JURY SELECTION STARTS, 4 SEATED
Judge allows third-party theory, but not in opening argument
Jury selection in the Karen Read trial got off to a slow and tedious start Tuesday, with just four chosen from a pool of nearly 100 during the first day of screening at Norfolk Superior Court.
Judge Beverly Cannone began the day deciding the most contentious issue that remained before the trial starts in earnest: whether the defense could use the third-party killer theory they have argued for roughly a year. It was a mixed decision, as Cannone said that the defense can “develop” the theory during questioning and in evidence, but may not state it outright in their opening statement.
“I am well within my rights, pursuant to the case law, to exclude the thirdparty culprit defense,” Cannone said. “I am not going to do that now. I’m going to give you a chance to develop it through relevant, competent, admissible evidence. But you cannot open on it.”
Read, 44, of Mansfield, was indicted in June of 2022 for second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a collision causing death in the Jan. 29, 2022, death of John O’Keefe, 46, a 16-year member of the Boston Police Department and Read’s boyfriend of two years. Prosecutors say she struck him with her Lexus SUV outside a Canton home after a night of heavy drinking and left him to die in the cold.
The more than 90 jurors scheduled for the first day were brought into the courthouse right around 10 a.m. and began their day with Cannone’s overview of the case, the allegation and the charges against Read. Cannone indicated that the charge of murder would require intention and malice, whereas manslaughter is causing someone’s death without intention.
The overview was hardly necessary, as the vast majority of the potential jurors indicated during basic questioning that they had heard of or talked about the case. A large subset of them, perhaps 20 or 30, indicated that they had formed an opinion on the case, and many of those indicated they were biased one way or the other. It was an early look at the difficulty of seating a jury in a case with widespread media attention.
The case has received national coverage and galvanized a vocal movement in Greater Boston.
Members of that movement have been in regular attendance at Read hearings, with demonstrators taking to the sidewalk and steps outside the courthouse to display signs and clothing promoting their “Free Karen Read” message.
Starting Tuesday, demonstrations for either side, or for law enforcement, are barred from the courthouse in a 200-foot radius.
Demonstrators appeared to abide by the ordered “buffer zone,” but outside that zone the signs and slogans were there, as always. Recognizable demonstrators from past hearings, including their de facto leader, Holdenbased blogger Aidan “Turtleboy” Kearney, appeared to have agreed to wear pink to more quietly indicate their support for the accused within the buffer zone.
Most of the day was dedicated to individual and private interviews of the potential jurors, which lasted from about 10:30 in the morning to 3 p.m. without a break.
Some of them were dismissed seemingly as soon as their juror number was called, many more were interviewed briefly. A few were subject to longer questioning by not only Cannone but also the attorneys. The process was genial and had the rare sight of the judge, defense attorneys and the prosecution smiling together as they got a feel for each potential juror.
By the end of the day, they had picked only four permanent jurors, indicating this process could last the week and possibly longer. And that’s just ahead of a trial expected to last six or more weeks.
The last juror called for an interview, Ray Ruggiero, said that he was “happy” he was dismissed.
“Because it could have been six to eight weeks and it could be longer than that. That’s a long time,” he told reporters outside the courthouse following the hearing. He added that he at least enjoyed his one-day experience as a potential juror, saying “it was different.”
Looking forward
The prosecution in a pretrial memo issued ahead of the hearing named 87 potential witnesses, including 23 police officers — most from the Massachusetts State Police, several from the Canton Police Department and one each from the Dighton and Needham police departments. The defense named 77 of their own witnesses, with much overlap with the prosecution’s list, and reserved the right to call anyone from the prosecution’s list.
Names that have come up in the copious pretrial motions and arguments were all over the witness lists, including Canton Police Sgt. Michael Lank, who was the first on the scene, and MSP Trooper Michael Proctor, who took over the case as the primary investigator. So too were Brian Albert, his nephew Colin Albert, and his sister-in-law Jennifer McCabe, who are principals in the defense theory of the case that O’Keefe was beaten nearly to death and then placed in the yard to die in the cold.
The defense filed a memo ahead of the hearing Tuesday to argue that they be allowed to mention an internal affairs investigation against Proctor and show any evidence that would indicate “Lank has used his position as a law enforcement officer in the past to protect the Albert family,” details the prosecution has asked to be barred from the trial.