Logical Observer

@PuppiesIover Brownie

His name is the last thing you ate

@sg123456777 @DCDeverell 😂😂

@DCDeverell What’s up with the salad bowl while cutting the cake?

Just a suggestion...

A couple jurors . .

I’ve never believed the ‘open tab’ story… And if it was true, I wonder how many people currently in prison based on their Cellebrite results are now looking for an appeal 🤔

👌👌👌

@adamfrancisco_ This has me in tears, I wasn’t expecting to see what I saw. Please tell me the girl is okay ?

How come pitbulls are the most commonly loose dogs? How come the pitbull didn’t let go of the little girl when the father picked it up and started hitting it? How come the father had to stab the pitbull with a pocket knife for the pitbull to finally release its grip? How come pitbulls account for the most human injuries and fatalities? How come pitbulls are most likely to attack or kill their family members like their owner or their owner’s other small pets or children?

@meredithoneil And this is what they’re like sober, imagine a few drinks under the belt 😐

1 year ago today😵‍💫… Full video here-youtu.be/-vQK0CTe8Wc?si…

Full Circle: It's so satisfying to see reporters banging on Michael Morrissey's front door, chasing down the story. Exactly like what Turtleboy is being charged for. Journalism is not a crime. #KarenRead

Coming Soon: There’s been a lot of demand to see Alan Jackson’s full closing argument—including the complete slide presentation that accompanied it. I’m currently working with him to make that happen. The final video will be available exclusively on his website. When it's complete I'll share the link. (BTW - I can't take credit for building the presentation that was all them)

I have just received a very special video that I would like to share with the world. This is what it was like to walk out of the courthouse post-verdict. This is the gift our supporters gave us. Thank you to all of you! 🙏

I've seen a lot of discussion online about jury nullification and the Read verdict. Nullification occurs where a jury simply refuses to convict after deliberately ignoring evidence of guilt without a true consideration of the facts, and they acquit for a reason other than a good faith finding of reasonable doubt, such as sympathy or as an act of civil disobedience. There is nothing to suggest than Karen was acquitted by a nullifying jury. To the contrary, as detailed by at least 4 jurors who have spoken publicly, the jury seems to have acquitted the normal and boring old fashioned way: following the law after finding reasonable doubt. A bunch of angry trolls calling the verdict an act of nullification...are nullifying the truth--the existence of substantial reasonable doubt.

Thank you @BostonDefender and @FBIBoston for taking out the trash for the women of Norfolk AND Suffolk counties 🫶🏻🫶🏻🫶🏻

🎨 Sunday McAlbert Caricature Drop 🎨 Just like their ABC News pity tour, here come Matt & Jen—storming down the hall to cry victim, whine about Karen Read’s acquittal, and spin fairy tales about “the guy” who never made it inside. No justice? No shame. Just lies. #KarenRead

@jjhockey_15 @bobalessi Alessinator in the house !

Needed to share this. Bob Alessi, everyone! What can’t this man do?! @bobalessi

@DoctorTurtleboy How in any way would a juror going on with Jen and Kerry be productive ? He’s sick

John Depetro got catfished into believing he was contacted by Juror 17. He published an entire interview in which the pretend juror explained why he believed Karen Read was innocent. John wanted him to go live on his broadcast with Jen McCabe and Kerry Roberts.

I’ve said this and I’ll keep saying it. Accepting facts in favour of Karen DOES NOT equal anything against John or his family. The two can exist independently!!

To everyone who twisted themselves into knots trying to convict Karen Read without evidence — let’s call it what it is: a bitter cocktail of bias, wounded pride, and yes, now racism. You weren’t looking for truth. You were looking for vengeance. For a woman who dared to question authority, defy narratives, and expose corruption. You lost — not just in court, but in character. Your refusal to admit the truth isn’t integrity. It’s intellectual laziness. It’s emotional immaturity. It’s the deep discomfort of seeing a system fail to protect its own — and the courage of a woman who refused to let that stand. So while you stew in denial, the rest of us will keep speaking her name. Loudly. Proudly. Unapologetically. KAREN READ IS FREED.

Oh, the jury failed John O’Keefe, you say? Here’s a partial list of the things the cops and Commonwealth FAILED to do (omitting anything re: conspiracy) in this case: 🚫Take a photo of the alleged murder weapon 🚫Secure the crime scene 🚫Separate witnesses 🚫Document/map evidence 🚫Secure evidence 🚫Complete reports in a timely manner 🚫Book evidence in a timely manner 🚫Knock on doors to talk to neighbors 🚫Look at Ring cams 🚫Interview witnesses in a timely manner 🚫Use crime scene services team 🚫Get a “homicide” manner of death 🚫Get a single medical doctor who could say the injuries are from a vehicle 🚫Hire an accident reconstruction expert who could show their version of how this happened 🚫Speak about/treat the suspect in a professional manner But it’s the jury’s fault? THEY failed John O’Keefe? What a shameful and absurd thing to say.

Oh look another person who is trying to discredit the jury and defences legal strategy, whilst simultaneously picking out phrases and words from jurors that confirm your bias and also ignore the pivots that the CW also made during the second trial in terms of their theory I wonder when you’ll come to terms with the fact that 1. The police investigation was complete shit and ruined any chance of being able to convict anyone OJOs death 2. It was never the defences burden to prove what happened.

This is precisely why we need professional jurors, people! The foreman thinks forensic data is just a fancy word for “jargon.” The special juror declares that if you’re only 99.9% sure of someone’s guilt, you must acquit because we can’t risk a 0.1% chance of being wrong! And then there’s the language ninja who believes Karen might have just given John a little bump with her Lexus, causing his shoe to fly off, which apparently infuriated him so much that he casually strolled into the house without his shoe on and in the snow, no less! But don’t worry, she was “definitely” sure he went inside, despite zero evidence to back it up. Even the defense got creative, claiming that John decided to skip the main two doors like a contestant on a game show and opted to head into the garage door of a house he’s never even been to for a party and then was attacked by his friends and a DNA-less dog named Chloe. Meanwhile, they completely ditched the third-party culprit defense and opted for the even more ridiculous “there was no collision” defense. Talk about a wild plot twist!