Karen Read’s jury deadlock leads to mistrial in death of Boston police officer’s boyfriend

DEDHAM, Massachusetts — A judge declared the trial void Monday after jurors could not reach a consensus in the case of Karen Read, a woman accused of killing her boyfriend, a Boston police officer, by hitting him with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm. The case attracted undue attention thanks to crime buffs, conspiracy theorists and Read’s pink-shirted supporters.

Read, a former adjunct professor at Bentley College, was charged with first-degree murder and other charges in connection with the death of Officer John O’Keefe. O’Keefe had been with the Boston Police Department for 16 years and was found outside the home of another Boston police officer in Canton in January 2022. An autopsy found that O’Keefe died of hypothermia and blunt force trauma.

Prosecutors said Read and O’Keefe had been drinking heavily before she dropped him off at a party at her co-worker Brian Albert’s house. They said she hit him with her SUV before driving away.

The defense tried to portray Read as the victim, saying O’Keefe was actually killed in Albert’s house and then dragged outside and left there. They argued that investigators focused on Read because she was a “convenient outsider” who saved them from having to consider other suspects, including Albert and other police officers at the party.

On Friday, a jury foreman told the judge that despite a “comprehensive review of the evidence,” they had not reached a unanimous verdict. The judge urged the jury to keep trying.

Testimony during the two-month trial focused on sloppy police work and relationships between the parties. Police admitted to using red plastic cups to collect blood evidence and using a leaf blower to clear away snow and expose evidence. The lead investigator admitted to making crude statements about Read in text messages from his personal cellphone.

Experts disagreed on whether O’Keefe’s injuries were consistent with the crash caused by Read’s luxury SUV, which had a broken taillight. The defense claimed the injuries were caused by an altercation and the family’s aggressive dog, Albert.

While the drama unfolded in the courtroom, dozens of Read’s supporters in pink gathered outside each day, carrying signs reading “Free Karen Read” and mobbed her as she arrived each day. Drivers honked their horns in support. A smaller group of people calling for Read’s conviction also showed up.

Prosecutors relied on testimony from several first responders that Read admitted to hitting O’Keefe – saying “I hit him” – as well as evidence that Read was intoxicated or nearly intoxicated eight hours later when she returned to the house with friends and they found the body.

Several witnesses testified the couple had a stormy relationship that began to deteriorate. Prosecutors presented angry text messages between the two written hours before O’Keefe’s death. They also played voice messages from Read to O’Keefe left after she allegedly hit him, including one left minutes later that read: “John, I hate you.”

Defense attorneys attempted to refute the police investigation, pointing out that Albert’s home was never searched for evidence of a fight with O’Keefe and that the crime scene was not secured. They suggested that police planted some evidence such as pieces of her SUV’s broken taillight, a broken drinking glass and even a lock of hair.

A turning point in the proceedings came when the lead investigator, State Trooper Michael Proctor, took the stand. He admitted to sending offensive text messages about Read to friends, family and colleagues during the investigation. He apologized for the language he used but insisted it had no impact on the investigation.

In his text messages, he insulted Read in various ways, including calling him a “nutcase.” He once texted his sister that he wanted Read to “kill himself,” which he told the jury was a figure of speech. And despite having relationships with several witnesses, he stuck with the case.

Two expert witnesses called by the U.S. Department of Justice as part of an investigation into the police handling of the case testified for the defense, providing a scientific analysis of their conclusion that O’Keefe’s injuries and the physical evidence were inconsistent with the prosecution’s theory that he was struck and injured by Read’s 7,000-pound vehicle.

O’Keefe suffered a significant head injury and other injuries, but no significant bruising or broken bones typically associated with a collision with a vehicle at the speed indicated by the SUV’s GPS and onboard computer.

This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without any modifications.