Judge declares mistrial in Karen Read murder trial

Livestream via NBC10 Boston.

Update 3 p.m.: The Norfolk County District Attorney’s Office has released a statement saying it plans to retry the case:

A mistrial has been declared in the matter of Commonwealth v. Karen Read.

Judge Beverly Cannone set a status conference date of July 22, 2024 at 2 p.m. in the Norfolk Superior Court.

First, we thank the O’Keefe family for their commitment and dedication to this long process. They maintained sight of the true core of this case – to find justice for John O’Keefe.

The Commonwealth intends to re-try the case.

___

Following days of deliberations and multiple notes from the deadlocked jury, Judge Beverly Cannone has declared a mistrial in the high-profile and often contentious Karen Read murder trial. 

The jury was tasked with determining whether Read, 44, drunkenly and intentionally backed her SUV into her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, on a snowy night in Canton two years ago. Lawyers for the Mansfield woman had alleged she was framed in a coverup. A unanimous jury is needed for any conviction or acquittal, and jurors ultimately failed to reach a consensus, despite Cannone’s last-ditch effort to break the deadlock using the so-called “dynamite charge.”

Cannone’s mistrial declaration leaves prosecutors free to retry the case.

Jurors faced an uphill battle in their quest for consensus, given the controversial evidence at stake in Read’s case and the intense coverage of the trial across social media, national news outlets, and the blogosphere.

The first indication of trouble came in a note Friday, when jurors reported they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict despite an “exhaustive review” and “diligent consideration” of the evidence. 

Shortly before 11 a.m. Monday, the jury said it remained at an impasse. 

“Judge Cannone, despite our commitment to the duty entrusted to us, we find ourselves deeply divided by fundamental differences in our opinions and state of mind,” Monday’s note read. “The divergence in our views are not rooted in a lack of understanding or effort but deeply held convictions that each of us carry, ultimately leading to a point where consensus is unattainable. We recognize the weight of this admission and the implications it holds.”

Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally argued the jury hadn’t yet completed its due and thorough deliberations. 

“This jury heard I believe about 29 days or so of testimony, 657 different exhibits marked as evidence, 74 different witnesses who testified before them,” Lally said. He noted the length of deliberations thus far didn’t even equate to one hour of discussion for each day of testimony. 

However, defense attorney David Yannetti noted jurors’ language about “fundamental” disagreements. 

“Our view is that it’s time for Tuey-Rodriguez, your honor,” Yannetti said, referring to the set of formal instructions often read to deadlocked juries. “They’ve come back now twice indicating essentially that they’re hopelessly deadlocked.”

Cannone ultimately sided with the defense, opting to read the Tuey-Rodriguez charge. 

“I think this has been an extraordinary jury,” she said. “I’ve never seen a note like this reporting to be at an impasse.”

The Tuey-Rodriguez charge essentially tells jurors there’s no reason to believe another jury would be better suited to decide the case, or that either the prosecution or defense would be able to offer clearer evidence in the event of a retrial. The instructions also remind jurors it’s their duty to decide the case if they can do so conscientiously.

With a possible life sentence on the line if Read were convicted of second-degree murder, the stakes were high. Read was also charged with manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence and leaving the scene of a fatal accident. The OUI manslaughter charge carries a sentence of five to 20 years in prison, and Read faced up to 10 years behind bars if found guilty of leaving the scene of a fatal accident.