Commonwealth v. Read — Trial ArchiveYuri Bukhenik - Direct (Part 1)
892 linesMR. LALLY: May we approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes, you're on.
MR. LALLY: Call Sergeant Yuri Bukhenik to the stand.
COURT CLERK: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Good afternoon, sir.
MR. BUKHENIK: Good afternoon.
MR. LALLY: Would you please state your name and spell your last name for the jury?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir. My name is Yuri Bukhenik, spelled Y-U-R-I-Y, last name B-U-K-H-E-N-I-K.
MR. LALLY: And how are you employed, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: I'm employed by the Massachusetts State Police.
MR. LALLY: And how long have you been a trooper with the State Police?
MR. BUKHENIK: I've been a trooper since 2012.
MR. LALLY: And, prior to being employed as a trooper with the State Police — excuse me — what, if any, other employment or background do you have as far as law enforcement is concerned?
MR. BUKHENIK: My law enforcement career began in 2003 when I graduated from the Military Police School in Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, while I was enlisted in the United States Marine Corps. From there, I was stationed at Quantico, Virginia, with the Marine Corps presidential helicopter squadron. I provided security for the presidential helicopter and assets, attaining a top secret Yankee White clearance. I was promoted meritoriously to corporal and sergeant, and had a platoon of 44 Marines. From there, I was stationed at Camp Pendleton, California, where I was a patrol supervisor on base as a military police officer. Once my enlistment ended, I decided to come home and pursue a law enforcement career here in Massachusetts in the communities that I grew up in.
MR. BUKHENIK: In, I first worked for the VA Hospital police, where I attained a secret clearance, which was a requirement of the employment. After that, I worked at the Attleboro Police Department in uniform patrol, as well as the SWAT team, with the Attleboro, Massachusetts Police Department. In 2011, I applied for the Massachusetts State Police, graduated, and worked at the Sturbridge Barracks, Millbury Barracks, and Foxborough Barracks. In 2015, I was selected to come to the Norfolk District Attorney's Office with the detective unit and worked homicide cases as a trooper. In December 2021, I was promoted and took on a supervisory role within the unit.
MR. LALLY: Now, with respect to your work within the detective unit at the Norfolk District Attorney's Office, what if any specialized training did you receive in regard to your work there?
MR. BUKHENIK: I've attended numerous homicide conferences, training in various aspects of digital device analysis and investigations in major crimes, homicides, drug investigations, and so forth.
MR. LALLY: Now, were you working in that capacity with the state police detective unit on January 29th, 2022?
MR. BUKHENIK: I was.
MR. LALLY: And were you on call that day?
MR. BUKHENIK: I was on call as a supervisor.
MR. LALLY: Now, can you explain to the jury, as far as the on-call system within the detective units — well, let me ask you this first: what if any duties or responsibilities do you have as sergeant, or as a supervisor, with reference to on-call duty, and sort of how that works?
MR. BUKHENIK: As a supervisor on call, responsibilities include answering the detective that's on call any questions that might arise. Obviously, we don't all have the same experience, so we put our heads together, and if it's a situation or case or scene that they have not been exposed to before, they call the supervisor for guidance, suggestion, or to bounce questions off of them in order to help them navigate that case.
MR. LALLY: And who was the on-call detective on this particular date of January 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: January 29th — the morning hours, up until 7 a.m., it was Trooper Michael Proctor.
MR. LALLY: And do you know Trooper Proctor?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And how long have you known Trooper Proctor?
MR. BUKHENIK: Since he came into the office in 2019. I believe it was September or October 2019.
MR. LALLY: And have you supervised Trooper Proctor sort of throughout his work within the office?
MR. BUKHENIK: I have supervised him throughout my supervisory position, so his entire time in the office — while I was a supervisor, I've supervised him directly, yes.
MR. LALLY: And as far as that on-call system, or that on-call rotation, is concerned — how is that, how was that determined, or how does that sort of come into existence?
MR. BUKHENIK: The on-call system is formulated — it's compiled — the month prior. So, for example, if it was the beginning of December, the troopers in the office would submit their days requesting not to be on call, due to trials, training, personal reasons, or vacations they had planned. Those days are submitted at the beginning of the month, and then — if it's the beginning of December, for example — the on-call schedule for January is then compiled a month in advance.
MR. LALLY: Really. So these are generated well in advance of whatever specific date a trooper is on call?
MR. BUKHENIK: Correct. That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the detective unit within the Norfolk County District Attorney's Office, who if anyone is your supervisor?
MR. BUKHENIK: Currently, my supervisor is Lieutenant Fanning, and the unit commander is Detective Lieutenant Brian Tully.
MR. LALLY: In that sort of pecking order, if you will — was that the way that it was set up in January of 2022 as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it was.
MR. LALLY: Now, on this morning of January 29th, 2022, at some point did you get a call in the morning, and from whom — from whom do you initially get a call?
MR. BUKHENIK: I received a call approximately 6:44 in the morning or so from H Troop headquarters, which is the field headquarters for the Metro Boston area, which also covers our county. And they advised me that there was a body in a snowbank in Canton. I asked for further details, and advised them that I was not on call, but I would call the on-call trooper and let them know that there was a call-out requesting their assistance. So that's what I did — I called Trooper Proctor and advised him to contact Canton police.
MR. LALLY: And following that initial contact that you had from H Troop, and then your call to Trooper Proctor — what happened then?
MR. BUKHENIK: Trooper Proctor began making phone calls, gathering information —
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained. Next question.
MR. LALLY: What was the next thing that happened as far as your involvement was concerned?
MR. BUKHENIK: I was advised of the circumstances under which the body was located and what was transpiring. And I told Trooper Proctor that I would start shoveling out — during the blizzard — and then proceed to meet him in Canton to begin our investigation.
MR. LALLY: And where was it that you and Trooper Proctor first met up on that particular morning?
MR. BUKHENIK: We met at the Canton Police Department.
MR. LALLY: And do you recall approximately what time it was that you arrived at the Canton Police Department?
MR. BUKHENIK: It was approximately 9:15, due to the amount of snow that was on the ground and the time that it took me to shovel out. The main roads — actually, no roads were plowed at the time during my trek. So I decided to drive my personal truck to Canton Police Department, because it was four-wheel drive, and meet Trooper Proctor there.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as your personal truck versus — you have a work vehicle as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And you mentioned that the truck is four-wheel drive. What is the difference between your personal truck and its capabilities in weather versus the work vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Well, at the time there was approximately 10 to 15 inches of snow that had accumulated already. My work vehicle is a sedan — low to the ground, low clearance, front-wheel drive — it would not be able to navigate the road conditions at the time. My four-wheel drive vehicle is higher clearance from the roadway and was able to navigate the conditions at the time.
MR. LALLY: And sir, when you arrived — so at approximately 8:22 in the morning or so, where is it that you were at that point in time, if you know?
MR. BUKHENIK: At 8:22, I would say I was still blowing the snow out of my driveway, clearing the path for my truck to leave the driveway.
MR. LALLY: And when you arrived at the Canton Police Station, you mentioned that you met Trooper Proctor there. Do you recall who arrived first?
MR. BUKHENIK: Trooper Proctor was in the parking lot in his vehicle, and I pulled in, backed in next to his, and we walked in together into the police department, I believe.
MR. LALLY: And when you walked into the Canton Police Station on that morning — sometime after 9:00 a.m. — where is it that you went, who if anyone did you talk to when you first got there?
MR. BUKHENIK: We walked into the police department, were guided to the detective department division of the PD, and we met with the detectives from Canton and Sergeant Goode, who was the uniform patrol sergeant and had been a first responder to the scene as well.
MR. LALLY: Now, without reference to anything that was communicated between the two of you — at some point prior to getting to the Canton Police Station, did you have conversations with Trooper Proctor?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: And did Trooper Proctor make you aware of conversations that he had had with other people prior to getting to the Canton Police Station?
MR. YANNETTI: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that. It's a yes or no.
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And so you get to the Canton Police Station — you and Trooper Proctor then proceed to talk to Sergeant Goode, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And again, without any reference to what was said to you by Sergeant Goode — he relayed some information to you as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And if you know, about how long was the period of the conversation that you had with Sergeant Goode at the Canton Police Station?
