DAY 30: Karen Read Retrial

"5’11 or 7’2… something around in there." - Dr. Laposata regarding the victim's height.

Hi. That’s me on the right. 👋

I’m living off of coffee and memes at this point as we all army crawl our way to the finish line of this trial.

I’m sure the jury is READY for it to be over as well.

Here are the highlights from the day…

ON THE STAND:

1. Dr. Elizabeth Laposata (Forensic Pathologist)

2. Dr. Andrew Rentschler (Biomechanical Engineer)

   ---

   Dr. Elizabeth Laposata (Forensic Pathologist)

• Testimony begins today with Dr. Laposata back on the stand for direct examination.

• She says that the cut above John’s right eye could not be from the back spoiler of the car. (CW’s expert said the spoiler was measured as the exact height as where the cut was located and inferred it was possible to be the cause for that particular injury ).

• Dr Laposata states that brain injuries cause swelling, which can lead to a brain stem herniation. Dr. Laposata says this is what occurred with John, and that it would have caused him to immediately become unconscious and die within 15-20 minutes.

• Dr. Laposata says that John’s back head wound indicates he fell backwards with a very forceful impact. She states the wound was caused by something that had ridges, not a flat surface. Laposata dismisses the possibility that John’s head hit the frozen lawn area.

• Prosecution asks if she viewed the lawn area in person to make that conclusion. She said she saw photos.

• She was asked if she knew what the ground was like under the grass (rocks, etc), and Laposata dismissed the idea of anything being rigid on that ground area despite not actually viewing it in person.

• No depressed fractures in the skull indicating any impact from an object like hammer or bat.

• Dr. Laposata says John’s skull fractures indicate he made a ‘medium to large’ impact with the ground. Death times are different with different patients regarding contrecoup injuries, but Laposata is unwavering on her opinion that John died within 15-20 minutes.

(This contradicts the CW’s neurosurgeon expert’s testimony that John would not have died immediately.)

• The doctor disagrees with the medical examiner’s report that John O’Keefe’s cause of death included hypothermia. She states that hypothermic bodies show a breaking of blood vessels in the stomach lining, which was not present in the victim’s autopsy.

• The doctor asserts that John died first and then his body got cold afterwards somehow.

• Laposata says that the LUCAS machine used in life-saving efforts could be what caused internal damage to his organs due to the compressions.

• Laposata says that she ruled out a pedestrian-vehicle accident as a cause of injuries. She opines that the arm abrasions are not caused from the taillight impact, but that they’re patterns from animal bites.

• The doctor contradicts the medical examiner’s report in regard to the arm wounds. The ME who did the autopsy reported the arm wounds were all abrasians, however Laposata claims she could tell some were puncture wounds.
  
  (Opinion: Not sure how Laposata can conclude the depth of a wound simply from photos. Her presumptuous attitude throughout the testimony was very off-putting for me.)

• Under cross-examination, Dr. Laposata confirms she is not a neurosurgeon, and not experienced examining the brains of living patients.

• When performing autopsies, she says she would refer to a neuropathologist approximately once a month. Laposata has not performed an autopsy in about 4 or 5 years.

• Laposata states that analyzing all information for a differential diagnosis is important in order to avoid any bias.

Prosecutor Brennan: …If you didn't look at all the evidence and you disregarded some of the evidence because you had already made up your mind, that really wouldn't be the proper study of differential diagnosis, would it?

Dr. Laposata: Right. I don't do that. I always look at all the evidence.

• Laposata later confirms that she made an opinion that the victim was not injured in a pedestrian strike without actually analyzing or considering the following evidence:

  • DNA (found on taillight housing) lab report.

  • Hair (found on side-panel bumper of vehicle) evidence report.

  • Debris on clothing (other than blood).

  • Defendant pulling a small shard of glass out of John’s face.

  • Tech data showing a vehicle reversed at John seconds before his phone registered his final steps on the lawn area.

Prosecutor Brennan asks Dr. Laposata if she knows how tall the victim was.
Here’s how she responds😬…

• Defense Attorney Jackson shows the doctor an x-ray of John’s arm and hand taken during the autopsy. She points out that there are no bone fractures and no abnormal tissue swelling.

• Prosecutor Brennan questions the doctor on the public criticism she’s received regarding her role as a medical examiner for the Station Nightclub fire in 2003.

• Laposata says the media got it wrong. She was never directly called to the scene, and she had her investigator report there instead. Laposota said it was “bullshit”.

• She is also questioned about the audit that was done on her practice right before she stepped down as Chief ME of RI. The audit found that many death certificates were not completed.

Dr. Laposata responds to this questioning…

”There was a flurry of stuff in the papers. There were union issues, new, um, new director of health, new governor. So I think there was a little flurry of stuff, which was not substantive.”

---

Dr. Andrew Rentschler (Biomechanical Engineer)

• Dr. Rentschler takes the stand towards the end of the day. He shares his educational background and work history.

• Vice President of ARCCA. Rentschler specializes in the field of Biomechanics.

  

• He explains how he got involved in this case alongside Daniel Wolfe and another partner. Instead of repeating this info, you can find that in Wolfe’s testimony HERE.

Trial ended for the day, and Dr. Rentschler will be back tomorrow to continue testimony.