Karen Read, a former adjunct professor, is facing serious charges, including second-degree murder, in connection with the death of her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, a Boston police officer. The incident occurred in January 2022 when Read allegedly struck O’Keefe with her SUV during a snowstorm and left him to die.
Her defense team contends that she is being wrongfully accused, asserting that another party is responsible for O’Keefe’s demise. In a bid to dismiss the charges, Read’s attorney has petitioned the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, arguing that retrial would constitute unconstitutional double jeopardy.
The legal backdrop includes a mistrial declared last summer after jurors were unable to reach a consensus on the charges against Read. Five jurors later came forward to assert that they were only deadlocked on a manslaughter count and believed Read was not guilty of the other charges.
Despite these claims, a judge ruled in August that Read could be retried, setting a new trial date for January. This ruling is contested by Read’s attorney, Martin Weinberg, who insists that the previous jurors’ assertions warrant consideration for a double jeopardy defense.
Former Professor Faces Second-Degree Murder Charges in Boyfriend’s Death Amid Claims of Judicial Bias
In his brief, Weinberg argues that it is unreasonable to believe that not all jurors shared the same view, particularly given the public nature of the case and the potential for bias. He points out that if five jurors felt strongly about Read’s innocence regarding the two charges, the remaining jurors would likely have addressed this disparity during deliberations.
This argument raises questions about the integrity of the judicial process and whether Read should be subjected to another trial based on the jurors’ claims.
Compounding the case’s complexity, prosecutors allege that Read had been drinking heavily with O’Keefe before the incident, and an autopsy determined that he died from hypothermia and blunt force trauma.
The defense counters this narrative, suggesting that O’Keefe was killed inside the home of another officer, Brian Albert, and later moved outside. They argue that law enforcement prematurely targeted Read, labeling her a “convenient outsider,” thereby avoiding scrutiny of the officers involved.
Moreover, the trial has revealed significant misconduct among some state investigators, including State Trooper Michael Proctor, who was relieved of duty after sending inappropriate messages about Read. This issue of bias among law enforcement personnel adds another layer of contention to the case.
As the prosecution prepares its response to the defense’s petition, scheduled for October 16, the ongoing legal battle highlights the tensions between justice and perceived systemic biases within the law enforcement community.
