Karen Read‘s second trial in connection with the death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, resumed Wednesday morning after a brief pause prompted by what Judge Beverly Cannone described as an issue with the jury.
All 18 jurors returned to the courtroom after the delay. Cannone stressed the importance of the jury not discussing the case and not letting anyone discuss the case with them. She told the jury that included not discussing the case with each other.
The jury has heard from two witnesses on Wednesday, including a forensic scientist with the Massachusetts State Police crime lab.
People to know:
Hank Brennan, special prosecutor for the district attorney’s officeChristina Hanley, forensic scientist at the crime lab, supervises the trace unitDr. Aizik Wolf, Miami-based neurosurgeon
3 p.m. – Jury sent home
After Hanley’s testimony concluded, Cannone told the jury the trial was ahead of schedule and they would have the rest of the week off. Every day next week after the Memorial Day holiday is expected to be a full day, except for Thursday,
The trial will resume at 9 a.m. on Tuesday.
2:40 p.m. – Plastic in O’Keefe’s shirt could have come from other source
Alan Jackson, a lawyer for Read, began his cross-examination of Hanley by noting that she did not say definitely that the plastic in O’Keefe’s clothes came from Read’s taillight.
Hanley said it was a “possibility” that the plastic came from another source. She also confirmed she did not note any glass inherent to the taillight.
She added she did not note anything consistent with biological material on any of the pieces of glass, but said it wasn’t her area of expertise.
Jackson had Hanley review a series of photos identifying who collected the evidence she analyzed. She confirmed that the evidence bags identified state police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik and former trooper Michael Proctor.
Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally objected to the questioning and asked to be heard at sidebar.
The only piece of glass from the bumper that was consistent with glass found at 34 Fairview Road was recovered by Proctor, Jackson noted. Hanley confirmed that was true.
Jackson ended his questioning there.
On re-direct, Lally asked Hanley if she knew the four items she analyzed were recovered by different people on different dates, prompting an objection from Jackson. Cannone called the lawyers to sidebar.
During a brief re-cross, Hanley confirmed the only piece of glass found at Fairview that matched anything on the bumper was recovered by Proctor.
Hanley stepped off the stand and Cannone again called the lawyers to a sidebar.
12:36 p.m. – State police scientist describes testing of glass, plastic fragments
Hanley resumed her testimony Wednesday afternoon after testifying briefly late in the day on Tuesday.
On direct examination, she described the physical match analysis she performed on a clear glass cup and several pieces of glass found at 34 Fairview Road. The jury saw photos of the glass fragments placed on the cup as if they had not splintered off.
Hanley also examined several pieces of glass recovered from the bumper of Read’s SUV. Only one of the pieces of glass she examined that were found in the roadway matched the bumper, she said.
Hanley also examined debris found on O’Keefe’s clothing. She said she found one clear piece of plastic and several pieces of red plastic in his grey, long-sleeve shirt.
The largest piece of red plastic was about the size of a grain or rice, she said.
The jury saw several photos of the debris, including a photo taken through a microscope showing the red plastic.
Hanley said both the clear and red plastic were consistent in color and instrumental properties with Read’s taillight housing.
11:49 a.m. – Wolf concludes testimony
Robert Alessi, a defense attorney for Read, conducted a very brief cross-examination of Wolf.
On cross, Wolf confirmed he was not a forensic pathologist, but said he sees “more brains than a forensic pathologist.”
Alessi published a photo depicting a cut above one of O’Keefe’s eyes. Wolf said he had seen the photo and agreed it had nothing to do with the injuries he described during his direct examination.
Cannone sent the jury out for a 15-minute recess, noting that Wolf’s testimony moved quicker than expected.
11:39 a.m. – O’Keefe would not have died immediately
Wolf said the fall in and of itself would not have immediately killed O’Keefe. But about two-thirds of patients who sustain similar injuries ultimately die, he explained.
He described the process for treating a person with an injury like O’Keefe’s: they would be intubated and given medication to control the swelling in their brain. The person would also undergo a CT scan to determine if their injury required surgical intervention.
The “raccoon’s eyes” O’Keefe was found with would not have been caused by “direct trauma to his eyelids,” Wolf said.
Brennan concluded his questioning by asking if Wolf had an opinion to a “reasonable degree of medical certainty” about whether O’Keefe died immediately or within 15 minutes.
Wolf said “neither hypothermia nor this kind of injury would kill you immediately.”
11:18 a.m. – Neurosurgeon describes O’Keefe’s injuries
Wolf said the wound to the back of O’Keefe’s head was a “classic blunt trauma laceration.” He also sustained a “classic linear basal skull fracture,” Wolf said.
His opinion, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, was that the wounds were caused by O’Keefe falling backwards and hitting his head.
The “only way to get this kind of injury is to fall backwards onto the back of [the] head,” Wolf explained.
O’Keefe also had two hemorrhages in his brain, which Wolf said would have been detected on a CT scan or an MRI had O’Keefe “made it to the emergency room.” Neither would have required surgery, Wolf said.
But Wolf said it was not necessarily true the wound would have to have been caused by a ridge or linear object.
Wolf worked at a trauma center in Minneapolis, where he said he treated many similar injuries caused by people falling on ice.
O’Keefe’s injuries were inconsistent with being hit by something like a bat or hammer because he did not have a depressed skull fracture, Wolf explained.
But he did sustain a coup contre coup injury when his brain rocketed forward in his skull after colliding with the ground, Wolf said.
“This is why people like this get raccoon’s eyes,” he said.
10:57 a.m. – Trial resumes
With the jury back in the courtroom, special prosecutor Hank Brennan called his first witness of the day, Dr. Aizik Wolf, a Miami-based neurosurgeon.
Wolf said he had four surgeries scheduled each day the rest of the week. He said he does not often work as a consultant or as an expert witness.
He started the Miami Neuroscience Center in the 1990s and is now the director there. The center is embedded in a hospital.
Wolf said he has 34 professional memberships, and his research has focused primarily on brain injuries.
Brennan went through a number of book chapters and journal articles Wolf authored, laying out his credentials for the jury.
In the Read case, Wolf reviewed the medical examiner’s assessment of the case, autopsy photos and a forensic pathologist’s report.
When a photo of O’Keefe’s wounds was published to the screen in the courtroom, his mother got up and left. The photo, which showed a cut to the back of O’Keefe’s head was a classic example of blunt impact trauma, Wolf said.
“This is what happens when soft tissue hits the solid ground. The skin tears apart,” he said.
9:26 a.m. – Courtroom cleared to investigate issue with jurors
After a sidebar conference, Cannone told the jury an issue came up that required her to question each jury individually. She told jurors not to speculate.
Read more: Karen Read trial: Everything judge said about ‘issue’ with the jury
Both reporters and the O’Keefe and Read families were told to exit the courtroom. With 18 jurors, it may take some time for each to be questioned individually.
Cannone maintained her usual chipper demeanor when speaking to the jury Wednesday morning.
Read, 45, is charged with second-degree murder in the death of O’Keefe, who was found outside the home of a fellow Boston police officer on Jan. 29, 2022.
Norfolk County prosecutors say Read struck O’Keefe with her SUV while driving intoxicated. Read’s attorneys say her car never struck O’Keefe and that others are to blame for his death.
