Karen Read’s lawyers filed a strongly worded objection Monday to the prosecution’s request to release her mother’s phone records ahead of the resumption of her murder trial, calling it a “blatant attempt to obtain salacious information.”

Prosecutors said Read called her mother several times after she allegedly hit her boyfriend with her SUV on a snowy night in January 2022. But in a filing in Norfolk Superior Court, Read’s attorneys criticized the attempt to obtain the phone records as a “blatant attempt.” “fishing for salacious information not known to the Commonwealth, seeking discovery without permission, violating (Read’s mother’s) privacy, and intimidating the Read family by sending the message that their lives are under inspection by the Commonwealth.”

Read, 44, of Mansfield, has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of bodily injury resulting in death. Their first trial ended with a jury verdict in July and the retrial is tentatively scheduled for January, although both sides have asked for it to be postponed until April.

Prosecutors say Read was drunk early on Jan. 29, 2022, and intentionally drove her SUV into Boston police officer John O’Keefe after dropping him off outside a Canton home following an all-night bar crawl. Her lawyers say she was framed and that O’Keefe entered the home, then owned by a Boston colleague, where he was fatally beaten in the basement before his body was dumped on the front lawn.

On Nov. 15, prosecutors filed a request for “call records for the telephone of Janet Read of Dighton from December 30, 2021 to January 30, 2022,” a day after O’Keefe’s death, after filing an earlier request for a similar one Recordings from the phone of Karen Read’s father, William Read. The defense also rejected this request; both remain pending.

In the Nov. 15 motion, prosecutors said Karen Read’s phone records show she called her mother three times in the hours after O’Keefe was allegedly beaten, at 1:14 a.m. 4: 38 p.m. and 4:42 p.m. None of these calls were answered. Read returned to the Canton address shortly after 6 a.m. with two other women and discovered O’Keefe’s snow-covered body on the front lawn, according to court documents and testimony.

“Janet Read’s telephone records are material and relevant to establishing the regularity or irregularity of defendant’s regular communication with her mother during the late hours,” the Nov. 15 motion states.

Prosecutors have also said in court papers that records indicate that Karen Read and her father spoke at 6:32 a.m. that morning while she was still at the crime scene, nearly an hour before she was taken to the hospital because of her distressed condition . Prosecutors have said they plan to call William Read as a witness in the second trial.

“Janet Read’s telephone records must be made available to be used as possible evidence in impeachment proceedings, contingent on the testimony of William Read,” prosecutors wrote.

On Monday, Read’s lawyers pushed back against that argument.

“The Commonwealth’s suggestion that (Janet Read’s) subscriber information would somehow reveal ‘conflicting statements’ made by Ms. Read to her father, Mr. Read, in the early hours of January 29, 2022 makes no sense,” they wrote. He added that prosecutors had referred to an interview William Read gave to Boston 25 News.

In this interview, William Read was asked whether his daughter had told him on the morning of O’Keefe’s death that she thought she might have hit him. He said she didn’t do that, but added that “she felt like she had bumped into something,” and a Boston 25 reporter later clarified that William Read meant his daughter thought she was against something struck an object as she drove out of O’Keefe’s home to search for him before his body was discovered, according to court documents.

During the first attempt, video footage was played showing Read’s SUV apparently striking the car as she slowly backed into O’Keefe’s driveway.

“The Commonwealth inexplicably maintains that it needs this from Ms Read Mother Cell phone data for prosecution Mr Reads Opinion because it assumes that such a conversation could not have taken place in the hospital but should have taken place earlier in the morning before They arrived at the hospital,” Read’s attorneys wrote in the motion. “That makes no sense. The facts that supposedly support the moment Request for Ms. Read’s mother’s cell phone information relate only to conversations between Ms Read and her father.”

Read’s attorneys said prosecutors already have their client’s phone records, which were not deleted or altered in any way before state police took possession of her device.

A hearing on a number of outstanding motions, including the telephone matter, is scheduled for Tuesday.

Separately, the state Supreme Court is considering a defense motion to dismiss the murder and leave the scene, saying several jurors told them, either directly or through intermediaries, that the jury had unanimously agreed to acquit them on those two counts Only in the case of manslaughter did the facts remain fixed. It is unclear when the court will decide.

Read also faces a wrongful death lawsuit brought by O’Keefe’s family.

This report used material from previous Globe stories.

Travis Andersen can be reached at [email protected].