Trial Turmoil: Karen Read's Defense Battles Over Jury Access and Missing Evidence
Mar 07, 11:00 AM
Share
Subscribe
The judge overseeing Karen Read’s murder case forcefully refuted claims made by her defense on Wednesday that a Massachusetts State Police lieutenant had direct oversight over the jury during her first murder trial.
Read appeared in federal court and Norfolk Superior Court on Wednesday, where her lawyers argued a motion to dismiss the case. At the outset of the hearing, Judge Beverly Cannone pushed back on the claim from Read’s attorney Alan Jackson, stating that his assertion—that Lt. John Fanning had control over and access to the jury—was “simply not true.” She emphasized that the only individuals with access to the jury were court officers and pressed Jackson on what “good faith basis” he had for making such a claim.
Jackson pointed to a sidebar conference during Read’s first trial in which a Norfolk County prosecutor referred to Fanning as the “commander” of security for the proceedings. This conference followed allegations of misconduct concerning a juror whom the defense believed would vote to acquit Read. That juror was ultimately dismissed before deliberations began.
The exchange was heated, as Read’s lawyers continued to argue that the case should be dismissed due to “extraordinary governmental misconduct.” They claimed that prosecutors or law enforcement officers failed to turn over key evidence that could have exonerated Read.
A significant portion of the argument centered on surveillance videos from the Canton Police Department’s sallyport. Hours after Read’s boyfriend, Boston Police officer John O’Keefe, was found dying in the snow outside a Canton home, her car was towed from her parents’ home to the police station. Read’s defense contends that a crucial 42-minute portion of the footage, which would have captured her SUV’s arrival, was missing.
State Police Trooper Michael Proctor initially requested copies of these videos in February 2022 and later requested additional footage in June 2023. Read’s defense accused Proctor, who has been suspended without pay since July due to disparaging texts he sent about Read, of deliberately withholding the videos.
Jackson argued that Proctor had complete possession and control over the footage and that the videos that were eventually turned over were “magically cut out, blurred, or became grainy” at the precise moment Read’s vehicle entered the sallyport. He accused the investigators of obscuring evidence to undermine Read’s defense.
Prosecutors countered that they were unaware of the videos until Proctor’s testimony before a federal grand jury revealed their existence. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan dismissed claims that the videos had been tampered with, stating that the defense had provided no evidence of intentional withholding.
The defense argued that the videos would support their claim that Read’s right rear taillight was cracked, but not shattered, when it arrived at the station. They contend that fragments of the taillight were planted at the crime scene to frame Read. Prosecutors maintain that the light shattered upon impact with O’Keefe and that the footage disproves the defense’s argument.
Brennan also addressed the jury tampering allegation, calling it one of the most serious accusations that could be made against the legal system. He stated that such a claim requires extraordinary evidence, which the defense failed to provide. He emphasized that Fanning had no interaction with any jurors and had never even set foot on court property while jurors were present.
Jackson pushed back, stating that the defense had never been given the information Brennan presented until the hearing. He questioned how Brennan had obtained such details and why the defense had not been informed of any conversations between Brennan and Fanning.
Judge Cannone did not rule on the motion to dismiss, and Read’s second trial remains scheduled to begin on April 1. Meanwhile, in federal court, Read’s lawyers also argued for the dismissal of two of the three charges against her on double jeopardy grounds. The judge in that case indicated he would issue a ruling before the trial date.
#KarenRead #TrueCrime #LegalDrama #CourtroomBattle
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Read appeared in federal court and Norfolk Superior Court on Wednesday, where her lawyers argued a motion to dismiss the case. At the outset of the hearing, Judge Beverly Cannone pushed back on the claim from Read’s attorney Alan Jackson, stating that his assertion—that Lt. John Fanning had control over and access to the jury—was “simply not true.” She emphasized that the only individuals with access to the jury were court officers and pressed Jackson on what “good faith basis” he had for making such a claim.
Jackson pointed to a sidebar conference during Read’s first trial in which a Norfolk County prosecutor referred to Fanning as the “commander” of security for the proceedings. This conference followed allegations of misconduct concerning a juror whom the defense believed would vote to acquit Read. That juror was ultimately dismissed before deliberations began.
The exchange was heated, as Read’s lawyers continued to argue that the case should be dismissed due to “extraordinary governmental misconduct.” They claimed that prosecutors or law enforcement officers failed to turn over key evidence that could have exonerated Read.
A significant portion of the argument centered on surveillance videos from the Canton Police Department’s sallyport. Hours after Read’s boyfriend, Boston Police officer John O’Keefe, was found dying in the snow outside a Canton home, her car was towed from her parents’ home to the police station. Read’s defense contends that a crucial 42-minute portion of the footage, which would have captured her SUV’s arrival, was missing.
State Police Trooper Michael Proctor initially requested copies of these videos in February 2022 and later requested additional footage in June 2023. Read’s defense accused Proctor, who has been suspended without pay since July due to disparaging texts he sent about Read, of deliberately withholding the videos.
Jackson argued that Proctor had complete possession and control over the footage and that the videos that were eventually turned over were “magically cut out, blurred, or became grainy” at the precise moment Read’s vehicle entered the sallyport. He accused the investigators of obscuring evidence to undermine Read’s defense.
Prosecutors countered that they were unaware of the videos until Proctor’s testimony before a federal grand jury revealed their existence. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan dismissed claims that the videos had been tampered with, stating that the defense had provided no evidence of intentional withholding.
The defense argued that the videos would support their claim that Read’s right rear taillight was cracked, but not shattered, when it arrived at the station. They contend that fragments of the taillight were planted at the crime scene to frame Read. Prosecutors maintain that the light shattered upon impact with O’Keefe and that the footage disproves the defense’s argument.
Brennan also addressed the jury tampering allegation, calling it one of the most serious accusations that could be made against the legal system. He stated that such a claim requires extraordinary evidence, which the defense failed to provide. He emphasized that Fanning had no interaction with any jurors and had never even set foot on court property while jurors were present.
Jackson pushed back, stating that the defense had never been given the information Brennan presented until the hearing. He questioned how Brennan had obtained such details and why the defense had not been informed of any conversations between Brennan and Fanning.
Judge Cannone did not rule on the motion to dismiss, and Read’s second trial remains scheduled to begin on April 1. Meanwhile, in federal court, Read’s lawyers also argued for the dismissal of two of the three charges against her on double jeopardy grounds. The judge in that case indicated he would issue a ruling before the trial date.
#KarenRead #TrueCrime #LegalDrama #CourtroomBattle
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com