Person Alan Jackson Trial 1Trial 2Defense attorney for Karen Read in both criminal trials ← All People
🛡️ Defense · Defense team

Alan Jackson

Courtroom still of Alan Jackson.

Defense attorney for Karen Read in both criminal trials

Trial 1Trial 2
22,026 lines 444 proceedings 2 trials

About

Alan Jackson represented Karen Read as defense counsel. He questioned witnesses about the investigation at 34 Fairview Road, the handling of physical evidence, and accounts of what Read said after John O'Keefe was found. He pressed Lieutenant Paul Gallagher and Lieutenant Michael Lank on why investigators had not searched the house; both said they lacked probable cause. Gallagher also explained that the storm and limited access to supplies affected the collection of blood samples in plastic cups. Jackson challenged Jennifer McCabe with a phone record bearing a 2:27 a.m. timestamp for a search about dying in the cold. McCabe acknowledged the record but denied searching at that time, saying she searched after O'Keefe was found at Read's request. When Jackson contrasted her accounts of Read asking whether she had hit O'Keefe with her later account of hearing “I hit him,” McCabe said they concerned different exchanges. Jackson also questioned lead investigator Michael Proctor about derogatory texts and investigative decisions. Proctor called the texts inappropriate but denied that they affected his work. In the retrial, Jackson argued in his opening that Read's Lexus had not struck O'Keefe. He examined accident-reconstruction experts Daniel Wolfe and Andrew Rentschler about the specific impact mechanisms they tested. Wolfe said his head- and arm-impact tests produced damage inconsistent with the subject taillight, while a thrown-glass test produced generally consistent damage. Rentschler said O'Keefe's injuries were inconsistent with the Lexus strike scenario he analyzed; on recross, he acknowledged that a car can generally clip a person but said he did not believe the evidence supported that scenario here. The prosecution challenged the experts' testing assumptions and the materials they had reviewed. Jackson's closing argued that the physical evidence and investigation left reasonable doubt.

Trial Record (444)

444 proceedings

Trial 1 First Criminal Trial Apr 29, 2024 – Jul 1, 2024 301 proceedings

Day 1

Day 2

Cross Steven Saraf - Cross-Examination Steven Saraf Alan Jackson 5 highlights 295 lines spoken
Summary

Officer Saraf acknowledged errors in the dispatch log and omissions from his early accounts, while the defense used dash-camera video to question what he observed and heard at the scene.

Highlights (5)
Key Moment

Saraf agreed that an account he later attributed to Karen Read was not included in his initial report or his next-day interview with Trooper Proctor; he called the omission an oversight.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Exhibit 26 was played twice while the defense asked Saraf to identify a woman's words on the audio; Saraf said he could not understand what was said, and the court sustained an ensuing question.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more
Key Moment

Saraf agreed that a person appeared to walk from the lawn area toward the house and that separating witnesses prevents them from collaborating on their stories; he said he did not hear Karen Read say "I hit him."

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Tim Nuttall - Cross-Examination Tim Nuttall Alan Jackson 4 highlights 172 lines spoken
Summary

Nuttall acknowledged limits in his memory of the scene and was questioned about differences between his trial account and his prior statement concerning "I hit him."

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

The court sustained objections to questions seeking a demonstration and an opinion about whether the injuries suggested a physical altercation; at sidebar, the judge permitted further causation questions if a foundation was established.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Nuttall said his account of hearing "I hit him" had been discussed differently in his February 8 interview with Trooper Proctor, and acknowledged that his memory of the time frame was faulty.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 3

Cross Anthony Flematti — Cross-Examination Anthony Flematti Alan Jackson 1 highlights 287 lines spoken
Summary

Defense counsel used synchronized dash-cam video and Flematti's records to test his recollection of the emergency response and what he reported about a possible vehicle strike.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

During video review, Flematti repeatedly could not identify figures or determine whether he was the person performing chest compressions; the judge sustained an objection and instructed counsel not to narrate the video for the witness.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Anthony Flematti - Recross Anthony Flematti Alan Jackson 4 highlights 16 lines spoken
Summary

Flematti said he could not identify CPR personnel in the video and clarified that he gave hospital staff two possible explanations for Mr. O'Keefe's condition.

Highlights (4)

Day 4

Cross Katie McLaughlin - Cross-Examination (Part 1) Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 3 highlights 100 lines spoken
Summary

Defense examined McLaughlin's prior report, documentation, and account of the attributed statement.

Highlights (3)
Voir Dire Katie McLaughlin - Voir Dire Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 3 highlights 158 lines spoken
Summary

McLaughlin was questioned outside the jury's presence about social-media photographs and her relationship with Caitlin Albert; she initially called Albert a close friend but later said they were not close friends and interacted infrequently.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

McLaughlin acknowledged knowing Caitlin Albert since high school and sharing mutual friends, but repeatedly described Albert as an acquaintance rather than a close friend.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

McLaughlin said she had never discussed the call or the case with Caitlin Albert and did not know the call address was the Albert family home at the time of the response.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Katie McLaughlin — Cross-Examination (Part 2) Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 2 highlights 38 lines spoken
Summary

McLaughlin was questioned about Caitlin Albert, 34 Fairview, and differences between her prior statement and jury testimony.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

McLaughlin said she did not recognize 34 Fairview as Caitlin Albert's home when she arrived that morning, although she said she knew the connection by the time of her testimony.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Katie McLaughlin - Recross Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 2 highlights 7 lines spoken
Summary

Recross questions about McLaughlin's social-media interactions and Caitlin Albert drew sustained objections before she was excused.

Highlights (2)
Procedural Rule 14 Objection and Jury View 1 highlights 15 lines spoken
Summary

The court denied the defense request to reconsider four excluded photographs, then supervised a jury view and cautioned jurors not to conduct independent measurements.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

Defense counsel asked the court to reconsider excluding four photographs, arguing they were impeachment material relevant to Katie McLaughlin's relationship with Caitlin Albert; the court denied the request.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 5

Cross Paul Gallagher — Cross-Examination Paul Gallagher Alan Jackson 4 highlights 287 lines spoken
Summary

Gallagher was questioned about missing scene documentation, estimated evidence locations, plastic-cup blood collection, and Canton Police stepping back from further investigative interviews.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

Gallagher agreed that the locations of the glass and blood were estimates because cross-coordinate mapping was not used, while explaining that officers prioritize lifesaving measures before measuring a scene.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The court allowed defense counsel to ask whether Gallagher knew Sergeant Lank had already contacted people inside the house before Gallagher assigned Lank to obtain initial statements.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Gallagher described collecting six individual snow-and-blood samples in plastic cups obtained from Lieutenant Kelleher, then bagging and transporting them to Canton Police Headquarters.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Gallagher testified that he supported Canton Police stepping back from further investigative interviews because a Boston police officer was found on another Boston officer's property and the homeowner was related to a member of Canton Police's investigative unit.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Paul Gallagher — Cross-Examination Resumed Paul Gallagher 4 highlights 170 lines spoken
Summary

Gallagher was questioned about blood-sample custody, sally-port access, Canton Police assistance, and photographs showing blood cups near the SUV.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

Gallagher testified that only Jen McCabe was interviewed in the house, that the other people were together in the kitchen, and that the interview was not audio- or video-recorded.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Gallagher distinguished an appearance of conflict from an actual conflict and said Canton Police could assist with tasks such as facilitating the taillight's removal.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Gallagher agreed, for the hypothetical posed, that unsealed and unsecured blood near the SUV could create cross-contamination; the court sustained objections to further questions about intentional tampering.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Paul Gallagher — Recross Paul Gallagher Alan Jackson 2 highlights 8 lines spoken
Summary

Gallagher said investigators should investigate further when appropriate but stated there was no probable cause for a search warrant.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Gallagher agreed that investigators should ask additional questions rather than simply accept a witness's account, and said search warrants require probable cause; he said there was no probable cause here.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Voir Dire Michael Lank - Voir Dire Michael Lank Alan Jackson 2 highlights 90 lines spoken
Summary

Lank was questioned about his relationship with Chris Albert and a prior altercation; he denied acting to help a friend.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Defense counsel questioned Lank outside the jury's presence about his longstanding relationship with Chris Albert and whether it affected his conduct during a 2002 incident.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 6

Procedural Ruling on Scope of Sergeant Lank Questioning 1 highlights 18 lines spoken
Summary

The judge set individualized limits on planned questioning of Sergeant Lank about the Alberts and an earlier incident, allowing limited bias-related inquiry and requiring advance notice before it began.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

Outside the jury's presence, defense counsel outlined proposed questioning of Sergeant Lank about an earlier fight and related complaints, reports, charges, and resolutions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Michael Lank Cross-Examination Michael Lank Alan Jackson 4 highlights 418 lines spoken
Summary

Lank was questioned about Albert-family relationships, the initial response at 34 Fairview, scene security, and collection of blood in Solo cups.

