DEDHAM, Mass. (Court TV) — Karen Read‘s attorneys returned to court on Thursday, where they accused prosecutors of committing discovery violations and withholding evidence in the case.
Karen Read sits next to her attorney, Alan Jackson, at a motions hearing on Feb. 6, 2025. (Court TV)
Read is facing multiple charges, including second-degree murder, in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe. Prosecutors say Read hit O’Keefe with her car after a night out drinking and left him to die in the snow, while her defense maintains Read is being framed and that O’Keefe was actually attacked by friends at a home nearby. Read’s claims of a cover-up were central in her first trial, which ended with a mistrial in July when the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict.
Ahead of Read’s second trial, scheduled to begin on April 1, the defense and prosecution have gone head-to-head in motions hearings battling over evidence and proposed expert witnesses. Read’s defense scored a win on Thursday when Judge Beverly Cannone said she would allow defense expert Richard Green to testify. Green testified that witness Jennifer McCabe used her phone to search “how long ti die in cikd” at 2:27 a.m, rather than 6:30 a.m, which the prosecution claims. Despite Special Prosecutor Hank Brennan’s arguments at a Jan. 31 hearing calling Green’s work “forensically and scientifically unsound,” Judge Cannone said he would be allowed to take the stand.
READ MORE | Prosecutors fight expert’s ‘baseless claim’ at Karen Read hearing
“It’s clear to me that the issues that give rise to the dispute do not invoke the gatekeeper function of the Court,” Cannone said Thursday. “To me, it’s rather a difference of opinions that needs to be resolved by the jury.”
Cannone did not render a decision on a motion from Read’s defense asking for the Commonwealth to foot the bill for their defense experts to review video from the Canton Police Department. The video in question, recorded on Jan. 29, 2022, was introduced at the first trial but was revealed to have been inverted.
Read’s attorney, Alan Jackson, accused the prosecution of deliberately withholding portions of the video. “What we have gotten, it appears, are scraps and fragments of videos that the Commonwealth has decided, on their own and within their own timeframe, to dole out to us,” Jackson said. “Why are we getting videos from Jan. 29, 2022, two-and-a-half years later? And why were some of those videos altered or manipulated or not in their proper format? We still don’t have answers to those questions.”
Brennan denied any wrongdoing and said that he and his office have gone above and beyond to share discovery and gave the defense access to the police department’s DVR system with “no hesitation.”
Jackson told Judge Cannone that he had previously been told the footage had been deleted from the DVR, but in recent days learned that a police officer had uploaded a copy of it to their iCloud. “This entire situation surrounding this DVR and the Commonwealth’s maintenance of the DVR and the footage on it is a complete dumpster fire, and Ms. Read has to pay for the fire extinguisher,” Jackson said.
The defense said it plans to file a motion to dismiss the case entirely. Judge Cannone set a deadline for that to be filed by 21, and a hearing for it was scheduled on March 4.
