The testimony could end in the murder trial of Karen Read as the defense calls the last witnesses to court.
Read, 44, of Mansfield, has pleaded not guilty to charges including second-degree murder in the death of John O’Keefe, her boyfriend, a Boston police officer.
Prosecutors say Read chased O’Keefe with her Lexus SUV and left him for dead in a snowstorm outside 34 Fairview Road in Canton in January 2022 after a night of heavy drinking. The defense wants to prove that O’Keefe was killed by someone in the house and then thrown into the snow.
After 68 witnesses, the prosecution rested on Friday in the murder case against Karen Read. The defense began its presentation to the jury after the judge denied their request to immediately find Read not guilty.
The defense says it will call three witnesses today, a pathologist and two accident reconstruction experts. Attorney David Yanetti tells Boston 25 that closing arguments could take place as soon as Tuesday.
Prosecutor rests, defense calls plow driver and dog bite expert to participate in Karen Read murder trial
LIVE PLAY-BY-PLAY FROM THE COURT:
11:10 am
10:50 am
-
The jury now knows that the ax exploration company ARCCA was not hired by the defense to conduct their analysis.
-
“You don’t work for us,” AJ says. Dr. Wolfe says the damage to KR’s Lexus was limited to her taillight.
-
This is interesting and something I’ve never heard before: Dr. Wolfe says his team has come up with a theory for KR’s broken taillight and glass on the bumper.
-
DW: “Possibly an individual threw a drinking glass at the taillight.” He says his team built a cannon to test that. At a speed of 60 km/h they fired a glass at the taillight.
10:30 in the morning
-
AJ calls Dr. Daniel Wolfe of the ax exploration company ARCCA.
-
He testified last week without the jury present.
-
ARCCA was hired by the FBI for their investigation into this case.
10:10 am
-
ADA Lally asks Dr. Sheridan whether the cuts on JO’s face could have been caused by something breaking?
-
RS: “I find that very difficult to even imagine…”
9:50 am
-
Eliza Little asks Dr. Sheridan about the injuries JO would sustain if he were hit by a vehicle.
-
FS: “It will at least cause bruising… In this particular case, one of the things I noticed was the distinct absence of bruising.”
-
EL asks if JO’s injuries are consistent with a fight or altercation.
-
FS: In a general sense that could be so.
9:38 am
9:30 in the morning
-
Little formulates the question in a different way.
-
FS: When you get hit you get bruises, you don’t have bruises. That doesn’t even remotely resemble the impact of a vehicle
-
EL then asks if a dog could have caused the injuries to JO’s arm.
-
Dr.’s answer Sheridan: I’d say they’re… scraping marks from the paws and possibly bite marks from the teeth
9:25 am
-
The judge orders the air conditioning off because Dr. Sheridan is a soft talker.
-
EL: Are these injuries consistent with being hit by a vehicle while holding a drinking glass?
-
AL: Objection,
-
BC: persistent, fast sidebar
9:10 am
-
The defense calls Dr. Frank Sheridan, a forensic pathologist, San Bernadino, CA. He’s the medical examiner they hired.
PREVIOUS STORY:
The jury heard from Dr. Maria Russel, a recently retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist. She testified that the injuries to John O’Keefe’s body were consistent with an animal attack, possibly a large dog.
However, under cross-examination, she said she was aware that O’keefe’s closing swabs tested negative for canine DNA.
The jury also heard from Brian “Lucky” Loughran, who works for the city of Canton and was plowing during the night of January 29, 2022.
He testified that when he passed Fairview 34 at 2:45 a.m. and 30 minutes later, he did not see a body on the front lawn, but he did see a car parked in front of the house.
The defense says this testimony from one of the first witnesses that morning was incredibly important in proving the theory.
Defense attorney David Yanetti says he found the plow driver two weeks after O’keefe’s death, while claiming the prosecutor didn’t question him until a year and a half later.
“He should be the number one witness for a fair prosecution,” Yanetti said. “The prosecutor should have tried to find out who plowed the street on a night when there was an absolute snowstorm, and if they saw a body in the lawn. Is our theory correct? Apparently they didn’t care. We did.”
This is a development story. Check back for updates as more information becomes available.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News App for the latest news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Tweet. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
