Karen Read's defense team called their first 3 witnesses Friday. Here's what they said. (2024)

Crime

A snowplow driver and experts on dog bites and digital forensics took the stand Friday for the defense after the commonwealth rested its case.

By Abby Patkin

updated on June 22, 2024

On the stand Friday:

• Richard Green, digital forensics expert
• Dr. Marie Russell
• Brian Loughran, Canton (first defense witness)
• Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, Office of the Chief Medical Examiner

3:20 p.m. update: ‘Hos long to die in cold’ search happened ‘at or before 2:27 a.m.,’ defense’s digital expert testifies

Despite challenges from two fellow digital experts, United States Forensics owner Richard Green stood by his 2:27 a.m. timestamp for Jennifer McCabe’s disputed “hos long to die in cold” Google search.

McCabe’s search has been a hot-button issue throughout Read’s trial, with the defense suggesting she turned to Google for information on hypothermia hours before John O’Keefe was found unresponsive in the snow. McCabe, however, testified that she made the search after finding O’Keefe’s body, and at Karen Read’s insistence.

Two experts, Jessica Hyde and Ian Whiffin, have previously testified that McCabe made two hypothermia-related searches shortly after 6:20 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022. Both Hyde and Whiffin said the 2:27 a.m. timestamp actually indicates when McCabe first opened the Safari browser tab.

Green, a defense witness, testified that he was asked to parse through data from phones belonging to McCabe, Read, and O’Keefe. He said O’Keefe’s phone data put him at 34 Fairview Road at 12:24 a.m. on the 29th.

Turning his attention to O’Keefe’s Apple Health data, Green explained: “The degree of accuracy, it depends on the type of data that’s being pulled out in the artifacts. For example, steps are known to have an accuracy of around 98% on the actual steps occurring.”

Defense attorney David Yannetti pointed out that O’Keefe’s Apple Health data indicated he took 80 steps between 12:21 a.m. and 12:24 a.m. on the 29th. The same data also shows O’Keefe climbing up or down three flights of stairs in a similar time period. Green confirmed a slight overlap between the timestamps for the movement and O’Keefe’s arrival at 34 Fairview Road.

He also confirmed O’Keefe’s phone data shows 36 steps between 12:31 a.m. and 12:32 a.m.

Yannetti asked about data linked to the navigation app Waze, which O’Keefe was using the morning of Jan. 29. The data indicated three different timestamps, and Green noted the times varied by as much as three minutes.

As for McCabe’s phone data, Green testified that the “hos long” search “happened at or before 2:27 a.m.” He said the Google search was found in a write-ahead log, where data is stored temporarily before it is written into the main database.

“Just by the nature of it, we’ll find a lot of the newest artifacts in that WAL file,” Green said. The search, he noted, “was in a deleted state.”

He said he came to his conclusion about the 2:27 a.m. timestamp based on “how this particular phone operates with that exact operating system” and his comparison with other data from the phone. He testified that he found “a lot” of other user-deleted artifacts in McCabe’s data from the morning of Jan. 29.

Green said he wasn’t aware of any internal mechanisms on the phone that could account for the deletions. He identified another report showing deleted and “live” data from McCabe’s call log, asserting that “100%” of her calls from before 8:50 a.m. on the 29th were deleted.

“Those would have been user-deleted,” he added.

Answering questions from Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally on cross-examination, Green said he understood Hyde and Whiffin both disagreed with his findings. He also confirmed one of the programs he used in his own analysis was ArtEx, a tool Whiffin created.

Lally asked if it was possible the “hos long” search Green timestamped at 2:27 a.m. and the search McCabe made at 6:24 a.m. were one and the same.

“That’s inconsistent with the actual data I’m seeing on this actual phone with this precise iOS version,” Green said.

He also testified that a recorded search for “how long to digest food” was most likely a suggested search from Apple, even though he stated otherwise in a previous affidavit. Green explained that further testing proved his initial belief wrong.

Lally asked Green if he saw any deleted web history from Read’s phone from the afternoon of the 29th, and Green said he didn’t. However, he couldn’t recall whether he specifically looked for deleted data.

“I don’t believe I did,” Green said. “I don’t know if I would have had a cause to.”

He said he undertook some testing with the same iPhone model O’Keefe had to see if it would record steps while he was driving or stationary. He said the phone only recorded steps consistently when he was actually taking steps.

Lally asked about the GPS native location data indicating O’Keefe was half a mile away from 34 Fairview Road when his iPhone recorded movement. Green suggested the three different timestamps for the Waze data could offer a possible explanation.

