The defense rests on the trial of Karen Read

DEDHAM, Mass. – The defense rested its case Monday in the murder trial of a Woman accused of assaulting Boston police officer boyfriend with his SUV and leaving it to die in a snow bank.

The defendant, Karen Read, did not testify, and after the final three witnesses testified, the judge told the jurors that they had heard all the evidence. Final arguments will be held on Tuesday, lasting an hour for each side, before jurors begin their deliberations, the judge said.

The case was surrounded by a media storm, sustained by distrust of the police and fueled by police bloggers.

Read has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder in the death of Officer John O’Keefe. Prosecutors say she struck O’Keefe with her SUV and then left the scene in January 2022. He was found unconscious hours later outside the Canton home of another Boston police officer who was having a party. An autopsy found he died of hypothermia and blunt force trauma.

One of the final witnesses was a retired forensic pathologist who testified Monday that some of O’Keefe’s injuries were inconsistent with the Lexus SUV crash.

Dr. Frank Sheridan, who previously worked as chief medical examiner for San Bernardino County in California, testified that he expected more bruises if O’Keefe had been struck by such a heavy vehicle. He also suggested that scratch marks on his arm could have come from an animal, possibly a dog, and that other injuries were consistent with a fight.

Two witnesses from an independent consulting firm that conducts forensic engineering also suggested that some of the evidence does not line up with the prosecution’s version. “You can’t deny science and physics,” ARCCA’s Andrew Rentschler testified at one point. ARCCA was hired by the FBI as part of a federal investigation into state authorities’ handling of the Read case.

Read’s lawyers, who argue that Read was framed, claim that O’Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten at Brian Albert’s Canton home and bitten by Albert’s dog. They used Sheridan’s testimony to bolster their theory about the dog, despite the lack of canine DNA evidence, and to suggest that the injuries did not match the fact that he was hit by Read’s SUV.

The defense argued that investigators focused on Read because she was a “convenient stranger” who saved them from having to consider other suspects, including Albert and other officers who were at the party.

Prosecutors spent most of the two-month trial methodically presenting evidence from the scene. The defense called only a few witnesses over two days, but used their time to cross-examine prosecution witnesses to raise questions about the investigation, including conflicts of interest and sloppy police work. The defense was echoed by complaints from a chorus of supporters who often camp outside the courthouse.

Rita Lombardi, a Canton resident who said she served on the “sidewalk jury” and never missed a day of trial, said the experience in the Norfolk County courtroom demonstrated “flaws in the system” that she believes need to be addressed.

“We know that Karen Read was framed. And framed by the people we trust, who are sworn to protect and serve,” she said. “This is a problem in America.”