Highlights (4)
Recross Michael Lank - Recross Michael Lank Alan Jackson 2 highlights 9 lines spoken
Summary

Lank denied that his actions in a prior incident were motivated by protecting an Albert family member.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Lank denied acting to protect an Albert family member, saying he was protecting someone who had asked for help and was clearly afraid; he agreed that person was an Albert.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 7

Cross Michael Camerano Cross-Examination on O’Keefe and Read’s Relationship Michael Camerano Alan Jackson 1 highlights 53 lines spoken
Summary

Camerano described O’Keefe and Read as a close couple, recalling only limited disagreements about spending on the children and no breakup discussion.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

Camerano described limited complaints by O’Keefe about Read buying expensive items for the children, while otherwise agreeing he did not recall O’Keefe suggesting a breakup.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Karina Kolokithas - Cross-Examination Karina Kolokithas Alan Jackson 2 highlights 22 lines spoken
Summary

Kolokithas confirmed prior testimony about Read's positive comments about O’Keefe and agreed to a five-to-seven-minute travel estimate from the Waterfall Bar to 34 Fairview.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Defense counsel elicited confirmations of Kolokithas's earlier testimony that Ms. Read spoke admiringly of Mr. O’Keefe, wanted more time together, and was excited about a planned trip.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Kolokithas agreed that Jennifer McCabe's reported invitation was directed to Ms. Read and estimated that travel from the Waterfall Bar to 34 Fairview would probably take five to seven minutes.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 9

Day 10

Cross Brian Albert Cross-Examination Brian Albert Alan Jackson 4 highlights 1,121 lines spoken
Summary

Defense cross-examined Brian Albert on prior statements, the Waterfall and 34 Fairview Road, his phone upgrade, and calls with Brian Higgins.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After a jury-out voir dire, the parties stipulated that the Commonwealth sent Albert a preservation notice on September 23 or 24, 2022; Albert testified that he had upgraded and traded in his phone around September 22.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Using Albert's phone records, the defense established a one-second outgoing call to Brian Higgins at 2:22 a.m. followed 17 seconds later by a 22-second incoming call.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Albert said he could have been looking through an unlocked phone and accidentally called Higgins from the recent-calls list; the judge later cautioned Jackson at sidebar to calm down.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 11

Sidebar Sidebar on communications with sworn witness 1 highlights 5 lines spoken
Summary

Defense raised concern about communications with Brian Albert while he remained under oath; the judge deferred any order pending review of the rules.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

Defense counsel raised a concern that Brian Albert communicated with the Commonwealth during a break while he was still under oath and asked that such communications not continue during ongoing testimony.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 12

Sidebar Sidebar on witness foundation and contacts during testimony 2 highlights 11 lines spoken
Summary

The court preserved a foundation objection and restricted substantive contact with witnesses during testimony.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Defense preserved an objection to Ms. Kun testifying before the later foundation was established; the judge directed defense counsel to move to strike if the foundation was not established.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The judge directed that counsel not discuss the substance of planned examination or redirect with a witness who was on the stand, while allowing logistical contact and declining to broadly restrict law enforcement activity.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Teri Kun - Cross Teri Kun Alan Jackson 2 highlights 121 lines spoken
Summary

Kun said her analysis was limited to two swabs and distinguished the inhibited nuclear-DNA test from the meat I.D. test.

Highlights (2)
Cross Ryan Nagel - Cross-Examination Ryan Nagel Alan Jackson 4 highlights 124 lines spoken
Summary

Nagel acknowledged limits on his attention at Fairview, recalled earlier timing estimates after reviewing reports, and described what he did and did not see around the SUV.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After reviewing a report, Nagel recalled a May 2023 interview and explained that the truck began about a car length and a half behind the SUV but was about three car lengths behind when it left.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Nagel acknowledged that his earlier estimate of the time at the truck was closer to five minutes for the whole encounter, after initially describing the overall time as two to three minutes.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Nagel said he was focused on Julie and not paying attention to the SUV during part of the stop; he did not see another vehicle between the truck and SUV, a person on the lawn, or the SUV reverse into a pedestrian.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Nagel said that, as the truck passed the idling SUV, he saw one female with long hair inside, while qualifying that he was also watching to make sure Julie got into the house.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Heather Maxon Cross-Examination Heather Maxon Alan Jackson 2 highlights 70 lines spoken
Summary

Maxon described limits on her attention and recollection and said she saw only the female driver as the truck departed.

Highlights (2)

Day 13

Cross Colin Albert Cross-Examination Colin Albert Alan Jackson 4 highlights 402 lines spoken
Summary

Albert was questioned about witness preparation, his relationship with Michael Proctor, phone and text-message evidence, and injuries shown in an admitted February 2022 photograph.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

The court declined at that time to admit the wedding photograph marked DD for identification, finding it cumulative, while allowing further questioning about Albert's relationship with the Proctor family and permitting renewal if the defense tied it in otherwise.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

Albert testified that Michael Proctor interviewed him once in July 2023 for about 10 minutes, did not take or examine his phone, and that the interview was professional and comfortable.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Albert said he and Alli used other messaging platforms during the apparent gap in the displayed text string and denied switching platforms or deleting texts to prevent their discovery.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Voir Dire Colin Albert - Voir Dire on Proposed Videos Colin Albert 2 highlights 77 lines spoken
Summary

Albert acknowledged threats in two jury-out videos, denied any connection to John O'Keefe, and was questioned about when the videos were made.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Albert acknowledged that the videos contained threats toward people he described as the Advantage kids, while saying he was unsure when the videos were made.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Evidentiary Argument Over Colin Albert Videos 2 highlights 11 lines spoken
Summary

The parties disputed whether two videos involving Colin Albert were relevant to the defense's investigation-adequacy and third-party culprit theories; the court recessed to review the flash drives.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“It goes to both. It certainly goes to Bowden, but, yes, it also goes to our third-party culprit defense, as well.”

Defense counsel expressly connected the proposed videos to both theories of the defense.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Defense counsel argued that two videos were relevant to Colin Albert's prior testimony and to the defense's investigation-adequacy and third-party culprit theories.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Colin Albert Cross-Examination Resumed Colin Albert Alan Jackson 1 highlights 63 lines spoken
Summary

Albert identified himself in two videos, acknowledged threats of physical violence, and was questioned about earlier testimony on the videos' timing and his injured knuckles.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

After Exhibit 87 was played, Albert agreed that the statements shown were threats of physical violence; the court allowed a rephrased question after objections.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 14

Day 15

Cross Jennifer McCabe Cross-Examination: Prior Statements, Calls, and Group Texts Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 5 highlights 1,128 lines spoken
Summary

Cross-examination challenged McCabe's prior accounts, phone records, and group texts; she denied deleting calls or coordinating a story.

Highlights (5)
Key Moment

McCabe testified that she never saw a body after looking out from the house, while disputing defense counsel's broader characterization of what her view showed.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Jackson contrasted McCabe's current account that Read said “I hit him” with prior grand-jury testimony in which McCabe described questions such as “Did I hit him?” and “Could I have hit him?”