As she released jurors for the weekend, Judge Beverly Cannone said deliberations are on track to begin next week.

1 p.m. update: Dog bite expert says she believes O’Keefe’s arm wounds were caused by an animal attack

The wounds on John O’Keefe’s right arm were caused by an animal attack, possibly from a large dog, according to Dr. Marie Russell, a retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist from California.

Russell has done research and published on the subject of animal bites and scratches, authoring or co-authoring several peer-reviewed papers on law enforcement dog bites.

“I have a very strong interest in wounds in general, and I have a strong interest in dog bites in particular,” she explained. Russell estimated she’s seen well over 500 patients and perhaps as many as 1,000 patients with animal-related injuries.

Karen Read’s lawyers have suggested that O’Keefe’s arm wounds were the result of a dog attack, and they’ve pointed specifically to “Chloe,” a German shepherd mix who lived at 34 Fairview Road at the time. Jurors previously heard testimony that the University of California, Davis Veterinary Genetics Laboratory Forensic Unit found no signs of canine DNA on swabs taken from O’Keefe’s shirt.

Russell testified that she reviewed numerous documents from Read’s case, including hospital records, autopsy photos and records, grand jury testimony, and Canton dog bite reports. After reviewing the various materials, she said she formed an opinion about O’Keefe’s injuries.

“I believe that these injuries were sustained by an animal, possibly a large dog, because of the pattern of the injuries,” she testified.

Defense attorney Alan Jackson projected an image of O’Keefe’s wounded arm for jurors, and Russell highlighted “a number of patterns” in the injuries, including parallel lines she said “were inflicted by either teeth or claw marks.” Russell also pointed to “punctate” marks she said could have come from a pointy tooth.

She replied “yes” when Jackson asked if it was her opinion, “based on a reasonable degree of medical certainty,” that the injuries were from an animal attack, possibly involving a large dog.

On cross-examination, Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally confirmed Russell is not certified in forensic medicine or pathology. Russell said she last worked at a coroner’s office conducting autopsies in 1995.

Russell testified that she first spoke with the defense on May 17, once Read’s trial had already begun. After reading about the case in a Boston Globe article that month, she said she reached out to a Los Angeles prosecutor she knew, who put her in touch with Jackson — a former L.A. prosecutor himself.

Russell said she was never asked to produce a report on her findings regarding O’Keefe’s injuries. She also testified that she reviewed some of the pertinent case files for the first time just two days ago due to “technical difficulties.”

Lally asked Russell if she was familiar with a 2008 National Academy of Sciences report concerning forensic odontology, or the science of teeth. According to Lally, the report indicated the forensic method is “not a reliable science, as far as bite marks are concerned.”

Russell said her understanding is that the method has been deemed unreliable for matching a particular bite mark to a specific person or animal. However, she noted, “I did not read the report.”

Lally also asked if it was normal in an animal attack for injuries to occur on just one side of one arm and nowhere else on the person’s body.

“It can be, yes,” Russell replied. She said she did not observe any other injuries on O’Keefe’s body that she would attribute to an animal attack.

Russell also testified that she could not say “with 100% certainty” what type of animal left the marks in question. However, she said she believed O’Keefe sustained the injuries before he died, likely “minutes to hours before death.”

She confirmed she reviewed Chloe’s bite history but did not see any record of the dog going after a human when there wasn’t another dog present. She also said the photos of bite marks included in Chloe’s file did not resemble what she observed in the photos of O’Keefe’s arm.

But, she testified, “I’ve seen thousands of people with injuries to their skin, from blunt, from sharp, from all different mechanisms. Those injuries did not look like blunt force injuries.”

On redirect examination, Jackson asked Russell why she believed the photos from Chloe’s records didn’t resemble O’Keefe’s wounds.

“There’s a variety of wounds … or patterns that one can see from an animal attack,” Russell explained. “It depends a lot on the thickness of the skin, the movement between the victim and the animal, and also the power of the animal and the training of the animal.”

11:40 a.m. update: Plow driver denies seeing a body outside 34 Fairview Road the morning of Jan. 29, 2022

Snowplow driver Brian Loughran testified that he saw nothing on the front lawn of 34 Fairview Road when he initially passed by the home at about 2:45 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022.

Loughran, who lives in Canton, also confirmed he’s familiar with the Alberts, the family who owned the home at the time. He said he once worked for homeowner Brian Albert’s brother, Chris, delivering pizzas.

Loughran testified that he arrived at the Canton Department of Public Works around 2:15 a.m. the morning of the 29th for plow duties. He said he was driving an older vehicle known as “Frankentruck” due to its mishmash of various parts.

