Karen Read’s deadlocked jury leads to mistrial in Boston police officer boyfriend’s death

DEDHAM, Mass. — A judge declared a mistrial Monday after jurors deadlocked in the case of Karen Read, a woman accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend by hitting him with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm, a case that attracted widespread attention thanks to true crime buffs, conspiracy theorists and Read’s pink shirt followers.

Read, a former associate professor at Bentley College, was confronted second degree murder and other charges in the death of Officer John O’Keefe, a 16-year-old member of the Boston Police Department who was found outside the home of another Canton police officer in January 2022. An autopsy revealed that O’Keefe died of hypothermia and blunt force trauma.

Prosecutors said Read and O’Keefe had been drinking heavily before she dropped him off at a party at the home of Brian Albert, a fellow officer. They said she hit him with her SUV before driving away.

The defense tried to portray Read as the victim, stating that O’Keefe was in fact murdered in Albert’s home and then dragged outside and left for dead. They argued that investigators focused on Read because she was a “convenient outsider” who prevented them from considering other suspects, including Albert and other police officers at the party.

On Friday, a jury foreman told the judge that despite an “exhaustive review of the evidence,” they had not yet reached a unanimous verdict. The judge told jurors to keep trying.

Testimony during the two-month trial focused on shoddy police work and relations between the parties. Police admitted to using red plastic cups to collect blood evidence and a leaf blower to clear snow to reveal evidence. The lead investigator admitted to making crude statements about Read in text messages from his personal cell phone.

Experts disagreed about whether O’Keefe’s injuries were consistent with being struck by Read’s luxury SUV, which had a broken taillight. The defense argued the injuries were caused by an altercation and the family’s aggressive dog, Albert.

While the drama played out in a courtroom, dozens of Read’s supporters gathered outside each day, dressed in pink, holding signs that read “Free Karen Read,” and attacked her as she arrived each day. Motorists honked their horns in support. A smaller group of people who want Read convicted also showed up.

The prosecutors based their appeal on multiple aid workers who testified that Read admitted to hitting O’Keefe — saying, “I hit him” — as well as evidence that Read was legally drunk or close to it eight hours laterafter returning to the house with friends and finding the body.

Several witnesses stated that the couple had a stormy relationship that began to sour. Prosecutors presented angry text messages in the few hours before O’Keefe died. They also played Read’s voice messages for O’Keefe left after she allegedly hit him, including one minutes later saying, “John, I (expletive) hate you.”

Defense attorneys tried to poke holes in the police investigation, noting that Albert’s home was never searched for signs of a fight involving O’Keefe and that the crime scene was not secured. They suggested that some evidence — such as pieces of her SUV’s cracked taillight, a broken drinking glass and even a lock of hair — had been planted by police.

A turning point in the process came when lead researcher, State Trooper Michael Proctor, took the floor. He acknowledged that he had sent insulting texts about Read to friends, family and fellow officers during the investigation. He apologized for the language he used, but insisted that it had no bearing on the investigation.

In his lyrics he called Read several names, including “whack job.” At one point, he texted his sister that he wished Read would “kill himself,” which he told jurors was a figure of speech. And despite having relationships with several witnesses, he stayed on the case.

Two expert witnesses hired by the U.S. Department of Justice during an investigation into police handling of the case testified for the defense and provided scientific analysis for their conclusion that O’Keefe’s injuries and the physical evidence were not were consistent with the prosecution theory that he was struck and injured by Read’s 3,175-kilogram vehicle.

O’Keefe suffered significant head injuries and other injuries, but lacked significant bruising or broken bones typically associated with being struck by a vehicle at the speed indicated by GPS and the SUV’s onboard computer.