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more
Key Moment

McCabe said she did not remember the repeated calls to O’Keefe after 12:29 a.m. and assumed they were accidental calls from her phone in a back pocket; the court sustained the final question on the subject.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 16

Cross Jennifer McCabe Cross-Examination Continues Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 3 highlights 258 lines spoken
Summary

Cross-examination used police reports and phone data to challenge McCabe's account of investigator contacts and disputed Google searches.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

The defense published Exhibit 99, a Cellebrite extraction from McCabe's phone, and questioned her about the wording and timing of searches concerning dying in the cold.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Jennifer McCabe - Recross Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 4 highlights 61 lines spoken
Summary

Recross examined McCabe’s prior statements, deleted family messages, group-text context, and account of the morning search.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After reviewing group-text pages, McCabe said “I love it” responded to her husband’s comment that Kerry Roberts could write a book, and that “She was telling them everything” was her later text.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 17

Cross Brian Higgins Cross-Examination: Phone Records, Access, and Phone Disposal Brian Higgins Alan Jackson 4 highlights 1,111 lines spoken
Summary

Brian Higgins was questioned about his relationships, January 29 phone and keycard records, and the extraction and later disposal of his phone.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

Phone records were marked Exhibit QQ for identification. Higgins acknowledged the records reflected a one-second incoming call from Brian Albert and a 22-second outgoing call 17 seconds later, while maintaining he did not have a conversation.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Higgins testified that he was at 34 Fairview for less than an hour, did not see anything out of the ordinary in the yard when leaving, and did not see a body.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The defense used keycard records marked Exhibit RR for identification to question Higgins about his movements through the Canton Police Department on January 29; Higgins said the records could show entries but did not establish he remained there continuously.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Higgins testified that he selected two text threads for extraction from his phone with guidance from Matt Kelch, later turned those strings over to law enforcement, and no longer had the phone.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 19

Cross Maureen Hartnett Cross-Examination Maureen Hartnett Alan Jackson 4 highlights 266 lines spoken
Summary

Hartnett corrected the date of her sally-port examination and described limits on vehicle swabs, pooled collections, untested Solo-cup swabs, and pre-laboratory evidence-history information.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After the court sustained the prosecution's objection to a broader chain-of-custody question, Hartnett stated that she had no data showing where the items had been before the laboratory accepted them.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Maureen Hartnett - Recross Examination Maureen Hartnett Alan Jackson 2 highlights 6 lines spoken
Summary

The court sustained an objection to questioning about the name on evidence submission form "UU" and called counsel to sidebar.

Highlights (2)

Day 20

Cross Christina Hanley Cross-Examination: Glass Comparisons Christina Hanley Alan Jackson 1 highlights 78 lines spoken
Summary

Hanley clarified the limits of several glass comparisons, including that Item 7-14 had no physical match with the cup or Item 7-12 pieces; the court deferred admission of a chain-of-custody document.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

Hanley distinguished a consistency finding between bumper piece E and Item 7-14 from physical-match results, and said Item 7-14 had no physical match with the cup or the Item 7-12 pieces.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Direct Yuriy Bukhenik - Direct Examination Yuri Bukhenik Adam Lally 3 highlights 97 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik described evidence collection, Read's reported interview statements, and surveillance evidence; the court addressed foundation and chain-of-custody disputes.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

The court declined to sustain the defense's objection to Bukhenik's use of “we,” leaving the defense to explore which investigator performed particular acts on cross-examination.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

During a sidebar over clothing bags, the defense raised a chain-of-custody concern about rebagging; the court allowed the sneaker exhibit to proceed while noting the issue could be developed on cross-examination.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

The court overruled defense objections after counsel reviewed the newly disputed sally port video and the docket entry for the Commonwealth's discovery notice.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Sidebar Sidebar on Witness Scheduling and Expert Discovery Yuri Bukhenik Adam Lally 3 highlights 20 lines spoken
Summary

The court addressed witness scheduling, anticipated expert testimony, and discovery concerns.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“I don't want to get ambushed and I don't want to have to adjust on the fly.”

Defense counsel explained why the expected witness order affected preparation for cross-examination.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

Defense counsel said the anticipated scope of cross-examination of Trooper Bukhenik depended on whether Trooper Proctor would testify; the court said counsel should prepare for either possibility.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

Counsel discussed anticipated expert testimony and discovery; defense counsel identified Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler after explaining that federal authorities would not permit further interviews or information requests.

Open in transcript →

Day 21

Cross Yuri Bukhenik Cross-Examination: Investigation, Evidence Handling, and Video Review Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 6 highlights 358 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik was questioned about Ring records, scene security, evidence documentation, video interpretation, and his preparation for testimony.

Highlights (6)
Key Moment

Bukhenik testified that Ring did not provide activity logs and that the materials provided did not prove or suggest the account activity defense counsel asked about.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Questioning examined the clothing bags' February 4 label date, drying period, and the witness's inability to explain the label procedure or identify a separate custody log.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Bukhenik said investigators did not obtain GPS or cross-coordinate measurements for unphotographed February 10 items, although he placed them in the same general vicinity as other recovered items.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 2 more
Key Moment

After sidebar, the court allowed limited questioning about witness preparation; Bukhenik said he met with Lally twice and discussed portions of the case he would present.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

While reviewing the sally port video, Bukhenik agreed it was mirrored and described uncertainty about the identities, distance, and movements shown near the vehicle.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Sidebar Sidebar on Proposed Video Display and Trial Schedule Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 1 highlights 16 lines spoken
Summary

The court postponed the defense's proposed video display until the Commonwealth could review it and gave jurors a projected late-June deliberation timeframe.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“I've got the exact same video to the bit and byte, but it's inverted correctly.”

Defense counsel described the proposed video as a corrected inversion of the version previously shown.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 22

Cross Yuriy Bukhenik Cross-Examination on Sally Port Video Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 3 highlights 221 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik was questioned about the mirrored sally port video, its limited runtime, and gaps in the footage; an inverted version was admitted as Exhibit 542.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

Bukhenik acknowledged that the displayed footage did not show the approximately 42-minute interval discussed in questioning, while characterizing it as unrecorded rather than missing.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Yuri Bukhenik - Redirect Yuri Bukhenik Adam Lally 1 highlights 15 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik addressed the mirrored sally port video, denied handling the taillight area, and explained his initial report to the medical examiner.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

At sidebar, the court declined to allow the prosecutor's proposed question about the defendant's earlier statements concerning the broken taillight, finding the subject had not been addressed on cross-examination.

Open in transcript →
Recross Yuri Bukhenik - Recross Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 4 highlights 25 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik was questioned about his OCME report, the documentation for reported statements attributed to Read, and the source of the inverted sally port video.

Highlights (4)
Cross Michael Proctor Cross-Examination: Text Messages and Impartiality Michael Proctor Alan Jackson 3 highlights 125 lines spoken
Summary

Proctor acknowledged unprofessional texts about Read and Mr. Yanetti, while denying that the messages affected his investigation or reflected a predetermined suspect.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

Proctor acknowledged texts about Read and Mr. Yanetti, described the wording as poor and unprofessional, and maintained it did not affect the case's integrity or physical evidence.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 23

Cross Michael Proctor - Cross-Examination Michael Proctor Alan Jackson 7 highlights 1,142 lines spoken
Summary

Proctor acknowledged offensive texts about Read and faced detailed questioning about his relationships, investigative steps, and handling of video and evidence, while denying bias affected the case.

Highlights (7)
Key Moment

Cross-examination explored Proctor's contacts with Albert-family members, including his sister's communications with Julie Albert and his coordination with Kevin Albert after Canton police had stepped back from the investigation.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Proctor acknowledged that he did not review Life360 data to check Colin Albert and Ally McCabe's stated departure time and that investigators did not further investigate that timing.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 3 more
Key Moment

Proctor agreed that his June 2022 Ring-video report did not note the 12:41 a.m. footage referenced in Trooper DiCicco's handwritten notes, and testified that the footage was no longer available.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Proctor acknowledged that his language about Read in messages had dehumanized her, then denied that it reflected different treatment of her during the investigation.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Michael Proctor - Recross Michael Proctor Alan Jackson 5 highlights 21 lines spoken
Summary

Proctor again acknowledged inappropriate messages about Read as defense counsel questioned his contacts and role as lead detective.