With the seat raised so he could see over the hood, “I can see about five feet on either side of the passenger side, driver’s side,” he said. And with the truck’s lights illuminating the roadway, “I can see a real long distance. The visibility is fine,” Loughran added.

He was able to see “the entire front lawn” outside 34 Fairview Road the first time he passed by, he said.

Defense attorney David Yannetti asked Loughran how much attention he pays to front lawns and the side of the road when he plows. Loughran said he’s constantly “making sure that there are no animals, no pedestrians, and making sure no one’s coming out of their driveways not expecting to see me.”

“And when you made that first pass by that residence at 2:45 in the morning, sir, with your headlights on, what, if anything, did you see on the front lawn in the area of the flagpole?” Yannetti asked.

“I saw nothing,” Loughran said.

“If there had been a 6-foot-2, 200-pound man lying in the snow there, would you have seen him?” Yannetti asked. Judge Beverly Cannone sustained an objection from prosecutors before Loughran could answer.

The plow driver also said he saw nothing outside 34 Fairview Road when he passed by the Albert home again a short time later.

“Did you see a body?” Yannetti asked. No, Loughran replied.

He said he made another pass through the neighborhood around 3:15 to 3:30 a.m. and saw a Ford Edge parked on the side of the road in front of the Albert home, near the flagpole. Loughran testified that he found the car’s presence unusual, adding, “The Alberts never had cars that were parked out front. It just stuck out as weird.”

He said plow drivers are typically supposed to report cars left parked on the street during a blizzard, but he did not make the call “because I was being courteous to the Albert family.”

Massachusetts State Police Det. Lt. Brian Tully previously addressed Loughran’s Ford Edge sighting and testified that he wasn’t satisfied with the plow driver’s reliability.

“The person has given the statement multiple times, and it appears to have changed over those times,” Tully said last week. “It also appears that the person observed this vehicle from a distance, and also the identification of a Ford Edge seemed highly suggestive the way that I had read the account of it. If I had done that as a police officer, this court would throw out that identification.”

During his testimony Friday, Loughran said he returned to Fairview Road “about three hours” later — possibly around 5:30 a.m., though he didn’t recall the exact time. He said he saw first responders on the street, and the road was blocked off. Karen Read, Jennifer McCabe, and Kerry Roberts did not find John O’Keefe’s body in the snow outside 34 Fairview Road until around 6 a.m.

Loughran also confirmed he spoke with a private investigator hired by the defense on Feb. 15, 2022, but was not approached by State Police investigators until 2023. As Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally began his cross-examination, he asked about Loughran’s statements to the private investigator.

Loughran said he told the private investigator he saw a Ford Edge outside the home, and the investigator then took him to a parking lot and pointed to a Ford Edge to confirm what he saw. Loughran said he is colorblind and could not say what color the car outside 34 Fairview Road was, only that it was dark.

Lally noted that Loughran told the private investigator “that the SUV that you saw was ‘exactly where Mr. O’Keefe’s body was found.’”

“How do you know where his body was found?” Lally asked.

“I told him specifically if he was looking at the door, the front door, it was about three feet to the left of the door,” Loughran said.

Lally pushed back, asking, “My question for you, sir, is: How do you know where Mr. O’Keefe’s body was found? At any point in time, did you see Mr. O’Keefe’s body on the front lawn?”

“No,” Loughran said. He clarified he was recounting what he’d seen or heard in news reports.

Lally also asked about an interview Loughran gave to authorities in May 2023. It was not immediately clear which agency interviewed Loughran, though prior court documents indicate he had spoken at some point with the FBI for the federal investigation into Read’s case.

Lally asked if Loughran told authorities he actually came into work around 11:30 p.m. to 12 a.m., putting him at Fairview Road hours earlier than he testified Friday. Loughran said he didn’t recall saying that and doubled down on his earlier testimony that he didn’t begin plowing until around 2:30 a.m.

Pointing to the discrepancies in timing, Lally asked whether Loughran could have actually seen a black Lexus SUV outside the home around 5 a.m. on the 29th.

“No,” Loughran said.

On redirect questioning, Yannetti sought to clarify Loughran’s answer regarding the Lexus SUV. “Does that mean that you’re not sure if you saw one or that you didn’t see one?” he asked.

“I did not see a Lexus at 5 a.m.,” Loughrain testified. In fact, he said, he didn’t see a black Lexus in front of 34 Fairview Road at any point while he was plowing.

10:40 a.m. update: Judge denies request for direct ‘not guilty’ verdict after defense says Karen Read is ‘entitled to an acquittal’

No “reasonable or rational” jury could reach a unanimous verdict in prosecutors’ favor, defense attorney Alan Jackson argued. He called on Judge Beverly Cannone to intervene and find Karen Read not guilty.

