BOSTON (Court TV) — A civil rights group has gotten involved in Karen Read‘s court battle as she fights to have two charges dismissed related to the alleged murder of her boyfriend, a Boston police officer.
FILE – Karen Read waits for her court case to resume at Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Mass., on June 28, 2024. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, Pool, File)
Read faces a number of charges for allegedly leaving her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, to die in the snow after hitting him with her car after a night out drinking in 2022. Her first trial ended with a mistrial in July 2024 after the panel of 12 empaneled jurors reported they could not reach a unanimous verdict. In the weeks and months following the mistrial, individuals claiming to be jurors approached Read’s defense team and prosecutors to say that they had only been deadlocked on the single charge of manslaughter and had actually agreed to acquit her on charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly accident.
Those claims from purported jurors have led Read’s defense to push for the charges to be dismissed, saying that she is protected by double jeopardy because the jury was ready to acquit. Massachusetts’ highest court, the Judicial Supreme Court, has agreed to hear the case with its full panel of judges.
RELATED | New prosecutor will step into Karen Read murder trial
On Wednesday, prosecutors filed their brief which argues that the jurors’ claims post-mistrial are irrelevant and “do not constitute acquittals.” In the brief, Norfolk County District Attorney Michael Morrissey points to the notes the jury sent out during their deliberations, which explicitly said that the panel was “starkly divided” over “the charges,” implying that there was, in fact, no consensus.
Prosecutors also argued that until the final verdict form is signed, jurors are free to change their minds, and the messages from individuals following the trial never indicated when, during the days of deliberations, the jury had reached agreements.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, a state affiliate of the national organization known for working to preserve individual rights in the United States, stepped into the case with an amicus brief, filed in support of Read’s appeal. While the ACLUM makes it clear they have no position on Read’s guilt or innocence, it argued that Judge Beverly Cannone, who presided over the trial, erred in not holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the jurors had reached a verdict.
MORE | Karen Read says in interview that murder case left her in ‘purgatory’
Prosecutors said in their brief that even the different statements from the five jurors who came forward don’t align, noting that “Juror C” said the group was only unanimous to acquit on a single charge: “Apparently even the five purported jurors, to say nothing of the seven other jurors, were not of one mind.”
The jurors in the case have not been publicly identified and their names have been sealed by the judge, citing security concerns. At least one juror petitioned the court to remain anonymous, citing harassment and fears for their safety.
The SJC will hear oral arguments on Read’s appeal on Nov. 6. Her retrial is currently scheduled to begin in January 2025.
