logo
How Karen Read's second murder trial has differed from the first

How Karen Read's second murder trial has differed from the first

CNN05-05-2025

The retrial of Karen Read is shaping up to be altogether similar to her first murder trial, but there are several differences that could influence whether the jury reaches a verdict this time around.
After the first trial last year ended in a hung jury and mistrial, Read again pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death.
Prosecutors say Read, 45, drunkenly drove a Lexus vehicle into John O'Keefe, her off-duty Boston Police officer boyfriend, and then left him to die in a blizzard outside a home in Canton, Massachusetts, on the night of January 29, 2022. Her defense has argued that fellow law enforcement officers in that home killed O'Keefe, dumped his body on the lawn and conspired to pin the blame on Read in a vast cover-up.
Despite that familiar backdrop, several new attorneys, Read's media interviews and the firing of the lead investigator have combined to change the dynamics of the case.
Here's a closer look at how her retrial has differed from the first trial and what those changes could mean.
The lead prosecutor in the first trial was assistant district attorney Adam Lally, but the retrial has been led by special prosecutor Hank Brennan.
Brennan is best known for defending mob boss James 'Whitey' Bulger during his federal racketeering trial over 10 years ago. He was appointed to retry the Read case by Norfolk District Attorney Michael Morrissey, who described Brennan as a 'highly respected and skilled former prosecutor and long-time defense attorney' who 'has expertise handling complex law enforcement matters.'
Lally remains on the prosecution team but did not deliver opening statements, as he did in the first trial, and has taken a backseat to Brennan.
The defense, too, has changed its legal team since the last trial.
Robert Alessi, a New York-based attorney who did not participate in the first trial, has handled the cross-examination of some expert witnesses and argued motions outside the presence of the jury. His website notes his 'scientific and technical background,' particularly in questioning experts.
Further, attorney Victoria George, who served as an alternate juror in the first trial, was added to Read's defense team. As an alternate, George did not participate in deliberations, but her perspective could help the defense better understand the jury's perspective.
One of the clearest differences from the first trial is Read's own words and commentary.
Read did not testify in the first trial, but she has since spoken publicly about her case in interviews with TV reporters, in Vanity Fair and in an Investigation Discovery documentary series. (Investigation Discovery, like CNN, is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery.)
'This is my version of testifying. Doing this film is my testimony,' she said in the documentary series, 'A Body in the Snow: The Trial of Karen Read.'
At her second trial, prosecutors have already presented some of that 'testimony' to the jury as evidence against her.
'You're gonna hear from her own lips, and many of her statements, her admissions to extraordinary intoxication, her admissions to driving the Lexus, her admissions to being angry at John that night, and I dare say, her admissions that she told (others) that she had hit him,' Brennan said in opening statements.
Brennan then played a video of Read speaking to 'Dateline' in which she raised the possibility that she hit O'Keefe with her vehicle.
'I didn't think I hit him hit him, but could I have clipped him, could I have tagged him in the knee and incapacitated him?' Read said in the clip from the October 2024 interview. 'He didn't look mortally wounded, as far as I could see – but could I have done something that knocked him out and in drunkenness and in the cold, he didn't come to again?'
Read's statement seemingly reinforced witnesses who say they heard her similarly wonder aloud whether she hit O'Keefe the morning his body was found.
Kerry Roberts and Jennifer McCabe, both of whom helped look for the victim, testified Read pointed out she had broken her SUV's taillight that night, and asked them, 'Could I have hit him?' and 'Do you think I hit him?'
Prosecutors during the retrial have used other clips of Read to bolster witness testimony and refute defense arguments.
For example, prosecutors played a clip from the documentary series in which Read said after O'Keefe's death, 'His mother leans over the kitchen island and says to me, 'I think it looks like he got hit by a car.'' However, Peggy O'Keefe testified she was never in the kitchen with Read that day.
In another instance, prosecutors played a clip of Read telling journalist Gretchen Voss in June 2023 that she personally picked pieces of the vehicle's broken taillight and dropped them onto O'Keefe's driveway. That appeared to contradict the defense's argument that this evidence was tampered with by corrupt investigators.
It's not clear if Read will testify in the second trial.
Another major change from the first trial is the employment status of Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator of Read's case.
In her first trial, Proctor admitted under oath that he sent a series of sexist and offensive texts about Read in a private group chat, calling her a 'whack job c*nt,' mocking her medical issues and commenting to coworkers that he had found 'no nudes' while searching her phone for evidence, according to CNN affiliate WCVB.
Proctor apologized for the 'unprofessional' comments on the stand, but the vulgar texts undermined his testimony and the prosecution's case.
Proctor was relieved of duty on the same day the mistrial was announced last July. He was then fired in March for violating four department policies, including for sending those messages.
In opening statements of the retrial, the defense announced plans to focus on Proctor, saying he lied and fabricated evidence in the case.
'You'll see from the evidence in this case that this case carries a malignancy … a cancer that cannot be cut out, a cancer that cannot be cured,' attorney Alan Jackson said. 'And that cancer has a name. His name is Michael Proctor.'
It's unclear if he will testify in this trial – but his name is included on a list of potential witnesses.
CNN's Elise Hammond, Dakin Andone and Jean Casarez contributed to this report.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Texas Starbucks customer fumes over ‘illegal' joke that barista wrote on her cup: ‘It's offensive'
Texas Starbucks customer fumes over ‘illegal' joke that barista wrote on her cup: ‘It's offensive'

