The district attorney whose office is prosecuting the case of Karen Read, the woman charged with second-degree murder in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, issued a rare statement out of court Friday addressing speculation about the case and defending the investigation.
"The harassment of witnesses in the murder prosecution of Karen Read is absolutely baseless. It should be an outrage to any decent person, and it needs to stop," District Attorney Michael Morrissey said in a video statement he said was the first of its kind he's made in 12 years leading the office.
WATCH ANYTIME FOR FREE
 |
>Stream NBC10 Boston news for free, 24/7, wherever you are. |
Read is accused of killing O'Keefe on Jan. 29, 2022, after a night out at the bar. Police said she ran him over with her SUV while dropping him off at a house party in Canton, after they had been arguing. Her attorneys have argued that someone else had to have killed O'Keefe and alleged a coverup.
Get updates on what's happening in Boston to your inbox. Sign up for our >News Headlines newsletter.
Intense attention on the case from the media, people online and in the community of Canton recently made its way into legal arguments in court. Prosecutors filed a motion asking Read and her attorneys to stop speaking to the media, but the judge denied it last month.
"I've practiced law for 40 years and have not seen such a statement, with such force," said NBC10 Boston legal analyst Michael Coyne.
Still, Coyne says he can see why Morrissey is speaking out.
"I'm sure the defendant is going to argue, in this case, that this statement, the force of the statement, and the video presentation, potentially is a taint on the jury pool now by the district attorney's office," he said. "The court is going to have to be very, very careful to select a jury that hasn't already made up its mind."
Outside of a recent court hearing, dozens of Read's supporters marched with signs, saying the evidence they've seen makes it clear Read couldn't have killed O'Keefe.
The defense has been aiming to prove someone else besides Read had to have killed O'Keefe, saying that they have evidence he made it inside the party, that someone who was there googled "Ho[w] long to die in cold" hours before 911 was called to report O'Keefe was found in the snow and that the lead Massachusetts State Police investigator was a friend of the people inside.
Morrissey's statement names several people who've been the subject of speculation inside and outside of court, including the state trooper and people who were at the party.
Lawyers for two of those people, Brian Albert — the homeowner — and his sister-in-law Jennifer McCabe, have successfully argued that they should not be called as witnesses in an evidentiary hearing in the case. Neither has been charged with a crime.
NBC10 Boston has reached out to Read's attorneys about Morrissey's statement on Friday.
The statement marks a shift for Morrissey's office, which said in May, when the defense announced they had "bombshell" evidence that would clear Read's name, that it was "ethically constrained" over what officials can say outside of court.
Prosecutors have said that Read suggested to the friends who she was with, as well as a Canton firefighter/paramedic at the scene, that she believed she hit O'Keefe with her SUV. One of the friends told police at the time that Read called her at 5 a.m. and said, "John's dead, I wonder if he's dead. It's snowing, he got hit by a plow."
Watch Morrissey's full video statement above and read a transcript, as released by his office, below:
This will be the first statement of its kind in my dozen years as Norfolk District Attorney.
The harassment of witnesses in the murder prosecution of Karen Read is absolutely baseless.
It should be an outrage to any decent person - and it needs to stop.
Innuendo is not evidence.
False narratives are not evidence.
However, what evidence does show is that John O’Keefe never entered the home at 34 Fairview Road in Canton on the night he died. Location data from his phone – recovered from the lawn beneath his body when he was transported to the hospital – shows that his phone did not enter that home.
Eleven people have given statements that they did not see John O’Keefe enter the home at 34 Fairview that night. Zero people have said that they saw him enter the home. Zero. No one.
Some have, without any evidence, pointed to 18-year-old Colin Albert, a nephew of the homeowner, and accused him of attacking John O’Keefe as he entered the home. But phone evidence shows O’Keefe never entered the home at all.
Testimony from witnesses tells us that 18-year old Colin Albert had left his uncle’s home before John O’Keefe and Karen Read had arrived outside the residence.
There was no fight inside that home.
John O’Keefe did not enter the home.
Colin Albert, the young man being vilified was not present when Read’s vehicle and John O’Keefe arrived on the street. That is a false narrative.
Colin Albert did not commit murder. Jennifer McCabe, Matthew McCabe, Brian Albert…these people were not part of a conspiracy and certainly did not commit murder or any crime that night. They have been forthcoming with authorities, provided statements, and have not engaged in any cover up. They are not suspects in any crime – they are merely witnesses in the case.
To have them accused of murder is outrageous. To have them harassed and intimidated based on false narratives and accusations is wrong. They are witnesses doing what our justice system asks of them.
The autopsy of John O’Keefe was conducted by a forensic pathologist from the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. The doctor found that the injuries that left John helpless in the cold were not the result of a fight. She further found that the line of abrasions on his arm was consistent with blunt trauma – not an animal attack.
A grand jury of everyday citizens heard the documented evidence and testimony before making its decision. The subject of that murder indictment enjoys the Constitutional presumption of innocence.
Why should the witnesses, who have committed no crime, be afforded less by members of the community? They should not be harassed for telling the government what they heard or saw.
I am asking the Canton community and everyone who feels invested in this case to hear all of the actual evidence at trial before assigning guilt to people who have done nothing wrong. And certainly before taking it upon yourself to harass citizens who, evidence shows, have done nothing in this matter but come forward and bear witness.
We try people in the court and not on the internet for a reason. The internet has no rules of evidence. The internet has no punishment for perjury. And the internet does not know all the facts.
Conspiracy theories are not evidence. The idea that multiple police departments, EMTs, Fire personnel, the medical examiner, and the prosecuting agency are joined in, or taken-in by, a vast conspiracy should be seen for what it is – completely contrary to the evidence and a desperate attempt to re-assign guilt.
Michael Proctor, the State Police trooper being accused of planting evidence outside 34 Fairview Road, was never at Fairview Road on the day of the incident. Proctor and his State Police partner traveled together the entire day, while other officers were processing 34 Fairview. Trooper Proctor was not there and did not plant evidence at 34 Fairview Road.
In addition to having no opportunity to plant evidence as has been suggested, Trooper Proctor would have no motive to do so: Trooper Proctor had no close personal relationship with any of the parties involved in the investigation, had no conflict, and had no reason to step out of the investigation. Every suggestion to the contrary is a lie.
This should all be seen for what it is – and not used as a pre-text to attack and harass others.
What is happening to the witnesses – some with no actual involvement in the case - is wrong.
It is contrary to the American values of fairness, and the Constitutional value of a fair trial.
It needs to stop now.
I am releasing this as a recorded statement rather than holding a news conference because my remarks need to be so narrowly tailored to the issue a hand while the prosecution is pending in Superior Court.
But the message is the same.
What is happening to these innocent people, these witnesses, is wrong and it needs to stop.