Highlights (5)
Key Moment

The court allowed questioning about Proctor's derogatory description of Karen Read; Proctor said his emotions got the best of him and called the comment inappropriate and juvenile.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Proctor agreed that Proctor would leave Kevin Albert's badge in his own mailbox for Albert to collect, after Proctor had said he did not know where Kevin Albert lived.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more

Day 24

Cross Brian Tully - Cross Brian Tully Alan Jackson 4 highlights 375 lines spoken
Summary

Tully was cross-examined on the unsearched house, sally port video, discrepancies in taillight-plastic documentation, and the limits of his cell-phone analysis; Exhibit 577 was admitted.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After a sidebar, Tully completed calculations requested by the defense but maintained that the RTT record's first and last distances did not establish when those distances were created.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Tully said he investigated the reliability of the Ford Edge account, but did not personally check vehicle registrations and could not say what follow-up by other investigators revealed.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Brian Tully - Redirect Examination Brian Tully Adam Lally 1 highlights 13 lines spoken
Summary

Tully addressed the Ford Edge account, video recording behavior, evidence-bag notes, and limits of phone-location records; he gave a qualified 5:18 location opinion.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

The judge ruled that Tully could describe the sally port video's recording behavior only if his knowledge came from his own review rather than solely from the Canton IT director.

Open in transcript →
Recross Brian Tully - Recross Brian Tully Alan Jackson 3 highlights 31 lines spoken
Summary

Tully qualified the timing information associated with his RTT range-map depiction after an RTT record sheet was marked for identification.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

After the defense moved to admit an RTT record sheet and the prosecution objected, the court had it marked Exhibit KKK for Identification and directed counsel to have Tully identify it.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The court sustained an objection to the defense question that tied Tully's range-map interpretation to a proposed travel speed and instructed counsel to rephrase it.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Tully said the times were not part of the range depiction and that he could not say with certainty that they were the exact times for the first and last distances without reviewing the records key.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 25

Voir Dire Joseph Paul - Voir Dire Joseph Paul 1 highlights 124 lines spoken
Summary

Trooper Paul’s voir dire examined his opinion that a low-speed contact shown on video was inconsistent with taillight damage, along with the testing and documentation behind that opinion.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

On questioning by the defense, Paul said investigators had not backed the vehicles together, measured them together, or tested the forces needed to crack the taillight.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 26

Direct Joseph Paul - Direct Examination Joseph Paul Adam Lally 2 highlights 5 lines spoken
Summary

Trooper Paul gave his reconstruction opinion that the Lexus reversed near 34 Fairview Road and struck John O'Keefe; the court struck part of a later visibility-related opinion.

Highlights (2)
Cross Trooper Paul - Cross-Examination Joseph Paul Alan Jackson 6 highlights 591 lines spoken
Summary

Defense counsel challenged Trooper Paul's reconstruction methods, including Techstream data, scene mapping, collision calculations, and his account of the taillight contact.

Highlights (6)
Key Moment

Paul qualified his interpretation of a Techstream data point, saying it was consistent with a pedestrian strike or another object but did not definitively identify where a pedestrian was struck.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 2 more
Key Moment

Paul testified that he could not calculate anything from this collision, explaining that he did not apply a formula because he viewed the collision as a sideswipe.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Joseph Paul - Recross Joseph Paul Alan Jackson 2 highlights 29 lines spoken
Summary

Defense counsel tested Trooper Paul's use of key cycles and odometer mileage in his reconstruction; the court allowed a limited follow-up after sidebar.

Highlights (2)

Day 27

Procedural Arguments on Late-Disclosed Defense Expert and Proposed Testimony Limits 4 highlights 17 lines spoken
Summary

The court heard arguments over excluding a late-disclosed defense expert, potential limits on her proposed testimony, and time for possible Commonwealth rebuttal.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“exclusion is the highest form of punishment. It's the highest form of sanction that the Court has available to it.”

Defense counsel framed exclusion as an extreme discovery sanction.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Defense counsel opposed exclusion, arguing the witness came forward through an intermediary and that the defense promptly disclosed her after deciding to use her as a rebuttal witness.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The parties agreed the proposed testimony could be limited to the animal-attack issue rather than motor-vehicle causation; the judge reserved a decision and directed the Commonwealth to begin looking for a possible rebuttal expert.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The court turned to proposed experts Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler, stating it wanted to know which expert performed which work before proceeding with their voir dire.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Arguments Over Defense Experts' Fourth Conclusion 1 highlights 5 lines spoken
Summary

The court reserved a Thursday decision on a disputed defense-expert conclusion and requested scheduling information if Dr. Russell is allowed to testify.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Both of these individuals have come to the conclusion and opinion, that the evidence is insufficient to support that determination, and it's well within their purview to testify to that.”

Defense counsel framed the disputed conclusion as an opinion the experts could offer.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 28

Day 29

Procedural Directed Verdict Motion Denied 2 highlights 6 lines spoken
Summary

The judge denied the defense's directed-verdict motion after the Commonwealth rested, and the defense began its case.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“There has been no competent evidence presented in the Commonwealth's case that Karen Read's vehicle actually struck John O'Keefe.”

Defense counsel's central sufficiency argument challenged proof of a vehicle strike.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Defense counsel moved for directed verdicts on all three counts, arguing that the Commonwealth had not presented competent evidence that Karen Read's vehicle struck John O'Keefe.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Direct Marie Russell - Direct Examination Marie Russell Alan Jackson 2 highlights 132 lines spoken
Summary

Dr. Russell gave her opinion that John O'Keefe's right-arm injuries were caused by an animal, possibly a large dog.

Highlights (2)
Cross Marie Russell - Cross-Examination Marie Russell Adam Lally 2 highlights 18 lines spoken
Summary

The Commonwealth challenged Dr. Russell's materials, report preparation, and the limits of her animal-injury opinion on Mr. O'Keefe's right arm.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

The judge clarified at sidebar that Dr. Russell's permitted opinion was limited to injuries on Mr. O'Keefe's right arm and an animal attack.

Open in transcript →
Redirect Marie Russell - Redirect Marie Russell Alan Jackson 3 highlights 24 lines spoken
Summary

Dr. Russell described variable dog-inflicted injury patterns, while the judge barred renewed questioning about her ultimate opinion on Mr. O'Keefe's arm injuries.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

Russell said her understanding was that the NAS report found individual identification from bite marks unreliable, while agreeing that trained police-dog injuries differ from injuries caused by a domestic pet dog.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The judge sustained repeated objections to questions seeking Russell's ultimate conclusion about O'Keefe's arm injuries; after sidebar, the judge ended the examination and the Commonwealth declined further questions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 30

Direct Daniel Wolfe - Direct Daniel Wolfe Alan Jackson 2 highlights 166 lines spoken
Summary

Daniel Wolfe described ARCCA's tail-light testing and said the observed Lexus damage was not consistent with striking a human head or arm.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Wolfe testified that ARCCA's glass-projectile testing produced tail-lamp damage he considered consistent with the subject tail lamp at an achieved speed of 37 miles per hour.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Direct Andrew Rentschler - Direct Examination Andrew Rentschler Alan Jackson 3 highlights 87 lines spoken
Summary

Biomechanics expert Andrew Rentschler gave general testimony about vehicle-impact forces and injury patterns; the judge barred case-specific causation opinions about John O'Keefe's injuries.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

Rentschler described his biomechanics role and the distinction between medical diagnosis and analyzing the forces and mechanisms that could produce an injury.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 31

Closing Closing Argument - Alan Jackson Alan Jackson 6 highlights 12 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson argued that investigative failures and disputed physical evidence created reasonable doubt and asked jurors to find Read not guilty.

Highlights (6)
Quote

“Karen Read is innocent. Do justice and find her not guilty.”

Jackson's final request for acquittal tied his evidence and reasonable-doubt arguments to the requested verdict.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Jackson argued that phone data, witness accounts, and the timing of Read's departure supported his claim that O'Keefe entered 34 Fairview Road before Read drove away.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 2 more
Key Moment

Jackson challenged the investigation and taillight evidence, arguing that evidence handling, video presentation, and the recovery of plastic pieces were unreliable or manipulated.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Jackson argued that medical and engineering testimony did not support a vehicle strike and asked jurors to find that the Commonwealth had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 32

Procedural Defense Objection to Lesser-Included Verdict Slip Options 2 highlights 11 lines spoken
Summary

The court kept the existing lesser-included verdict slip over the defense's strong objection.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“Well, apparently that's how it's going to be because Court's ordered it. But that's not how it should be, and it's over our strong objection.”

