MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #31 Retrial

[mrjitty]

I'm confused as you said it was pre-trial and I was going by the date on the tweet. So he didn't testify in trial 2.

He hasn't testified yet in T2.

 

[Tortoise]

More importantly, OJO’s DNA wasn’t on the taillight

Yes it was.

Reporting from testimony 16th May 2025. Also confirmed by Bode witness testifying on 19th May 2025.

"9:41 a.m. - O’Keefe’s DNA found on Read’s taillight​

The first witness of the day was Andre Porto, a forensic scientist at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab. He is the third witness from the crime lab to testify so far.

He described the DNA testing process for the jury. Porto was advised to slow down his speaking several times by the court reporter and by Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally.

Porto performed DNA testing on swabs taken from Read’s SUV taillight. The DNA from the taillight matched O’Keefe’s, he said."

Link: MSN


"DNA from Read’s SUV tail light matched O’Keefe and two others, who weren’t identified."

Crime lab analyst says O'Keefe DNA on Read's SUV tail light | ABC6

Testimony resumed Friday morning in the second murder trial of Karen Read.

www.abc6.com

"Testing showed “very strong support” for including John O’Keefe in a mixture of DNA found on Karen Read’s taillight, according to a DNA expert with Bode Technology.

He testified O’Keefe was exponentially more likely than not to have contributed to the DNA mixture on Read’s taillight, noting the testing also suggested Bukhenik and Proctor should be excluded as contributors."

Karen Read trial: Digital expert's credentials, methodology questioned during defense's cross

Defense attorney Robert Alessi began his cross-examination of Aperture LLC expert Shanon Burgess by putting him in the hot seat.

www.boston.com

 

[mrjitty]

I guess one of my main curiosities is whether ARCCA is going to talk about the EDR/infotainment data.

Looking at the bio of DiSogra it feels like he is a true EDR data guy, so I would have expected him to deliver that testimony as the foundational witness. Instead he adopted the CW extraction and data sets.

IIRC Brennan also said during Alessi's motions on 14th and 15th that ARCCA at that time. didn't have anything in their reports/presentations for this trial that were relevant to the DiSogra/Burgess debate.

Let's see.

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

I am just watching LYK right now...

They mention the '8 miles per hour would break the tail light', but say Welcher never actually proved that, or didn't say how he proved that. I looked quickly at his testimony and I see where he said it, but I don't see where he says how he came to that conclusion.

They are also talking about the crash test dummies lol and why didn't he test it!

One can infer it was in his report, backed up by maths and physics calculations. He wouldn't just pluck a number out of thin air. Notably the defence didn't cross-examine him on that opinion, so they had nothing to show it was speculation. They went through the weight of an arm with him and accepted it. The jury doesn't need to be bogged down with scientific stuff which might go over their heads, unless the defence has a point to score with it, to show it's not credible. IMO

 

[mrjitty]

One can infer it was in his report, backed up by maths and physics calculations. He wouldn't just pluck a number out of thin air. Notably the defence didn't cross-examine him on that opinion, so they had nothing to show it was speculation. They went through the weight of an arm with him and accepted it. The jury doesn't need to be bogged down with scientific stuff which might go over their heads, unless the defence has a point to score with it, to show it's not credible. IMO

I think the main issue for the defence here is they've created a straight up beauty contest between John's arm and the Traverse as to what broke the tail light.

I've never believed that crawling 'collision' could break the tail light without significant crumpling of the bumper of the Lexus. You will put a big dent in your bumper long before the recessed superstructures of the cars connect - that's the point of bumpers.

So if not the Traverse then what?

You can speculate Higgins jeep but that isn't in evidence so far. Then of course we have the mysterious work of Dr Wolfe and his glass cannon. Yet the defence appeared not to adopt that theory last time. Maybe they need it this time?

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

I think the main issue for the defence here is they've created a straight up beauty contest between John's arm and the Traverse as to what broke the tail light.

I've never believed that crawling 'collision' could break the tail light without significant crumpling of the bumper of the Lexus. You will put a big dent in your bumper long before the recessed superstructures of the cars connect - that's the point of bumpers.

So if not the Traverse then what?

You can speculate Higgins jeep but that isn't in evidence so far. Then of course we have the mysterious work of Dr Wolfe and his glass cannon. Yet the defence appeared not to adopt that theory last time. Maybe they need it this time?

