The prosecution has concluded its case in the retrial of Karen Read, whose defense team is now preparing to present its witnesses. Read, who is accused of backing her SUV into her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, during an alleged drunken incident, had the prosecution’s accident reconstructionist Judson Welcher testify on Thursday. Welcher described the damage to Read’s vehicle as consistent with a collision with O’Keefe, who died in January 2022.
Following the prosecution’s rest, the judge, Beverly Cannone, informed the jury that the trial is ahead of schedule and instructed them to return for a full day of court on Friday. Read’s defense team, led by attorney Robert Alessi, plans to call multiple witnesses over the next one to two weeks, beginning with Matthew DiSogra from DELTA |v|, a firm specializing in accident reconstruction and biomechanics.
During the testimony, Welcher noted that Read’s vehicle recorded multiple ‘Techstream’ events prior to the incident, but when pressed by Alessi, he conceded that not all events were collisions. The defense argues that there are flaws in the prosecution’s assertions regarding the case, questioning the forensic evidence related to glass shards found at the scene.
Read has indicated that her view of the prosecution’s case can be summed up in one word: “Unjust.” As the defense prepares to counter the prosecution’s narrative, they have suggested the possibility of a conspiracy against Read, arguing that O’Keefe may have been attacked inside a residence rather than being struck by her vehicle.
This retrial represents Read’s second attempt to prove her innocence after the first trial ended with a hung jury. The ongoing proceedings reflect the complexities surrounding the case as both parties prepare to present their perspectives to the jury.
The case has drawn significant public attention, highlighting issues of justice in domestic situations and how interpretations of evidence can vary greatly. This retrial could serve as a crucial example of the legal system’s efforts to ensure a fair trial. Given the prior mistrial, many will be watching closely for how the defense’s arguments may shift perceptions or introduce new evidence into the proceedings.