Newsletter Signup
Stay up to date on all the latest news from Boston.com
A ‘tall blue wall’ or a ‘three-card monte’ trick? Karen Read’s case in jury’s hands after closing arguments.
The prosecution and defense each accused the other of trying to distract jurors from the facts in Read's trial.
Lawyers on both sides of the Karen Read murder trial offered their closing arguments Tuesday, hammering at the evidence in the case, clashing over allegations of a coverup, and hurling accusations of trickery and deception.
Speaking on behalf of Read’s camp, defense attorney Alan Jackson laid out a tale of planted evidence, lying witnesses, and corrupt law enforcement officials.
“‘Look the other way. Look the other way.’ Four words that sum up the commonwealth’s entire case,” he said. “Four words that sum up the hopes of those who have tried to deceive you.”
Advertisement:
Among his evidence, Jackson cited conflicts of interest, “magic” hair and glass, late night calls and Google searches, and “butt dials galore.”
More on Karen Read:
“Your singular duty is to stare down the evidence and do it unflinchingly and do it unwaveringly,” he told jurors, adding, “You see, you’re the only thing standing between Karen Read and the tyranny of injustice.”
Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally likewise accused the defense of manufacturing a conspiracy theory in a “three-card monte” trick meant to distract jurors from the facts. He said the evidence indicates Read killed her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe.
Advertisement:
“The little things matter,” Lally urged. “The little things start piling up in this case.”
Prosecutors allege Read, 44, was driving drunk following a night of bar hopping and intentionally backed into O’Keefe as she dropped him off at a fellow Boston officer’s home in Canton on Jan. 29, 2022. However, lawyers for the Mansfield woman say others are to blame for O’Keefe’s death. They allege Read was framed in a coverup, and that O’Keefe was actually beaten inside the home and attacked by the homeowner’s dog, a German shepherd mix named “Chloe.”
As both lawyers delivered their closing arguments, witnesses Brian Albert, Colin Albert, Jennifer McCabe, and Kerry Roberts looked on from the gallery, where they sat with members of O’Keefe’s family.
What Karen Read’s team said
Throughout his remarks, Jackson sought to undermine testimony from investigators and witnesses who said O’Keefe did not enter 34 Fairview Road on the 29th.
“You don’t have to wonder if they would lie to support their narrative,” Jackson said. “You need only wonder how many times they did lie.”
Advertisement:
He pointed specifically to the Albert family, who owned the home at the time, as well as the McCabes, Brian Higgins, Canton Police Lt. Michael Lank, and Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik, and Det. Lt. Brian Tully.
“Ladies and gentlemen,” he continued, “there was a coverup in this case, plain and simple.”
Jackson noted that the witnesses who said O’Keefe never entered 34 Fairview Road were all family or friends of the Alberts. O’Keefe’s Apple Health data, meanwhile, was consistent with walking into the house and heading downstairs to the basement, he said.
While prosecutors have suggested her deteriorating relationship with O’Keefe drove Read to kill, Jackson argued the couple’s verbal arguments and heated text conversations instead pointed to “a normal set of ups and downs for any couple.” Witnesses who saw Read and O’Keefe at two local bars the night before O’Keefe died described the couple as affectionate and “lovey-dovey,” he noted.
“If an argument with a loved one is a motive for murder, folks, we’re all in trouble,” Jackson added.
Were others to blame?
Pointing to State Police Trooper Nicholas Guarino’s testimony that Read connected to the Wi-Fi at O’Keefe’s house at 12:36 a.m. on the 29th, Jackson accused McCabe of lying about the times she supposedly saw Read’s SUV outside 34 Fairview Road.
Advertisement:
Another witness, Brian Higgins, was “clearly pining” over Read after the pair swapped flirty texts and shared a kiss, Jackson said. The flirtation had run its course for Read, and Higgins “didn’t like being ignored, that was pretty clear,” he added.
Jackson accused Higgins of coaxing O’Keefe to the afterparty.
“We know that John ascended or descended stairs. We know that Brian Higgins and Brian Albert excused themselves,” Jackson said. “How long does it take to have a cross word? How long does it take to have a fight? How long would it take for Brian Higgins to say to John, ‘You know, your girl’s been texting me’? A push, a punch, a fall. Pull Chloe off his arm, and now it’s done.”
He highlighted the calls Albert and Higgins exchanged later that morning. Both men testified that the calls were inadvertent, or “butt dials.” Minutes after, Jackson said, McCabe Googled “hos long to die in cold.”
The timestamp of McCabe’s now-infamous Google search has been a point of controversy in the case. McCabe and two digital forensics experts testified that the search actually occurred before 6:30 a.m. on the 29th — shortly after Read, McCabe, and Roberts found O’Keefe in the snow. However, defense expert Richard Green testified that McCabe’s phone data indicates the search was made “at or before 2:27 a.m.”
