A Body in the Snow: The Trial of Karen Read

The filmmakers clearly leaned on the Staircase docuseries to create this one. Once again we have .. is this an accident or not? ... is this conspiracy or not? What is clear from this series and The Staircase, those individuals that have the money to pay for an array of "experts" and lawyers can draw a lot of attention, from the media and public.

Once again we have a defendant that is unlikable, un remorseful and self centered. I guess she gives so many interviews to pay for the plethora of lawyers and experts she has hired.

Would she end up like Michael Peterson? ... I guess we will get a season 2 of this bias show.

I did not have any opinion about the case before I watched the documentair but that changed alom the way

Ah yes, Karen Read: The Documentary - the docu absolutely no one needed, but somehow still happened. A bold, head-scratching PR move that screams, "Let's win the court of public opinion with a camera crew and a whole lot of me."

Let's be honest: the last time this kind of defense strategy actually worked was with O. J. Simpson. And we all definitely learned from that... or did we?

And oh, the data frenzy. This documentary doesn't just flirt with conspiracy - it slow dances with it in the middle of a fog machine and strobe lights. It plays right into the same crowd that hit peak distrust during COVID. Remember that?

What makes it worse - and honestly, kind of sad - is that there are people who genuinely believe in her innocence, not just because they're naive, but because they want to stand for something good. And I really think their sincerity is being used.

Making this docu is not a really smart move i believe. But also kind of fascinating, because it reveals more about her than maybe she ever intended. If they had tacked on one final episode - just a nice sit-down with a forensic psychologist - I'm pretty sure that alone would've sealed the case. Because at the heart of all this isn't just a crime, it's a character. And one that seems way too comfortable being the star of this sad situation. .

It's end March 2025 and I've just watched episode 5. I honestly can't say if I believe the prosecution's story or not. Luckily it's not up to me to decide that.

Karen doesn't come across as the most sympathetic person, but she's also fighting for her freedom. She's a person in a constant state of crisis. Being self-centered is not a crime.

The coverage of the trial does seem biased as it mainly shows behind the scenes stuff from the defense. Her story isn't very clear, but neither is the evidence presented by the prosecution. It looks like the state is more concerned with putting Karen in prison than getting to the bottom of what actually happened.

You can watch the Karen Read trial on YouTube. The documentary edited it to leave out so many facts. Officer Proctor was the lead investigator and due to his awful investigation of this case the FBI reviewed his conduct and he has now been fired. The prosecution presented the video of the car in the carport then when defense looked at the video they realized the prosecution had misrepresented the video. To cover that up they put a clock over the original clock on the video so they wouldn't see that the timing was backwards. There are so many things this documentary just skimmed over. I couldn't stand it.

The most notable aspects of A Body in the Snow are its repetitiveness, the deep inside look at Karen Read and her defense and a fairly choppy view of the trial.

Whether it was just padding or an attempt to make each episode stand alone re. The case (assuming sporadic viewership?), some episodes repeated such large blocks of the previous episode I thought I'd accidentally mis-clicked. Simply eliminating all the repeat content could've easily shaved off two hours.

And made for a more compelling watch.

I was most interested in the trial itself, specifically the evidence about John O'Keefe's injuries and the police investigation.

It's a shame there wasn't greater focus on the actual legal proceedings-versus, say, 'turtle boy' and the 'free Karen Read' or 'lock her up' brigades.

Was the medical examiner even asked (after two expert witnesses were somewhat contradictory) if JO's arm injuries were consistent with dog bites? Was KR's blood alcohol tested that morning? It's unclear. Did anyone really need to see the defendant curling her hair and steaming her clothes?

One of the more surprising aspects of ABITS was, for a very PR-savvy defense, what an unflattering portrait of Karen Read emerged.

Someone should've advised KR before filming to try to lower her volume-and come across as sad about John and less self-centered. The scene where she's giddy over having 'zero empathy' about the harassment of a witness' teenage daughter was unnerving.

Given defense attorneys are known for their bullishness, when *everyone* on the defense team comes across as more likable than the defendant, that's really saying something.

In a case where many facts remain elusive, ABITS clarified at least two things.

First, Karen Read was clearly overcharged; *if* she hit JO, it wasn't deliberate and she had no idea. Those angry and hurt voicemails she left him were well beyond acting. No one could be convicted of second degree murder with this mound of mishandled evidence.

Second, the defense needs to take it down some notches around the conspiracy theory. Why even speculate JO was placed on the lawn? *If* something happened inside, it's far more likely he left on his own steam, after being ordered out or fleeing a dog attack. Particularly since he was still alive. When you look at where he was found, it makes no sense anyone would take that kind of risk.

It appears a number of people lied on the stand. ABITS is, as much as anything, a spotlight on crappy human impulses.