New York Post

time2 hours ago

  • New York Post

Texas Starbucks customer fumes over ‘illegal' joke that barista wrote on her cup: ‘It's offensive'

A Texas Starbucks customer claims she and her culture were the target of an 'offensive' joke written on the lid of her drink by one of the store's employees. Blanca Lopez, who is Hispanic, ordered a horchata latte during a trip with her two daughters to the Starbucks inside the Irving, Texas Target store on June 23, CBS Texas reported. One of Lopez's daughters noticed their mother's cup had a message scribbled in black marker across the clear lid, an abnormality for a company known for writing customer names on the side of its products. 'What do you call a sick eagle?' the cup asked, according to a photo obtained by the outlet. 'Illegal,' the riddle answered. 7 Blanca Lopez stands outside the Irving, Texas Target where she was handed the offensive joke at the Starbucks location inside the store on June 23, 2025. CBS TEXAS/YouTube Lopez was left in shock by the joke written on her order. 'It's basically saying that we are sick, illegal individuals that do not belong in this country,' she told the outlet. Lopez recalled her confusion when she first saw the message, unsure if the note was a light-hearted joke or an attack on her identity. 'When I read it, I'm like, OK. Was I supposed to laugh or what do I need to do?' she told the outlet. 7 'What do you call a sick eagle?' the cup asked. 'Illegal.' CBS TEXAS/YouTube 7 The Starbucks outlet inside the Target in Irving, Texas. CBS TEXAS/YouTube 'Why did they call me that? Why are they asking if I have papers or no papers? Why did she write this?' she added. 'For me, like, it's offensive.' Lopez said the joke hit close to home as she had friends and relatives deported because they were in the country illegally. In January, 84 illegal immigrants were arrested during an ICE raid in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, according to Fox 4. The outraged customer reported the joke to the store's manager, who told her there would be a team meeting to ensure it didn't happen again, CBS Texas reported. 7 Lopez recalled her confusion when she first saw the message, unsure if the note was a light-hearted joke or an attack at her identity. CBS TEXAS/YouTube 7 Lopez said the joke hit close to home as she had friends and relatives deported because they were in the country illegally. CBS TEXAS/YouTube Lopez called for the unidentified barista to be fired over the comment. 'I work as a manager. If someone on my team did something like that, I would fire her immediately,' she said. Community activists soon heard about the story and began planning a gathering at the store to meet the 'author of the offensive joke,' Dallas-based protester Carlos Quintanilla wrote on Facebook. Quintanilla planned for other protesters to arrive at the shopping center at 10 a.m. on June 28. 7 Carlos Quintanilla speaks out against the message outside the Target on June 27, 2025. CBS TEXAS/YouTube 7 Community activists soon heard about the story and began planning a gathering at the store, to meet the 'author of the offensive joke.' CBS TEXAS/YouTube An hour later, he canceled the gathering after no one showed up. However, he still walked into the Target, livestreaming for his Facebook followers, in search of the Starbucks, but was stopped by a store employee who told him to leave the building because he was recording inside. 'It's not easy to organize our community to raise their voice, I understand that protesting is already very difficult but acting is quite simple. Even Starbucks and Target have responded to our insistence to clarify their position on the offensive 'ILLEGAL' advertisement,' Quintanilla wrote. 'Let's suspend our protest in forgiveness and let's Protest in Silence!' The Post has reached out to Starbucks and Target. Quintanilla defended the illegal immigrants living in his community while outside the store. 'It's not just inappropriate, it's disturbing,' he told CBS Texas. 'Especially right now, when the narrative being thrown out in mass media is if you're illegal, you're a criminal, and if you're a criminal, you're illegal.'

