BOSTON (Court TV) — Karen Read will face the same charges, including second-degree murder when she stands trial for a second time this spring after the State’s highest court denied her bid to toss the charges.
Karen Read appeared in court on Aug. 9, 2024, as her attorneys argued for charges against her to be dismissed. (Court TV)
Prosecutors have accused Read of hitting her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in the snow outside of a friend’s house. Read has maintained her innocence, and her defense has alleged a wide-ranging cover-up at the hands of investigators and the owners of the home where O’Keefe’s body was found.
RELATED | Karen Read’s attorney: Commonwealth’s videos a ‘dumpster fire’
Read’s first trial ended in a mistrial after jurors reported they were hopelessly deadlocked. In the days after the trial, Read’s defense filed motions saying jurors had contacted them to report that they had, in fact, been unanimous that Read had been not guilty of second-degree murder, and the panel was only split on the lesser charges.
In their appearance before Massachusetts’ highest court, Read’s attorneys argued that retrying Read on the murder charges would amount to double jeopardy. Her defense said they were contacted by five jurors after the trial and argued that the affidavits from the jurors “reflect a clear and unambiguous decision that Ms. Read is not guilty.”
Prosecutors argued that the jury’s notes stated three times that it was deadlocked and never indicated that it had reached a unanimous ruling on any charge. However, the Commonwealth conceded that it, too, had been contacted by jurors who said that the jury had voted “not guilty” on at least one count.
MORE | State’s highest court hears arguments in Karen Read’s case
In its decision, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found there was “no abuse of discretion” in trial Judge Beverly Cannone’s decision to declare a mistrial. The Court also found that the jury’s third and final note implied that they were deadlocked on all charges, not just some.
“That note stated, in part: ‘Some members of the jury firmly believe that the evidence surpasses the burden of proof establishing the elements of the charges [beyond ] a reasonable doubt. Convers[e]ly, others find the evidence fails to meet this standard, and does not sufficiently establish the necessary elements of the charges’ (emphases added)”
The justices also found that had Judge Cannone inquired whether the jury had reached a partial verdict, Read would have had standing to argue that any verdict was the result of “coercive intrusion.”
Read’s retrial is scheduled to begin on April 1. Her attorneys have indicated they plan to file another motion to dismiss the case in its entirety, and a hearing on that motion is scheduled for March.