Defense counsel expressly preserved the objection to the verdict-slip format.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Jury Question and Supplemental Count 2 Instruction 1 highlights 12 lines spoken
Summary

The court denied the jury's request for additional evidence, clarified the Count 2 lesser-included-offense sequence, and revised the verdict slip.

Highlights (1)
Key Moment

The defense requested that the Count 2 verdict slip state that a not-guilty finding covers the charged offense and any lesser included offense; the Commonwealth did not oppose the request, and the court agreed to revise the slip.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 33

Trial 2 Retrial Apr 22, 2025 – Jun 18, 2025 143 proceedings

Day 1

Opening Defense Opening Statement: No-Collision Theory and Investigation Critique Alan Jackson 5 highlights 11 lines spoken
Summary

The defense previewed a no-collision theory, alleged investigative failures and bias, and argued that the expected evidence would create reasonable doubt.

Highlights (5)
Quote

“By the end of this trial, you will conclude that Karen Read is not guilty of hitting John O'Keefe with her SUV.”

States the defense's requested conclusion and not-guilty position.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“The evidence in this case will establish above everything else three points. There was no collision with John O'Keefe.”

States the defense's central opening theory as anticipated proof rather than established fact.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more
Key Moment

The defense previewed medical, forensic, phone, video, and search-record evidence it said would support an alternative account and challenge the collision theory.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Tim Nuttall - Cross Tim Nuttall Alan Jackson 4 highlights 152 lines spoken
Summary

Nuttall acknowledged inconsistencies between prior and current accounts of an alleged statement and of John O'Keefe's clothing.

Highlights (4)
Cross Tim Nuttall Cross-Examination Continued Tim Nuttall Alan Jackson 2 highlights 146 lines spoken
Summary

Defense counsel challenged Nuttall's memory and prior account of the alleged statement, then used dash-camera video to examine his description of the resuscitation scene.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

After reviewing Trooper Proctor's report, Nuttall said it did not refresh his recollection; he later agreed his memory of that conversation was still faulty.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The defense played a portion of dash-camera video while questioning Nuttall about the timing and positions of firefighters, Karen Read, and chest compressions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Tim Nuttall - Recross Tim Nuttall Alan Jackson 2 highlights 65 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson used Nuttall's treatment focus and video footage to challenge the timing and detail of his recollection of hearing "I hit him."

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

Jackson used the video and Nuttall's account of the CPR sequence to challenge the timing of the alleged statement; Nuttall maintained that the shown segment was not when it was made.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 2

Cross Kerry Roberts - Cross Kerry Roberts Alan Jackson 1 highlights 397 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Jackson cross-examines Kerry Roberts about her contacts with the DA's office, coordination with Jennifer McCabe before law enforcement interviews, and false grand jury testimony about a Google search.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“So what you told the grand jurors was in fact false.”

Jackson characterized Roberts's grand jury answer about the Google search as false after she confirmed it was not based on firsthand knowledge; Roberts responded that she had misunderstood Lally's question.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Kerry Roberts - Recross Kerry Roberts Alan Jackson 2 highlights 26 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson pressed Kerry Roberts on her admission that she gave false grand jury testimony about hearing Karen Read ask Jennifer McCabe to Google hypothermia, challenging her claim that it was merely a misunderstanding.

Highlights (2)
Procedural Procedural - Motions 2 highlights 10 lines spoken
Summary

Sidebar argument over admissibility of two video clips of Karen Read's statements, with the prosecution arguing consciousness of guilt and the defense objecting to one clip as prejudicial.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“In Massachusetts, you can't call a witness just for the purposes of impeaching them. What this clip would be doing is purporting to impeach Mrs. O'Keefe, who just testified, 'I never said that.'”

Defense's legal basis for exclusion — the clip contradicts the prosecution's own witness.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“This is simply a wolf in sheep's clothing. They're trying to get it in because it makes my client look bad.”

Defense framing the prosecution's consciousness of guilt argument as a pretext for prejudicial evidence.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 3

Day 4

Cross Jason Becker - Cross Jason Becker Alan Jackson 1 highlights 88 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson cross-examines firefighter Jason Becker about Karen Read's demeanor, trauma signs, and the nature of her statements about her 'last words' to John O'Keefe.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“When she was having this conversation with you about her last words to him, she did actually take out her phone and show you a bunch of missed calls to him at the same time. Didn't she?”

Jackson asked whether Read showed missed calls while discussing her 'last words'; Becker answered that she tried to.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Jason Becker - Recross Jason Becker Alan Jackson 2 highlights 7 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson's brief recross addressed the temporal ambiguity of 'earlier in the night' and Becker's testimony that Karen Read tried to show him her phone.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“And earlier in the night could have been 6:00 p.m.”

Reflects the temporal ambiguity of the phrase 'earlier in the night,' which Becker agreed could include earlier evening hours.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“That's when she said about the argument, she said those were the last words, the argument. Right.”

Jackson's statement sought to link the 'argument' and 'last words'; the court sustained an objection and instructed jurors to disregard the statement.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 6

Day 7

Procedural Judge Allows Limited Directions Testimony and Defers Clip Playback 2 highlights 4 lines spoken
Summary

The judge allowed limited directions testimony from Jennifer McCabe and the parties agreed related clips would not be played during her testimony.

Highlights (2)
Cross Jennifer McCabe - Cross-Examination Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 4 highlights 663 lines spoken
Summary

McCabe was questioned about discussions with other witnesses, pretrial meetings, her later correction of an interview answer, and her limited recollection of vehicles outside 34 Fairview.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

McCabe testified that she called the other law-enforcement officers back to say she had forgotten to mention additional people she had contacted before their interview.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Jennifer McCabe - Recross Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 3 highlights 528 lines spoken
Summary

McCabe was questioned about text-message timing, her visibility and observations at 34 Fairview, and earlier accounts of statements attributed to Read.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

The parties stipulated to the timing, sender, recipient, and contents of five text messages between Jennifer McCabe's and John O'Keefe's phones on January 29, 2022.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

McCabe acknowledged prior testimony linking her texts to observations of the SUV, but said she could not now state with certainty how many times she went to the door.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

The defense used McCabe's prior grand-jury testimony to contrast questions attributed to Read—such as "Could I have hit him?"—with McCabe's present account that Read said "I hit him" three times.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 8

Cross Jennifer McCabe - Cross Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 3 highlights 587 lines spoken
Summary

McCabe was questioned about prior accounts, calls, family texts, and location data; the court admitted two text exhibits for a limited state-of-mind purpose.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

McCabe acknowledged a 5:07 a.m. call to Nicole Albert shown in phone records, while maintaining that she did not speak with her sister that morning before waking her later.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

A map/GPS location-data printout was marked for identification, and McCabe identified locations and timestamps while saying parts of her recollection of the January 30 route were foggy.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Jennifer McCabe Cross-Examination Continues Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 4 highlights 442 lines spoken
Summary

McCabe was questioned about phone records, missed calls to O'Keefe, the timing of a Google search, and her actions during the emergency response.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

McCabe said she did not remember making the series of missed calls to John O'Keefe after 12:18 a.m. and suggested they may have been inadvertent calls while she moved between the door and her phone.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

After reviewing a Cellebrite record, McCabe agreed it showed a Google search at 2:27 a.m. and that the phrase "hos long to die in cold" appeared in a search record, while maintaining she did not recall making a search at 2:27 a.m. and that the hypothermia search occurred after O'Keefe was found.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

McCabe testified that she did not go into 34 Fairview to seek Brian Albert because her focus was on helping O'Keefe, including calling 911 and taking over chest compressions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Jennifer McCabe - Recross Jennifer McCabe Alan Jackson 3 highlights 52 lines spoken
Summary

McCabe was questioned about emergency-scene noise, her initial law-enforcement interview, and a private group chat.

