Jury in Karen Read trial reports deadlock. Why judge says keep going

DEDHAM ― There will be no verdict this week in the trial of a Mansfield woman accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend, 46-year-old Braintree native John O'Keefe, with her SUV outside a Canton home in January 2022.

A few hours after the jury reported that they were deadlocked in the murder trial of Karen Read, Judge Beverly Cannone sent them home for the weekend. Deliberations will resume on Monday.

Earlier on Friday afternoon, after reading a note from the jury and hearing from lawyers on both sides, Cannone ordered the jurors to continue deliberating.

"A case that has been .... it's been a long case," said Cannone said.

The jury continued deliberations until 4:15 p.m. Friday and then were dismissed for the weekend.

Cannone told the jury to use the weekend to clear their heads, to not think about or do additional research on the case. Jury deliberations will continue starting at 9 a.m. Monday.

Judge Beverly Cannone updates court on status Friday afternoon

Before being dismissed for the day, the jury requested to stay in deliberations until 4:15 p.m. Friday, which had them approaching 21 hours of deliberations this week.

Cannone sent a note to the jury at 3:30 p.m. Friday as she has done each day during deliberations asking if the jury wants to be released for the day or continue until 4:15 p.m. She announced at 3:45 p.m. they requested to stay.

This was about 3.5 hours after the jury sent a note saying they were "unable to reach a unanimous verdict."

The note from the jury, passed to Cannone just after noon Friday, read: “Despite our exhaustive review of the evidence, and our diligent consideration of all disputed evidence, we have been unable to reach a unanimous verdict.”

Cannone, outside jurors’ presence, said she did not, at this point, believe it was proper to declare a hung jury.

Karen Read trial: What happens if there is a hung jury in the Karen Read trial? What to know

She noted, still outside earshot of jurors, that they’d heard from 74 witnesses, reviewed more than 650 exhibits, and had complicated issues to consider.

After making her ruling, Cannone brought the jury back into the courtroom, told them she knows they’ve been working hard, and asked them to continue deliberations.

Jurors have so far been deliberating for at least 17 hours over four days following closing arguments Tuesday.

Reaction outside courthouse

Outside the courthouse, Read supporter Mike Brooks of New Hampshire said he “absolutely” agreed with the judge’s decision to ask the jury to continue deliberating.

Brooks said Read has had the case hanging over her head for a long time, and deserves, in his opinion, to be acquitted.

Asked how he thought people would react if she was convicted, Brooks said there would likely be outrage, but he hoped there would not be physical unrest.

“This is a peaceful protest,” he said.

Brooks identified himself as one of about a dozen Read supporters who have been providing security for Read as she travels to and from the courtroom each day.

Earlier in the day, he posed for a photo with a friend, Dennis Sweeney of Canton, who was dressed in a black robe and blonde wig and holding an American flag.

Sweeney said he wore the getup to criticize the judge in Read’s case, Cannone, who he believes has not been fair.

In what has become a ritual, Read and her defense lawyers are mobbed by a crush of media every time she leaves and departs the courthouse, with Read supporters screaming loudly in support every time they see her.

Throngs of people lined the street Friday, as they have throughout the trial. Many sat in lawn chairs, some with their kids; “Free Karen Read” could be seen scrawled in chalk Friday afternoon on the sidewalk.

One youngster held a sign Friday that proclaimed he was holding a sign, smiling as he said, “I’m holding a sign.”

A group of counter-demonstrators showed up shortly after jurors sent their note indicating deadlock, holding signs saying they believed Read is guilty.

One of the demonstrators, who identified herself as Julie Guinto, said she used to believe in the cover-up espoused by Aidan “Turtleboy” Kearney of Holden, but reversed course after doing more research.

“I realized everything Turtleboy said was a lie,” she said, accusing him of manipulating people open to suggestion for the benefit of Read.

Guinto noted that authorities have alleged in court documents that Read had control over things Kearney published. She said she believes, as authorities have alleged, that Read used Kearney to publicize her defense and lead the public to believe things that were not true.

“There’s no evidence of corruption (by police),” she said, adding the only thing corrupt was the defense strategy.

Guinto said she believes the narrative that most people support Read is false, and that there are many more who think she’s guilty but don’t show up outside court.

Normal people have better things to do, she said, while they also know they will likely be harassed by Read supporters, and insulted and threatened online.

Guinto said she believes the media has done a poor job of reporting on testimony she believes exposes the defense theory as bogus, including an alleged 2:27 a.m. Google search that became a central peg of the conspiracy.