Advertisement:
“That timeline seems to fit, doesn’t it?” Jackson said. “And it fits a very telling and a very clear story.”
Karen Read’s voicemails
Jackson also laid out an explanation for the angry voicemails Read left O’Keefe the morning of the 29th. Investigators testified that Read called her boyfriend 53 times between leaving 34 Fairview Road around 12:30 a.m. and finding O’Keefe’s body outside the home at about 6 a.m.
From Read’s perspective, Jackson said, O’Keefe left her waiting while he ducked inside the party. Then he stopped responding to her calls and texts.
“She’s sitting in the cold dark, freezing outside in the car,” Jackson said. “Naturally, she’s perturbed. Being perturbed turns into being peeved, and being peeved eventually turns into being pissed. By 12:30, Karen’s mad.”
When O’Keefe still hadn’t come home a few hours later, Jackson said Read’s anger turned to panic and fear. Video and audio captured outside 34 Fairview Road documented her grief and “raw anguish” after finding O’Keefe’s body, he said.
Jackson also alleged Read cracked her right taillight backing into O’Keefe’s parked car when she set out to look for him around 5:07 a.m. on the 29th. Jurors have seen Ring home surveillance footage of the purported collision.
Trooper Proctor ‘erected a tall blue wall’
Jackson later turned his attention to Proctor, who has come under scrutiny for his personal ties to members of the Albert family.
Advertisement:
Proctor also admitted on the stand that he sent vulgar texts about Read to family, friends, and colleagues. In one text, the trooper said he hoped Read would kill herself. In another, he joked about looking for nude photos on her phone.
Jackson accused Proctor of planting evidence, dodging witness statements that would absolve Read, and protecting Brian Albert from scrutiny, given his role as a Boston police officer.
“And with that, Michael Proctor didn’t draw a thin blue line. He erected a tall blue wall,” Jackson said. “A wall that you can’t scale. A wall that Karen Read certainly couldn’t get over. A wall between us and them. A place you folks are not invited.”
Prosecutors can’t distance themselves from the “stench” of Proctor’s involvement, he said.
“There’s no evidence whatsoever that Karen Read’s vehicle ever struck John O’Keefe or that Karen Read ever wanted to strike John O’Keefe,” Jackson argued. “In fact, every single piece of material evidence in this case unequivocally proves the opposite.”
He took aim at State Police Trooper Joseph Paul’s theory that Read struck O’Keefe on his arm and propelled him some 30 feet onto the lawn.
“I think I’m being kind when I say that Trooper Paul’s analysis lacked credibility,” Jackson sniped. “It’s nonsensical. It borders on laughable.”
Advertisement:
He urged jurors to send a message with their verdict: “I see the truth, and I will not ever look the other way.”
“When you stare the truth down, you’ll see that the commonwealth has not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. Not even close,” Jackson said. “Ladies and gentlemen, Karen Read is innocent. Do justice and find her not guilty.”
What the prosecution said
In his own closing argument, Lally painstakingly reconstructed a timeline of Jan. 28 and 29, relying on witness testimony, voicemails, texts, and phone GPS data to illustrate whereabouts for and communication between Read and O’Keefe.
He opened with, “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him,” the statements Read allegedly made to several witnesses after finding O’Keefe’s body in the snow. Read also allegedly stated, “This is all my fault. This is all my fault. I did this,” he noted.
“Those were the words that came from the defendant’s mouth on Jan. 29, 2022,” Lally said. “As John O’Keefe lay dying on the front lawn of 34 Fairview Road, where the defendant had left him after striking him with her motor vehicle several hours before and then left him freezing there in a blizzard.”
He addressed Proctor’s role in the subsequent investigation, as well as his crude messages.
“The text messages from Trooper Proctor are unprofessional. They’re indefensible. They’re inexcusable,” Lally acknowledged. “However, as distasteful as those messages are and their content is, I submit they had no bearing whatsoever or impact whatsoever on the integrity of the entirety of the investigation that the Massachusetts State Police collectively — collectively — conducted into John O’Keefe’s death here.”
Advertisement:
He pointed out that the text threads do not mention planted evidence or a conspiracy.
“Why? Because it didn’t happen,” Lally said. “There is no conspiracy. There is no coverup. There is no evidence of any of that beyond speculation, rampant speculation and conjecture on behalf of the defense.”
Two things can be true at once, he argued.
“The texts from Trooper Proctor are distasteful, they’re disrespectful, they’re unprofessional. There is no defense to them,” Lally said. “And the defendant killed John O’Keefe.”