Highlights (3)
Key Moment

McCabe acknowledged stopping an initial interview with law-enforcement agents to seek counsel, while testifying that she later met with them and answered their questions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Jackson questioned McCabe about the membership and scope of a private group chat involving her family members and contrasted it with other text-message contacts.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 9

Cross Sarah Levinson - Cross Sarah Levinson Alan Jackson 1 highlights 58 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson cross-examines Sarah Levinson about her familiarity with the Albert home, her observations leaving 34 Fairview Road, and the nine-month delay before law enforcement interviewed her.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“You've never met — or you had never met — going into uh January 29th, 2022, you had never met their dog, had you?”

Reflects Levinson's conditional acceptance of her prior testimony that she had not met Chloe, while she said she was not completely sure and did not know why she had not met the dog.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Katie McLaughlin - Cross Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 4 highlights 281 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson cross-examines Katie McLaughlin about her relationship with Caitlin Albert, pre-trial conversations with ADA Brennan, Read's demeanor, and the reported 'I hit him' statement.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“I went to high school with somebody named Caitlin Albert.”

Jackson confronts McLaughlin with her minimizing prior testimony about the Albert relationship, then establishes extensive social ties including vacations, baby showers, and overnight trips.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Even though she just confessed in front of a police officer, according to you.”

Jackson used this statement to question why Officer Saraf did not take immediate action after McLaughlin's account. McLaughlin responded that questions about Saraf's conduct should be directed to Officer Saraf.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“It was important enough, as you say, to go back and report the statement, but not important enough to write it down with that pen very conveniently in your right hand.”

Crystallizes the core credibility challenge — McLaughlin documented demographics on her glove but not the most significant statement at the scene.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“You're also aware that not a single police officer at the scene wrote that down either.”

Jackson asserted that no officer at the scene wrote the reported statement down. Brennan objected, and the record contains no witness answer adopting or resolving that assertion.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Katie McLaughlin - Recross Katie McLaughlin Alan Jackson 2 highlights 14 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson's brief recross reinforces that the scene was emotionally chaotic and revisits Kevin Albert's role in coordinating McLaughlin's interview with Trooper Proctor.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“And that's when things start getting missed. When emotion starts playing a role, correct?”

Sets up the argument that McLaughlin's certainty about Read's exact words is unreliable given the chaotic scene.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Did he tell you that the reason we're here, the reason we set this is because Kevin Albert texted me that he had already coordinated with you?”

Implies Trooper Proctor's interview of McLaughlin was arranged through Canton police officer Kevin Albert rather than through normal channels.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Paul Gallagher - Cross Paul Gallagher Alan Jackson 261 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson questions Gallagher about scene documentation and blood-sample collection, including use of Solo cups and the decision not to retrieve swabs; Gallagher cites storm urgency, scene security, and access constraints. Gallagher later says he had not seen an evidence log while describing computerized logging and his personal removal of the samples from refrigeration.

Day 10

Cross Paul Gallagher - Cross (Continued) Paul Gallagher Alan Jackson 2 highlights 248 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Jackson continues cross-examining Lt. Gallagher about failures to search the Albert home, secure surveillance footage from a neighbor's Arlo camera, and properly handle biological evidence photographed near Karen Read's SUV during a custody transfer from refrigerated storage.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“You did not see a single piece of bright red plastic tail light material either, did you?”

Establishes that despite a thorough 50-square-foot excavation of the scene, no taillight debris was found — central to the defense theory that taillight evidence was planted.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“So you are familiar enough that you decided that it wasn't important to capture the footage, but you're not familiar enough to know whether or not the footage is actually saved onto the Arlo system.”

Highlights the contradiction in Gallagher's reasoning for not securing potentially exculpatory surveillance evidence.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Paul Gallagher - Recross Paul Gallagher Alan Jackson 2 highlights 39 lines spoken
Summary

Attorney Jackson challenges Lt. Gallagher's failure to investigate the occupants and interior of 34 Fairview Road, pressing on missed interviews, unsecured camera footage, and the decision not to seek a search warrant.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“Might have been a good idea, Mr. Gallagher, since you happened to be there — no sweat off your brow — to sit Mr. Albert down and say, "By the way, I got a pen and paper. Who was here last night just before John O'Keefe was found dead on your lawn? Who was here?" Might have been a good idea.”

Frames the failure to interview Brian Albert as a missed opportunity that required minimal effort.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“There's a dead guy on the lawn that looked like he potentially could have been in a physical altercation. How about that? Might that be of some concern — to go inside the house and see if there was a struggle that started in the house?”

Jackson articulates the defense theory that the physical evidence itself warranted investigating inside the Albert home.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Kevin O'Hara - Recross Kevin O'Hara Alan Jackson 3 highlights 15 lines spoken
Summary

On recross, Alan Jackson asked O'Hara about the SERT recovery count and search area, a black cap the team did not find, the already-disturbed snow in photographs, and what O'Hara had been told or knew about the vehicle's timing and location.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“And you did not find 40 pieces of tail light at or near or on that street or the lawn or any place else.”

Jackson introduced a 40-piece comparison; O'Hara agreed SERT did not find that number but said he did not know the overall number later located.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“The only thing that you found was concentrated in one area, maybe a foot or 2 ft in diameter. You said six or seven pieces and a shoe.”

Emphasizes how small the evidence cluster was relative to the large search area, a point central to the defense's theory about evidence placement.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“When Trooper Tully told you that the vehicle was en route and could not provide you a photograph at, let's call it, 5:50 p.m., did he tell you that the vehicle had actually been secured at Canton PD about a mile and a half away at 5:35 p.m.?”

Jackson's question supplied the 5:35 p.m. Canton PD premise. O'Hara answered that Tully did not tell him that and that he did not know when the vehicle arrived.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 11

Day 12

Cross Yuri Bukhenik - Cross-Examination Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 4 highlights 399 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik defended Michael Proctor's investigative role while cross-examination examined supervision, initial actions at 34 Fairview Road, and records for clothing evidence.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After a sidebar about the form of questioning and the witness's narrative answers, the judge instructed Bukhenik to do his best to answer the question asked.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

Bukhenik testified that he did not enter or secure 34 Fairview Road, search the house, photograph its interior, call crime-scene services, or create a scene log on January 29.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Bukhenik testified that authorized personnel could access the area where clothing was drying, that he did not know who later bagged it, and that he had not seen a real-time log of handling during that period.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Bukhenik said reports concerning the February 3, 4, and 10 searches may have been written later, while maintaining that evidence bags documented recovery details.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 13

Cross Yuri Bukhenik - Cross Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 2 highlights 424 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik was questioned about documentation and handling of recovered fragments, later lab processing, and text messages admitted with a limiting instruction.

Highlights (2)
Key Moment

The court admitted photographs as Exhibits 112A and 112B. Bukhenik identified the bag as showing that Trooper Proctor collected an item on February 11, the day after Bukhenik's February 10 collection.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Exhibit 115, the text messages, was marked as an exhibit, and Bukhenik began reading messages that he said purported to be between Brian Higgins and Karen Read.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Yuri Bukhenik - Cross (Continued) Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 5 highlights 474 lines spoken
Summary

Bukhenik was questioned about phone-investigation decisions, text messages, videos, Chloe's records, and delayed witness interviews; the court limited several lines of inquiry.

Highlights (5)
Key Moment

Bukhenik said he had no evidence that John O'Keefe saw the text messages between Karen Read and Brian Higgins, while offering his own interpretation of their overall exchange.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Bukhenik testified that investigators did not seek Brian Albert's phone or Brian Higgins's actual phone, and said he did not learn of the 2:22 a.m. call during the investigation.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

After Exhibit 22 was played, Bukhenik identified Brian Higgins and Brian Albert and described their apparent interaction as roughhousing rather than fighting.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

While reviewing the One Meadows Ring video, Bukhenik testified that the Lexus and Chevy Traverse appeared to have contacted at a slow speed, with the Lexus's right rear area contacting the Traverse.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more
Key Moment

Bukhenik acknowledged that Ricky D'Antuono was interviewed in September 2023, about a year and a half after the events under discussion, and agreed an ideal investigation would have proceeded more quickly.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 14

Cross Yuri Bukhenik - Cross (Continued) Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 1 highlights 457 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Alan Jackson cross-examines Sergeant Bukhenik on investigative failures, Proctor's misconduct texts, Canton PD surveillance gaps, and horizontally mirrored sallyport video; Bukhenik said the corrected view appeared to show Proctor, if it was him, at the SUV's right rear.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Motorcycles? Handbags? A pair of shoes? Or naked pictures of Miss Karen Read?”

