Key Witnesses Testify in Karen Read’s Retrial for John O’Keefe’s Death

Dedham, Massachusetts — Karen Read‘s retrial for the death of John O’Keefe is nearing its conclusion nearly three years after the fatal incident. This complex case has seen years of legal battles and numerous witnesses who presented their testimonies during the trial.

On January 29, 2022, around 12:30 a.m., O’Keefe’s body was discovered in the snow outside a home at 34 Fairview Road, sparking claims by prosecutors that Read, while intoxicated, fatally struck him with her Lexus SUV and left him behind. However, Read has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death, arguing that there was no collision at all.

The retrial commenced after standard procedures required a fresh examination of the extensive evidence presented in the first case, involving 49 witnesses in total, including law enforcement officials and forensic experts. Significant details emerged over the past weeks during the testimonies, shedding light on crucial aspects of the case.

On the night leading to O’Keefe’s death, Read and O’Keefe were seen socializing at a local bar before heading to a party. Read maintains she dropped O’Keefe off at the house, while several other witnesses contest this, asserting he never arrived there, which is critical to the prosecution’s narrative.

One key witness, a friend present during the incident, detailed frantic phone calls from Read when O’Keefe went missing. The witness recalled a moment where Read allegedly confessed, saying, “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him.” However, this statement drew scrutiny during cross-examination regarding potential biases influenced by family connections to law enforcement.

The defense has introduced compelling counterarguments, including testimonies from a snowplow driver who reported not seeing any body outside the residence when passing by during the early morning. Defense witnesses also pointed to possible flaws and neglect in the police investigation, questioning the integrity of evidence collection.

In the testimony of a medical examiner, blunt force injuries were noted as the primary cause of O’Keefe’s death, yet the manner of death could not be conclusively labeled as homicide or accidental. This ambiguity plays into the defense’s strategy to cast doubt on the prosecution’s claims.

Digital forensic evidence was presented showing O’Keefe’s phone movements leading up to his body being found, keeping the phone near the flagpole until 12:32 a.m. on January 29. This information is pivotal in aligning actions and timelines concerning the events leading to his fatal injuries.

As the trial draws to an end, the court awaits the final arguments from both sides. Expectations are high for a verdict that could finally close this tragic chapter for all involved.