There was no “a-ha” moment in the torturous case, according to Juror #1, the foreman in the Karen Read retrial, who told the Herald that taxpayer funds were squandered on flimsy evidence that did not provide any consolation to the victim’s family.
The foreman went on to say that it was unacceptable that detectives did not swarm the house at the murder scene on 34 Fairview Road in Canton during a nor Easter. This was poor job and a clear red flag. Because of this, drunk driving was the only guilty finding.
The juror, who is Black and was raised in Jamaica Plain, stated, “I know my house would have been stormed if that body had been on my front steps.” Trooper Proctor’s bitch and (expletive) texts also demonstrated a significant bias, but I had to set aside my personal beliefs.
According to the foreman, it all appeared to be a lot of wishy-washy privilege. Many of the pieces of evidence that we had to examine didn’t make sense. No flesh was present! No eureka moment. Despite all of that rhetoric, no one was able to prove a collision. And every juror concurred.
The juror, who requested that his name not be disclosed, called the Herald late Friday afternoon with his spouse. The couple has three kids and has a history of near-crime experiences. The juror claimed to have known both Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who set off two bombs at the Boston Marathon finish line in April 2013 with his terrorist brother Tamerlan, and Martin Richard, an 8-year-old who was a bombing victim.
The Tsarnaevs would later participate in a violent confrontation with police in nearby Watertown, which resulted in Tamerlan’s death and Dzhokhar’s capture. In addition, his wife was employed at MIT the night campus cop Sean Collier was executed. To avoid any problems, his wife traveled home by train. The juror claimed to have met Dzhokhar and young Martin while working at a Dorchester charter school that serves at-risk adolescents.
“Of course!” we replied. Then, the pair added me to the Karen Read jury over the phone, sharing in the irony.
The juror claimed that he was still having trouble with the fast-paced case and the moments when he would look at the mother of victim John O. Keefe, who would wipe away tears when pictures of the Boston police officer with his head split open were displayed. He did, however, add that the jury was unable to imprison Read, the officer’s girlfriend, based on the scant evidence that was offered.
The jury’s announcement of a decision on Wednesday that was abruptly withdrawn was due to one male member who had reservations, the foreman said.
I questioned the juror, “Are you okay?” during lunch.
Is it possible for me to withdraw my vote? He inquired.
The foreman stated that other jurors became a little anxious, but he claimed it was all right after 20 minutes. guilty of OUI.
The foreman went on to say that it was the only charge they had agreed upon and the only unquestionable proof.
He added of the panel, which consisted of five males and seven women, “we only went with what was put in front of us.” Where is John’s justice, I continue to ask?
Speaking out following the verdict, another jury expressed her dissatisfaction at the Commonwealth’s lavish investment of taxpayer funds in the case and the continued pursuit of justice by O Keefe’s family.
Paula Prado, a resident of Walpole, expressed her sympathy for the family of the former BPD officer.
In an appearance with the Howie Carr Show on Friday, Prado stated, “It is not our fault that they didn’t find out who killed John O. Keefe.” The investigation and the Commonwealth were unable to establish that it was Karen Read. We were unable to prove anything against her since we had sufficient evidence to believe that it wasn’t her.
After she continued, “I sincerely hope the O Keefes can figure out who killed John O. Keefe, and the DA (Michael Morrissey) reopens the case, and things continue from there.” I’ll be paying great attention and following along. Seeing that family in court that day was heartbreaking.
Morrissey has only given WBZ this four-word comment since the jury returned the decision on Wednesday: The jury has made its decision.
The top-level charge against Read, 45, of Mansfield, was second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. She was also accused with manslaughter for fleeing the scene of a fatal collision while driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated.
On the early snowy morning of January 29, 2022, prosecutors accused Read of using her SUV to back into her two-year boyfriend O Keefe, leaving him to freeze and die in the front yard of a Canton home where they were meant to continue a night out after the bars closed.
However, neither Prado nor the jury accepted the argument. She and her fellow jurors were perplexed by the high cost of prosecuting Read, she added in her Friday radio interview.