Diddy 'might be cooked' on key sex crime as jury prepares to deliberate, expert says
Diddy 'might be cooked' on key sex crime as jury prepares to deliberate, expert says

Fox News

time3 hours ago

  • Fox News

Diddy 'might be cooked' on key sex crime as jury prepares to deliberate, expert says

Sean "Diddy Combs' sex trafficking and racketeering trial came to a close after seven weeks on Friday as the rapper's defense team and prosecution completed closing arguments. Both sides saw wins and losses throughout the trial, but experts claimed Diddy "might be cooked" on one specific charge as the jury prepares to deliberate. After his arrest in September 2024, the "Last Night" singer was charged with sex trafficking, racketeering and transportation to engage in prostitution. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Former Danity Kane singer and Diddy protégé, Aubrey O'Day, has been following the trial and isn't sure what the outcome will be. While she personally believes the rapper is "guilty of all the charges," the musician isn't sold on the prosecution's case in court. "The rational, justice side of me that leads a good amount of what I do nowadays says the answer should be what was proven by the prosecution, the law, and that's conflicting to what I want personally," she told Extra. She noted: "I don't know if the prosecution proved [Diddy's crimes] without a doubt, though." During closing arguments, prosecutors argued that Diddy ran an alleged criminal enterprise with full control. They pointed out that the jury heard testimony, saw texts, viewed bank records and heard audio showing the rapper committing crime after crime for decades. According to the prosecution, the government showed that Diddy didn't take no for an answer. Up until today, Diddy was able to get away with crime because of his money and power, Assistant U.S. Attorney Christine Slavik said. "That stops now." Here's where experts say things stand for each charge against Diddy with the jury about to deliberate. WATCH: DEFENSE ATTORNEY BREAKS DOWN 'TROUBLING' TREND WITH DIDDY DEFENSE TEAM As to the transportation to engage in prostitution charge, an expert told Fox News Digital, Diddy might be in trouble. "The sex workers were very clear about their role and their purpose for being transported across state lines; it was for sex and not something else," criminal defense attorney Eric Faddis explained. "Diddy might be cooked on this charge." However, the defense did find a way to show the jury a different explanation in an attempt to undermine the government's argument. "Defense got an employee of one of the companies to say that Diddy was just buying the escorts' time and not any sexual performance, which the jury could use as a basis to acquit Diddy on the transportation charges," Faddis, a founding partner of Colorado-based Varner Faddis, said. "Diddy might be cooked on this charge." The jury is unlikely to find Diddy not guilty of racketeering, criminal defense attorney John W. Day told Fox News Digital. "The only thing Diddy and his team can hope for is a miracle where the jurors don't buy the government's claim that this was racketeering and that Diddy was the head of a criminal empire dedicated to fulfilling his desires," the founder of New Mexico-based law practice, John Day Law, explained. "A defense win is more likely if the jurors are conflicted on the racketeering charges and can't reach a unanimous verdict. That could lead to a hung jury on one or more of the charges. But the jurors spent the entire trial waiting to see how Diddy's lawyers rebutted the massive case against him, and they merely rested without putting on any witnesses. That leaves the jury picking through the government's case to see if this really rises to racketeering, and if not, they may hang or acquit on some of the charges – but it's unlikely." WATCH: THE PROSECUTORS' MADE A 'GRAVE ERROR' IN THE DIDDY CASE, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY WARNS According to the legal expert, the prosecution "presented overwhelming evidence" that Diddy "presided over this little kingdom of criminal activity designed to make him happy – and made a compelling case to the jury that this met all the elements of racketeering, sex trafficking, and transportation for prostitution." "The prosecution can withstand an acquittal or a hung jury on some of the counts, but the prosecutors really need a conviction for racketeering to claim total victory," Day added. "Again, that can be a difficult charge to convict on if the jurors don't buy the theory that this entire business empire was engaged in sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. But the defense needed to have convinced at least one juror that the case wasn't there, and that witnesses were lying to save their own necks. And that's a tough sell to a jury that spent weeks listening to horrific testimony about Diddy and his empire." Things aren't as clear-cut on the sex trafficking charge, one expert told Fox News Digital. Diddy was accused of sex trafficking two of his ex-girlfriends, Cassie Ventura and Jane, who testified under a pseudonym. The prosecution claimed the rapper transported both women across state lines and then forced them to have sex with male escorts while he watched. "On cross-examination, both Cassie and Jane admitted to willingly participating in some of the 'freak offs,' which could cause the jurors to wonder if all of the romantic encounters may have been consensual," Faddis noted. "Both Cassie and Jane admitted to voluntarily ingesting drugs before the 'freak offs,' which may undercut the prosecution's coercion argument." The criminal defense attorney did note that Cassie and Jane both gave "compelling, evocative testimony detailing physical abuse and financial coercion."