IMO

Yeah, let me think, was it

A) a reverse at 0.7 mph that left no taillight on the snow at 5.07 am, that Read didn't get out of the car to examine, but knew about when she took Kerry and Jen back to 1 Meadows to inspect with her,

or was it

B) a high speed reverse creating a trigger event at around 12.32 am, when John's phone moved for the last time, at 34 Fairview, where his shoe and cap left his body, and he was left on the ground surrounded with shards of her taillight and his broken glass, and fragments of taillight in his sleeve.

That's a hard one. Hope ARCCA can help elucidate.

IMO

 

[lohrtabitha]

Yes it was.

Reporting from testimony 16th May 2025. Also confirmed by Bode witness testifying on 19th May 2025.

"9:41 a.m. - O’Keefe’s DNA found on Read’s taillight​

The first witness of the day was Andre Porto, a forensic scientist at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab. He is the third witness from the crime lab to testify so far.

He described the DNA testing process for the jury. Porto was advised to slow down his speaking several times by the court reporter and by Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally.

Porto performed DNA testing on swabs taken from Read’s SUV taillight. The DNA from the taillight matched O’Keefe’s, he said."

Link: MSN


"DNA from Read’s SUV tail light matched O’Keefe and two others, who weren’t identified."

Crime lab analyst says O'Keefe DNA on Read's SUV tail light | ABC6

Testimony resumed Friday morning in the second murder trial of Karen Read.

www.abc6.com

"Testing showed “very strong support” for including John O’Keefe in a mixture of DNA found on Karen Read’s taillight, according to a DNA expert with Bode Technology.

He testified O’Keefe was exponentially more likely than not to have contributed to the DNA mixture on Read’s taillight, noting the testing also suggested Bukhenik and Proctor should be excluded as contributors."

Karen Read trial: Digital expert's credentials, methodology questioned during defense's cross

Defense attorney Robert Alessi began his cross-examination of Aperture LLC expert Shanon Burgess by putting him in the hot seat.

www.boston.com

In my opinion if that is to be true, dna is super easy to be planted along with the pieces of tail light that didn't match.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

In my opinion if that is to be true, dna is super easy to be planted along with the pieces of tail light that didn't match.

It easily could have been touch DNA. There were two other unknown male profiles. Buhkenik and Proctor were swabbed and weren’t matches, but Lt Tully, Brian Albert, Brian Higgins, etc were never swabbed. IMO it’s likely just touch DNA from getting groceries, inspecting/working on the vehicle, etc.

eta: and I agree with you that it was possible for the red solo cups we saw about 2 ft away from the Lexus to ‘accidentally’ contaminate the vehicle. That’s why protocol exists for safely securing forensics evidence. I do think that’s what Alessi or AJ (I don’t remember who crossed the forensic expert) was insinuating by asking if Tully, BA, BH were swabbed.

 

[missy1974]

Yes - which is critical because they could not take the steps Green suggests to protect the location cache - and he then even goes on to say that even if they had realised to do that it may not have worked anyway.

What Green says is the phone might have had some cached location data from apple maps but it is only kept for a few weeks. He then goes on to talk about whether the phone was put in airplane mode or whatever - he does not know. But the point is from your other link that because Karen did not provide the passkey, the CW had to brute force the phone which took months (into July).

He then claims to have found deleted location data from april 2022 (i.e not from January). He then goes on to say he may not have looked for the web searches Karen deleted.

In any event, this is nowhere close to testimony that the CW deleted Karen's location data. He does not say location data from January was deleted - he said it was in the cache and then lost if it ever existed.

From around 48mins.

Ok.. I have a question lol I don't remember this testimony from last year... but .. if they couldn't get into her phone, how was Proctor going through her phone? I don't know the date of those "no nudes yet" text to the his LE group messages though.

 

[missy1974]

I guess one of my main curiosities is whether ARCCA is going to talk about the EDR/infotainment data.

Looking at the bio of DiSogra it feels like he is a true EDR data guy, so I would have expected him to deliver that testimony as the foundational witness. Instead he adopted the CW extraction and data sets.

IIRC Brennan also said during Alessi's motions on 14th and 15th that ARCCA at that time. didn't have anything in their reports/presentations for this trial that were relevant to the DiSogra/Burgess debate.

Let's see.

IMO

When I read DiSogra's bio, I thought for sure he would have something to say haha I am very curious to know what DiSogra's real 'feelings' are about Burgess LOL But that is just me being nosey and really has no relevance to the trial LOL

Interesting about ARCCA... but wouldn't that just mean, ARCCA is not weighing in on the time drift issue? That was what that was all about.

 

[Leilei]

Ok.. I have a question lol I don't remember this testimony from last year... but .. if they couldn't get into her phone, how was Proctor going through her phone? I don't know the date of those "no nudes yet" text to the his LE group messages though.

