Karen Read’s appeal to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was revealed to have failed on Tuesday as the Court found she could be retried for the charges involving the death of boyfriend John O’Keefe in January of 2022.
Read trial for the charges of second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while driving under the influence and leaving the scene of a collision causing death ended in a hung jury last year.
Shortly after the non-verdict, Read’s defense released what they said was evidence that the jury had acquitted Read of the second-degree murder charge and leaving the scene of a personal injury or death charge in deliberations that were then not announced to the Court.
The mistrial was granted after the jury in the case said that they were hopelessly deadlocked multiple times and offered no partial verdict to the court. While the defense initially agreed with the mistrial, and offered no objection, they later claimed that members of the jury approached them with various scenarios where Read was found innocent in deliberations, prompting their objection to her retrial.
Twitter user Grant Smith Ellis released PDF copies of the ruling by the Court on Tuesday (see below), where the Court reaffirmed the fact that the jury wasn’t allowed to say “oops, what we really meant to say was…”
The Court addressed the idea that the mistrial was a result of some sort of clerical error directly, stating, “Here, there is no suggestion that the jury’s failure to return a verdict was the result of a clerical error. The posttrial accounts do not dispute that the jurors had reached an impasse, as they reported, and had decided not to return a verdict slip on any charge, as occurred. Contrast Brown, 367 Mass. at 27-28, and cases cited (permitting testimony to correct clerical mistakes in verdict where jury, without outside influence, “immediately indicated” error in announced verdict). No juror expressed surprise or disagreement in court when the judge declared a mistrial based on the jury’s report that they could not reach a unanimous verdict on “the charges.” Contrast Latino v. Crane Rental Co., 417 Mass. 426, 431 (1994) (juror inquiry permissible where jurors audibly answered “no” during polling of jury).”
Continuing, the Court also ruled that Judge Beverley Cannone did not error by denying the defense’s inquiry, concluding, “the trial judge did not err or abuse her discretion in denying the defendant’s request for such an inquiry where it would not change the outcome of the defendant’s first trial. The jury chose to report a deadlock, not a verdict, and no basis exists for further investigation into private discussions or subjective beliefs they declined to announce publicly in open court.”
The issue was remanded back to the county court for entry of a judgment denying the petition for relief.
Karen Read’s second trial for the murder of John O’Keefe is due to begin on April 1, 2025.