Hiker's wilderness adventure ends in tragedy at popular park destination
Hiker's wilderness adventure ends in tragedy at popular park destination

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Hiker's wilderness adventure ends in tragedy at popular park destination

An Illinois man died after falling while hiking at a state park in New York. The 70-year-old tourist, Jack Wersching, was hiking in the Kaaterskill Wild Forest in the Catskills on the evening of Friday, June 20, when he fell from a rock ledge onto stone steps below, according to a statement from New York State Police. Wersching, of Park Ridge, Illinois, was walking along a path near a waterfall when the incident occurred. Park rangers responded quickly to the scene and attempted to stabilize him for an airlift to a hospital, but he died at the scene. Second Missing Hiker Found Dead In Maine As Authorities Conclude Massive Search Operation "DEC sends our condolences to the hiker's family, and thanks the first responders for their efforts," the Department of Environmental Conservation said in a statement, adding that it was investigating. Read On The Fox News App Hiker Found Dead In Maine, Search Continues For 28-Year-old Daughter A witness to the accident told the New York Post that he recalled hearing cries for help and finding Wersching badly injured. Shilo Shalom, who had briefly met Wersching and his family earlier in the day while hiking, told the outlet he had attempted to assist by using shirts to stem the bleeding. Fatal Fall In Washington's North Cascades Kills 3, Leaves 1 Survivor "I just tried to save him, and I couldn't," Shalom told the outlet. Wersching's family also shared a statement with the Post and described him as a "loving husband, father, and grandfather, remembering him as someone who approached life with curiosity and a sense of adventure." "Though we are devastated by this loss, we take comfort in knowing he was doing something he truly loved when he passed," Wersching's family said in the article source: Hiker's wilderness adventure ends in tragedy at popular park destination

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store