless of verdict. Feel so sorry for all the jury that were simply trying their best but are now the subject of scrutiny, caught in the battle between prosecutor and defense.

I understand that the note everybody wants to say was the jury but the person who wrote the note was the Retired police officer that was your number one that the judge picked prior to the alternates being picked. That is the person that wrote the note. we don’t know if he wrote the note based on everybody’s opinion and how it should be written.

I have a question: Let's assume the Jury found Karen Read NG on 1 and 3 - The judge doesn't inform the defense that happened (Perhaps she didn't know and didn't ask, or perhaps she knew and didn't care) and were led to believe it was a hung jury on all 3 counts, how can it be expected that they would object under those facts? The court coming to the wrong decision based on wrong information shouldn't, in my opinion, remove the possibility to object to something when correct information comes up later. Am I missing something? I think it is interesting that the Prosecution isn't debating over whether the Jury found Karen Read NG on 1 and 3 - their argument seems to be "Even if the jury did acquit her and the court made a mistake by not informing defense about that - the defense should have seen into the future and objected, based on information they didn't have at the time". What could Defense have done with the information they had at the time? The Court said they were Hung on the charges (Plural) and provided no indication whatsoever there may have been a unanimous decision made on some of the charges.

Why weren't the jurors more clear that they were split on one charge? Surely that only makes sense to put that in the note to the judge. Or ask the judge what they should do in that situation. They were vague and this is the result.

Both Erlinda Johnson and Kari Morrissey were added to the New Mexico Brady list for prosecutor misconduct.

The law should always be on the defensive side. It's innocent until proven guilty so everything should benefit the defense

Travis walking in with the meme made my day 😂

I agree with you on the Read case. Those jury notes and the case law provided by Lally are pretty damning. It sucks so bad, but, there really is nothing more to be done. 😔 “Voice to text” 🤣🤣🤣

Best legal notion I learned through my divorce is that law is not fair, it’s law. Once I accepted that, life got easier.

Not for me I don't like when the Prosecutors cheat and I don't like it when witnesses only have real answers for the prosecution

Was waiting for this the smoke and mirrors are lifting. Thank you EDB