Excellent question...
You get the first BAM of the day
IMO

 

[missy1974]

One can infer it was in his report, backed up by maths and physics calculations. He wouldn't just pluck a number out of thin air. Notably the defence didn't cross-examine him on that opinion, so they had nothing to show it was speculation. They went through the weight of an arm with him and accepted it. The jury doesn't need to be bogged down with scientific stuff which might go over their heads, unless the defence has a point to score with it, to show it's not credible. IMO

I think going through the weight and force of different body parts WAS them disputing it.
I think they did have a point, and I think for some people, doing the math matters. I get that it isn't for everyone, but if it's good for 1 or 2 or 3 jurors... it matters.
JMO

 

[Wishbone]

A new witness is expected on the stand Monday morning. We know that it's a witness who did not testify in the first trial, a former Canton police officer.
We asked Read outside of court Friday about what we can expect from them, and she responded with, "You'll see."

Childhood friend reads Michael Proctor's texts at Karen Read trial

The defense continued making its case Monday after the prosecution rested last week.

www.nbcboston.com

 

[Tortoise]

Ok.. I have a question lol I don't remember this testimony from last year... but .. if they couldn't get into her phone, how was Proctor going through her phone? I don't know the date of those "no nudes yet" text to the his LE group messages though.

August 2022.

Karen Read trial witness shares why police suspected her in cop boyfriend’s death

The case out of Dedham, Massachusetts, has turned into a yearslong whodunnit legal saga that has captivated true-crime fans across the country.

eu.usatoday.com

In August 2022, a trooper sent a photo of Read's attorney David Yannetti to several members of the department. Proctor responded to the group text saying he was going through the phone of Yannetti's client, referring to Read with a slur used against the disabled community.

“No nudes so far,” Proctor wrote.

 

[missy1974]

August 2022.

Karen Read trial witness shares why police suspected her in cop boyfriend’s death

The case out of Dedham, Massachusetts, has turned into a yearslong whodunnit legal saga that has captivated true-crime fans across the country.

eu.usatoday.com

In August 2022, a trooper sent a photo of Read's attorney David Yannetti to several members of the department. Proctor responded to the group text saying he was going through the phone of Yannetti's client, referring to Read with a slur used against the disabled community.

“No nudes so far,” Proctor wrote.

Thanks! I don't have the time this morning to go search and I checked YB's testimony last night and the date didn't come up in testimony that I could find!

 

[missy1974]

here is the law and crime feed

Expected today...
a ruling about MP's friends testifying?
Kelly Dever - former Canton PD, now BPD
Lucky? the snow plow driver?

Supposed to be a full day.. so we should get at least 2 hours of testimony between sidebahs!

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Yes it was.

Reporting from testimony 16th May 2025. Also confirmed by Bode witness testifying on 19th May 2025.

"9:41 a.m. - O’Keefe’s DNA found on Read’s taillight​

The first witness of the day was Andre Porto, a forensic scientist at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab. He is the third witness from the crime lab to testify so far.

He described the DNA testing process for the jury. Porto was advised to slow down his speaking several times by the court reporter and by Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally.

Porto performed DNA testing on swabs taken from Read’s SUV taillight. The DNA from the taillight matched O’Keefe’s, he said."

Link: MSN


"DNA from Read’s SUV tail light matched O’Keefe and two others, who weren’t identified."

Crime lab analyst says O'Keefe DNA on Read's SUV tail light | ABC6

Testimony resumed Friday morning in the second murder trial of Karen Read.

www.abc6.com

"Testing showed “very strong support” for including John O’Keefe in a mixture of DNA found on Karen Read’s taillight, according to a DNA expert with Bode Technology.

He testified O’Keefe was exponentially more likely than not to have contributed to the DNA mixture on Read’s taillight, noting the testing also suggested Bukhenik and Proctor should be excluded as contributors."

Karen Read trial: Digital expert's credentials, methodology questioned during defense's cross

Defense attorney Robert Alessi began his cross-examination of Aperture LLC expert Shanon Burgess by putting him in the hot seat.

www.boston.com

And? Do you think my girlfriend's DNA isn't on my car?

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1929403851460763900

 

[Tortoise]

And? Do you think my girlfriend's DNA isn't on my car?

I responded to an unsourced claim that it wasn't on there, not expectation or anything else.

My opinion on expectation, relevant to this case, is that yes, I would expect to find it on those jagged broken edges of her taillight because his arm scraped back out of it.

I'd be concerned if it wasn't on there.

My Opinion

 

[Leilei]

Her Honor is letting the text messages in!!!