Karen Read’s high-profile legal team outmatched prosecutors and secured back-to-back victories

How Karen Read’s All-Star Legal Team Overpowered Prosecutors—Twice

Karen Read’s two-year journey through Massachusetts’ courtrooms became one of the nation’s most closely watched murder cases, ending in her dramatic acquittal and exposing the limits of criminal prosecution in the face of a determined, high-powered defense, supporter mobilization, and investigative missteps.

The Murder Charge and the Media Spotlight

In January 2022, Read—a 45-year-old financial analyst from Mansfield—discovered her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, lifeless in the snow outside a friend’s Canton home after a late-night party. Accused of hitting O’Keefe with her SUV and leaving him to die, Read’s arrest sparked not only media attention but a movement. Her high-profile legal fight and the swirling controversy around the investigation soon made “Free Karen Read” a rallying cry for thousands of supporters and a regular presence across social platforms.

An Unmatched Defense—At Any Cost

Read spared no expense assembling her superstar legal team, which included renowned Los Angeles attorney Alan Jackson—known nationally for defending Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey—along with Boston trial veteran David Yannetti and, at one point, even an alternate juror from her first trial. Facing millions in legal bills, Read sold her home and relied on her retirement savings after losing her jobs post-arrest. Her battle also drew more than $1 million in crowdfunding from over 13,000 donors, demonstrating the depth of public interest and belief in her innocence. The fundraising page set up by her defense team even crashed under traffic after her verdict was announced.

On Instagram and Twitter, Read’s supporters created a strong online community, sharing trial updates, court sketches, and the defense’s latest revelations, further fueling awareness and debate about the fairness of her prosecution and the theory that she was framed in a law-enforcement cover-up.

Focusing on the Flaws: Weaknesses in the Prosecution

Much of the legal strategy centered on dismantling the Commonwealth’s case by highlighting investigative errors and questionable behavior by police and witnesses. Central to this was former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, whose inflammatory and deeply unprofessional text messages—read aloud to the jury in the first trial—suggested a prejudgment of Read’s guilt before the investigation even began. Proctor’s conduct led to his suspension and eventual firing, and he did not testify during the second trial.

The defense also spotlighted other inconsistencies and unaddressed leads:

• Suspicious actions by party host Brian Albert, suggested by the defense as an alternate suspect. Notably, the Alberts gave away their dog shortly after O’Keefe’s death, which the defense argued could explain O’Keefe’s arm injuries as dog bites rather than vehicle trauma.
• The timing of Google searches made by Jennifer McCabe, an acquaintance present that night, also came under scrutiny. The defense argued the crucial search, “how long to die in cold,” was conducted earlier than McCabe claimed—at a time she wasn’t with Read—casting doubt on the prosecution’s timeline.
• Contradictory eyewitness testimony about Read’s comments at the scene (“I hit him!” versus “Did I hit him?”) further chipped away at the confidence in the police narrative.

Crucially, Read’s team pushed an alternative theory: O’Keefe entered the house that night, was assaulted during a dispute inside, and was then found fatally injured later outside. This scenario, they argued, was discounted by authorities too quickly.

The Trials: Victory at a High Price

The first trial, which began in April 2024, ended in mistrial after the jury could not agree on a verdict, demonstrating early on the effectiveness of the defense’s doubt-raising approach. For the retrial starting April 2025, Read’s team doubled down—bringing in new legal minds, including a juror from her earlier case for unique inside insight into jury dynamics.

After extensive deliberations, the second jury found Read not guilty of murder and manslaughter, convicting her only on the far lesser charge of drunk driving, for which she received probation. This outcome was celebrated by her legion of social media supporters and further cemented her legal team’s reputation for mounting aggressive, creative defenses in high-profile cases.

Legacy and Ongoing Debate

Karen Read’s acquittal does not mark the end of public discussion. Her case highlights how effective legal strategies, public mobilization, and the power of social media can both influence and reflect the outcome of legal proceedings—especially when official investigations come under scrutiny. Her celebrity defense, aided by crowd-funded support and fuelled by investigative errors, set a precedent that legal observers and the broader public are still debating.

As media outlets like The New York Post and Vanity Fair have chronicled, Read’s high-stakes defense and the controversy over the handling of the case leave lasting questions about justice, policing, and the influence of public sentiment in high-profile criminal cases. For an in-depth timeline and updates on the trial, readers can visit the CBS Boston timeline or explore background interviews through Vanity Fair’s comprehensive coverage.

For a closer look at the trial chronology, visit the CBS News timeline of the Karen Read case. A broader profile of Read’s defense team can be found at Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP, and additional reporting on her supporters and their online influence is available through The New York Post.