MR. BUKHENIK: The conversation with Sergeant Goode was probably 25 to 30 minutes. He walked us through his —
JUDGE CANNONE: Next question please, Mr. Lally. I'm going to stop you from answering that, Sergeant.
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir.
MR. LALLY: So, Sergeant Bukhenik — in reference to, um — at some point did you learn the name of the body, or the person that was found on the lawn on Fairview Road?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: Who did you learn him to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: Mr. John O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: And in reference to where Mr. O'Keefe's body was at that point, what if any information did you receive about that?
MR. YANNETTI: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: We learned that Mr. O'Keefe's body was transported to the hospital — Good Samaritan Hospital in Brockton.
MR. LALLY: And in reference to Good Samaritan Hospital in Brockton, who if anyone else were you told had been taken to that facility as well, in relation to your response that morning?
MR. YANNETTI: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant.
MR. LALLY: And just to be clear — at some point over the course of your investigation, had you had interactions with Karen Read?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I have.
MR. LALLY: And to be clear, when we say — as far as Karen Read, the defendant — do you see her in the courtroom today?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: Could you identify just as to where she's seated or an article of clothing?
MR. BUKHENIK: She's seated between her legal defense team, wearing the white blouse.
MR. LALLY: I'd ask the record reflect the identification of the defendant.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: So, upon having that conversation with Sergeant Goode at the Canton Police Station, where is it that you and Trooper Proctor went next?
MR. BUKHENIK: From the Canton Police Department, we proceeded to the McCabe residence.
MR. LALLY: And that was over on Country Lane, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct. Number 12 Country Lane.
MR. LALLY: And when you arrive there, as far as transportation — is it you and Trooper Proctor in the same vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. I made the decision to drive us there — we would only take one vehicle — in addition to Trooper Proctor being able to make phone calls and facilitate other logistics as necessary — allowed him that freedom to do so while I operated the vehicle in the dangerous snow conditions.
MR. LALLY: And the snow conditions that you were talking about — as far as clearing out your driveway, the drive to the Canton police station — did those conditions persist throughout the day of the 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, they did.
MR. LALLY: And so you make your way over to the McCabe residence — again, without anything that was said — who if anyone did you speak with at the McCabe residence that morning?
MR. BUKHENIK: We first spoke with Miss Jennifer McCabe. We then spoke with Mr. Matt McCabe, and then we spoke with Mr. Brian Albert.
MR. LALLY: And with reference to each of those conversations, were they done collectively or separately, or how were those interviews conducted?
MR. BUKHENIK: Each interview was conducted separately. We first interviewed Miss Jennifer McCabe — with the request of Mr. McCabe to give us privacy, he proceeded upstairs. Once we were done with that interview, Mr. McCabe came downstairs, and Miss McCabe gave us the same courtesy. And once that interview was over, Mr. Brian Albert had arrived and we interviewed him briefly.
MR. LALLY: Is that sort of the typical process of how at least your unit conducts interviews with respect to civilians?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, with cooperating civilians. We typically advise them we are going to — we schedule an interview, we proceed to their location of convenience, and separate them and get their version of recollection of events that we are inquiring about.
MR. LALLY: Now after you spoke with those three individuals — yourself and Trooper Proctor at the McCabe residence — where is it that you and Trooper Proctor went next?
MR. BUKHENIK: We proceeded to the Good Samaritan Hospital in Brockton.
MR. LALLY: And where within the Good Samaritan Hospital did you go?
MR. BUKHENIK: We went to the emergency department.
MR. LALLY: And within the emergency department, were you led to a specific room?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, we were.
MR. LALLY: And what if anything did you observe when you were in that room?
MR. BUKHENIK: Once in the room, we observed Mr. O'Keefe's body on the medical bed — bed or gurney — and his clothing, which had been cut off of him, were on the floor at the foot of the bed, a couple of feet away at the foot of the bed.
MR. LALLY: Now first with regard to the clothing, what if anything did you do with regard to that after viewing Mr. O'Keefe's body?
MR. BUKHENIK: We proceeded to identify the clothing items and bag them into evidence bags, notating which item and a brief description about each item of clothing.
MR. LALLY: So let me ask you just a little bit about that, as far as that process is concerned. So when an item of evidence is collected by you or by your unit during the course of an investigation, is there sort of a policy or protocol — or how are things — what do you do with things when you collect them and take them into custody as evidence?
MR. BUKHENIK: If we deem an item to be of evidentiary value, we identify the item, we take a brief description of it, and we label the evidence bag with that description. We notate who's taking the item into custody, typically who located the item, the time that it's located, and the location from which it was seized or taken or collected.
MR. LALLY: And with regard to items of clothing, is that something that would be placed in just one big bag of clothes, or how would those be packaged?
MR. BUKHENIK: In an evidence bag — Mr. O'Keefe's clothing, which was already in one big pile on the floor, we packaged —
JUDGE CANNONE: Jurors, feel free to stand up and stretch.
MR. LALLY: So I'm sorry, Sergeant Bukhenik — when you come into the hospital room where Mr. O'Keefe's body was, there are clothing items that are on the floor, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And do you recall how those clothing items were in relation to each other on the floor?
MR. BUKHENIK: They were positioned on the floor in a pile, stacked on top of each other, and they were in a condition of being soaked and wet.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to those clothing items, do you recall what those clothing items were individually?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir. They were: a plaid pair of boxer underwear, an orange-colored design print t-shirt, a blue pair of Lucky Brand jeans, a belt, a two-tone gray light thin hooded sweatshirt, and a right sneaker, black in color with white design and a Nike brand.
MR. LALLY: And how many sneakers were there contained within that property?
MR. BUKHENIK: One right sneaker.
MR. LALLY: And what if any observations did you make of the condition beyond them being soaking wet?
MR. BUKHENIK: I also recognized, due to the aroma and visual observations, traces of vomit on the clothing.
MR. LALLY: And with regard to those items that you observed on the floor, what if anything did you and/or Trooper Proctor do with reference to those clothing items?
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: Once we went through the clothing, we collected each item and put it into a large evidence bag. We double-bagged due to the wetness of the clothing so it would not seep through. We also identified the fact that there was only one sneaker, so I requested that Trooper Proctor contact the paramedics that transported Mr. O'Keefe from 34 Fairview to the hospital and have them once again check their ambulance to see if there was another sneaker inadvertently left behind in the ambulance vehicle.
MR. LALLY: Now prior to sort of physically touching this or any other piece of evidence, what if any other sort of precautions do you take prior to handling — tactile handling — any piece of evidence?
MR. BUKHENIK: Anytime we handle evidence — which obviously we take great caution not to destroy, alter, or discard any evidence — we also put on gloves in order to help preserve that item.
MR. LALLY: And in reference to these items, or items of anything of evidentiary value that you seize as evidence, once you take it and secure it into an evidence bag, what happens to it from there?
MR. BUKHENIK: Once it's secured in the evidence bag, it is sealed and logged into our evidence storage facility at the office, and then as necessary it is signed out, shipped off for processing, review, or court proceedings.
MR. LALLY: And as far as that sealing is concerned, how — how are bags or boxes of items of evidentiary value — how are they sealed?
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it. I'll allow it. Thank you.
MR. BUKHENIK: Once the bag is sealed, we utilize tape — typically red or yellow tape. Once it's secured, we initial and date the tape on the edge. That procedure helps identify the time and date it was sealed and by whom, with the initials.
MR. LALLY: And then once that bag or box is sealed, if that bag or box is subsequently opened at a later time, what if any notation or recordation of that is made?
MR. BUKHENIK: Anytime a piece of evidence is signed out for review, it's logged in the tracking system. In addition, anytime a piece of evidence — the container being the bag or a box — is opened and the tape is cut, it is then resealed, re-initialed by the trooper or individual who's signing that evidence out and then returning it.
MR. LALLY: As far as the evidence bag or box is concerned, when it's been opened, is that something that is noticeable based on the sealing and resealing of that particular receptacle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir, it is definitely noticeable, and it's noted in the systems.
MR. LALLY: Now with regard to — you mentioned or made some mention earlier in the testimony in regard to evidence storage facilities at your office?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Can you describe what those are, and who if anyone has access to those evidence storage?