Rhetorical demolition of Bukhenik's claim that he didn't know what Proctor meant by 'no nudes so far.'

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Yuri Bukhenik - Recross Yuri Bukhenik Alan Jackson 2 highlights 78 lines spoken
Summary

Attorney Jackson's recross challenged investigative decisions involving Brian Higgins and ended with an objected-to phone-data premise; after the judge narrowed the question, Bukhenik said he had no information about logged steps on O'Keefe's phone.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“You certainly didn't take any action to investigate forensically what those stains actually were.”

Jackson highlighted that Bukhenik personally took no action to determine forensically what the stains were. Bukhenik had also said the jeans were processed but that he did not know the laboratory protocol, so the exchange does not establish that no forensic work occurred.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“You did not realize that Trooper Guarino had information that John O'Keefe took 36 steps covering a distance of some 84 ft. That would have placed Mr. O'Keefe inside the residence at 12:32:16.”

Jackson asserted that phone data placed O'Keefe inside 34 Fairview, but the assertion drew an objection. The court narrowed the inquiry to whether Bukhenik had information about logged steps, and Bukhenik said no; this proceeding establishes his lack of awareness, not the asserted placement.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 16

Day 18

Cross Nicholas Bradford - Cross Nicholas Bradford Alan Jackson 2 highlights 15 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson cross-examines DNA analyst Nicholas Bradford about the statistical comparison involving Michael Proctor and asks whether Bradford was asked to compare four other named individuals' known DNA samples to the taillight sample.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“So when you say that there is strong support for the exclusion of Michael Proctor in that DNA sample, you're not suggesting that he's completely excluded as a potential contributor?”

Jackson put a non-exclusion proposition to Bradford; Bradford responded by restating the likelihood comparison and saying there was strong support for exclusion.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Were you asked to compare a known sample from a person by the name of Brian Higgins?”

Jackson asked whether Bradford had been asked to compare Higgins's known sample; Bradford answered no, as he did for Brian Albert, Kevin Albert, and Berkowitz.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Carl Miyasako - Cross Carl Miyasako Alan Jackson 2 highlights 33 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Jackson cross-examines DNA analyst Miyasako to establish that mitochondrial DNA testing cannot identify the hair found on Karen Read's vehicle as specifically belonging to John O'Keefe.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“Because the hair could have come from his mom, it could have come from his maternal nephew, or anybody in his maternal line. Correct?”

Drives home the range of people who could be the source of the hair.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“You can't tell this jury how the hair got to where it was found.”

Miyasako answered ‘Correct,’ but the judge then sustained the question; an earlier question and answer had established that the analysis did not reveal how the hair got where it was found.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 20

Cross Christina Hanley - Cross Christina Hanley Alan Jackson 1 highlights 98 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson used a demonstrative to organize Hanley's results: two bumper pieces used in physical-match comparison did not physically match the cup, while piece E was microscopically and instrumentally consistent with item 7-14.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“But not a single piece of glass — nothing that you analyzed coming from that bumper matched the cup. Did it?”

Jackson's question framed a defense point, and Hanley answered that there was no physical-match comparison to the cup; her earlier testimony described two bumper pieces used for physical-match comparison.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Christina Hanley - Recross Christina Hanley Alan Jackson 2 highlights 4 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson's recross elicited Hanley's qualified answer that there was no physical match between the drinking cup and the bumper pieces she compared for physical match; she also said a bumper piece was consistent with item 7-14.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“So in sum, not a single piece of glass on that bumper can be connected to that cup. Correct.”

Jackson posed a broad no-connection question; Hanley's following answer qualified the result as no physical match among the bumper pieces she compared for physical match.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“But the one piece of glass that did match something came from the same source. It was consistent with coming from the same source as the single piece of glass recovered from — the possession of, or bagged by — Trooper Michael. Correct.”

Jackson's question included a provenance premise; Hanley answered only that the bumper piece was consistent with item 7-14.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 21

Day 24

Procedural Procedural - Motions 3 highlights 10 lines spoken
Summary

Defense argues for required finding of not guilty under Rule 25(a), contending the Commonwealth failed to prove a collision occurred. Judge Cannone denies the motion on all three counts.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“The Commonwealth has simply not proven, even in a light most favorable to them, that there was a collision on January 29th, 2022 at 34 Fairview in Canton, Massachusetts.”

Core defense argument — the Commonwealth failed to establish the basic factual predicate for all charges.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“The Commonwealth also put on an expert who said that she found no injuries, none mind you, indicative of a vehicle strike on John O'Keefe's body.”

Uses the Commonwealth's own medical examiner against them, undermining the collision theory.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“There is evidence, however, that Brian Higgins and Brian Albert were sparring at 34 Fairview. There is evidence that that was just minutes, not hours, not days, minutes before John O'Keefe ultimately met his fate.”

Defense signals its alternative theory — a physical altercation inside the Albert home.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Matthew DiSogra - Redirect Matthew DiSogra Alan Jackson 1 highlights 69 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson rehabilitates DiSogra on redirect, reinforcing that his clock alignment analysis was built entirely on Burgess's own data and labels. DiSogra testified that the January-report analysis showed the lock event occurred after the vehicle event in all of its scenarios, while the combined 30-scenario analysis yielded 25 after, two simultaneous, and three before.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“So if anything is wrong with your analysis, would it be based on Mr. Burgess being wrong in his analysis?”

Jackson asked whether any flaw in DiSogra's analysis would derive from Burgess's analysis. Brennan objected, no answer or explicit ruling followed, and the question did not establish the proposition.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Matthew DiSogra - Re-redirect Matthew DiSogra Alan Jackson 1 highlights 6 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson briefly re-redirects DiSogra to emphasize that his analysis relied entirely on the prosecution's own data from Burgess and Welcher.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Garbage in, garbage out — basic scientific postulate. Correct?”

Frames any data-quality attack on DiSogra as equally applicable to the prosecution's own analysts who generated the data.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 25

Direct Kelly Dever - Direct Kelly Dever Alan Jackson 2 highlights 161 lines spoken
Summary

Boston Police Officer Kelly Dever, formerly with Canton Police, testifies that her earlier recollection of seeing Brian Higgins and Chief Berkowitz in the Sallyport with the SUV was a false memory that she had retracted after receiving contrary information.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“Did you tell those law enforcement agents on August 9th, 2023 that you saw Brian Higgins and Chief Berkowitz go into the Sallyport together and alone with the SUV for a wildly long time?”

The core prior statement — placing Higgins and Berkowitz alone with the evidence vehicle for an extended period.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Kelly Dever - Redirect Kelly Dever Alan Jackson 2 highlights 51 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson challenges Dever's claim that defense threatened her with perjury, confronts her with her prior statement about Higgins and Berkowitz in the Sallyport, and raises her friendship with Sarah Levinson and exposure to trial footage.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“Have you ever seen a defense attorney charge anybody with a crime?”

Undermines Dever's claim of a perjury threat by establishing defense attorneys lack charging authority

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Did you also say on that phone call something to the effect of, 'I know you're going to tear me a new one because I'm changing my testimony'?”

Reframes the phone call dynamic — Dever anticipated pushback for changing her account, suggesting she knew the retraction was problematic

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Kelly Dever - Re-redirect Kelly Dever Alan Jackson 2 highlights 10 lines spoken
Summary

Jackson closes by pressing Dever on the career consequences of implicating two fellow officers, contrasting her credibility argument against the stakes of her recantation.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“If you agreed with that statement here on the witness stand, you would be implicating two officers as having been in the Sallyport weirdly for a wildly long time with the SUV, implicating not one but two fellow officers. Correct. That's what you would be doing.”

Jackson makes explicit the career cost of maintaining her original statement — implicating Higgins and Berkowitz.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“And your entire job revolves around what you say on that witness stand. That's what you said. Correct.”

