Accusations fly between lawyers during Karen Read pretrial hearing
Accusations flew between attorneys as the Karen Read case was back in court Tuesday for what could be a pivotal pre-trial hearing for the defense team.
Read's attorneys were defending their communications with a witness in the first trial. They accused special prosecutor Hank Brennan of deliberately lying about where he got information that prompted the judge in the case to suddenly halt a hearing last week.
There is just over a month until Read's second criminal trial is scheduled to begin on April 1, 2025. She is accused of hitting John O'Keefe, her Boston police officer boyfriend, with her SUV and leaving him to die in the snow in Canton, Massachusetts in January of 2022. Read argues she is the victim of a cover-up involving law enforcement and several others.
Karen Read judge had "grave concern"
Judge Beverly Cannone suddenly suspended last week's evidentiary hearing after special prosecutor Hank Brennan moved to prevent experts Daniel Wolfe and Andrew Rentschler, who work for ARCCA, from testifying again. They testified in the first trial that based on their testing, O'Keefe's injuries were not consistent with being hit by a car.
On Tuesday, Cannone opened proceedings by explaining why she suspended the hearing. She said she had three concerns.
The first was that it was not fair to make the defense answer for an allegation of candor issues without preparation. She also said what the prosecution had told her was inconsistent with how she remembered things happening, and she wanted to review transcripts. Finally, Cannone said she needed time to reflect.
"I don't know what might flow from this," Cannone said on Tuesday. "I have to make findings. But I wanted you to know why we recessed."
Defense attorney Alan Jackson told jurors at the first trial that he and the crash experts had never met and that they were hired by an independent third-party agency. Brennan told the court last week that he had obtained a bill from ARCCA to the defense for almost $24,000. He also said that in emails between Read's team and the experts, Wolfe wrote in one instance, "if you don't want me to say this, that's fine."
"The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern," Cannone said last Tuesday. "The implications of that information may have profound effects on this defense and defense counsel."
When WBZ asked Jackson outside court February 18 what the judge's concerns were about, Jackson said he had "no idea" and also denied paying the ARCCA experts to testify at Read's first trial. Brennan cited that question and answer during court on Tuesday.
Jackson declined to clarify the comments from last week outside court on Tuesday.
Karen Read was asked by reporters what would happen if the judge tried to remove Jackson from the case. "It would mean an appeal," she said outside court.
Defense calls it "unorthodox situation"
During Tuesday's hearing, Bob Alessi defended the defense team's handling of the witnesses.
"This is one of the most unusual situations I've ever seen in my practice of law, meaning you have these experts, you have great exculpatory information, but you there are significant constraints on how it is you can interact and utilize those experts in a complete unorthodox situation," he said.
Alessi laid out the timeline of communications with the ARCCA witnesses ahead of Read's first trial. He noted that fellow defense attorney David Yannetti never even mentioned the ARCCA experts in opening statements, because he had no idea yet if they would be able to testify.
During the middle of the trial, a hearing was called to determine if Wolfe and Rentschler could testify.
Alessi on Tuesday told Cannone that a transcript shows Yannetti said that day, "We've spoken to them only for the purposes of coordination of their testimony and their background."
Alessi pointed out several times that Wolfe sent a testimony outline to Jackson the day before he testified -- not the other way around. He emphasized that the Commonwealth had equal access to ARCCA.
"The entire buildup of February 18 was on the false information that the Commonwealth had gotten all their information from the federal government and not the defense," Alessi said, adding "ARCCA should be unscathed. ARCCA should be available to the defense."
When Brennan had his chance for rebuttal near the end of the day on Tuesday, he maintained that the relationship between the witnesses and the defense is not as impartial as has been portrayed.
"There is a murky relationship between the defense and the U.S. Attorney's office as it relates to these ARCCA witnesses," Brennan said, adding "We know we are getting a fraction of the story."
Karen Read's defense alleges "misdirections" by prosecution
Alessi said he counted 10 "misdirections" that Brennan made while making his arguments that caused Cannone to halt the proceedings.
"What happens after these 10 misdirections? The court's comments go viral. I'm not saying this for drama's sake. I'm saying this for what has impacted the defense six weeks before trial starts while jury notices are out in the mail. Those words, based upon misdirections that your court has endured," Alessi said. "I don't know if this can be remedied."
Alessi said that on February 13 at 6:30 p.m., the defense team sent an email to the prosecution with the subject "Karen Read – ARCCA Reciprocal Discovery."
During the hearing on February 18, Brennan initially said the federal government sent the documents, not the defense.
"Was it an honest mistake?" Alessi asked on Tuesday.
Later, Brennan said that he did mistakenly say where the email came from, and that as soon as he noticed, he corrected it in court.
"I did misspeak, I corrected it. But it's not the source of that information, it's the substance which is critical and relevant," Brennan said.
"Ghosts. Illusions. Shields."
Alessi attempted to use the prosecution's own words against them when Brennan accused the defense of hiding information about ARCCA experts.
"Your honor, I think it's only fair for the defense to be allowed to be able to speak to the very words that were used against us. Ghosts. Illusions. Shields. That's what we're accused of," Alessi said. "I choose to try and purport myself and practice a certain way and try to give people a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. But if we're going to be talking about ghosts, illusions, and shields, I don't think it's the defense that's creating ghosts, illusions and shields here."
Alessi referenced the Massachusetts Code of Ethics for lawyers, which prohibits "offer[ing] evidence that the lawyer knows to be false." Alessi said if Jackson made any false statements about contact or agreements with ARCCA witnesses, he did not do so knowingly.
ARCCA bill came "out of the blue," defense says
Alessi said there was mention of possible fee in March before the trial about potential payment, but there were no additional discussions with Wolfe.
"There was no engagement, there was no retainer. Those conversations were paused after the March 22 email but they were never re-engaged," he said.
Then on July 12, the defense team received a bill.
"Here's the punchline your honor with the invoice. It came out of the blue. It came out of the blue. It gets sent to Mr. Jackson's office in July," Alessi said.
According to Alessi, the defense team called a member of the U.S. Attorney's office and asked if they were allowed to pay the bill. They were told yes, Alessi said, and sent a check on July 25.
"There's no doubt the invoice was paid. But the story is not solely about was the invoice paid? The important part of the story about the facts is it came out of the blue," Alessi said.
Karen Read schedule
Tuesday's hearing concluded around 4:20 p.m., just over five hours after it began.
The case is set to return to the Massachusetts courtroom on March 4, March 5 and potentially March 7 for additional pretrial hearings.
Karen Read federal investigation
What was not discussed was an announcement that had been expected in court that the federal investigation into the death of John O'Keefe has ended. Two sources have told WBZ-TV that no charges will be filed in connection with that probe. Yannetti told WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex he had no comment on the report.
New U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Leah Foley told WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex on Feb. 5 that she could neither confirm nor deny an investigation into the Read case. But the existence of the investigation was public knowledge, as multiple witnesses in the case testified in state court that they were questioned by a federal grand jury in the spring and summer of 2023.
It was never made clear exactly who or what was under federal investigation. Many of Read's supporters have hoped that a federal investigation would help her cause.
Who is Karen Read?
Read, a 44-year-old financial analyst who was living in Mansfield when O'Keefe died, has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence of alcohol, and leaving the scene of personal injury and death.
Read's first trial ended in a mistrial due to a "starkly divided" hung jury. Earlier this month, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts denied her appeal to get two of the charges against her dismissed based on statements made by jurors after the first trial.