MR. BUKHENIK: Within our office we have two troopers that are designated as evidence officers. Those individuals have access to the secure rooms designated strictly for evidence storage. Those rooms are inventoried and kept under not just lock and key, but also digital access control and alarm systems. They are the only ones that have access to those facilities, in addition to our unit commander. But I'll tell you that our unit commander does not access that room without the evidence officers. I myself, even as a supervisor, do not have access to that room.
MR. LALLY: You don't have access to that evidence room, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Trooper Proctor — is he one of those evidence officers? Did he have access to that room?
MR. BUKHENIK: He does not.
MR. LALLY: As far as at the time in January of 2022, who were the troopers within your office who did have access to that?
MR. BUKHENIK: In January 2022, that would be Trooper Jeff Kakowski and Trooper David Deo.
MR. LALLY: And that would be in addition to Lieutenant Tully, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: Detective Lieutenant Tully — I believe he has access to it, but I cannot speak to that. I just believe that he does, as a unit commander, to facilitate any next assignment.
MR. LALLY: Now with reference to any items that you were physically present for, or that were taken into custody or taken into evidence — including that clothing from the hospital on January 29th and any other items throughout the course of this investigation — when they were taped and sealed, what happened with each of those items once they were taken back to your
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it.
MR. BUKHENIK: Each item that was sealed was processed — it was logged in and then stored. After processing, it was stored in the evidence room.
MR. LALLY: Now we're turning back to the Good Samaritan Hospital. Within that hospital room, you made mention that you secured items and that you made observations of Mr. O'Keefe, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And can you describe for the jury, as far as Mr. O'Keefe's body, what were those observations?
MR. BUKHENIK: Mr. O'Keefe's body was laying on his back. The observations I made were of bruising to the eyelids of his face — based on my experience and having cases with head trauma, I can tell you that, uh, during subdural hematoma the —
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, I'll sustain the objection. You can build a foundation if you can, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Over the course of your work uh with this unit, um, in particular, um — if you know about — how many homicide, or — or let me — let me step into it this way. As far as your work within this unit, as far as it concerns, uh, what if any jurisdiction uh does the State Police Detective Unit of the District Attorney's office have with reference to not only homicide but death investigations within Norfolk County?
MR. BUKHENIK: By statute, uh, Chapter 38, Section 4, each county, um, the District Attorney's office is provided jurisdiction over all death investigations. Um, as a result, the law enforcement entities that are assigned to that Norfolk — or that District Attorney — um, performed the investigations in Norfolk County. Those individuals are members of the Massachusetts State Police assigned to the State Police Detective Unit within our office.
MR. LALLY: And so as far as death investigations, what exactly — or what type of investigations would that encompass?
MR. BUKHENIK: Death investigations that um we have jurisdiction over are all unattended deaths. Unattended death um means that a physician, a doctor, is not overseeing the individual that passes. Those uh deaths would be suicides, homicides, overdose-type deaths, natural deaths, accidental deaths, uh, and so forth. Any type of death that is not overseen by a doctor at a medical facility or in a hospice-type situation.
MR. LALLY: So as a result of your assignment to this unit and that sort of exclusivity of jurisdiction over unattended deaths within Norfolk County, if you know, approximately how many uh death investigations have you been a part of over the course of your work with the State Police Detective, um, over the last nine years?
MR. BUKHENIK: I would venture to say it's over 500 death investigations that I was uh a part of.
MR. LALLY: And, Sergeant, over the course of your involvement within those investigations, if you know, how many of those uh investigations involved uh some indication or some type of head trauma?
MR. BUKHENIK: Scores of — um, investigations that involve some sort of head trauma.
MR. LALLY: And through the course of your investigations uh in those cases that have involved uh scores of head trauma, um, have you been privy to information as far as medical findings, autopsy reports, things of that nature, in relation to those prior investigations?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir, I have been.
MR. LALLY: Now with regard to your observations of Mr. O'Keefe uh with regard to his eyelids, um, what if any — what if any observations did you make, and what if any um — well, let me — just with physical observations — what if any physical observations did you make of Mr. O'Keefe's face and body in general?
MR. BUKHENIK: His face — I observed the swelling and the discoloration uh being produced through the uh the blood pooling in the eyelids.
PARENTHETICAL: [sidebar]
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, so just — just your observation. So the swelling and discoloration.
MR. JACKSON: Move to strike last —
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll strike the remainder of what you've said.
MR. BUKHENIK: I also observed a um cut to his nostril and an eyelid, which was very small in size, which would have been produced by a —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, so we'll leave it at that. Next question, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Based on uh your training experience, what if any uh conclusions or what if any opinions do you have in regard to the swelling around the —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, I'll see you at sidebar.
MR. LALLY: So, Sergeant Bukhenik, with reference to your prior uh death investigations, have you had occasion to make observations of bodies where there was a later determination of some sort of subdural hemorrhage?
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. LALLY: Have you made those observations? Have you been part of those investigations?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, your Honor. Yes.
MR. LALLY: And what you observed in regard to Mr. O'Keefe, was that consistent or inconsistent with what you had observed on those prior investigations?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: That I'll allow.
MR. BUKHENIK: It was consistent.
MR. LALLY: Now in addition to the injuries that you observed to Mr. O'Keefe's face, uh, what if any injuries did you observe to his extremities?
MR. BUKHENIK: His extremities uh produced um abrasions to his upper forearm and lower bicep uh area on his right arm.
MR. LALLY: And just as you use that term — I'm not asking for any sort of medical definition — but as far as you use that term "abrasions," what do you understand that term to mean?
MR. BUKHENIK: I understand that term to be a injury sustained through blunt force trauma or friction to the epidermis of the skin where a crushing of the vascular system occurs and produces that type of uh uh sign on the skin.
MR. LALLY: And from your observation of the injuries to Mr. O'Keefe's arm, uh, which arm was this again? It
MR. BUKHENIK: Was his right arm.
MR. LALLY: And as far as your observation of those injuries to his right arm, what if any — um, as far as the consistency of those injuries, what if anything did you note or observe in reference to those — consistency with what — let me let me rephrase. How were the abrasions that you're describing positioned in relation to each other?
MR. BUKHENIK: Each abrasion appeared to me to be linear and concentrated in a specific um location on the arm. It didn't go any further north of a point and did not go any further south of a point. So it was concentrated in the — elbow — few inches below the elbow, few inches above the elbow on the right arm.
MR. LALLY: Now, while you were at uh the Good Samaritan Hospital, uh, did you endeavor to speak uh with Miss Read?
MR. BUKHENIK: We did attempt to, yes.
MR. LALLY: And was she present at the hospital at that time?
MR. BUKHENIK: No, she was not.
MR. LALLY: And at some point subsequent to that, did you receive — or what if any information did you receive as to her whereabouts?
MR. BUKHENIK: We were made aware that she was located at 345 Country Hill Drive in Dighton, at her parents' home.
MR. LALLY: And where did you go from the Good Samaritan Hospital, once — once you left from there?
MR. BUKHENIK: We proceeded to that location.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, with reference to the items of clothing um that you recovered from the Good Samaritan — of Mr. O'Keefe — uh, do you have those items of clothing with you here today in court?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: Uh, your Honor, uh, with the Court's permission, I would ask that the witness uh be allowed to uh retrieve those items and display those items.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Are they in the courtroom?
MR. LALLY: I believe so, yes. Okay.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. May I — yes. How many items are we talking about? Uh, okay. Jurors, if we go a little past one, my intention would be to still just take a half-hour lunch today and come back, so I'd rather just go through this if we could.
MR. LALLY: Sergeant, I'm handing you this item. Do you recognize that?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: Uh, the sweatshirt from uh the hospital room where Mr. O'Keefe was located.
MR. LALLY: And, um, your Honor, we'd move to introduce and admit that as the next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Any objection, Mr. Jackson?
MR. JACKSON: I sort of need to see what's in the bag before I can object. But okay.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So you've received photos of all of this, right? I assume what's in the bag is what's been photographed. But until I see it, I won't know.
