Karen Read Prosecutors May Get 'Big Benefit' in Retrial

Legal experts are weighing in on how a new motion filed by the prosecution could impact Karen Read's retrial.

Prosecutors filed a motion on Tuesday asking the judge to exclude testimony from the defense's digital forensics expert, Richard Green, who testified in Read's first trial. They alleged that Green's findings "lack any evidentiary support."

Why It Matters

Read is facing charges of second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. She is accused of fatally hitting her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, who worked as a Boston police officer for 16 years, with her car in 2022.

Her first trial began on April 16, 2024. On July 1, the judge declared a mistrial after the jury said it was deadlocked on the fifth day of deliberations.

Karen Read in court on July 1, 2024, in Dedham, Massachusetts. Read's second trial is scheduled to begin in April. Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool

What To Know

At Read's first trial, Green analyzed data from witness Jennifer McCabe's cellphone. He said that McCabe searched "ho[w] long to die in cold" at 2:27 a.m., hours before O'Keefe was found unresponsive in the snow.

Brad Bailey, a Boston criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, told Newsweek that the timing of the Google search plays a key role in the cases of the prosecution and the defense.

"The timing is extremely important to both sides here in terms of their theories of the case," Bailey said.

Bailey said that if this motion is successful, it would be a "big benefit" to the prosecution.

"Their timeline, if that's all that's allowed in, would be the one that could be accepted by the jury," he said.

The defense has argued that O'Keefe was injured inside a residence belonging to McCabe's relatives and then taken outside.

"The theory, therefore, was that he was already outside at that time, and there's potential consciousness of guilt, or at least linkage to the defendant's theories of what happened in the house given the timing," Bailey said.

When McCabe was called by the prosecution to testify, she said that she conducted the Google search around 6:20 a.m. at the request of Read. Two digital forensics experts for the prosecution upheld that timeline.

Tracy A. Miner, a Boston criminal defense attorney, told Newsweek that the testimony from digital experts was not the focus of the first trial.

"I think it probably had some impact, but I wouldn't think it's the biggest issue in this case by any means."

Miner said it is unlikely that the judge will grant the prosecution's motion since the expert was permitted to testify in the first trial.

"They're looking back at the first trial and trying to get any evidence out that the defense presented, and it seems to me they're going to lose this motion," Miner said. "The judge has already let this in, and it would be unusual for a judge to change her mind."

Bailey said the judge granting this motion could damage the defense's case.

"While it wouldn't be completely fatal to it, it would take away a key element that they're presenting in support of their theory of the fight in the home and the timing of that fight," Bailey said.

Miner said that this motion would not have a significant impact on the case.

"This is not a make-or-break motion," Miner said.

What People Are Saying

The prosecution, in its motion: "Richard Green's debunked opinions are not an example of a 'battle of the experts' best left to be resolved by the factfinder, but instead, an attempt to infect the jury with an inadmissible opinion that is not premised on reliable digital forensics."

What Happens Next

Read's retrial is scheduled to start in April. It was initially set to begin this month but was delayed after Judge Beverly Cannone granted a joint motion filed by the prosecution and defense.

Do you have a story Newsweek should be covering? Do you have any questions about this story? Contact LiveNews@newsweek.com.