Things to know about the retrial of Karen Read in the killing of her police officer boyfriend
A digital forensics expert at Karen Read’s second murder trial acknowledged Tuesday that data from her car doesn't necessarily confirm it was involved in a collision the morning her boyfriend was killed.
Read, 45, is accused of backing her SUV into John O’Keefe, 46, and leaving him to die on a snowy night in the front yard of another officer’s home after she dropped him off at a party there in January 2022. Her lawyers say she was framed in a police conspiracy and someone inside the home that night killed him.
A mistrial was declared last year. Read’s second trial on charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter and leaving the scene has so far appeared to follow similar contours to the first.
Triggers don't equal collisionsOn the witness stand for a second day, digital forensics analyst Shannon Burgess was questioned by Read's attorney about “trigger” events recorded by her Lexus SUV, including a three-point turn and backing up.
“None of the information in that black box ... indicates there was a collision on January 29?” asked attorney Robert Alessi.
“Not by itself,” Burgess answered.
“Are Lexus SUVs trigger-happy?” Alessi asked.
“I do not know, sir,” Burgess said.
Yet Burgess used the word “collision” in a report he wrote about the data, Alessi noted. Burgess said that information came from State Police reports, prompting Alessi to accuse him of confirmation bias.
Burgess, who specializes in analysis of digital forensics from vehicles and cellphones, works for Aperture LLC, an accident reconstruction, biomechanics and digital forensics company. He didn’t participate in the initial investigation of Read’s car in 2023.
Data missed in initial car investigationOn Monday, Burgess testified that he discovered a secure digital card on a circuit board of one of the car's modules that wasn't found in the initial investigation. The data is critical to helping the prosecution pinpoint a timeline of when they believe Read allegedly hit O’Keefe with her Lexus.
He said cars contain modules that track different data. The card he found detailed time-stamp data about when the vehicle was powered on and off both before and after O'Keefe's death.
He said when the Lexus is powered on, an internal clock begins running like a stopwatch. When the car performs a maneuver like a three-point turn or backing up, a time stamp is created.
Using data pulled from the GPS navigation application Waze from O'Keefe's cellphone and Ring camera surveillance video, Burgess said he was able to verify the accuracy of the time stamps collected from the Lexus.
Defense says analyst's credentials misleadingRead’s team tried to poke holes in Burgess’s credibility, accusing the analyst of misleading clients about his academic credentials.
Read lawyer Robert Alessi presented Burgess's biography on his employer Aperture’s website, which states that Burgess graduated with bachelor's degrees in mathematics and business administration from the University of Alabama. Burgess's LinkedIn profile, previously linked to Aperture's website, showed him having obtained a bachelor's degree. On a different CV on the company's website, Burgess is listed as having earned his bachelor’s degree from Alabama in 2022.
Meanwhile, copies of Burgess's CV submitted to the court say he is “currently pursuing" the degree but does not yet have one.
Burgess said he graduated in 2015 with an associate degree. When Alessi asked when he began “pursuing” his bachelor's degree, Burgess said in 2008.
“If I did the math correctly, you've been pursuing a bachelor of science degree for 17 years, correct?” he asked Burgess, asking him whether he was familiar with the terms “mendacity” and “academic dishonesty.”
Burgess said he doesn't know why his resume on the company website contained inaccuracies, and that he hadn't updated his LinkedIn profile for some time.
Alessi also questioned why Burgess waited to submit a new report about time stamp data obtained via the car modules on May 8, weeks after Read's trial had begun.
"Do you think it’s fair to submit a report without anybody asking you in the middle of a trial?” he asked the expert. Burgess said the new report contained clarifications, not changes, to a previous analysis.
Last week, Read’s lawyers tried to prevent Burgess’s report from being presented to jurors and Aperture experts from testifying. They accused the prosecution of committing a pretrial discovery violation. But Judge Beverly Cannone let the prosecution proceed.
Police expert details DNA linked to O'KeefeOn Friday, Andre Porto, a forensic scientist who works in the DNA unit of the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab, detailed various items he tested, including the broken rear taillight on Read's SUV.
Porto found three DNA contributors but only O'Keefe was a likely match. He also tested DNA from parts of a broken cocktail glass found in the yard and only O'Keefe was seen as a likely match. Porto also tested a hair found on the taillight. No human DNA was found on a hair recovered from the right rear panel of the SUV.
On Monday, analyst Karl Miyasako of Bode Technology testified that tests of the hair sample taken from Read's vehicle found a mitochondrial DNA match to O’Keefe. He said that means the DNA could be a match to O’Keefe or any one of his maternal relatives.
Porto also took DNA samples from stains on O'Keefe's jeans, sweatshirt and T-shirt. He found DNA from several sources but the only likely match was O’Keefe.
Under cross-examination by defense attorney David Yannetti, Porto acknowledged that he didn't know the source of the other DNA found on O'Keefe's clothing and other items.
Porto also acknowledged that he was never asked to test whether the DNA on the taillight matched either Canton Police Officer Kevin Albert or then-Canton Police Chief Ken Berkowitz. He also said he was not asked to test the broken cocktail glass for DNA from Brian Albert, a former Boston police officer who owned the house where O'Keefe was found, nor Brian Higgins, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent who attended a party at Albert's house that night.
The defense has suggested that O'Keefe died after getting into a fight at the party and that Albert and Higgins could have been responsible.