Commonwealth v. Read — Trial Archive
Person Nicholas Bradford Trial 1Trial 2Bode Technology DNA analyst who examined taillight and hair evidence. ← All People
🔬 Expert Witness · BODE Technology

Nicholas Bradford

Courtroom still of Nicholas Bradford.

Bode Technology DNA analyst who examined taillight and hair evidence.

Trial 1Trial 2
204 lines 3 proceedings 2 trials

About

Nicholas Bradford testified in both Karen Read trials about DNA testing on an extract from the passenger-side taillight of Read’s vehicle. He found a mixture from three people, including at least one male contributor. His comparisons gave very strong statistical support for John O’Keefe as a contributor and supported excluding Yuriy Bukhenik and Michael Proctor. At the retrial, Bradford testified that the result was 740 nonillion times more likely under a mixture including O’Keefe and two unknown unrelated people than under a mixture of three unknown unrelated people. He also found that a hair sample from the vehicle was below the detection limit for autosomal STR testing; it was forwarded to another analyst for mitochondrial DNA testing. On cross-examination at the retrial, defense attorney Alan Jackson questioned the limits of the taillight comparisons. Bradford said the profile was 76,000 times more likely under a mixture of three unknown unrelated people than under a mixture including Proctor and two unknown unrelated people. When Jackson asked whether Proctor was not completely excluded, Bradford described the result as strong support for exclusion rather than giving a categorical answer. Bradford also said he had not been asked to compare known samples from Brian Higgins, Brian Albert, Kevin Albert, or former Chief Kenneth Berkowitz.

Trial Record (3)

Trial 1 First Criminal Trial Apr 29, 2024 – Jul 1, 2024 1 proceeding

Day 24

Direct Nicholas Bradford — Direct Examination Nicholas Bradford Adam Lally 3 highlights 89 lines spoken
Summary

Bradford testified that a taillight extract was a three-person DNA mixture, with very strong support for inclusion of John O'Keefe and support for exclusion of Yuriy Bukhenik and Michael Proctor; the hair sample did not yield a usable STR profile.

Highlights (3)
Quote

“Yes. So in this case when comparing the John O'Keefe profile, assuming a mixture of three individuals, it is at least 749 nonillion times more likely to be observed if it originated from John O'Keefe and two unknown, unrelated individuals than if from three unknown, unrelated individuals.”

Bradford stated the likelihood-ratio result supporting inclusion of John O'Keefe in the taillight mixture under the stated assumptions.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“So in that case, assuming a mixture of three individuals, the DNA profile obtained is at least 46 million times more likely to be observed if it originated from three unknown, unrelated individuals than if from Yuriy Bukhenik and two unknown, unrelated individuals.”

Bradford gave the numerical basis for his stated exclusion conclusion concerning Yuriy Bukhenik.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

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

Day 18

Direct Nicholas Bradford - Direct Nicholas Bradford Adam Lally 4 highlights 100 lines spoken
Summary

DNA analyst Nicholas Bradford testifies about DNA testing performed on evidence from Karen Read's vehicle tail light and a hair sample.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“John O'Keefe could not be excluded as a potential contributor to that mixture profile.”

Reports Bradford's conclusion that O'Keefe could not be excluded as a potential contributor to the tail light mixture.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“it would be 740 nonillion times more likely that it was a mixture of John O'Keefe and two unrelated individuals versus three unknown unrelated individuals.”

Reports the likelihood ratio for O'Keefe and two unknown unrelated individuals versus three unknown unrelated individuals.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“So he could not be visually excluded based on just comparing the profile to the STRmix output. So we do the likelihood ratio... So in this case it was 46 million times more likely that it was three unknown unrelated individuals versus Yuri Bukhenik and two unknown unrelated individuals. So that would be very strong support for exclusion.”

Reports Bradford's testimony that Bukhenik was not visually excluded on the initial comparison, followed by a likelihood ratio providing very strong support for exclusion.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“the quantification results were below the limit of detection. So we would not expect to get an STR profile from that hair.”

Explains why the hair evidence required different (mitochondrial) DNA testing by another analyst.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Cross Nicholas Bradford - Cross Nicholas Bradford Alan Jackson 1 highlights 14 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 (1)
Quote

“So, like I said, in this case, it's 76,000 times more likely that we would observe that evidence profile if it were three unknown unrelated individuals as opposed to Michael Proctor and then two unknown unrelated individuals.”

Bradford framed the 76,000 statistic as a comparison between two explanations of the evidence profile, rather than a population analogy.

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