Jackson turns Dever's own credibility argument from recross back against her, suggesting the same career pressure could motivate protecting fellow officers.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 26

Redirect Nicholas Barros - Redirect Nicholas Barros Alan Jackson 4 highlights 66 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Jackson rehabilitates Sergeant Barros on redirect, reinforcing his clear memory of the tail light condition and addressing the prosecution's implications about the hotel meeting and witness bias.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“The fact that you can't remember the day of the week, does that mean that you have a bad memory?”

Reframes the memory issue — forgetting trivial details does not equal unreliable observation of significant events

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Was that your vehicle that was being seized?”

Establishes Barros had no duty to photograph the vehicle, neutralizing the cross-examination suggestion that his failure to take photos undermines his account

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Was the condition of that tail light the same as the photo that I showed you on my direct examination?”

Final question — Barros reaffirms the tail light condition he observed does not match the later photograph, the central point of his testimony

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 28

Direct Daniel Wolfe Direct Examination Daniel Wolfe Alan Jackson 4 highlights 687 lines spoken
Summary

Dr. Wolfe described ARCCA testing and opined that the subject taillight and hoodie damage were inconsistent with the arm-impact and center-of-mass scenarios he tested.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

Wolfe testified that his head-impact test produced more taillight damage than the subject damage and, according to Dr. Rentschler, did not generate enough force for a skull fracture.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Wolfe summarized laboratory and full-scale testing and gave opinions that the subject taillight damage and hoodie damage were inconsistent with the tested arm-impact scenarios.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Daniel Wolfe - Redirect Daniel Wolfe Alan Jackson 4 highlights 59 lines spoken
Summary

Wolfe defended the mechanics and clothing-damage conclusions of his testing, clarified he was not hired by an insurance company, and addressed arm-weight assumptions.

Highlights (4)
Key Moment

After a sidebar discussion, Wolfe confirmed that an insurance company had not hired him in this case.

Open in transcript →
Key Moment

Wolfe explained that the tested arm-weight difference did not change his analysis because the vehicle's speed substantially increased the kinetic energy involved.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 29

Procedural Procedural - Motions 1 highlights 31 lines spoken
Summary

Pre-testimony motions hearing addressing Commonwealth rebuttal witnesses, scope of Elizabeth Laposata's expert testimony on dog bites and pattern injuries, and admissibility of defense photographs of the 34 Fairview Road garage.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Ryan Nagel and Heather Maxon saw Karen Read in her vehicle alone. The passenger seat was illuminated and empty. John was nowhere in the area of that vehicle... There's only one other place that he could be, and that is in the house.”

Defense articulates the theory underlying the garage photographs — O'Keefe must have entered the house because witnesses saw Read alone in her car.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Daniel Wolfe - Re-redirect Daniel Wolfe Alan Jackson 33 lines spoken
Summary

On re-redirect, Jackson sought to address Brennan's arm-weight criticism by eliciting Wolfe's testimony that Dr. Welcher used the same 50th-percentile Hybrid III model in a drop test. Wolfe also repeated his 14 percent label from a symmetric percent-difference calculation for the 29 mph and 24 mph comparison and testified that, in his tests, no tail light fragment caused garment punctures, holes, or fraying.

Voir Dire Elizabeth Laposata - Voir Dire Elizabeth Laposata Alan Jackson 1 highlights 72 lines spoken
Summary

Voir dire examination of defense forensic pathology expert Dr. Elizabeth Laposata to establish her qualifications to testify on dog bite wound pattern recognition and motor vehicle pedestrian injury analysis.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“that level of knowledge, that level of skill, that level of expertise that's beyond that of the average lay person in order to opine as an expert on a particular issue.”

Jackson argued that Laposata needed knowledge, skill, and expertise beyond an average layperson to qualify on the issue; this was defense advocacy during voir dire, not a court ruling.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Procedural - VD Ruling (Laposata) 1 highlights 5 lines spoken
Summary

Judge Cannone ruled on the scope of Dr. Laposata's testimony after voir dire, excluding her opinions on dog bite wounds and limiting her motor vehicle strike analysis.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“The Commonwealth waited until June 5th to even bring this up, to file a motion regarding Dr. — and all reciprocal — That's number 45. And the Commonwealth was ordered to file whatever motions they wanted — whatever motions in limine they thought were appropriate — by March 7th.”

Defense preserving objection that Commonwealth's late Daubert challenge prejudiced the defense by sandbagging

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Procedural - Motions 23 lines spoken
Summary

Judge Cannone and attorneys resolved which photographs from Dr. Laposata's report could be admitted, discussed scheduling for Dr. Rentschler's testimony and Commonwealth rebuttal witnesses, and addressed upcoming motions.

Day 30

Procedural Procedural - Motions 3 highlights 42 lines spoken
Summary

Pre-testimony motions hearing where defense argues Commonwealth opened the door to Dr. Laposata's dog bite testimony through cross-examination of Dr. Russell, and the court rules on photograph exhibits.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“They used it tactically as a sword and a shield, and that's burden shifting.”

Core of defense argument that Commonwealth cannot elicit testimony about Laposata's dog bite opinions then move to exclude that very testimony.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Dr. Laposata's opinion has never wavered. Those injuries on John O'Keefe's arm are from a dog. Period. Full stop.”

Defense states on the record what Laposata would testify to if permitted, preserving the issue.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Elizabeth Laposata - Redirect Elizabeth Laposata Alan Jackson 1 highlights 26 lines spoken
Summary

Alan Jackson's brief redirect of Dr. Laposata addressed body cooling rates regardless of indoor/outdoor location and introduced X-ray exhibits of John O'Keefe's right arm showing no fractures or abnormal soft-tissue swelling.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Does a body, as it's cooling — does it know if it's indoors or outdoors?”

Frames the body cooling issue to counter prosecution's implication that cooling proves prolonged outdoor exposure

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 31

Procedural Procedural - Motions 9 lines spoken
Summary

End-of-day motions session covering the Commonwealth's objection to Dr. Rentschler's PowerPoint admission, exhibit numbering for sweatshirt evidence, a conditional no-rebuttal announcement after the defense rests, and scheduling closings for Friday.

Day 33

Closing Closing Argument - Alan Jackson Alan Jackson 5 highlights 90 lines spoken
Summary

Defense attorney Alan Jackson delivers his closing argument, asserting there was no vehicle collision and that the investigation was corrupted by lead investigator Michael Proctor's bias and personal loyalties.

Highlights (5)
Quote

“Not a single medical expert — think about this — not a single medical expert called by the defense or called by the Commonwealth has testified that John was hit by a car. Not one.”

Frames the absence of any medical testimony supporting a collision as the most important point in the trial

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“The Commonwealth's own medical examiner, Dr. Scordi-Bello, performed the autopsy. She did it personally. She's the only one to have personally examined John's body, and she found no evidence of an impact site on his entire body.”

Central defense argument that the Commonwealth's own expert undermines the collision theory

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Is the homeowner going to catch any shit? Nope. He's a Boston cop, too.”

Proctor's own text messages used to demonstrate bias and preferential treatment toward Brian Albert

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Show 1 more
Quote

“If you convict Karen Read of anything, if you convict her of anything, science, the physics, the data, they lose. But tragically, Michael Proctor wins.”

Final emotional appeal linking acquittal to rejecting investigative corruption

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 35

Procedural Procedural - Motions 1 highlights 25 lines spoken
Summary

Judge Cannone and counsel formulate answers to three jury deliberation questions and finalize amendments to the verdict slip.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“Every single piece of evidence is weighed in and of itself. It's individual to the piece of evidence that's presented. For instance, they can weigh the statements by Ms. Read. They could give it no weight.”

Defense argues jurors must understand they can entirely discard Read's interview statements.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Procedural Procedural - Motions 1 highlights 8 lines spoken
Summary

Judge Cannone and counsel debate a response to a jury question about partial-verdict reporting, which Cannone characterizes as theoretical.

Highlights (1)
Quote

“I don't think the court can say, or should say, I can't answer the question, because the court absolutely can answer it... if that question remains in their minds, we're going to end up in the exact same position that we were in last year.”

Jackson explicitly invokes the first trial's hung jury as the consequence of mishandling this question.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