MR. JACKSON: All right. So let's go ahead and open it, with the Court's permission.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. Hearing no objection — Mr. Lally, why don't you come take the bag. [Exhibit 437 admitted]
MR. LALLY: Okay. Yes — another item, sir. Do you recognize that item?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: Uh, it's a — one orange T-shirt.
MR. LALLY: And your Honor, with the Court's permission, if the witness could remove that item and display for the jury as well.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. Hearing no objection. Okay. [Exhibit 438.]
MR. LALLY: You want — approach? Yes.
MR. BUKHENIK: It's the right sneaker uh recovered from the hospital room.
MR. LALLY: Your Honor, with the Court's permission, if the witness could remove that item from the bag.
JUDGE CANNONE: Make — okay. Evidence display continuing — audio gap Continue, Sergeant. You are unmuted. All right, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Yeah, thank you, sir. If you could uh return that to the bag, please. [Exhibit introduced] Thank you. May I approach one last time?
MR. JACKSON: I'm — my apologies. I guess I should have said no objection, with what we discussed.
JUDGE CANNONE: I understand. Thank you. You may approach.
MR. LALLY: Do you recognize that?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. Uh, it's a bag containing blue jeans, black belt, and plaid boxer shorts.
MR. LALLY: And your Honor, with the Court's permission, um, may the witness remove just the jeans and the belt from uh from the bag?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, sir. Uh, you can return that to the bag, sir. Your Honor, we'd move to introduce and admit as the next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. No objection. Thank you. So are you not displaying the third item, but it's going into evidence? Or is it just the jeans and the belt going into evidence?
MR. LALLY: Jeans and the belt into evidence, your Honor, with the Court's permission. So we'll mark the bag and we'll remove the third item during a break.
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you. All right, so Sergeant, you'll be with us this afternoon. Why don't we take our lunch recess. It's only going to be about a half an hour.
MR. BUKHENIK: Thank you, your Honor.
COURT OFFICER: All right, Jer, you are muted. [lunch recess]
MR. LALLY: Yes, thank you. Sergeant, those items — as far as the clothing items that you displayed for the jury just prior to the recess — those were the same clothing items that you recovered from the hospital room of the Good Samaritan on January 29th, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir.
MR. LALLY: Now, you had mentioned earlier in your testimony that those items had been placed into one bag initially. What, if anything, happened with those items as far as their keeping or their bagging once you got back to the office or to where the evidence rooms are?
MR. BUKHENIK: Due to the condition of those items after they arrived at the office, the items were laid out on butcher paper that we utilized for evidence viewing, and allowed to dry naturally, because they were soaking wet.
MR. LALLY: And as far as when they were done with that sort of drying process, how were they packaged from there?
MR. BUKHENIK: They were packaged in the bags, sealed up, and stored for transport and processing.
MR. LALLY: And so those would be bags individual for each clothing item, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: Each item — the way that it was packaged — the pants with the belt and the boxers, and then so on and so forth with the sweatshirt and the sneakers.
MR. LALLY: And I'll get to this a little bit more in a moment, but at some point there were pieces of plastic — red and clear plastic — that were recovered by you and other troopers from Fairview Road, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: At any point in time, were pieces of clear and red plastic that were recovered from 34 Fairview Road ever placed inside the same evidence bag as any piece of clothing that you recovered?
MR. BUKHENIK: No, absolutely not.
MR. LALLY: Now, with reference to the hospital — Good Samaritan — in addition to yourself and Trooper Proctor, were there other members of the State Police or other units of the State Police that arrived at the hospital at some point?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir. Lieutenant Melo came to the hospital to document the victim and the clothing, and he's assigned to the State Police Crime Scene Services section.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the Crime Scene Services section, or CSSS, what if any role do they have with relation to your investigation in this case, or your investigations in general, as far as documentation is concerned?
MR. BUKHENIK: Crime Scene Services section assists us in documenting scenes through video and photographs. They also assist in collecting latent prints, fingerprints. They assist in collecting impressions — like foot impressions in mud or soil — and those types of missions.
MR. LALLY: Now, there are a number of different troopers that are assigned to that particular unit, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And as far as over the course of this investigation, how many occasions approximately were there that a member of the Crime Scene Services section responded to memorialize or photograph different scenes or different areas throughout the course of your investigation in this case?
MR. BUKHENIK: Just off the top of my head, there would be four, five, maybe six instances where a trooper or sergeant from Crime Scene Services responded to the scene to assist us in this investigation.
MR. LALLY: Now, at any point in time over the course of the investigation, when Crime Scene Services troopers responded to document anything, was it ever the same trooper more than once?
MR. BUKHENIK: No, it was not.
MR. LALLY: And so with regard to January 29th, back at the Good Samaritan Hospital — Sergeant, then Sergeant, Melo arrived to document and photograph Mr. O'Keefe, correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. Mr. Lally, do you want me to give my instruction now or in a few minutes?
MR. LALLY: Just about 30 seconds.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: So, Sergeant Bukhenik, I've just placed three photographs before you. Do you recognize what's depicted in those three photographs?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize those to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is Mr. John O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: And what's contained within those photographs — is that a fair and accurate representation of what you saw of Mr. O'Keefe's body at the Good Samaritan Hospital on January 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it is.
MR. LALLY: May I approach again?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. The Commonwealth seeks to introduce — all right, so there's no objection? All right, so folks, the Commonwealth is introducing into evidence through this witness certain photographs that are not pleasant and may be considered graphic. Sometimes evidence is presented that creates an emotional reaction in jurors. For example, it's natural and understandable to feel sympathy and empathy when you hear about a person who was injured in some serious way, or suffered in some way, or who has passed away. But as jurors, you've taken an oath to follow the law, and I instruct you that you must separate any emotional reaction on your part from the informational value and weight of the evidence.
JUDGE CANNONE: You must not be influenced in any way by the nature of some of the testimony, and you must find the facts in this case based only on the evidence. You can't find facts or base your decision on sympathy, anger, passion, prejudice, or pity for or against either side in this case. Rather, your verdict must be based solely on the evidence and my instruction on the law. All right, with that, Mr. Lally, those photos will be in evidence.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. With the Court's permission, may I publish just briefly each of the three respective photographs?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. And Miss Gilman, if I could have photograph 2866. Sergeant, direct your attention to the screen. Is that what's displayed there — and now has been marked as Exhibit 441 — do you recognize that?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And using the laser pointer on the desk before you, if you could draw the jury's attention to what, if anything, of significance you observed in this particular photograph.
MR. BUKHENIK: In this photograph, I observed the swelling of the eyelids, the laceration of the nostril and the eyelid, the blood pooling, and that depiction of Mr. O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, photograph 2857. And again, Sergeant, do you recognize what's up on the screen, and it's now been marked as Exhibit 442?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And similar to the prior exhibit, if you could, using the laser, direct the jury's attention to what, if anything, of significance you observed.
MR. BUKHENIK: I observed the — I observed the lateral — excuse me — parallel lacerations — excuse me — abrasions and markings on the skin of Mr. O'Keefe, limited between that point there and that point there, as I described earlier in my testimony.
MR. LALLY: And Exhibit 2859. And again, Sergeant, do you recognize what's up on the screen, and has now been marked as Exhibit 443?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you see in this?
MR. BUKHENIK: It's the same abrasions to Mr. O'Keefe's right arm, just further up on the bicep, tricep, shoulder area.
MR. LALLY: Now, Sergeant, taking you back to January 29th, 2022, after you left the Good Samaritan Hospital, where is it that you went?
MR. BUKHENIK: We went to 345 Country Hill Drive in Dighton.
MR. LALLY: And that was the residence of Miss Read's parents, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, on your way from the Good Samaritan in Brockton to the residence in Dighton, what if any communication did either you or Trooper Proctor have with regard to the Dighton police?
MR. BUKHENIK: I advised Trooper Proctor to contact Dighton police dispatch and advised them that we would be responding to the location at 345 Country Hill Drive and seizing a vehicle, and we were requesting uniform patrols to assist us in that mission.
MR. LALLY: And why was that request made of the local PD?
MR. BUKHENIK: We were going into their jurisdiction. There was a blizzard going on. We were considerate of the circumstance, and wanted to be courteous to the Read family and not just show up without any uniform presence. We have never met the Read family, they have never met us, and with the clothing that we were wearing, it would be difficult for them to see that we were law enforcement.
