Attorneys are pushing for Massachusetts’ highest court to dismiss two of the three charges against her.
What to Know
- Karen Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her SUV during a snowstorm in Canton in January 2022
- A mistrial was declared in her case in July, and the prosecution had vowed to retry her
- The defense claims that several jurors revealed to them that the jury was in agreement that she was not guilty on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a crash resulting in death; they now want those charges dismissed
- Both sides will appear before the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts to make their arguments
The defense team in the high-profile Karen Read case submitted their response to the prosecution's argument against dismissing some of the charges against her as both sides prepare to square off before Massachusetts' highest court next month.
WATCH ANYTIME FOR FREE
 |
Stream NBC10 Boston news for free, 24/7, wherever you are. |
Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her SUV during a snowstorm in Canton in January 2022, but after a mistrial was declared in the initial trial, her legal team filed to have the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a crash resulting in death dismissed on grounds of double jeopardy. They claim that after the mistrial, several jurors revealed to them that the jury was actually in agreement that Read was not guilty on those two charges and were only in disagreement on the charge of manslaughter while driving under the influence.
The jury in Read's first trial began deliberations on June 25 and expressed that they were deadlocked to the judge on three occasions — on June 28, and in two separate occasions on July 1, the day Judge Beverly Cannone ultimately declared the mistrial.
Get updates on what's happening in Boston to your inbox. Sign up for our News Headlines newsletter.
In the 77-page document filed with the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts last week, the prosecution argued its key points: that the judge's declaration of a mistrial was reasonable given the information provided by the jury in notes on three separate occasions, that the defendant consented to the mistrial (as defense counsel was given an opportunity to speak about the declaration of a mistrial and pushed for that result), and that Read was never acquitted on any charges in formal court.
But in a reply brief, the defense argues that the Commonwealth did not satisfy its burden of establishing manifest necessity and that the claims that the jury made a unanimous conclusion after the trial should count as acquittal on the charges they did come to an argument over. They also note that the defense is entitled to a judicial inquiry.
"The defense independently maintains that a jury’s final, unanimous agreement that Ms. Read is not guilty constitutes an acquittal for Double Jeopardy purposes, and that the trustworthy and uncontradicted post-trial affidavits entitle her to a judicial inquiry on this issue," the introduction to the brief reads.
Read the reply brief from Karen Read's defense
American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts is backing Read's argument to the SJC, filing a brief last week arguing that the court should toss Cannone's decision and at least have her hold a hearing involving the evidence that the jury was in agreement.
Read the Karen Read prosecution's full argument to the SJC
NBC10 Boston legal analyst Michael Coyne believes that Read's argument won't win out after the Supreme Judicial Court hears arguments in the case on Nov. 6.
Read is scheduled for a for retrial in January.
