Police witness blasts hole in cracked taillight timeline in Karen Read case
Karen Read pleaded not guilty to murder charges in the death of Boston police officer John O’Keefe and is facing a retrial after a jury was unable to reach a verdict last year.
Coverage for this event has ended.
Karen Read, who has repeatedly told reporters "TBD" when asked if she plans to testify in her own defense in the murder of her boyfriend John O'Keefe, said her team's proposed jury instructions, which indicate she will not take the stand, used "boilerplate" language.
She also doubled down on her assertion that police tampered with the taillight of her Lexus SUV, telling reporters, "It's on video. We all know when it was tampered with."
Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros, who was present when state police seized her vehicle on Jan. 29, 2022, testified earlier that damage seen in photographs taken at Canton police headquarters was more extensive than what he saw on when it was towed from Read's parents' driveway.
Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testifies on the witness stand in Karen Read’s trial on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. (Pool)
Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testified on cross-examination by special prosecutor Hank Brennan that he did not see anyone tamper with Karen Read’s vehicle after it was seized by authorities.
“And no time from when you got there until you left, did you see anybody from the state police in any way tamper with that vehicle?” Brennan asked.
“I did not,” Barros said.
Brennan pointed to Barros’ incident report in which he included one line regarding the damage to Read’s taillight, writing “the vehicle had damage to the right rear taillight.”
Following Barros' testimony, Judge Beverly Cannone sent the jurors home for the day.
Karen Read's defense team called Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros to the witness stand Tuesday afternoon after two days of testimony from Dr. Marie Russell, a Los Angeles-based expert on dog bites who faced a grueling cross-examination from special prosecutor Hank Brennan.
Barros assisted state police in seizing Read's vehicle on Jan. 29, 2022, the day her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, was discovered dead in the snow in Canton, Massachusetts.
Read's car was at her parents' house in Dighton when police went to serve a search warrant, and local authorities assisted because it was in their jurisdiction.
Barros testified that when he arrived at Read's parents' house to help take the vehicle, less pieces of taillight were missing from the cracked taillight.
He said that a photo of Read's SUV taken at the Canton Police Department's sallyport did "absolutely not" show the taillight in the same condition it was in when he saw it in the driveway.
Karen Read sits with her defense team, from left, Robert Alessi, Elizabeth Little, Alan Jackson, and David Yannetti during her murder retrial in Norfolk Superior Court, in Dedham, Mass., Monday June 2, 2025. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
Karen Read’s trial returned from a lunch break on Tuesday with dog bite expert Dr. Marie Russell continuing to answer questions on redirect examination by defense attorney Robert Alessi.
Alessi questioned Russell regarding her analysis of the injuries to John O’Keefe’s arm and her conclusion that he was bitten by an animal.
“If the shorter incisors leave an impression, smaller skin lesions, parentheses, round pressure marks or streaky glide marks can be found between the impact points of the canines,” Russell said before lunch, quoting a peer reviewed study regarding wounds sustained by dog bites. “In practice, it is hardly expected that all six incisors will act uniformly.”
Following a short line of redirect, special prosecutor Hank Brennan returned for additional questions.
Prosecutor Hank Brennan questions expert witness Matthew DiSogra, an accident reconstruction analyst, during Karen Read's murder trial in Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Mass., Friday, May 30, 2025. (Mark Stockwell/The Sun Chronicle via AP, Pool)
Dr. Marie Russell, an expert in dog bites, testified on cross-examination by special prosecutor Hank Brennan regarding the factors she considered before determining that John O’Keefe’s arm injuries were from an animal.
“When a dog bites a sweater, you would not expect it would leave little fragments of taillight shards in clothes, would you?” Brennan asked.
“Correct,” Russell said.
“When you are developing your theory, differential diagnosis and excluding causes, did you consider that when Mr. O'Keefe's clothes were scraped - his pants and his shirt and his sweatshirt - what was discovered were minute fragments of broken taillight that came from the defendant's motor vehicle?” Brennan said.
“I didn’t know that at the time,” Russell replied.
Karen Read, center, sits during her retrial in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday June 2, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
Following a morning recess, Judge Beverly Cannone ruled against Karen Read’s defense team request for a mistrial with prejudice.
The motion came after special prosecutor Hank Brennan asked Dr. Marie Russell, an expert in dog bites, about the absence of animal DNA on John O’Keefe’s sleeve.
The question prompted an objection from Read’s defense, with attorney Robert Alessi arguing the prosecution did not call a witness to address the absence of dog DNA on O’Keefe’s sweatshirt.
Brennan countered by insisting that Russell brought up the absence of DNA during her testimony, thus opening the door for the line of questioning.
Cannone ultimately ruled that Brennan could continue questioning Russell on the topic.
“The motion for a mistrial is denied,” Cannone said. “Your rights are saved.”
Defense attorney Robert Alessi questions forensic pathologist Dr. Marie Russell (not shown) during the murder retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, June 2, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
On cross-examination, special prosecutor Hank Brennan asked Dr. Marie Russell, an expert in dog bites, about the testing for animal DNA on John O’Keefe’s clothing following his death.
“You’re aware, aren’t you, that those holes were swabbed for traces of dog DNA?” Brennan asked, prompting an objection from the defense.
Following a sidebar, Judge Beverly Cannone called for a morning recess before holding a hearing without the jury present.
“Attorney Brennan, just with regard to Dr. Russell in open court in front of the jury, used the concept of DNA,” defense attorney Robert Alessi said. “In this case, he has introduced it and brought it in for the very first time in front of the jury. He has done so intentionally.”
Alessi went on to ask for a mistrial with prejudice.
