Commonwealth v. Read — Trial ArchiveHeather Maxon
Testimony Impact
Heather Maxon was a passenger in Richard D'Antuono's truck when it pulled up to 34 Fairview Road in the early hours of January 29, 2022, to pick up Julie Nagel. She testified in both trials about observing a running SUV parked in front of the Albert home with an unidentified female driver and male passenger, and that she did not see anyone exit the vehicle or walk toward the house. Maxon said alcohol most likely affected her perception, believed she was impaired, and did not know the occupants, whom she described as strangers. In Trial 1, she said she did not observe damage to the vehicle's rear.
Challenges & Responses
What attorneys challenged during examination and how the witness responded.
In Trial 1, Jackson highlighted the 19-month gap before law enforcement first contacted Maxon, questioning why such a proximate eyewitness was not interviewed sooner. In Trial 2, Yannetti focused on Maxon's fatigue, alcohol consumption, and possible phone distraction to suggest she was not actively monitoring the SUV; prosecutor Brennan responded on redirect by establishing that Maxon was physically oriented toward the house and vehicle during the stop.
Trial 1 vs Trial 2
In Trial 1, Jackson's cross-examination centered on the investigative delay — the 19 months before Maxon was contacted — and her clear-range observation of an undamaged SUV rear. In Trial 2, Yannetti shifted focus to Maxon's state of mind and attention, arguing she was tired, had been drinking, and may have been distracted by her phone, attempting to undercut the reliability of her observations rather than the timeline of the investigation. Brennan's redirect in Trial 2 was also more targeted, specifically reestablishing Maxon's physical orientation toward the SUV to counter the distraction argument.
Notable Quotes From The Record
“There was another vehicle in front of us on the same road, coming from the opposite direction.”
Establishes that the SUV arrived at the house from the opposite direction just before Maxon's group.
“I noticed a male and a female in the car. The female was driving and the male was in the passenger seat.”
Places two people in the SUV — consistent with Karen Read driving and John O'Keefe as passenger.
“It was snowing out. It was a light snow but it was sticking to the ground — it started to stick.”
Establishes weather conditions at the scene, relevant to timeline reconstruction and evidence preservation.
“I could tell that it was running, yes. The lights were on.”
Vehicle was running with all lights on while parked — consistent with a brief stop, not a parked and abandoned vehicle.
“I did not see any other person. Just the female in the driver's seat.”
On departure, the male passenger was no longer visible in the SUV, though Maxon was not looking intently.
“I did not.”
Direct confirmation that no person was seen leaving the vehicle toward the house.
“Most likely. Yes.”
Maxon agreed that alcohol most likely affected her perception and that she believed she was impaired, qualifying the certainty of her observations.
“I saw a male and a female inside the car.”
Establishes two occupants in the SUV when it arrived on Fairview Road
“I did not.”
In response to whether she saw anyone exit the SUV during their entire stop — central to the prosecution's timeline
“I saw the female that I saw beforehand also still in the car.”
On departure, the female driver remained but the male passenger was no longer visible
“Not with certainty. No.”
Maxon cannot say with certainty that she was not checking her phone while waiting, leaving phone use possible but not remembered.
“Very much so. Yes.”
Maxon confirms she was tired, compounding the distraction factors — alcohol, phone use, fatigue, disinterest
“I don't think I was facing the opposite.”
Maxon's qualified response that she did not think she was facing the opposite direction; it does not establish that she was oriented toward the house and SUV or continuously observing them.
“No.”
Final confirmation that no one other than Julie came in or out of the house while the truck was parked nearby.
Key Moments
- Maxon described the SUV arriving from the opposite direction just before D'Antuono's truck, establishing its presence at the house from the moment she arrived and providing a close-range observation of the vehicle and its occupants.
- She testified that she saw a female driver and a male passenger in the SUV — one of the few eyewitness accounts placing two people in Read's vehicle at the Albert home — and that the vehicle was running with headlights, taillights, and interior lights on.
- On departure, Maxon stated she saw only the female driver in the SUV; the male passenger was no longer visible, a detail both prosecution and defense drew upon in their respective arguments about O'Keefe's movements that night.
- During cross-examination in Trial 1, Jackson established that Maxon was not interviewed by law enforcement until 19 months after the event, raising questions about the pace of the investigation and the preservation of her observations.
- When asked directly whether she noticed any damage to the rear of the SUV during her close observation, Maxon confirmed she did not — testimony the defense used to challenge the prosecution's account of a taillight-shattering impact.