The high-profile retrial of Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, has entered a critical phase. On June 2, 2025, Read’s defense attorney, Alan Jackson, engaged in a heated exchange with former Canton police officer Kelly Dever, a witness called by the defense. Dever accused the defense of pressuring her to “repeat a lie” and threatening her with perjury, leading her to contact the FBI. This confrontation underscores the escalating tensions in a case that has deeply divided the community and drawn national attention.
Table of Contents
A Trial Marked by Conflicting Narratives
Karen Read’s retrial, which began on April 1, 2025, follows a 2024 mistrial where the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict. Prosecutors allege that Read, after a night of drinking, intentionally backed her SUV into O’Keefe, leaving him to die in the snow. They presented evidence including a damaged taillight matching O’Keefe’s DNA and a video of Read expressing concern she might have hit him.
In contrast, the defense argues that O’Keefe was beaten inside the home of fellow officer Brian Albert and that Read is being framed to protect those involved. They have highlighted investigative missteps, such as the failure to search the Albert home and the dismissal of potential alternative suspects. The defense has also scrutinized the conduct of lead investigator Michael Proctor, who was fired for misconduct, including sending inappropriate messages and sharing sensitive information.
Defense Strategy Under Scrutiny
The defense’s approach has faced challenges, particularly regarding its handling of witnesses. The confrontation with Kelly Dever has raised questions about the defense’s tactics and credibility. Additionally, the defense’s presentation of expert testimony has been contentious. For instance, accident reconstructionist Judson Welcher, who reenacted the alleged incident by dressing as O’Keefe, admitted uncertainties about the dynamics and injuries involved. Read and her team criticized the demonstration for lacking scientific rigor.
Furthermore, the defense’s claim that O’Keefe’s injuries resulted from a dog attack was supported by Dr. Marie Russell. However, her credibility was questioned due to a lack of formal forensic training, weakening the impact of her testimony.
Community Division and Ongoing Proceedings
The case has polarized the community of Canton, Massachusetts. Supporters of Read argue that she is a scapegoat in a broader cover-up, while others believe she is responsible for O’Keefe’s death. The trial has attracted significant media attention, including documentaries and widespread social media discourse.
As the defense continues to present its case, the trial remains a focal point of public interest. The outcome will hinge on the jury’s assessment of conflicting testimonies and the credibility of both the prosecution and defense narratives.
Stay informed on the latest developments in the Karen Read trial as it continues to unfold.