🎬 VCH Deep Dive P2 w ai | Mass v Karen Read
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2025
- This is a NotebookLM podcast based on the information gleaned in the previous video "VCH Deep Dive P1". It explains the visual data in more depth and explains, in layman terms, how the ai is able to reach conclusions using a given a data set.
In case you missed P1 • 🎬 VCH Deep Dive P1 | M...
Buy me a coffee: paypal.me/dashiz
Join me on Rumble: rumble.com/c/c...
Follow me on Twitter: / mezmerelda007
Maybe Trooper Paul should’ve used AI so he could’ve saved himself all of that “Pirouette” embarrassment…
Been saying this for months… WHEELSPINS by tow truck driver ,, on daddy’s driveway , in a snow bank from being parked there all night😊
The product quality of these AI,s is mind boggling, and your direction was well played. Thank you for another great video.
Thank you Aussie 💜
I think they should get Chat gpt up on the stand. It seems to have a better understanding of the data than the cops.
Pehaps replace Bev with AI wich would be far maore human and fair
This is so impressive and instructive! This video, in combination with the kinematic analysis of the data that Trooper Paul provided (but could not expertly explain) is a huge nail in the CW's case in chief. Basically, it demonstrates that the CW's hypothesis (it doesn't measure up to a theory) is nonsense. In other words, the CW's explanation is not remotely plausible; it goes so far beyond establishing reasonable doubt that for anyone to maintain Trooper Paul's story has been proven in court is not thinking rationally. They are not reviewing the evidence; rather, they are following their own agenda, likely fixed in their mind before one shoddy piece of evidence was even offered in court by ADA Lally.
Thank you for all your excellent work on this travesty of justice against Karen Read. You've clearly provided many unique contributions to this case and I greatly appreciate it!
I still can't wrap my brain around how the heck you do this AI stuff. But it's so good and you are so incredibly talented 💖
Amazing work! This answers so many questions. I hope you have sent this and the previous one to the defense team.
This is more consistent with road conditions when the car was seized by MSP than when the snow was only an inch or two deep at 12:30am. JMO
Are there timestamps?
@@playsaboutmycat No timestamps in the data provided by Trp Paul. Also no Yaw column which should be there.
Yeah, I think that’s what Aussie went through in the previous video that it was when they were trying to get it on the flatbed tow truck, which I believe matches the real key cycles.
@@HanksHashtagNOTskintag - I think you are right. Unfortunately, YT suggested this one first thing this morning and I jumped right on it. LOL
Thank you Aussie 😁🤘
Great video! Doesn't the ring-camera footage of KR's Lexus in her parents' driveway (prior to the tow) also show the infamous 3-point turn in conjunction w/ the back up and tire spin?
When i read the title for this one, i had to brace myself
I was pleasantly surprised
Fascinating 😮
❤ the P1 video you narrated - very understable & illuminating. Still trying to wrap my 🧠 around AI facsimile of a human convo, sometimes AI speech disfluencies & word choices are off-putting to my 👂 but you're pulling me in. TY for the education. 😊
Thank you for all you hard work 🙏🙏
Awesome, Great show.
Hello, Ms Aussie!! Love ya!
Another good one! Thx
I think the most valuable part of this, is the G forces wouldn’t have been enough to break the tail light.
As for the stuck in the snow, try redoing it to calculate the advanced traction control of the Lexus, is there any data to suggest that it was on or off?
no
The jolting is the tires getting down to pavement. Secondly, the car would experience micro g force hitting 200 pounds. Add in that she didnt know she hit him
Hey Aussie, just a heads-up. The event data you're referencing is what the CW claim is the U-turn on Cedarcrest, not the pedestrian impact. I do agree that it is likely wheel spin though.. I'm so sorry 😬 I know you put work into that.. I just don't want it to be for nothing.. Keep up the great work! ❤
The CW claimed it was a three point turn and AJ said but wouldn’t that be more consistent with a J turn which Paul agreed it probably would. But the snow part was where Paul said it was the pedestrian strike, even though the key cycles don’t match.
Perhaps we can put the picture in Chatgtp of John O'Keefe's arm injuries and have it search a database for similar injuries and the cause of those injuries.
💥💥boom💥💥
Ok, so we know now that trooper Paul has turned the car into Christen?
I'm guessing you meant Christine? I was confused for a minute.
@GPDogDrool
I hate spell check, that's what I meant. Ty
@JeffBegbie Me too!!! 😊
No indicators of a pedestrian impact. Only markers of spinning in the snow. Spinning in the snow wouldn’t cause a large human man to pirouette and land in the yard - it lacks momentum.
Cross examination: you mentioned the lack of data indicating hard braking, swerving consistent with a pedestrian collision. What if the collision was intentional? Could that explain that lack of swerving and braking?
No, because that event didn’t occur at 34 Fairview. As per the correct key cycles, this would have been during the interaction with the tow truck. Perhaps when the CW get the “new” data from the car it might come complete this time, with time and date stamps.
👍🇩🇪 Vielen Dank
lol are we shocked clown shoe Paul fucked up hahaha
Omg as much as I detest AI, this was truly a stroke of genius. I thought that from the first one but this one you take yourself out of the equation completely you're out of the whole video your voice isn't in there you know nothing of you was in there it's nothing but these two AI characters talking about the data and I think that was really smart so that the people that maybe have an issue with you or whatever it might be they don't have to hear it from you at all all they have to do is listen to the results and guess what the proof is right there plain as day for everyone to see broken down in layman's terms for everyone to understand. I'm beginning to think that there is no limit to your intelligence
we all set our own limits.. mine is only time
Chat gpt has a huge ego. Just sayin'.
Sadly, this type of detail wouldn't be helpful in court. Why? Because the jurors would glaze over...they're not that smart. It would be as useful as presenting this to a bunch of 5yr old boys.
And how old are you? 6?
I disagree, I think they could demonstrate this visually quite easily. But I am sure there will still be people who would switch off if it was verbally walked through.
It's actually quite straightforward to show that Karen wasn't driving when the event is triggered just counting key cycles.
@@valhallaw Sure, which the defense did in the first trial, and the jury didn't even consider it (did they fall asleep?) so there's that. They also didn't understand the basic testimony regarding the 2:27am search so there's also that. They are not very smart people.
@ Coming from a 5yr old boy, you would think that 🤷♀
Great explanation again from Aussie AI 🫶
Rather you than bots- 🩷💪