MR. LALLY: And so as you arrived in that area of the residence in Dighton, where did you position yourselves, and when did you arrive in relation to the marked unit from Dighton?
MR. BUKHENIK: We called them while we were still on the highway and gave them an approximate time of arrival. GPS was not accurate due to the conditions at the time on the roadways. Once we arrived to Dighton, I positioned my vehicle at the top of Country Hill Drive, awaiting a marked uniformed officer from Dighton to meet us there.
MR. LALLY: And if you know, about how long approximately did it take you to get from Brockton to Dighton on that particular day?
MR. BUKHENIK: [unintelligible] — into Dighton it took us about 45 — 45 minutes to an hour to travel that distance.
MR. LALLY: And if you know, about what time was it that you arrived at the residence in Dighton?
MR. BUKHENIK: We arrived approximately on the street at 2:30 or so in the afternoon, and we waited for a significant amount of time for the uniform patrol to arrive.
MR. LALLY: And when the uniform patrol arrived, at some point did you learn the name of at least one of those officers that arrived at the residence with you at the time?
MR. BUKHENIK: I did, yes.
MR. LALLY: And was that Officer Barros?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it was.
MR. LALLY: And so when Officer Barros arrived, where did you then proceed with Officer Barros?
MR. BUKHENIK: [unintelligible] — well, the road was only plowed the width of one vehicle, so even though he and his partner were in an F-150 or F-250 marked police cruiser, we could only travel in single line. We traveled up to the cul-de-sac, turned around, and positioned our vehicles facing back out to the way that we entered the roadway or that street. We parked on the roadway since the driveway was not plowed, and we waded through the snow to the front door of the residence.
MR. LALLY: When you say the driveway was not plowed or you waded through the snow, can you describe to the jury sort of the condition of the driveway as you made your way from the street to the house?
MR. BUKHENIK: With the blowing winds and the drifting snow, there were locations along our walk to the property with snow varying from knee high to up to my waist. For reference, I'm 6'1" so it was quite deep in some locations.
MR. LALLY: And as you made your way to the home, what if anything did you observe in the drive?
MR. BUKHENIK: As we walked up to the driveway in front of the garage, we observed a large black-in-color Lexus SUV bearing Massachusetts registration 3GC684.
MR. LALLY: And subsequently, did you come to find out whose vehicle that was?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, once we queried the plate we learned that the vehicle was registered to the defendant.
MR. LALLY: And as you're going by this vehicle, what if any observations did you make of the vehicle as you were walking past it toward the home?
MR. BUKHENIK: I observed a damaged rear right tail light fixture on the vehicle. From my vantage point I also told Trooper Proctor to approach the vehicle closer and confirm what I was seeing, which he did.
MR. LALLY: And as far as that damage to the right passenger tail light area, can you describe sort of what it was that you saw during that initial phase?
MR. BUKHENIK: Absolutely. During the initial phase I observed snow compacted and then caked onto portions of the tail light casing. There were pieces missing, and I knew that because the left side tail light was intact.
MR. LALLY: And as you made your way past the vehicle to the home, at some point are you greeted or do you meet someone in the area of the home?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, once we walked up to the front door I rang the doorbell, and Mr. Read opened the front door — with the storm door, a glass storm door, unable to open due to the level of snow on the ground and on the front steps.
MR. LALLY: And so where were you directed to enter the home from?
MR. BUKHENIK: Mr. Read directed us to the garage door, at which point it opened up and Trooper Proctor and I entered the garage. We were once again greeted by Mr. Read and invited into the home.
MR. LALLY: And Officer Barros, where did he remain when you and Trooper Proctor went into the home?
MR. BUKHENIK: He remained outside with the vehicle. During our time in the home, Officer Barros came in and asked what the plan was and offered to have DPW plow out the driveway because the tow truck was not able to maneuver into the driveway in order to retrieve that vehicle.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as during any time that you were on scene or at this residence in Dighton, did you yourself or did you observe Trooper Proctor touch that vehicle at any point in any way while you were there?
MR. BUKHENIK: No.
MR. LALLY: And did you observe Officer Barros or any other personnel beyond the tow truck driver touch the vehicle in any way?
MR. BUKHENIK: No.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the tow truck driver was concerned, did you observe that individual touch anywhere in the rear passenger side area of that vehicle at any time that you were there?
MR. BUKHENIK: No.
MR. LALLY: So then you proceed inside the home, and when you get inside the home, where did you go and who if anyone did you speak to?
MR. BUKHENIK: We were directed by Mr. Read to the living room where the defendant was seated on the couch. She had her laptop on her lap and her phone resting on the right armrest of the couch.
MR. LALLY: Now in addition to the defendant and her father, who if anyone else was present when you talked to Miss Read?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant's mother, Mrs. Read, was also present in the home.
MR. LALLY: And the defendant's mother and the defendant's father, were they present throughout the course of your interview or your discussion with Miss Read?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, they were.
MR. LALLY: And at any point in time did you ask them to leave or anything like that?
PARENTHETICAL: [sidebar]
JUDGE CANNONE: You did. All right, so I interrupted you, Sergeant, and I'm going to instruct you jurors. Okay, we're about to hear testimony about statements allegedly made by the defendant Karen Read, allegedly concerning the crimes that are charged in this case. Before you may even consider any such statement as evidence, the Commonwealth must prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant made the statement that she's alleged to have made and that she made it voluntarily, freely, and rationally. In determining whether any statement made by the defendant was voluntary or not, you may consider all the surrounding circumstances.
MR. BUKHENIK: I did not, no.
MR. LALLY: Now, can you describe sort of the demeanor or the tone of the conversation that you had with Miss Read?
MR. BUKHENIK: It was polite, courteous. She had just went through a traumatic event, so we were considerate of her losing her boyfriend and we had a normal tone conversation. We were in the information gathering, fact finding portion of the investigation. We simply wanted to collect her recollection of events that she remembered.
MR. LALLY: And so throughout the course of this interview, are you standing, are you seated, or how are you positioned in relation to Miss Read and how is she positioned in relation to you?
MR. BUKHENIK: She was sitting on the couch. We were standing across the room. I don't recall if there was a coffee table, but if there was a coffee table we would be standing on the opposite side of that coffee table if there was one present. I do not remember if there was one present, but that's the distance approximately from me to the defense table.
MR. LALLY: And if you could describe to the jury sort of how did that interview or how did that conversation begin — what was said?
MR. BUKHENIK: First things first we introduced ourselves, advised the individual we're speaking with who we are, where we work, and what we're looking to find out. The defendant was advised that we're looking to get a recollection of the events — what happened, what she observed, what she remembers from the night before — and to walk us through the last 24 hours or so of activity.
JUDGE CANNONE: Prior — do I need to give an instruction, Mr. Lally?
MR. LALLY: I'm not sure exactly.
JUDGE CANNONE: Why don't I see counsel at sidebar for a minute.
JUDGE CANNONE: These include when and where the statement was made, the [unintelligible] of any conversations with the police or questioning by the police, and the defendant's physical and mental condition including her intelligence, age, education, experience, and personality. Your decision does not turn upon any one factor. You must consider the totality of the surrounding circumstances. I'll instruct you about this again at the end of the case, but for purposes of as you hear the testimony, that's the lens that you have to sort of hear it through. All right, with that, Mr. Lally, thank you.
MR. LALLY: Now, Sergeant Bukhenik, when you began to speak to the defendant, prior to any sort of substantive conversation, what if any conversation did you have with her about the conversation you were going to have?
MR. BUKHENIK: I just asked her to recount any events and the history between the actions that were taking place.
MR. LALLY: And how did she initially respond to that?
MR. BUKHENIK: She stated that she's willing to answer our questions, she just doesn't want to go into too much detail about what transpired. And given the circumstances that she had just lived through, I understood and gave her that courtesy.
MR. LALLY: And as far as that interview, where that conversation went, can you describe that conversation or the content of that conversation to the jury?
