In the ongoing legal saga of Karen Read, a significant development has emerged from the prosecutor’s office. Since the mistrial declaration on July 1, four jurors have reportedly reached out to prosecutors, with one supporting the defense’s claim that the jury was unanimous in acquitting Read on two of the three charges. This revelation could impact the upcoming retrial scheduled for January. Here’s a detailed look at the latest updates and what they mean for the case.
Background of the Karen Read Case
Karen Read, a 44-year-old resident of Mansfield, is accused of a tragic incident involving Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, her boyfriend of two years. On January 29, 2022, Read allegedly struck O’Keefe with her vehicle and then left him to die on a front lawn in Canton. The charges against her include:
- Second-degree murder
- Manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence
- Leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death
Jurors’ Claims Post-Mistrial
Since the mistrial, the Karen Read defense team has been asserting that jurors revealed they were only divided on the manslaughter charge. They claim that jurors were unanimous in acquitting Read of both the second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident charges. Here’s what has transpired:
- Four Jurors Reached Out: Prosecutors have reported that four jurors contacted them after the mistrial.
- Support for Defense Claims: At least one juror confirmed that the jury was unanimous in acquitting Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident.
- Communication Attempts: Jurors also reached out via voicemails and emails, providing conflicting information about the jury’s stance.
Details from the Prosecutor’s Office
The Commonwealth’s Post-Trial Notice of Disclosure, dated Thursday, reveals that prosecutor Adam Lally received several communications from jurors. Key points include:
- Voicemails from Jurors: One juror confirmed in a voicemail left on July 21 that the jury was unanimous in their verdicts on charges 1 and 3, which were not guilty. They also mentioned a 9–3 vote on the manslaughter charge.
- Emails from Jurors: Three other jurors sent emails expressing a willingness to speak anonymously. However, they declined further communication after learning that the substance of their deliberations might be disclosed to the defendant.
Prosecution’s Response to Defense Claims
The prosecution has firmly disputed the defense’s claims. They argue that:
- Unsubstantiated Claims: The prosecution described the defense’s assertion of a unanimous acquittal as “sensational” and lacking legal foundation.
- Ethical Restrictions: Prosecutors are ethically barred from discussing the substance of jury deliberations. They cannot confirm or deny the details of the jurors’ communications.
Implications for the Upcoming Retrial
The upcoming retrial of Karen Read, scheduled for January, could be significantly impacted by these developments:
- Focus on Manslaughter Charge: The defense argues that, given the jurors’ claims, Read should only be tried on the manslaughter charge, with the other charges considered resolved.
- Legal Precedents: If the claims are verified, it could set a precedent for how post-trial juror communications are handled and considered in future cases.
- Public and Media Interest: The case continues to attract significant media attention, and these latest revelations only add to the public’s interest in the outcome of the retrial.
Next Steps for Karen Read’s Legal Team
For Karen Read and her legal team, the next steps will involve:
- Preparing for Retrial: Focus on strategies related to the manslaughter charge, considering the new evidence and claims from jurors.
- Navigating Legal Challenges: Address the prosecution’s response and prepare for any legal challenges that arise from the jurors’ communications.
- Public Communication: Managing public statements and media interactions to ensure a fair trial and protect the integrity of the legal process.
Conclusion
The Karen Read case remains a complex and evolving legal matter. With juror claims adding new dimensions to the case, the upcoming retrial will be closely watched. The revelations about the jury’s stance on the charges and the prosecution’s rebuttal highlight the intricate nature of legal proceedings and the challenges faced by both the defense and prosecution.
