Quickly
Socially
Trending
Crypto
DEDHAM, Jun 17 (AP) The jury asked the judge several questions relating to charges and evidence Tuesday in the second murder trial of Karen Read, who is charged with killing her Boston police officer boyfriend.
Jurors began deliberations late last week, more than a month after the trial started. The second full day of deliberations began Tuesday morning.
Also Read | Donald Trump Declares US Has 'Complete and Total Control' of Skies Over Iran Amid Conflict With Israel.
Read, 45, is accused of striking John O'Keefe with her car outside a suburban Boston house party and leaving him to die in the snow in January 2022. She has been charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter and leaving the scene.
Read's lawyers say O'Keefe, 46, was beaten, bitten by a dog, then left outside a home in Canton in a conspiracy orchestrated by the police that included planting evidence against Read.
Read's second trial followed similar contours to the first, which ended in a mistrial last year.
Jury asks judge to clarify evidence, charges
The jury asked questions of Judge Beverly Cannone, who oversaw the first Read trial and this one. Both sides discussed the question in open court.
The first question related to the time frame of an operating a motor vehicle under the influence charge. Prosecutors wanted Cannone to instruct the jury to consider a time of 12:45 a.m., while the defense didn't want a time specified. The defense argued during the trial that Read returned home and kept drinking, which would have influenced her blood alcohol level. Cannone said she would advise the jury that they are the finders of fact and to make their own decision based on the evidence.
On the second question, the jury asked whether video clips of interviews Read did in a documentary that were presented at the trial constituted evidence. The judge advised that they were.
The third question pertained to the jury slip, specifically whether a guilty verdict on a lesser charge of driving under the influence meant guilt on the main charge, which is manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence. The defense argued amendments should be made in the jury slip to make it clearer and Cannone was considering that.
Cannone returned to the courtroom with the jury present and answered the three questions, emphasizing this was their case to decide. “You folks have all the evidence. It's only you who decides the facts in this case. You are the fact finders,” she said.
She then turned to the second question, saying they should treat Read's interviews as evidence. “Yes, videos are evidence. You should weigh the defendant's statements in the video interviews as you would any other piece of evidence and give them the weight you deem appropriate,” she said.
Cannone then went through the amended jury slip with jurors before releasing them to continue their deliberations.
Daniel Medwed, a law professor at Northeastern University who is not involved in the case, said it's "quite possible it is heading for a compromise or mercy verdict, a split verdict” in light of the questions.
“My take is that the jury might be homing in the OUI charge, suggesting they might have doubts about whether she struck him at all,” Medwed said.
After a break, the jury returned a fourth question to Cannone, asking if they found Read not guilty on two charges but couldn't agree on the third charge, is it a hung jury on all three charges? Cannone said she would respond to the jury that the question was theoretical and not one she could answer.
The defense has said several jurors from the first trial came forward and said the jury was set to acquit Read of two charges, but deadlocked on a third, leading to a mistrial. (AP)
(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)
Share Now
Google Trends