In particular, Prado drew attention to the $400,000 spent on Aperture, an accident reconstruction company from which the Commonwealth obtained two witnesses. According to their testimonies, O Keefe was probably struck by Read’s Lexus LX570 at approximately 12:32 a.m. on the morning of his death.
Prado also took notice of special prosecutor Hank Brennan’s at least $250,000 retrial salary.
We all wonder, “How much money is the city, the state, putting on the police following us, the bus, and everything else?” whenever we board a bus, especially when we first get on it. Prado uttered those words. Yes, it really annoys me.
O Keefe managed to get into the house on Fairview Road, where he was killed by people inside, including Brian Albert, a fellow Boston Police officer who may have been the home’s owner at the time, according to Read’s defense. It contended that the wealthy police family then collaborated with state and local police investigators to frame Read and conceal the crime.
When asked if she had any theories regarding O Keefe’s death, Prado said that she did, speculating that, based on information from Aperture, Read may have clipped him with her SUV.
According to Prado, the scratches on O Keefe’s arm seemed to have been caused by a dog rather than Read’s broken taillight, supporting the defense’s argument that Albert’s German Sheppard, Chloe, was responsible for his demise.
According to Prado, something occurred inside the residence. What is it? I’m not sure. I don’t understand why the dog didn’t bark at all or why the Alberts didn’t come out. We were unable to fill in the gaps.
The Alberts and key prosecution witnesses, most of whom were not called to the stand in the retrial but testified in the first trial, said they did not see O Keefe enter the home that early morning.
The defense and prosecution were prohibited by Judge Beverly Cannone from making direct reference to the federal investigation into the case, which has since concluded. Prado claimed that although she was aware of the FBI’s involvement from the beginning, it was not taken into account when making decisions.
Prado said her thoughts about Brennan changed throughout the trial and that she can t judge him as a lawyer because the case was awful, full of holes. She went on to say that she thought Cannone, who was extremely kind, gave the prosecution too much protection by raising a lot of objections during important defense testimony.
When O Keefe was killed, Prado shot Boston Police Officer Kelly Dever, who was working for the Canton Police Department.
Defense attorney Alan Jackson questioned Dever on initially telling the feds that she saw Brian Higgins and then-Canton Police Chief Kenneth Berkowitz enter the police department garage and spend a wildly long time with Read s SUV.
This would give credence to the defense s theory that police meddled with the evidence, including the busted taillight whose pieces were later found at the crime scene. Dever later recanted the statement as a false memory after being shown a timeline of events that proved that it wasn t possible.
Dever was described by Prado as completely unbelievable.
It was uncomfortable to watch her behavior because she is an officer after all, and she is among us, and she carries a gun, Prado said of Dever. She was not reliable and scary, knowing that she s around holding a weapon.
Since her first interview with independent journalist Jessica Machado on Thursday, Prado has been the subject of accusations from internet trolls. She addressed them during her interview on the Howie Carr Show.
They are all saying, How come she is an attorney and she was picked for the jury? She s a liar! No, I am not an attorney in the US, I am an attorney in Brazil, never worked here, not licensed here, Prado said. And How come she loves true crime, but she didn t know about the case? Because all of my interests was Brazilian cases from my country. My social media account is in Portuguese.
I really didn t know about the case, she added. I thought Turtleboy (journalist Aidan Kearney) was an environmental problem, Karen Read was just a lady.
The stay-at-home mother to four young children called the power given to her to decide Read s fate a great, huge responsibility that she was happy to be part of it and be able to serve justice.
I am really happy that I am confident that Karen Read isn t going to jail, she s not going to pay for something she didn t do. This filled me with joy, Prado said, and filled me with anger the fact that we don t know what happened with John O Keefe.
Related Articles
-
Karen Read verdict prompts calls for Norfolk DA Michael Morrissey to resign: Do better, sir
-
Howie Carr: Hos much did the Karen Read trials cost Massachusetts taxpayers?
-
Massachusetts State Police leader vows further reforms after Karen Read trial
-
Now that Karen Read s trial is over, John O Keefe family s civil suit can go on
-
Disgraced former Congressman George Santos weighs in on Karen Read verdict: Spirit animal