MR. BUKHENIK: Absolutely. The conversation was normal tone of voice, like I am speaking to you right now. Miss Read responded in the same tone of voice, answered questions. The content of the conversation began with her saying that — as I stated — she doesn't want to go into too much detail but she was willing to answer our questions. We asked what she had had for plans, what she had as far as activity the night before leading up to Mr. O'Keefe being discovered. She stated that she was in a relationship with Mr. O'Keefe. That morning — meaning the 28th of January — she got into a fight with Mr. O'Keefe over what the niece and nephew were being fed for breakfast. She went on to say that she met Mr. O'Keefe at C.F. McCarthy's approximately 9:00 p.m. the night of the 28th of January 2022.
MR. BUKHENIK: She stated that the gentlemen were drinking, consuming beers — Bud Lights — and she was drinking vodka soda prior to moving on to the bar at Waterfall. The defendant was asked where she parked her vehicle, and she told me that she parked her vehicle on Washington Street, across the street from C.F. McCarthy's, facing northbound, so the vehicle was on the side of Waterfall Bar and Grill. We went on through the conversation — the interview — to the Waterfall restaurant, at which point she was asked if she left C.F. McCarthy's with a beverage or a container from that establishment, to which she stated that she did not. She also confirmed that Mr. O'Keefe did not have any injuries on him when she interacted with him at C.F. McCarthy's or the Waterfall.
MR. BUKHENIK: He did not get into any verbal or physical altercations with anyone to have sustained those injuries. She stated that once at the Waterfall, they stayed for approximately an hour, hanging out with acquaintances, and then they left the Waterfall. She drove them — after they were invited to a residence — she drove them to a location in Canton where she dropped Mr. O'Keefe off. She was asked if she saw Mr. O'Keefe walk into the home at 34 Fairview, and she stated she did not. She stated that she made a three-point turn after dropping him off and left. She was asked — excuse me, let me back up — she was asked how she found out about the damage to her vehicle, to which she stated, quote, "I don't know, it happened last night," end quote.
MR. LALLY: Now, at some point earlier in the interview, what if any indication did she give as to who Mr. O'Keefe was with when she arrived at C.F. McCarthy's, and sort of how long he had been with those respective people?
MR. BUKHENIK: She indicated that Mr. O'Keefe was with Mr. Camerano and Curt Roberts, at which point she was asked to provide contact information — meaning phone numbers — for those individuals. At that time she picked up the phone on the right armrest of the couch, manipulated the device, entering a passcode, and provided that phone number to Trooper Proctor and I.
MR. LALLY: At any point in time in the conversation or interview you had with her, what if anything did the defendant say in regard to why she had not gone into the residence at Fairview Road herself?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant stated that she was having stomach issues and did not want to enter the residence.
MR. LALLY: Now what if anything did she tell you about later on that morning of the 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: She stated that when she woke up she began looking for Mr. O'Keefe, and when she found him in the snow she began CPR on Mr. O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: And what if anything did she say to you about any observations she made of Mr. O'Keefe later on that morning, as far as any injuries to Mr. O'Keefe?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant stated that while she was performing CPR, Mr. O'Keefe had sustained injuries and was bleeding from the nose and the mouth.
MR. LALLY: And if you recall, what if anything did she say about Mr. O'Keefe's eyes at that time?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant stated that Mr. O'Keefe's eyes were swollen.
MR. LALLY: Is that both eyes, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, as the interview progressed, at some point did you ask questions seeking further details?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes I did.
MR. LALLY: And details about what specifically were you asking?
MR. BUKHENIK: Once we got to the point in time where the defendant told me she did a three-point turn, I asked her to walk through step by step her operating the vehicle and exactly what she did. Prior to that I asked — excuse me — she was asked to give a step-by-step recollection of what she did maneuvering the vehicle and leaving the scene.
MR. LALLY: And at that point was the interview terminated?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes it was.
MR. LALLY: Now once the interview concluded or was terminated, what if anything did you do with reference to Miss Read's phone and the defendant's vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Once the interview was terminated, I advised Miss Read that her phone was going to be seized as evidence, and her vehicle was going to be seized as evidence as well.
MR. LALLY: And did you subsequently seize both of those items, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes we did.
MR. LALLY: And similar to Mr. O'Keefe's clothing, as far as evidence was concerned, was that packaged and taped and transported back to the office in a similar fashion?
MR. BUKHENIK: The vehicle was transported via tow truck that was dispatched by Dighton PD on our request.
MR. LALLY: And so when you got back outside of the residence after the conclusion of your interview with the defendant, what if anything did you observe going on with regard to the driveway and or any other vehicles that weren't there when you went into the house?
MR. BUKHENIK: During our interview I glanced out the window and I saw flashing amber lights and a tow truck plowing the driveway. So the driveway was plowed — and the tow truck was — excuse me, the plow truck was plowing the driveway, not the tow truck — and the tow truck was loading the vehicle onto the flatbed.
MR. LALLY: And at any point in time when you were outside of the residence, what if any observations did you make as far as cameras or anything like that on the exterior of the home?
MR. BUKHENIK: I did not see cameras on the exterior of the home at that point in time.
MR. LALLY: Subsequent to that, did you become aware that there were exterior cameras that record on the exterior of the home in Dighton?
MR. BUKHENIK: Subsequently, yes. We learned that there was video recording of the residence and the driveway.
MR. LALLY: Your Honor, may I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you a disc. Do you recognize that, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: I recognize it to be Dighton videos as it relates to the location where the interview and the vehicle was seized from.
MR. LALLY: And what's contained on that — as far as the videos are concerned, is that a fair and accurate portrayal of what you observed as far as the defendant's vehicle being loaded onto a tow truck?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes it is.
MR. LALLY: Thank you.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. [Exhibit admitted]
MR. LALLY: And, Judge, with the Court's permission, if I could publish those two short clips for the jury?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. If you could click on and then pause when you need to. Keep your voice up.
MR. LALLY: Yes. To tech You can pause right there, please. Now, Sergeant Bukhenik, from this particular point of the video, the vehicle that has just pulled into the driveway —
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Is that the same driveway that you had walked up from the street to the house in Dighton that morning?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes it is.
MR. LALLY: As far as the vehicle is concerned, what do you recognize that vehicle to be?
PARENTHETICAL: [Pause in playback]
MR. BUKHENIK: That would be the Lexus SUV owned by the defendant, bearing Massachusetts registration 3GC684.
PARENTHETICAL: [Pause in playback]
MR. LALLY: If you pause right there. Two individuals just exited that vehicle, is that correct, Sergeant?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Do you recognize who those individuals are as far as who they are from what part of the vehicle they exited?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. The passenger side exit was the defendant, and the driver side of the vehicle was Mr. Read's father.
PARENTHETICAL: [Pause]
MR. LALLY: You can take that down. Now, Sergeant Bukhenik, as far as when you left the residence in Dighton, where is it that you went?
MR. LALLY: Is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, towards the end of that video, did you observe the defendant and her father in any specific area in relation to that vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. I observed the defendant and her father at the rear right tail light, gesturing or signaling towards the affected, damaged, and missing parts of the tail light.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow just the direction that they were signaling at.
MR. LALLY: Direction. Okay. As far as that vehicle's position within the driveway, is that essentially the position that you observed it in when you and Trooper Proctor were walking up the driveway in Dighton?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes it was.
MR. LALLY: Again, Sergeant Bukhenik, if you could describe to the jury what you observe of significance within this particular video.
MR. BUKHENIK: This video captures the vehicle being moved into position to be loaded up onto the flatbed for transport from the scene.
JUDGE CANNONE: You really have to keep your voice up.
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Sergeant Bukhenik, from this still image from this video, what if anything of significance do you observe in relation to the vehicle at this time that is being loaded onto the tow truck?
MR. BUKHENIK: The rear tail light is illuminated. You could see a white light coming from that tail light.
MR. LALLY: If you could, using that laser pointer, just direct the jury's attention to the specific area you're talking about. Right there.
JUDGE CANNONE: Can we turn the lights on, Mr. Lally?
MR. LALLY: Yes, my apologies.
MR. BUKHENIK: Once we left the residence in Dighton, we proceeded following the tow truck back to the Canton Police Department.
MR. LALLY: And was there anywhere else that either you or the tow truck went between Dighton and the Canton Police Department?