Multiple experts put on by the state, including one who works for Cellebrite, a major digital forensic firm, testified that the searches did not happen at 2:27 a.m., but instead close to 6:30 a.m., after O’Keefe’s body was found.

The experts testified that while the tab used to make the search was opened at 2:27 a.m., the actual search wasn’t performed until four hours later, and an indication that the search was “deleted” in the records referred to an automatic deletion, not one initiated by the user.

The defense presented a dueling expert who said he believed the search did occur at 2:27 a.m.

Kearney told the Telegram & Gazette on Friday he was unswayed by the state’s witnesses, and believes the search took place at 2:27 a.m.

He said nothing the state presented changed his views on the case, denied ceding editorial control to Read, and alleged that the counterprotesters who showed up Friday all showed up because they dislike him.

Some of the counterprotesters told reporters they were “disgusted” with comments they said Kearney has made about O’Keefe’s family.

Kearney acknowledged that he does not like some members of the O’Keefe family; he said that’s not because they hold opposite views of the case, but because, he alleged, they tried to exclude him from court proceedings by inviting an ex-girlfriend of his who has a restraining order against him.

Kearney alleged the woman showed up again Friday in an attempt to cause him problems. Kearney, who is facing felony charges tied to allegations he intimidated witnesses in Read’s trial, is also facing a separate witness intimidation charge and a wiretapping charge stemming from an interaction with the woman last December.

Kearney was jailed for two months for witness intimidation and alleged assault and battery after an arraignment in district court. The assault and battery charge was dropped months later, and he was indicted into Norfolk Superior Court on allegations of witness intimidation and illegal recording.

The ex-girlfriend Kearney said showed up Friday was not called as a witness in Read’s trial. Other witnesses Kearney is separately accused of intimidating did testify at the trial, and he was ordered to leave the courtroom for their testimony.

Expert: Judge's decision not to declare hung jury typical

Peter Elikann, a longtime Boston defense lawyer and member of the Massachusetts Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Council, said Friday it’s typical for a judge to send the jury back to continue deliberations at this stage.

Elikann said it’s not usually typical for juries to signal they are deadlocked this early in deliberations – he said notes like that more often come after a week or two.

“Whenever a jury says it’s deadlocked (at this stage), a judge always sends them back and pushes them,” he said, adding it’s not unusual for a judge to continue requiring deliberations even after a second or third such note.

“The judge will push them for a while, but at some point would need to throw in the towel,” he said.

Elikann said sometimes jurors are able to reach a verdict after initially signaling concern, and sometimes they are not.

“We don’t really know what is going on inside (the jury room). It’s pure speculation,” he said. “But what would be very important to know is, whether there’s two strong sides to this, or whether it’s just one or two people holding this up.”

Elikann noted it could possibly come out after the trial is concluded how the deliberations shook out, either through juror interviews with the media or, in some circumstances, a requested straw poll of jurors by lawyers.

He said the deliberations so far have probably surprised many people who expected a not guilty verdict, since the bulk of the public, he said, seems to believe there is too much reasonable doubt.

“The jury is obviously seeing something the public isn’t, unless it’s just one lone juror (holding out),” he said. “But, we really don’t know that at this point.”

A mistrial does not count as 'double jeopardy'

A mistrial will occur if the jury deadlocks and cannot reach a unanimous decision. This means the trial will start all over again from the beginning with a new jury.

The district attorney would have to decide whether or not to bring the case forward again. This would not violate the constitutional prohibition on "double jeopardy" because no verdict was reached.

What is Karen Read charged with?

Karen Read was charged with second-degree murder after O'Keefe's body was found in the driveway outside the Canton home of a fellow Boston police officer on Jan. 29, 2022. She is also charged with manslaughter while operating under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of personal injury or death.

Who is Karen Read? Everything you need to know about Boston's Karen Read murder trial

The case has drawn national attention as her defense claims it was a cover-up by law enforcement and that others involved framed Read for O'Keefe's death.

Prosecutors say Read and O’Keefe had been drinking at a local bar with friends and acquaintances before they got into an argument. They say she hit him with her SUV outside the home of Brian Albert, who was hosting an after-party, shortly before 12:30 a.m.

But Read's lawyers say Read dropped O'Keefe off at Albert's home, where he was fatally beaten inside before his body was planted on the front lawn. They say she was then framed for his death.

Prosecutors called more than 65 witnesses since testimony started April 29.

The defense's list of witnesses was much shorter and included a plow driver who said he did not see anything on the lawn in Canton where O'Keefe's body was found.

This article originally appeared on The Patriot Ledger: Karen Read trial: Jury can't reach verdict; judge says deliberate more