What’s Lally’s timeline?
He offered jurors a timeline of the couple’s activities and whereabouts, starting with their argument via text at 9:49 a.m. on Jan. 28. Through heated messages, O’Keefe said he was “sick of always arguing and fighting,” and Read questioned whether O’Keefe had developed feelings for someone else.
The couple drank at two Canton bars later that day, and Lally said Read consumed a total of nine drinks over roughly two hours.
By 12:25 a.m. on the 29th, O’Keefe’s phone data put him in the area of 34 Fairview Road, Lally said. The device logged no further movement until Roberts found the phone under O’Keefe’s body around 6 a.m., he noted.
Lally pointed to data pulled from Read’s SUV, which indicated she accelerated in reverse for about 62 feet and reached a top speed around 24 mph. Paul, the State Police crash analyst, testified that the data was consistent with a pedestrian collision.
Advertisement:
Minutes later, according to Lally, Read left O’Keefe a voicemail “seething in rage as she’s screaming, ‘John, I f***ing hate you!’”
Lally also suggested Read stopped by 34 Fairview Road before driving to McCabe’s home at 5:35 a.m. to enlist help searching for O’Keefe.
“Why is it that the defendant can see Mr. O’Keefe when they eventually get to 34 Fairview Road and no one else can?” he asked. “It’s because she knew exactly where he was.”
After O’Keefe was pronounced dead at Good Samaritan Medical Center in Brockton, Read allegedly told his sister-in-law, Erin O’Keefe, “I don’t think I’ll ever see you guys again.”
“If she didn’t kill John, why would she say that?” Lally asked.
‘She hit him with her SUV and she left him in the snow’
He also suggested Read could be responsible for deleting Ring home surveillance footage that would have shown her arriving back at O’Keefe’s home after dropping him off at 34 Fairview Road. According to Lally, the Ring video was also missing a moment later in the morning, when Read showed McCabe and Roberts the damage to her taillight.
Turning his attention to Read’s alleged motive, he pinpointed a possible trigger from the night before. McCabe testified she gave the couple directions to 34 Fairview Road and told O’Keefe the house was near “Bella’s street,” referring to a child whose mother O’Keefe had dated years prior. Roberts, meanwhile, said Read repeatedly mentioned “Bella’s mom” during their search for O’Keefe hours later.
Advertisement:
“It’s that much on her mind,” Lally argued.
He also noted that Read wore her shoes into O’Keefe’s house that morning, despite his rule about removing footwear at the door.
“Why is it that the defendant had no issue with wearing shoes in the house when Mr. O’Keefe has that strict rule? Because she knows where he is,” Lally argued. “She knows it’s not an issue. He’s not coming home, because she hit him with her SUV and she left him in the snow.”
Lally aims to debunk third-party culprit theory
Pushing back on the defense team’s claims of a dog attack, Lally argued the wounds on O’Keefe’s right arm were consistent with dimpling on a piece of Read’s taillight. He also pointed to medical examiner Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello’s testimony that O’Keefe had no major signs of “a significant altercation.”
What’s more, Lally noted, no one else’s DNA was found on O’Keefe’s clothing or under his fingernails. Aiming to further debunk Read’s third-party culprit theory, he pointed to the lack of evidence tying Higgins and Brian Albert to the scene.
“There’s no footprints around the body,” Lally noted. “There’s no drag marks around the body. There’s no evidence of anything in relation to Brian Albert and Brian Higgins.”
Advertisement:
Lally also cast doubt on the notion that the pair would travel to New York for the funeral of a police officer they didn’t know, only to return home and murder an officer they did.
“And then, criminal mastermind genius that Brian Albert is, 28 years on the Boston Police Department, he’s then going to just leave Mr. O’Keefe’s body on his front lawn?” Lally asked. “Really? That’s the conspiracy? What evidence do you have of that?”
What’s next?
Read has pleaded not guilty to three charges: Second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while driving under the influence, and leaving the scene of a collision causing injury and death.
Judge Beverly Cannone sent jurors into deliberations Tuesday after walking them through a laundry list of instructions and criteria for each charge. There are several possible outcomes as deliberations get underway, and notably, any conviction or acquittal must be unanimous.
As she exited the courthouse Tuesday, Read fielded a question about whether she felt any nerves about the impending verdict.
“I don’t know if ‘nerves’ are the right word,” Read said in a clip from WBZ reporter Kristina Rex.
Jackson, meanwhile, said it was a “joke” to see Brian and Colin Albert, McCabe, and Roberts present in the courtroom Tuesday.
“I think they were doing it for some sort of intimidation factor, probably for the jurors. It just plays into their countenance as bullies. That’s all that was about.”
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com