MR. BUKHENIK: No sir.
MR. LALLY: And when you say "we," it's yourself and Trooper Proctor, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now once you arrived at the Canton Police Department, where did the vehicle go?
MR. BUKHENIK: The vehicle was loaded and put into a heated sally port located at the Canton Police Department.
MR. LALLY: And in reference to the Canton Police Department and putting it in the sallyport, why was it that it was taken to that location?
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
PARENTHETICAL: [video plays]
MR. LALLY: Thank you, Your Honor. No objection.
MR. BUKHENIK: It's a location that serves as storage for a vehicle that would suffice for the size of the vehicle. The location, as it related to the crime that took place and was investigated, was in that town, so we utilized their facility. It was also a heated facility to help melt the snow that had been accumulating on the vehicle.
MR. LALLY: And at some point subsequent to this, did you learn that there are exterior cameras of the Canton Police Department as well as cameras within the sallyport garage area?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes I did.
MR. LALLY: And have you reviewed each of those respective cameras for your testimony here today?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes I have.
MR. LALLY: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you a disc, Sergeant — [unintelligible] — Do you recognize that, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: The Canton Police Department driveway with video.
MR. LALLY: And what's contained on that? Is that a fair and accurate portrayal of yourself and the tow truck pulling into the Canton Police Department driveway on that afternoon or early evening of January 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it is.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Seek to introduce next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. With the Court's permission, publish that video.
MR. LALLY: Just for reference points — in regard to this view of this camera, Sergeant, you're familiar with Canton Police Station?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I am.
MR. LALLY: And so where is this camera view in relation to the Canton Police Department sallyport garage where the vehicle eventually goes?
MR. BUKHENIK: This camera is capturing the driveway entrance to the Canton Police Department as viewed from Washington Street. That driveway there is on the left side of the structure. The camera itself is pointing towards the entrance of the driveway to the Canton Police Department. As you can see, the brake light illuminated in the shot — that is a Canton police cruiser sitting at the edge of the driveway right by Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: So for orientation purposes, as far as the tow truck and your vehicle, is that coming from the top of the screen to the bottom, or the bottom to —
MR. BUKHENIK: It's coming from the top left to the bottom right of the screen, towards the rear of the building where the sallyport is located.
MR. LALLY: What's depicted in this still shot on this video, Sergeant? What, if anything, do you observe?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is the tow truck transporting the defendant's vehicle arriving at Canton PD. My vehicle, with Trooper Proctor inside — me operating — are following closely behind, as we did the entire way from Dighton all the way to Canton PD.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the interior of the sallyport garage —
COURT OFFICER: Put the lights on.
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you.
MR. LALLY: As far as the interior sallyport of the garage, you mentioned that that is a heated area. Is that correct?
PARENTHETICAL: [video plays]
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the heat within that, do you know how that is produced, or how hot it gets in there as far as the time that you spent within there?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do not know, but it was a standard garage heating system that blows hot air. As far as temperature — when the doors were open that day, it was freezing cold. It was, I believe, like 18 degrees, with winds blowing. So inside the sallyport with the doors open, it was quite cold. Once the door shut, the temperature rose above freezing, and the snow began to melt off of the vehicle.
MR. LALLY: And from the arrival of that vehicle into the sallyport garage area, have you reviewed video in reference to that?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: Your Honor, may I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Showing you another disc, sir. Just ask you to review that. Are you finished?
MR. BUKHENIK: reviews disc
PARENTHETICAL: [bench conference]
PARENTHETICAL: [break]
JUDGE CANNONE: We're going to take a short afternoon break. On our long days, in about a half an hour, but I think the better use of our time is to give you a 10-minute break now, and then we'll go straight through till 4:00. If anybody needs a break —
MR. LALLY: Do you recognize that, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And does that contain the video that you were just testifying about, as far as the arrival of the vehicle at the Canton Police Department sallyport garage?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it is.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. May I approach, Your Honor?
PARENTHETICAL: [unidentified]
JUDGE CANNONE: : Okay, thank you, Your Honor.
PARENTHETICAL: [break]
PARENTHETICAL: [video plays]
JUDGE CANNONE: Back. All right, so we're ready to pick right up where we left off.
PARENTHETICAL: [unidentified]
PARENTHETICAL: [pause — laughter; someone nearly fell in the video]
JUDGE CANNONE: : We're ready. Thank you. So I'll just be clear — the objection is overruled, Mr. Jackson.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Move to introduce. No objection. Sergeant, before we get to that video, if I could just ask — if you know approximately what time it was that you left Dighton following that tow truck back to the Canton Police Department?
MR. BUKHENIK: We left Dighton approximately 4:15, 4:20, and we followed the vehicle back to Canton, arriving probably around 5:30 or so p.m.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. Your Honor, with the Court's permission, if we could publish that video for the jury.
PARENTHETICAL: [video plays]
MR. LALLY: Sergeant Bukhenik, from what you're observing in this video — what you've seen, or what you recall from this — what is it that you and Trooper Proctor and some of the other officers are doing?
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Could you just pause there for a moment? Sergeant, direct your attention up to the video on the screen. Just for orientation purposes again — first of all, do you recognize what's depicted in this video?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: What do you recognize?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is the sallyport two-bay garage at Canton Police Department, with the antique Canton cruiser on the bottom of the screen, and the open spot for a vehicle in the middle of the screen, with the four-wheel drive all-terrain vehicle at the top.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as for orientation purposes, the driveway that the jury just witnessed in the prior exhibit — is that to the left of the screen, the right of the screen, or something else?
MR. BUKHENIK: The driveway is to the right of the screen.
MR. LALLY: And this vehicle — the defendant's vehicle — is it being taken into the garage from the opposite side, or the left of the screen?
MR. BUKHENIK: Correct.
MR. LALLY: If you could — do you want me to approach briefly?
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Could you pause that, Miss Gilman.
COURT OFFICER: All rise for the court. Please follow me.
MR. LALLY: May I get just a little closer?
JUDGE CANNONE: Sure.
MR. LALLY: Can we turn out the lights, please? [lights dim — video plays] [video ends]
JUDGE CANNONE: Is that the end of it, Mr. Woll?
JUDGE CANNONE: Is that the end of it, Miss Gilman? Okay, all right. Lights on, please. lights on All right, so I have a copy of the printed docket on letter-size paper. Number 347 was the Commonwealth's notice of discovery. I just asked Mr. McDermott to print it for me — our printer up here doesn't work. All right, so that was before we impaneled — that was the day, I believe, of the long motion and [unintelligible] hearing. All right, so we'll take a five-minute break.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you.
MR. LALLY: Sergeant, we're going to start up again with the video. Your Honor, for the record, I believe we're picking up where it was paused, which was at 5:35:36.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Could you pause right there? And Sergeant, as far as the condition of the vehicle as you observe it in this sort of paused still shot of the video — is that a fair and accurate portrayal of the condition, as far as the snow or ice or anything you observe on that vehicle when it came into the sallyport garage?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it is.
MR. LALLY: Could you just pause for a moment?
JUDGE CANNONE: Keep your voice up.
MR. LALLY: Sergeant Bukhenik, with reference to any individuals you see in this video, do you recognize any of those individuals?
MR. BUKHENIK: I can recognize Trooper Proctor and myself. Other than that, I don't remember exactly who else was present at this moment in time.
MR. LALLY: If you could, using the laser pointer, just direct the jury's attention to where you yourself are and where Trooper Proctor is. witness uses laser pointer And at any point in time when you were present with this vehicle in the sallyport garage this evening of January 2022, did either you yourself, or did you observe Trooper Proctor, touch or manipulate in any way the right rear passenger side area?
MR. BUKHENIK: No, we did not.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if you could play from here.
MR. BUKHENIK: We're establishing a perimeter around the vehicle with yellow tape in order to prevent — or alert and advise — anyone in the area to stay away from the vehicle.
MR. LALLY: You can take that down. Officer, we can have the lights back on now. Sergeant Bukhenik, you were aware of a warrant that was executed on that vehicle on February 1st of 2022?
MR. BUKHENIK: I am aware.
MR. LALLY: And you yourself were not present for that. Is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: I was not. present for the execution, no sir.
