A judge heard arguments Friday morning for dozens of motions before Karen Read's murder trial starts. She's expected to issue rulings in the afternoon.
www.masslive.com
Editor’s note: This story has been updated with a judge’s decision on a pair of motions after the hearing resumed at 2 p.m.
Arguments about the evidence that will be presented to jurors during the murder trial of Karen Read, set to begin this upcoming Tuesday, dominated the final pretrial hearing on Friday morning.
With nearly 40 motions filed in the last few days, Judge Beverly Cannone of Norfolk Superior Court took dozens of those motions under advisement as attorneys argued whether topics referenced in two years’ worth of court proceedings could be admissible as evidence at trial.
Cannone took a majority of motions under advisement. When the hearing resumed at 2 p.m., she said she would allow prosecutors’ motion to get criminal offender record information of jurors.
As for a motion prosecutors made to prevent mentioning a federal grand jury investigation involving interviews with witnesses of Read’s case, Cannone said, “That will come into evidence the way it typically does here in Massachusetts. You can question as to a date where the statement was made under oath, and we can discuss it as it gets closer in more detail.”
Read, 44, of Mansfield, is charged with the killing of her boyfriend John O’Keefe, a Boston police officer, on Jan. 29, 2022. Norfolk prosecutors claim she struck O’Keefe while driving under the influence of alcohol after dropping him off at a Canton home during a snowstorm.
Some of the most significant motions revolved around whether Read’s defense team could pursue a third-party culprit defense in which they would argue that others were responsible for O’Keefe’s death, not Read.
Towards the end of the nearly three-hour hearing on Friday morning, Norfolk prosecutor Adam Lally described a number of the defense team’s arguments as “rank speculation,” and opinions not supported by evidence regarding its pursuit of a third-party defense.
“What I’m concerned about is whatever is acceptable as far as believability when it comes to arguing things in pretrial motions, shouting things from courthouse steps or bandying about on Twitter is not what we do here,” Lally said. “And so now is a time where counsel is going to be relegated to what is actual admissible, relevant evidence.”
David Yannetti, an attorney for Read, countered that the basis for the third-party defense is that a forensic medical examiner provided a sworn affidavit to the court that stated that O’Keefe’s injuries were consistent with him being in a fight and not consistent with being hit with a car.
“The federal authorities have provided us with their reports whereby FBI experts also corroborate that John O’Keefe’s injuries are not consistent with having been hit by a car,” Yannetti said. “If he was not hit by a car, then there is a third party culprit or culprits.”
Other topics addressed during the hearing included a trip to Aruba in December 2021 by O’Keefe and Read that prosecutors said led to a prolonged issue between the couple; whether a federal investigation that has overshadowed the Read case can be discussed at trial; and whether Read’s extrapolated alcohol levels on the night of Jan. 28 could be entered as evidence.
Lally said the trip to Aruba is “highly relevant” to the case since it goes to the motive of the alleged killing.
“This is not as the defendant seems to continuously try to pose it as some sort of temporary or isolated incident,” Lally said. “It literally continues from the Aruba incident all the way through to the murder’s occurrence.”
The arguments stemmed from Read’s belief in O’Keefe’s infidelity in their relationship, according to Lally.
Elizabeth Little, an attorney for Read, said the attempts to admit the “inflammatory” evidence served no purpose other than to “assassinate Ms. Read’s character in the eyes of the jury.”
Alan Jackson, another attorney for Read, argued that jurors were entitled to know that a federal grand jury — a “neutral” agency, he said — was able to uncover evidence that Norfolk prosecutors did not.
Lally argued that since the federal materials produced to the defense, prosecution and court make no reference to a specific target and only state an investigation into “unnamed criminal activity,” it would be unfair to specifically mention the federal grand jury investigation.
Cannone said she would likely rule on that motion on Friday.
Jackson also argued that an extrapolation of Read’s blood alcohol levels, which an expert estimated to be between .13 and .29, could not be reliable since the range is so large.
Lally said the testimony from an expert from the office of alcohol testing about the analysis and how he came to that conclusion about what Read’s blood alcohol level likely was at 12:45 a.m. on the night before O’Keefe’s body was found should be allowed at trial.
Cannone asked Lally to write up a memo about the blood alcohol testing.
Read’s trial is scheduled to start on April 16 with jury selection.
Read pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while driving under the influence, and leaving the scene of a motor vehicle crash causing death. Her attorneys claim other people are responsible for O’Keefe’s death and that alleged
conflicts of interest have compromised the case.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/cmg/MANMJPKF35CIJONWXAUQDMKPIM.jpeg)
www.boston25news.com
www.bostonherald.com
www.nbcboston.com
www.bostonglobe.com
www.cbsnews.com
