Commonwealth v. Read — Trial Archive
Person Joseph Paul Trial 1MSP crash reconstructionist who testified that vehicle data from Karen Read’s Lexus is consistent with striking John O’Keefe while reversing at 24 mph on Fairview Road. ← All People
👮 Law Enforcement · MSP

Joseph Paul

Trial 1
1,248 lines 7 proceedings
Courtroom still of Joseph Paul.

About

Trooper Joseph Paul is a Massachusetts State Police crash reconstructionist assigned to the CARS unit who analyzed vehicle data, physical evidence, and the scene at 34 Fairview Road. He testified across two days in Trial 1, presenting EDR and VCH data from Read's Lexus LX 570 to support the prosecution's theory that the vehicle struck O'Keefe during a reverse maneuver. His testimony encompassed vehicle inspection findings, data module downloads, geographic mapping of triggering events, and a formal collision reconstruction opinion placing the vehicle at the scene at the time of impact.

Key Points

  • Paul presented the prosecution's central technical argument: that a VCH event recorded in Read's Lexus — a sudden speed drop from 24.2 to 23.6 mph in half a second while throttle held steady at 74% during reverse — is consistent with striking a pedestrian, and that the vehicle traveled approximately 62 feet in reverse at 24 mph before that event.
  • Paul testified that the Lexus's backup camera, overhead-view display, and proximity alerts appeared to function during his inspection.
  • During voir dire, Paul testified that he first saw the Ring video on Court TV, discussed it with Lally about two weeks before his testimony, gave an opinion about the depicted tail-light damage, and did not memorialize that new opinion in a report.
  • On cross-examination, Jackson questioned Paul about a tail-light piece near the fire hydrant. Paul said it did not change his view that the impact area was along the roadway, while acknowledging that he did not know the exact point of impact.
  • On recross, Jackson questioned Paul about reliance on odometer mileage and whether a different route would affect the analysis. Paul said he used a range because he could not determine a definitive route.

Trial Record (7)

Trial 1 First Criminal Trial Apr 29, 2024 – Jul 1, 2024 7 proceedings

Day 25

Direct Joseph Paul Adam Lally 2 highlights 457 lines spoken
Summary

Trooper Joseph Paul presented crash-reconstruction evidence, including scene mapping, Lexus testing, and vehicle-control-history data that he said contained a point consistent with a pedestrian strike.

Highlights (2)
Quote

“In this bit of software, there was no data recovered or no events recovered.”

Paul said the airbag control module did not record data or an event in this case.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Yeah, there's a point in there where it appears to be consistent with a pedestrian strike.”

Paul gave his reconstruction opinion about a point in the vehicle-control-history data.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Voir Dire Joseph Paul 4 highlights 135 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 (4)
Quote

“No, because I watched the video like after court was done, and honestly I watched the first time on Court TV, so --”

Paul described when and how he first viewed the video later used for his opinion.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Paul testified that the video contact was not consistent with the Lexus taillight damage, citing the absence of damage on Mr. O’Keefe’s vehicle and the relative height of the taillight.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Day 26

Direct Joseph Paul Adam Lally 2 highlights 39 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 Joseph Paul Alan Jackson 4 highlights 533 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 (4)
Quote

“I do go in my report saying I can't say that's definitively where a pedestrian was struck, but --”

Paul limited the certainty of his interpretation of the particular Techstream data point.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“so the taillight in this case was shattered when it was strucked(sic) John O'Keefe's arm.”

Paul stated his reconstruction opinion about how the taillight shattered.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Redirect Joseph Paul Adam Lally 4 highlights 64 lines spoken
Summary

Trooper Paul restated his reconstruction opinion, explained his use of Techstream and odometer data, and acknowledged limits on calculating the sideswipe-style crash.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“Right. Okay. Yeah, so why I think that's consistent with a pedestrian strike is because of the sudden change in the speed. It drops down by a half mile-per-hour. The external(ph) pedal is staying constant at the same percentage, and the steering wheel angle also turns to the right.”

Paul explained the vehicle-data features supporting his pedestrian-strike opinion.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“Based on the evidence from the vehicle, based on the injuries to John O'Keefe, the taillight appears to be broken and its sharp plastic pieces that could've ripped his arm”

Paul tied his reconstruction opinion to the vehicle damage and injuries.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Paul explained why he believed the reverse triggering event was consistent with a pedestrian strike, citing a speed change, constant pedal percentage, and steering-wheel movement.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Key Moment

Paul gave his reconstruction opinion that the taillight damage, injuries, dent, scratches, and glass were consistent with the described interaction between the vehicle and John O'Keefe.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Recross Joseph Paul Alan Jackson 1 highlights 18 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 (1)
Quote

“I've always said it's key cycles and odometer mileage plus all the information within the triggers themselves. So it wasn't just one or the other.”

Paul described the inputs he said supported his vehicle-data analysis.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Locations Touched By This Testimony

34 Fairview Road 6 procs Canton Police Department 4 procs Waterfall Bar & Grille 2 procs Canton PD Sally Port 1 proc