The sensational second trial of Karen Read, charged with killing her Boston police officer boyfriend John O’Keefe, has reached a crucial juncture as the defense hits out at the evidence presented by the prosecution. Read is being accused of second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while intoxicated, and leaving the scene of a deadly accident. Yet her legal counsel claims that she’s the victim of a police cover-up, rather than the perpetrator of a crime.
At the heart of the case is the night of January 29, 2022, when O’Keefe was found unresponsive in the snow outside the house of now-retired Boston police sergeant Brian Albert. Prosecutors say Read, drunk and arguing with O’Keefe, backed her SUV into him, intending to kill him in a blizzard. According to the defense, that narrative is false and police framed Read to protect their own, says the defense.
Phone and Vehicle Data Under Scrutiny
In the latest court sessions, the prosecution relied strongly on data taken from O’Keefe’s iPhone, which it said proves he never entered Albert’s house. Instead, the phone’s GPS and battery temperature data indicate it stayed close to a flagpole in the front yard, just the place where he was found several hours later. This, prosecutors say, lends credence to the theory that he was struck by Read’s vehicle and left outside.
The defense, however, presented expert testimony that questioned the accuracy of that data, particularly battery temperature readings. Defense attorney Robert Alessi said that tests showed temperature drops are slighter faster under similar conditions, which raises the question whether the phone was actually outside as long as claimed. He also observed inconsistencies in motion tracking that would indicate O’Keefe had gone indoors and back to the street.
A Damaged Investigation
A lot of the defense’s case concerns police misconduct. At its center is Michael Proctor, the state investigator who first handled the case. Although he has not been called on to testify in the second trial, Proctor’s role has gained attention. He was sacked between trials, a strange decision which came at the time of bias and evidence mismanagement claims. His presence to this day casts a shadow over the proceedings.
The defense indicates that Proctor and others mismanaged or overlooked major facts, and that pressure from within the law enforcement side prejudiced the investigation. Prosecutors reject these claims and do not fail to insist that their evidence talks for itself.
Witness Testimony Raises Doubts
Another forum for violating the court’s stand was statements from Jennifer McCabe, Read’s friend and fellow witness of the night in question. McCabe said that Read said, “I hit him” after they found O’Keefe in the snow. Nevertheless, the defense noted inconsistencies with her timeline and questioned the time a Google search she made about how long a person could live in the cold was conducted.
The defense says McCabe’s story changed and possibly because of her close relationship to Brian Albert. They say her texts indicate colluded storytelling, and her initial statements to police contradicted what she would later say under oath.
A Divided Public and Lingering Questions
The Karen Read case has become headline news all over the country, not just because of the dramatic facets of the trial but because the trial encompasses larger issues such as police accountability, forensic evidence, and witness reliability. Where there exists no video footage or eyewitness testimony as to when O’Keefe was hurt, the case rests on data interpretation and on how credible the major players are.
As the trial proceeds, the defense will try to persuade the jury that Read had been set up, while the prosecutor is trying to prove her guilty of a violent, fatal act. The outcome will depend on how jurors weigh complex evidence and navigate the tangled relationships at the heart of this tragic case.