“Because of the conduct of the prosecution and specifically the intentional mention of DNA, the prosecution has put in the jury's mind that topic that is irremedial,” Alessi argued. “That cannot be reversed, that cannot be cured, that cannot be ameliorated with a jury instruction, that cannot be dislodged.”
Brennan insisted the reference to the DNA was permissible during Russell’s testimony.
“Let's be clear, the defense is on notice that there is no dog DNA in the sweater of John O'Keefe,” Brennan said, adding, “Dr. Russell herself testified in December 2024, that she did consider the absence of DNA. In her opinion, she disregarded it, she discounted it, she created false theories about the potential destruction of it. But she did testify this was part of her consideration for her opinions.”
This is the second mistrial request the defense has argued for since the start of Read’s second trial.
During testimony by forensic pathologist Dr. Marie Russell, a chart of canine dental anatomy, is projected by the defense, during the murder retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday June 2, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
On cross-examination, special prosecutor Hank Brennan asked Dr. Marie Russell, an expert in dog bites who worked as both an emergency room physician and a forensic pathologist, about inconsistencies in her testimony regarding the cause of the injuries found on John O’Keefe’s arm.
“Do you remember changing your testimony from teeth or nails to being very certain that it was canines - not just teeth - canines, that caused that wound?” Brennan asked.
“I became more certain,” Russell said. “Yes.”
Brennan pointed out an apparent shift in Russell’s testimony in which she initially reported O’Keefe’s injuries were caused by a dog’s teeth or nails, but later determined the source was specifically from the animal’s canine teeth.
“You had never said canines before, ever, until that recent hearing,” Brennan asked. “Isn’t that true?”
“I said teeth, canines,” Russell replied. “It doesn’t matter if I said teeth. Canines are some of the teeth.”
The back-and-forth continued, with Russell doubling down on her analysis that O’Keefe’s injuries were caused by a dog’s canine teeth.
“We call Dr. Russell’s testimony ‘junk science,’” retired Massachusetts Superior Court Judge and Boston college professor Jack Lu told Fox News Digital. “Russell is not outwardly hostile, but is evasive and struggling to respond to Brennan’s withering cross-examination. [She] is in over her head on international television.”
Forensic pathologist Dr. Marie Russell testifies under cross-examination by special prosecutor Hank Brennan (not shown) during the murder retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, June 2, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
Dr. Marie Russell, an expert in dog bites who worked as both an emergency room physician and a forensic pathologist, returned to the witness stand in Karen Read’s trial Tuesday morning.
On cross-examination , special prosecutor Hank Brennan grilled Russell on whether there is a medical standard for analyzing dog bites.
“There is no recognized standard anywhere for methodology on how to identify a dog bite wound,” Brennan said. “Is there?”
“There is no published standard from an organization that I am aware of,” Russell said.
Russell pushed back, telling Brennan there are “many conditions in medicine” without developed standards before eventually relenting.
“There is no standard in the medical community relative to differential diagnosis and pattern recognition as it relates to dog bites - not other areas of medicine - dog bites,” Brennan said.
“That’s true,” Russell replied.
Massachusetts defense lawyer David Yannetti and special prosecutor Hank Brennan arrived at the Dedham courthouse at the same time Tuesday morning, greeting one another cordially before climbing the steps.
Just behind them, defendant Karen Read and the rest of her legal team -- out-of-state attorneys Alan Jackson, Elizabeth Little and Robert Alessi -- arrived. She smiled for the cameras and waved at supporters.
Behind them came her parents.
Read is accused of murder in the death of her former boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, whom she and two friends found unresponsive under a pile of snow hours after he was last seen alive outside an acquaintance's house party.
Special prosecutor Hank Brennan may have dulled the impact of inappropriate text messages the lead homicide detective sent regarding Karen Read days before she was charged with the murder of John O'Keefe – but they're still damaging to the state's case and not just because he used vulgar and obscene language, experts say.
The texts were a bomb that blew up the first trial when they were read with Michael Proctor on the witness stand, and it ended with a deadlocked jury last year. This time around, prosecutors decided not to call him as a witness, and it was his childhood friend Jonathan Diamandis who – visibly uncomfortable – walked the jury through the conversation.
"Proctor is mentally begging [the defense] to call him," retired Massachusetts Superior Court judge and Boston College law professor Jack Lu told Fox News Digital. "Now that the texts are in, they will not call Proctor unless they are convinced they have lost – the old ‘Hail Mary’ pass."
Lu said the defense team gained some ground with Diamandis on the stand, but with Brennan facing the text chain head-on, the messages were likely not a significant shift in Read’s favor.
"Will the jury be truly shocked by abusive texts from a police officer investigating a person they think is a murderer?" Lu said. "I doubt it."
Forensic pathologist Dr. Marie Russell testifies about the type of injuries to the back of someone's arm during the murder retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday June 2, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)
Karen Read's defense team is vying to chew up the prosecution's allegation that she fatally struck her former boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with a Lexus SUV and left him to die in a blizzard in January 2022.
Dr. Marie Russell, a Los Angeles-based doctor who believes the injuries on O'Keefe's right arm came from a dog and not the rear end of Read's vehicle, returns to the witness stand for a second day of testimony Tuesday.
Not only did she assert that scratches up and down his arm came from a dog's teeth or claws, she also said that holes found in O'Keefe's clothing were consistent with canine teeth.
Russell is a forensic pathologist and former emergency room doctor.
Injuries to the outside of a person's arm often indicate that the victim raised their arms defensively, she testified.
Dr. Judson Welcher, an expert on crash reconstruction for the prosecution, showed jurors a video last week using blue paint to illustrate where a Lexus taillight would come in contact with the arm of someone roughly O'Keefe's size.
Live Coverage begins here