crime

“When Ms. Read knew she had hit John O’Keefe is a crucial issue in this case,” special prosecutor Hank Brennan said Tuesday.

There is “strong evidence” that Karen Read “knew she had done something terrible” when she called her parents shortly after she allegedly left her boyfriend John O’Keefe to die in a blizzard, special prosecutors argued Hank Brennan in a hearing on Tuesday.

When Read returned to Norfolk Superior Court, several requests were on the docket, including prosecutors’ request for phone records from her parents, Janet and William Read.

Prosecutors say Read called her parents and texted her father after she allegedly drove her SUV into O’Keefe, a Boston police officer, shortly after midnight on Jan. 29, 2022. Authorities allege Read, 44, was driving drunk at the time and hit O’Keefe intentionally, leaving him to die on a snowy lawn in Canton. Her lawyers claim she was framed for a cover-up by law enforcement.

“The conclusion that a 40-year-old woman called her parents at 1:30 a.m. after this tumultuous event is strong evidence that Ms. Read knew she had done something terrible, that she had lashed out.” John O ‘Keefe, and she knew she left him behind,” Brennan claimed. He said Read’s calls went unanswered.

Read is charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death. Her first trial ended in July with a hung jury and she is scheduled to stand trial again in January, although lawyers for both sides have asked for a postponement in April. Judge Beverly Cannone said Tuesday she was still considering the request.

Brennan said prosecutors will likely call William Read as a witness in his daughter’s upcoming retrial, citing his statements in an interview with Boston 25 News last year.

“She felt like she hit something,” William Read said on the Boston 25 segment. “She said, ‘Dad, I think I’m onto something. … I remember … reversing and hitting something.'” Later in the clip, however, he made clear his suspicion that his daughter had damaged her taillight while reversing out of O’ just after 5 a.m. on the 29th. Keefe’s garage drove to look for him.

Read’s parents did not testify during her first trial, but sat behind her in the courtroom and showed their support.

“When Ms. Read knew she had hit John O’Keefe is a crucial issue in this case,” Brennan said. He said he was looking for a month’s worth of phone records from before O’Keefe’s death to see if it was unusual for Read to call her parents in the middle of the night.

“With no further calls, it’s terribly remarkable that she calls her parents in a panic at 1:30 a.m.,” Brennan said. Prosecutors have also requested records of William Read’s calls, text messages and data usage from January 29-30, 2022.

Brennan argued that Karen Read’s recordings are insufficient for prosecutors because call logs can vary depending on the device and some of Read’s phone records may also have been redacted when investigators analyzed the data.

But defense attorney Elizabeth Little called the request a “gross invasion” of privacy and claimed Read’s call logs confirmed that she made no calls to her father on the 29th until she found O’Keefe incapacitated in the snow around 6 a.m

“The Commonwealth did something funny, didn’t it? During their argument, they suggested that she call both parents in the middle of the night. “That’s not true,” Little said. “On the morning of January 29th there was only one call to her father. It was at 6:32 a.m..”

Brennan argued it was unclear whether Read’s father answered her mother’s phone or vice versa.

Little described prosecutors’ motions as a “fishing expedition” and called on Cannone to reject the motions. The judge considered the matter and made no ruling.

Separately, prosecutors also sought recordings from several news outlets interviewing Read or her parents, including Boston Magazine, Boston 25, NBC’s “Dateline” and ABC’s “20/20.” Brennan accused Read of making contradictory statements in her various interviews.

While Boston Although the magazine had previously turned over some recordings of his interviews with Read, Brennan claimed the recordings were peppered with significant redactions and interruptions by Read’s lawyers.

“One thing that stands out when you actually listen to the interviews and look at the transcripts is that there is often a redaction during interruptions by the lawyers, and then when the conversation resumes there is a change – “sometimes subtle, sometimes not subtle – there is a change in Ms. Read’s statement,” Brennan said.

The defendants, he added, “enjoy the privilege of the Fifth Amendment as they should; A defendant is presumed innocent. But if they cast it aside, it is at their peril.”

Robert Bertsche, an attorney for the magazine, blamed the redactions on the prosecution’s original motion, which requested statements only from Read and not her attorneys. Cannone took note of the matter in an advisory capacity.

Read’s attorneys have also requested Norfolk District Attorney Michael Morrissey’s personal phone and email records, and attorneys briefly discussed a protective order that would allow prosecutors to release some of the requested materials, according to Brennan. more will follow.

Cannone suggested that the prosecution and defense continue to talk, leaving open the possibility of a hearing on the matter during Read’s Dec. 12 court date.

Live stream via NBC10 Boston.

---

Abby Patkin is a general assignment news reporter whose work covers public transportation, crime, health and everything in between.

---