The court must consider whether a rational jury will find the elements of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, he said, “and here, the case that the commonwealth has submitted to the jury after resting is insufficient to meet such a finding.”

“No reasonable or rational jury could come to a unanimous verdict in favor of the commonwealth,” Jackson argued.

He asserted that prosecutors’ entire case rests on the shoulders of Massachusetts State Police Trooper Joseph Paul, a crash analyst who testified that data captured by Read’s SUV appeared to be “consistent with a pedestrian strike.”

“There has been no competent evidence presented in the commonwealth’s case that Karen Read’s vehicle actually struck John O’Keefe,” Jackson argued. “There’s been conjecture, there’s been speculation, but no actual competent evidence.”

He also pointed to medical examiner Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello’s testimony earlier on Friday that O’Keefe’s arm injuries were “not the classic pedestrian injuries we observe” following a collision.

Read, Jackson said, is “entitled to an acquittal.”

“Everything turns on whether or not the car hit John O’Keefe, and the commonwealth’s only theory of how that happened is from Trooper Paul’s description,” Jackson said.

“Surprisingly, I would disagree,” Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally sarcastically remarked as he stepped up to offer a rebuttal, earning a reprimand from Cannone.

Lally asserted Paul’s testimony is just one part of the prosecution’s case. “I don’t want to minimize it, but at the same time, that is not the only evidence that the vehicle struck Mr. O’Keefe or interacted with Mr. O’Keefe,” he said.

He pointed to the physical evidence in the case, including broken pieces of taillight recovered from outside 34 Fairview Road, microscopic pieces of red and clear plastic found on O’Keefe’s clothing, and a hair matching O’Keefe that was found on the back of Read’s car. The couple’s heated text messages from Jan. 28, 2022, and Read’s angry voicemails from the morning of the 29th provide evidence of motive, he argued.

Witness Jennifer McCabe also testified that she told O’Keefe 34 Fairview Road was near “Bella’s street” when he called asking for directions after midnight on Jan. 29. She said she was referring to a child whose mother O’Keefe had dated years prior. Lally suggested the mention of Bella’s mother sparked a verbal fight between Read and O’Keefe as they headed over to 34 Fairview Road.

Cannone ultimately rejected the defense team’s motion, adding, “I am satisfied the commonwealth has met its burden.”

10:05 a.m. update: Prosecution rests following ME’s testimony that John O’Keefe’s head injury could be consistent with a fall to the ground

Medical examiner Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello walked jurors through John O’Keefe’s autopsy photos, noting injuries that ranged from cuts on his right arm to discolored eyelids and bruising on the back of one hand.

She explained the cuts on O’Keefe’s arm were “superficial abrasions to the skin. They are not lethal; they are not contributory to the cause of death.”

As for a laceration on the back of O’Keefe’s head, “It’s a typical, classic blunt impact injury, and you can see the abrasion, the scrape, that is adjacent to it,” Scordi-Bello said.

She said the injury to the back of the head could have been caused by “any blunt object” and could be consistent with a fall to the ground. Scordi-Bello further testified that it’s possible the injury could be consistent with striking one’s head on the ground following a pedestrian collision.

The arm wounds, meanwhile, were possibly consistent with scratches from plastic, glass, or metal, she confirmed. However, Scordi-Bello added that the arm injuries are “not the classic pedestrian injuries we observe” following a collision.

Pedestrian injuries can vary depending on factors such as speed and the body’s position, she noted. In the majority of cases, she said, the pedestrian will have injuries to their legs from the car’s bumper. While O’Keefe did not have any injuries to his lower extremities other than a small cut on the side of his right knee, Scordi-Bello acknowledged Karen Read’s SUV is on the larger side, with a higher taillight and bumper.

The medical examiner also said she spoke with investigators in the days and weeks following O’Keefe’s autopsy in hopes of gaining more information about the circ*mstances surrounding his death. Scordi-Bello testified that she spoke with Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor twice, though she denied feeling pressured or coerced into reaching a certain determination regarding manner of death, as the defense has suggested.

As defense attorney Elizabeth Little stepped up to the plate for cross-examination, Scordi-Bello confirmed O’Keefe had no major injuries below the neck.

“Would you agree that John O’Keefe’s injuries — or lack thereof — are inconsistent with having been struck by a vehicle at 24 miles per hour?” Little asked.

“I would say it’s likely and unlikely at the same time, depending on the position of the body and the vehicle in question,” Scordi-Bello replied.

