We take a look at the closing arguments made by the prosecution and the defense in the Karen Read trial, which is now in the hands of the jury.
The jury's deliberations in the Karen Read murder trial will continue into a second day.
Closing arguments were delivered Tuesday, and the jury began deliberating shortly before 1:30 p.m., after receiving instructions from Judge Beverly Cannone. The jury was sent home for the day about 4:23 p.m. with no verdict reached.
Watch NBC6 free wherever you are
While the jury deliberated, a throng of Read's supporters, many wearing pink shirts, gathered around her and her lawyers, Alan Jackson, David Yannetti and Elizabeth Little.
Get local news you need to know to start your day with NBC 6's News Headlines newsletter.
The day began shortly after 9 a.m. with a sidebar involving a juror and lawyers for the prosecution and defense. Several prosecution witnesses are in court Tuesday, including Brian Albert, Jen McCabe, Colin Albert and Kerry Roberts.
The same juror was brought back into court for a second sidebar shortly before 10 a.m., at which point Cannone returned to her chambers. Court is now in recess. NBC10 Boston's Sue O'Connell, who is in court, said the juror has been dismissed from the case. That leaves 14 jurors and two alternates.
Cannone began the day's official proceedings by addressing the jurors and explaining that one juror had been dismissed "because of an issue that is just personal to that juror." The defense began its closing argument shortly before 10:15 a.m.
You can follow along with live updates from O'Connell below or on X:
U.S. & World
After nine weeks of trial and testimony from nearly 70 witnesses, Read's defense team rested its case in her murder trial Monday afternoon.
The stage has now been set for closing remarks in the murder trial. NBC10's Kirsten Glavin caught up with Read after Monday's proceedings.
"I'm ready to be done with this. It's been a long haul, it's been my third year. I've worked on this case every day since Jan. 29," said Read.
Two years, four months and 26 days later, a 12-person jury will now decide her fate.
Read is accused of hitting her Boston police officer boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with her SUV while dropping him off at a Canton, Massachusetts, home and leaving him to die in the snow. She is charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of liquor and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death.
Her defense claims she is being framed. And just before wrapping up their case, their most important witnesses — a doctor and two crash analysis experts — all testified that it's a possible a coverup.
"What is your opinion or conclusion as to whether the damage to the taillight was caused by striking John O'Keefe's head?" asked defense attorney Alan Jackson.
"From a damage standpoint, it was inconsistent," said Dr. Daniel Michael Wolfe, director of accident reconstruction at ARCCA.
"If it's a significant impact at all, you're going to ger bruising and we don't have any bruising here," said Dr. Frank Sheridan, a retired medical examiner and forensic pathologist,
"I mean, that's the whole issue. There's no evidence to indicate what may have allegedly occurred in this case," said Dr. Andrew Rentschler, a biomechanical engineer and accident re-constructionist with ARCCA.
'Look the other way': Defense presents its closing argument
Jackson began to present his closing argument shortly before 10:15 a.m., describing a cancer of lies that “spreads into a conspiracy,” and he told jurors they’re the “only thing standing between Karen Read and the tyranny of injustice.”
"Look the other way, look the other way -- four words that sum up the commonwealth's entire case," he said. "Conflict of interest doesn't matter, look the other way. Late night calls and Google searches... inverted videos and butt dials galore, just look the other way. That's what they want. That's what they are counting on. But the incontrovertible fact is you have been lied to in this courtroom."
He told jurors there was a coverup in the case, and the case "picked their patsy" and decided to pin O'Keefe's death on Read.
"If you don't have actual evidence, throw everything against the wall and see what sticks," Jackson said. "Drag her through the mud and make sure you attack her character. And that's exactly what the commonwealth did."
He also talked about how all the testimony showed that O'Keefe and Read were "a loving couple," right up until she dropped him off at 34 Fairview Road on the night of his death.
"If an argument with a loved one is a motive for murder, folks, we're all in trouble," Jackson said.
He also spoke about the powerful Albert family, owners of the Fairview Road home where O'Keefe's body was found, and how their influence in town impacted the trial.
Jackson also tried to indicate that ATF agent Brian Higgins, who had been exchanging flirtatious texts with Read, might have gotten into an altercation with O'Keefe, and then the Alberts' dog Chloe could have bitten O'Keefe's arm.
"So what happened next? We absolutely know that John was in the house... 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 its done."
"And then the panic sets in. It wasn't intended to go that far, but what's done is done."
'Defense by obfuscation': Prosecution gives its closing
In his closing argument, Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally focused on the timeline between the evening of Jan. 28, 2022, and the discovery of O'Keefe's body the following morning.
"Throughout the course of this trial, you've heard a lot of purported evidence, or questions of witnesses, in an attempt to distract you from the evidence in this case. It's essentially defense by obfuscation, it's a three-card monte trick," he said.
Lally pointed to the drinks he said Read was observed consuming before driving to the Fairview Road home, the moment he argues she hit O'Keefe with her vehicle at 12:30 a.m., and her phone connecting to the WiFi at O'Keefe's home on Meadows Avenue at 12:36.
He played the voicemail she left on O'Keefe's phone one minute later at 12:37, in which she said, "John, I f***ing hate you."
Lally said jurors heard during the trial about Read's blood-alcohol content and they heard that O'Keefe's DNA was on the drinking glass found at the scene and on the tail light of Read's SUV. And he noted that prosecution witnesses testified there was no evidence of anyone else's DNA on O'Keefe's body that would have indicated any sort of a struggle with anyone else.
Near the start of his statements, Lally also brought up the texts sent by Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, arguing that while they were inappropriate, they do not negate the investigation or its findings.
"Text messages from Trooper Proctor are unprofessional, they're indefensible, they're inexcusable. However, as distasteful as those messages are in their content, 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."
He closed by quoting John Adams, who once wrote, "Facts are stubborn things. But whatever may be our wishes or inclinations or the dicates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of the facts and the evidence." He said the facts here show that Read drove her vehicle in reverse at 24 mph, for 62.5 feet, causing catastrophic injuries, leaving him incapacitated and in the freezing cold.
"From that facts and that evidence, I would submit ineluctably demonstrates her guilt on each of the indictments before you, and I would ask that you find it so."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
