meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary

MA v. Karen Read Murder Retrial - Dog Bite Expert Daubert Hearing PART 2

Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary

True Crime Today

News, True Crime, News Commentary

3.3907 Ratings

🗓️ 8 January 2025

⏱️ 62 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Karen Read is returning to court Tuesday for a motions hearing ahead of her retrial on second-degree murder charges in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe. The case has captured widespread attention, marked by allegations of foul play, contentious expert testimony, and a mistrial last summer.

Prosecutors allege that Read, 43, drove drunk after a night out and struck O’Keefe, 46, with her car before leaving him to die in a snowbank near his Canton home. Read’s defense, however, claims she is being framed by investigators, casting doubt on the credibility of the case against her.

“We have evidence of a rushed and incomplete investigation,” said Read's attorney. “Karen Read is innocent, and we intend to prove this in court.”

The upcoming Daubert hearing, a critical step in the pretrial process, will examine the admissibility of expert testimony. One key witness is Dr. Marie Russell, who previously testified about injuries O’Keefe sustained, including dog bites, raising questions about the timeline and circumstances of his death.

During the first trial, Dr. Russell's analysis of wounds on O’Keefe’s body played a pivotal role in the defense's argument that the injuries may not have been caused by Read’s vehicle. Prosecutors, however, counter that the evidence overwhelmingly supports their theory of the crime.

“The evidence shows a tragic but clear sequence of events: Karen Read struck John O’Keefe with her vehicle and left him in the snow,” said a representative for the Commonwealth.

The case has been mired in controversy since the beginning. Critics have questioned the investigation's integrity, while supporters of both O’Keefe and Read have expressed frustration over delays and legal wrangling. The mistrial declared in July 2024, stemming from undisclosed issues during jury deliberations, added another layer of complexity.

Despite the contentious nature of the case, Read maintains her innocence. “This has been a nightmare, but I believe the truth will come out,” Read stated in a previous court appearance.

The motions hearing is expected to address procedural matters and the scope of evidence admissible in the retrial, which is scheduled for later this year. Both the prosecution and defense are preparing for a high-stakes trial that could ultimately hinge on expert testimony, forensic evidence, and competing narratives.

As the legal battle continues, the case remains a focal point of public and media interest, drawing attention to issues of justice, law enforcement, and accountability.

#KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BostonNews #CourtUpdates #TrueCrime #JusticeSystem #Massachusetts

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

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

This is continuing coverage of the trial of Karen Reed from the Hidden Killers podcast and true crime today.

0:07.4

Now, back to the courtroom.

0:11.5

Can you be more specific?

0:13.3

I can.

0:14.9

Glass shards or broken taillight plastic shards, you understand they were found in Mr. O'Keefe's sweater, right?

0:25.6

Doesn't surprise me.

0:27.6

Well, I know it doesn't surprise you, but the question I'm asking you is when you decided to engage in differential diagnosis,

0:32.6

and you decided to exclude collision as the cause of this abrasion.

0:37.8

Didn't you want to know all the facts and information

0:41.8

in considering whether it was the taillight that caused the abrasion?

0:45.2

Didn't you want to know that information?

0:46.9

Yes.

0:47.5

OK.

0:48.1

And when you were considering that information,

0:49.6

did you know from the criminalistic reports

0:52.8

that shards of that broken tear light were

0:55.2

littered in his sweater I did not know that when's the first time you learned of

1:01.3

that right now right now and so when you've prepared for this case and you've

1:08.6

received materials from the defense, nobody has ever sent you,

1:12.4

ever. The criminalistic reports that show tail light shards were in his sweater where the abrasion was.

1:22.9

No one ever showed you that? I don't recall seeing that at all. Well, talking about being a detective,

1:30.5

using circumstantial evidence and trace evidence, I want you now to consider this new evidence

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from True Crime Today, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of True Crime Today and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.