Karen Read: Murder Case Left Me in ‘Purgatory,’ She Tells Interviewer

BOSTON (AP) — Karen Read’s murder case, which has drawn significant attention over the past months, has led her to describe her situation as one of “purgatory,” filled with daily stress and uncertainty. In an interview scheduled to air on Friday night, Read, 44, spoke candidly about her experiences since being accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, a Boston police officer, by hitting him with her SUV during a severe snowstorm in January 2022.

The case against Read has been complicated and tumultuous. After a two-month trial concluded in July, jurors found themselves deadlocked, prompting a judge to declare a mistrial just five days into their deliberations. “This is no life. I’m not in prison, but this is no life. I’m stressed every day,” Read stated, highlighting the emotional toll the trial has taken on her. “I’m waiting for the next shoe to drop.”

In a recent ruling, Judge Beverly Cannone declined a defense motion to dismiss several charges against Read. This decision allows the prosecution to proceed with a new trial, which is scheduled for January 27, 2025.

Read, a former adjunct professor at Bentley College, and O’Keefe were reportedly drinking heavily on the night of the incident. After dropping O’Keefe off at a party hosted by a fellow officer, Brian Albert, Read is alleged to have struck him with her SUV before leaving the scene. An autopsy later determined that O’Keefe died due to hypothermia and blunt force trauma.

During her interview with ABC News, Read expressed her turmoil while searching for O’Keefe. She admitted to consuming four drinks that evening, some of which she did not finish, and insisted she felt sober enough to drive. “I was worried he might’ve gotten hit by a plow. That was my first thought,” she reflected, searching for answers regarding O’Keefe’s sudden disappearance.

The defense’s narrative contradicts the prosecution’s claims, asserting that O’Keefe was killed inside Albert’s home and subsequently dragged outside. They argue that investigators disproportionately targeted Read because she was an “easy outsider,” diverting attention away from potential suspects within the police force.

Following the mistrial, Read’s legal team presented information indicating that four jurors believed they were only deadlocked on a third count of manslaughter. Inside the jury room, they unanimously agreed that Read was innocent of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly accident. One juror reportedly stated that “no one thought she hit him on purpose,” which her lawyers highlighted as a significant point.

Additionally, the defense criticized the judge for abruptly announcing the mistrial without confirming the jury’s verdict on each count. Attorney Marty Weinberg sought to have the judge reconsider and summon jurors for further questioning. However, the judge ruled that the jurors had not conveyed during deliberations that they had reached a decision on any of the counts.

Judge Cannone clarified her logic by emphasizing, “Where there was no verdict announced in open court here, retrial of the defendant does not violate the principle of double jeopardy.” This ruling continues to allow the prosecution to pursue the case.

In response, prosecutors urged the judge to reject what they labeled as an “unsubstantiated but sensational post-trial claim,” pointing out that it relied on hearsay and conjecture regarding jury deliberations.