Commonwealth v. Read — Trial Archive
Person Brian Tully Trial 1Det. Lt. Brian Tully of the Massachusetts State Police served as the investigation’s supervising officer, presenting the prosecution’s core surveillance and cell site evidence against Karen Read. ← All People
👮 Law Enforcement · MSP

Brian Tully

Trial 1
712 lines 5 proceedings
Courtroom still of Brian Tully.

About

Det. Lt. Brian Tully commanded the Norfolk State Police Detective Unit and supervised the state-police investigation into John O'Keefe's death. His Trial 1 testimony covered the January 29 search of the Fairview Road snowbank, the decision to exclude Canton Police because of conflicts, cell-site location data, and surveillance video. He also addressed the decision not to search the interior of the Albert home; Trooper Michael Proctor served as case officer.

Key Points

  • Tully explained that Canton Police were removed from the investigation because the homeowner at 34 Fairview Road, Brian Albert, had connections to Canton PD — a conflict the MSP acknowledged and acted on before the investigation concluded.
  • On the January 29 snowbank search, Tully described the recovery of taillight pieces and John O'Keefe's missing shoe within a five-foot area, physical proximity the prosecution used to anchor its vehicle-impact theory.
  • Tully walked the jury through cell tower ranging data and surveillance footage showing a black SUV — consistent with Read's Lexus — near the Albert house at 12:15, 12:27, 5:11, 5:15, and 5:18 a.m., and noted that Read made 53 unanswered calls to O'Keefe's phone between 12:33 a.m. and 6:03 a.m.
  • On cross, Tully conceded that his official report stated three pieces of plastic were recovered when the evidence bag handwritten notes indicated a different count — an inconsistency he acknowledged but defended by pointing to the contemporaneous bag labeling.
  • Jackson presented a conditional calculation that, if the two RTT arcs represented sequential phone positions 0.004 seconds apart, would imply a device speed of 135,000 miles per hour. Tully agreed with the arithmetic and that such travel would be impossible for a cell phone, but rejected the sequential-position premise and said he was not suggesting the phone traveled at that speed.

Trial Record (5)

Trial 1 First Criminal Trial Apr 29, 2024 – Jul 1, 2024 5 proceedings

Day 23

Direct Brian Tully Adam Lally 2 highlights 137 lines spoken
Summary

Tully described oversight of the investigation, the SERT search and recovery of a sneaker and plastic pieces at 34 Fairview Road, and evidence handling; three physical-evidence exhibits were admitted.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“I expressed my displeasure in his unprofessionalism and the content of them.”

Tully described his supervisory response after learning of Proctor's text messages.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 24

Direct Brian Tully Adam Lally 3 highlights 197 lines spoken
Summary

Tully described surveillance video and phone-location records, explained their limits, and authenticated Exhibits 572 through 576.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“I don't believe that Mr. O'Keefe entered the home. So I had no nexus to the house.”

Tully explained why he said investigators did not seek to search the interior of 34 Fairview Road.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“I can make generalizations that the phone is going to be in the area of the antenna. But I would never, with just that specific information, be able to tell you exactly where it is.”

Tully stated a limitation of using cell-site listing information alone to locate a phone.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Tully described video observations of a black SUV traveling on Washington Street at approximately 12:15 to 12:17 a.m. and again between 5:11 and 5:18 a.m.; he said the SUV was consistent with the defendant's vehicle.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Brian Tully Alan Jackson 5 highlights 321 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 (5)
Quote

“No. I don't know when these distances were created. It doesn't say start of procedure distance. It says first distance, last distance.”

Tully distinguished the RTT record's distance fields from the procedure's listed start and end times.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Well, the person has given statements multiple times and it appears to have changed over those times.”

Tully explained why he questioned the reliability of the Ford Edge account.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Tully testified that he did not review the clear sally port video in detail, did not note that it was inverted, and did not know when the video was provided to Trooper Proctor.

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

Tully acknowledged five plastic pieces in Exhibits 570 and 571, while his report described three; he said the report did not properly memorialize the collection and speculated that a small fragment may have separated from a larger piece.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Brian Tully Adam Lally 3 highlights 33 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 (3)
Quote

“It appeared to be motion activated. As these jumps occurred, it appeared to be triggered by motion.”

Tully gave his observation-based explanation for the video recording pattern after the court limited hearsay-based testimony.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“The difference would be the notes on the outside of the bag happened at the time of collection. And then I wrote my report 11 days later.”

Tully distinguished contemporaneous evidence-bag notes from his later report.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Well, relevant, I'll zero in at 5:18. I would suggest that the defendant, her vehicle and the cell phone were on Washington Street, outside of the Temple Beth Abraham at that time. That is one thing that I would be comfortable suggesting.”

Tully gave a qualified location opinion based on his review of the phone records and other evidence.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Brian Tully Alan Jackson 1 highlights 23 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 (1)
Quote

“The times were not part of the depiction of the range. I will suggest to you that it is probably unbelievable that those are actually start and end times. What I am saying is we don't know for certainty that that is the exact time of the first distance and the last distance. I'd have to look back at the records.”

Tully qualified the relationship between the Verizon times and the distances used in the range depiction.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Locations Touched By This Testimony

34 Fairview Road 4 procs Canton Police Department 4 procs Canton PD Sally Port 2 procs Good Samaritan Medical Center 2 procs Waterfall Bar & Grille 2 procs