“Would you agree that John O’Keefe’s injuries to his arm … are inconsistent with having been struck by a vehicle at 24 miles per hour?” Little pressed.

“I don’t know,” Scordi-Bello said. “I am not a reconstruction expert. I am not a biomechanics expert. I never personally inspected the car, so I can’t offer an opinion on that.”

Asked if O’Keefe’s facial injuries were consistent with having been punched, she answered, “That is a possibility.”

Little noted O’Keefe also had a cut on his tongue, and Scordi-Bello acknowledged the wound could have resulted from a punch to the face or jaw.

She also confirmed the cut on the back of O’Keefe’s head could have come from falling backward onto concrete or being struck with a large object like a baseball bat or barbell.

Little suggested the linear wounds on O’Keefe’s right arm seemed inconsistent with road rash, and Scordi-Bello confirmed she doesn’t know what caused the scratches.

Scordi-Bello previously testified that O’Keefe had no major signs of “what I would call a significant altercation,” citing the lack of broken fingernails, hand fractures, or bruised knuckles. However, Little pointed out that O’Keefe did have injuries to his face and contusions on the backs of his hands.

“These injuries are consistent with a physical altercation, correct?” Little asked. Judge Beverly Cannone sustained an objection from prosecutors before Scordi-Bello could answer.

Later on, Little asked, “In your expert medical opinion, is it possible for someone to get punched in the face hard enough to lose consciousness and fall backward?”

“It’s possible,” Scordi-Bello acknowledged.

Following the medical examiner’s testimony, the prosecution rested its case. The defense will begin calling its witnesses Friday.

Livestream via NBC10 Boston. Friday’s testimony included graphic autopsy photos.

Having learned Thursday that John O’Keefe died of “blunt impact injuries of head and hypothermia,” jurors in the Karen Read murder trial are now expected to view O’Keefe’s autopsy photos when medical examiner Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello returns to the stand Friday.

Scordi-Bello previously testified that O’Keefe had brain hemorrhages and fractures on the front and back of his skull, as well as swollen eyes and various wounds on his face, the back of his head, and his right arm. His internal organs also showed possible signs of hypothermia, she said.

O’Keefe, who had been out drinking at two local bars the night before he died, had a blood alcohol level of 0.21 grams per deciliter, Scordi-Bello testified. His intoxication level was higher in his vitreous humor — fluid from behind his eyes — at 0.28 grams per deciliter, and Scordi-Bello explained that O’Keefe was sobering up when he died.

“Alcohol intoxication has been shown to inhibit some of the mechanisms that the body uses to maintain heat,” she said, answering a question from Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally. “So it’s definitely a factor that is a negative factor when it comes to hypothermia.”

Prosecutors say Read, O’Keefe’s girlfriend of two years, was also drunk when she dropped O’Keefe off at a house party in Canton on Jan. 29, 2022. The Mansfield woman is accused of intentionally backing her SUV into O’Keefe outside 34 Fairview Road, then leaving him to die in a blizzard.

Jurors on Thursday heard eight voicemails Read left O’Keefe in the early hours of the 29th, the first one coming in shortly after she drove off from Fairview Road. “John, I f***ing hate you!” Read screamed into the phone at 12:37 a.m. In later messages, she called O’Keefe a pervert and accused him of sleeping with “another girl.”

Massachusetts State Police Trooper Nicholas Guarino testified Thursday that O’Keefe’s phone data shows his arrival on Fairview Road at 12:24 a.m., while Read’s data indicates her phone auto-connected to the Wi-Fi at O’Keefe’s house at 12:36 a.m.

Defense attorney David Yannetti pointed out that Read’s timestamped voicemails and her 12:36 a.m. arrival at O’Keefe’s house are inconsistent with State Police crash analyst and Trooper Joseph Paul’s theory that Read struck O’Keefe at about 12:45 a.m. on the 29th.

Instead, Read’s lawyers believe she was framed, and that O’Keefe was actually injured in a physical altercation after walking into 34 Fairview Road. They’ve suggested the injuries to his right arm were caused not by Read’s shattered taillight, but by an attack from the homeowner’s dog, a German shepherd mix named “Chloe.”

The defense will have a chance to lay the groundwork for that theory when they call Dr. Marie Russell, a retired physician and forensic pathologist who believes O’Keefe’s arm injuries “are consistent with a large dog attack.”

However, Scordi-Bello testified Thursday that she saw no major signs of “what I would call a significant altercation.” She noted the lack of fractures in O’Keefe’s hands or bruising on his knuckles, explaining that the contusions on one hand were possibly from attempts to insert an IV.