MR. LALLY: Trooper Proctor was, as far as you're aware, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, the next time that you were within the Canton Police Department sallyport garage with the vehicle was on February 2nd, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And on that day, where did the vehicle go from the police station?
MR. BUKHENIK: From the Canton police station, I escorted the vehicle to the Milton Barracks for safekeeping.
MR. LALLY: And why was it taken from the Canton police station on February 2nd to the Milton Police barracks? What had occurred in the intervening period between January 29th and February 2nd?
MR. BUKHENIK: The Canton Police Department had recused themselves from interviews and that portion of the investigation, and now that the vehicle had been processed, we needed to free up the Canton sallyport so they could utilize that facility for transporting prisoners to their facility and booking. So we stored the now-processed vehicle back at the Milton Barracks in an unheated garage.
MR. LALLY: And, your honor, with the Court's permission, if I could publish just a very brief portion of what's been marked as Exhibit 34?
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Which is the Canton Police Department sallyport garage camera.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, what you have up there — I'm sorry — February 2nd, 2022, approximately 8:09 a.m. I'm just going to ask you to play that through until about 8:10:26. Sergeant, just for orientation purposes, again, this is another camera from within the same sallyport garage, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct. That's the opposite view from what we just viewed in the previous video.
MR. LALLY: And as far as any of the people within this video, do you recognize any of the individuals in there?
MR. BUKHENIK: I believe that's myself, and then another officer — I don't know who that other officer is.
MR. LALLY: And just again, using the laser pointer, if you could draw attention to where you see yourself. And as far as the condition of the vehicle — from January 29th when you saw it on that day, to February 2nd when you saw it on that day — as far as the exterior of the vehicle, what if anything was different, or what if anything did you note or observe?
MR. BUKHENIK: I noted the tail light removed and the evidence collected.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the snow and the ice that you observed on that prior day, was that still present on February 2nd?
MR. BUKHENIK: No, that had melted away.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if you would — I'm sorry — just play through to 8:10:26. And you can take that down, and it's off, so we can have the lights back on. Thank you. Now, Sergeant Bukhenik, with regard to Mr. O'Keefe's house at One Meadows Avenue in Canton, at some point did you become aware, throughout the course of your investigation, that there were exterior cameras fixed to that residence as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: And those were Ring cameras, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, with respect to the investigation, what if any steps were taken in order to secure any of that footage from the exterior of the house from Ring?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: No, I'll allow it.
MR. BUKHENIK: We applied for multiple search warrants.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right, I'll see you at sidebar on this. audio muted
MR. LALLY: And so, sir, during the course — let me ask you this. As far as this or any other investigation is concerned, how is it that members of your unit sort of work through an investigation or work on a case?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: No, I'm going to allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: As a case comes in, we address each case on an individual basis based on the evidence that is presented through testimony and physical evidence that is recovered. That is what guides our investigations, and we then develop leads and process information collected. Sometimes information needs to be collected from third-party holders of data or service providers, at which point, to access that data, we apply for search warrants, which are guided —
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay, leave it, move on from that. Thank you.
MR. LALLY: So you apply for search warrants — we'll move on from that. So, Sergeant, my question is more geared towards, as far as individual personnel within your unit, how is an investigation conducted? Is it one Trooper does everything, or is it a collaborative effort? How is that?
MR. BUKHENIK: The reason I say "we" is because every investigation takes the entire unit typically to put an effort in — to conduct interviews, analysis, and so forth. So it's a team effort each and every time. No investigation is a one-man show. That's why we call it a "case officer," not a "lead investigator," because the case officer organizes the individuals to assign different tasks and collect and organize the data that comes back from the third-party providers and from the interviews that are conducted.
MR. LALLY: As far as the interviews that are conducted through the course of this or any other investigation, is there ever an interview that's conducted by just one Trooper or one person, in any investigation that you've done with this unit?
MR. BUKHENIK: No. We conduct interviews with two people, whether it's a trooper and a local detective, or two Troopers assigned to our office, other State Police agents, units within the agency.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the case officer, who was the case officer on this particular investigation?
MR. BUKHENIK: The case officer on this investigation was Trooper Michael Proctor.
MR. LALLY: And Trooper Proctor works under your supervision, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: So as far as a search warrant for the Ring video from One Meadows Avenue, who specifically sat down, put pen to paper, and wrote the search warrant?
MR. BUKHENIK: Trooper Proctor is the affiant.
MR. LALLY: And as far as from that search warrant, are you aware of the materials that were provided by Ring in response to that search warrant?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'm going to allow it.
MR. BUKHENIK: I am aware of it.
MR. LALLY: And have you reviewed both the material as well as the videos that were provided by Ring in response to that search?
MR. BUKHENIK: I did.
MR. LALLY: Now, with reference to those with reference to those videos specifically — did you observe — if you know — with respect to those videos, how were they sort of ordered sequentially, in the manner in which they were provided, as far as date, time —
JUDGE CANNONE: Ask it differently. Ask it differently, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: So the videos that you received from Ring — that you reviewed?
MR. BUKHENIK: Correct.
MR. LALLY: Yes?
MR. BUKHENIK: I did.
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: No, I'll allow that. So he's reviewed videos from Ring. Next question.
MR. LALLY: What if any information did they contain as far as date or time?
MR. BUKHENIK: The data provided back from Ring — provided videos — there was no date and time on the labeling of the unique identifier for each video, but it was presented in a sequential order, knowing that the last video presented from the provider was the last video within the scope of our request, and the first one being the first in that timeline.
MR. LALLY: In the scope of your request — the scope of the request of the warrant — what time frame are we talking about?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow that.
MR. BUKHENIK: The first warrant — we requested from January 24th at midnight through January 30th at midnight.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to those videos that were provided, you reviewed each of those, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And, your honor, with the Court's permission, I would ask to publish certain of those videos for the —
JUDGE CANNONE: So, are these — why don't we come to sidebar? audio muted audio unmuted
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could have — from what's been previously marked as Exhibit 6 — our first video, number 119. If you could pause there, Miss Gilman. Now, with reference to this particular video number 119 in Exhibit 6, Sergeant, what if anything can you tell the jury as far as the timing of this particular video based on the appearance of the driveway?
MR. BUKHENIK: We know that this recording took place prior to the blizzard of January 29th.
MR. LALLY: And as far as anything that you observe in this video as far as vehicles or people within those vehicles, what if anything did you observe within this vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: I observed Mr. O'Keefe's car parked in the same location, as he typically parked it, and then —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll strike "as he typically parked it."
MR. BUKHENIK: And then a black SUV parked perpendicularly to Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle, adjacent to the entryway to the garage.
MR. LALLY: Pause there. At some point in the course of your viewing of this video — the video surrounding it — were you able to identify the operator of the black SUV?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. That is the defendant operating her black in color Lexus SUV, bearing Massachusetts plate 3GC684.
MR. LALLY: And now, Sergeant Bukhenik, you're also aware, from your review of the Ring videos from One Meadows Avenue, of another video depicting the defendant leaving the house sometime shortly after 5:00 a.m. on January 29th?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I am.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could also from Exhibit 6 — ask for video 3. You can just pause there for a moment. Now, Sergeant, with reference to this video and the one just previously, number 119, where is Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle parked in relation — vis-à-vis the other?
MR. BUKHENIK: The vehicle's parked in the back corner of the driveway along the fence, in the same location as it's parked in the previous video.
MR. LALLY: And at some point, do you see the defendant's vehicle back out of the garage in the same directionality that it did in the prior video 119?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, you — —do.
MR. LALLY: Pause there for a second. Now, as far as the operator of that vehicle, are you able to observe who that operator is within that vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: I observe the vehicle being operated. I cannot identify who the individual is.
MR. LALLY: And then from that shot right there — at any point in the shot or the video that you observed, are we able to recognize the operator?
MR. BUKHENIK: Not from that shot, no.
MR. LALLY: Now, with respect to the timing of this video, what time in the morning is this video?
MR. BUKHENIK: The timing of this video is approximately 5:07 a.m., when the defendant left the home through the garage via her vehicle.
MR. LALLY: Now, from this particular paused portion of the video, Sergeant, what if anything of significance do you observe within the still shot of this portion of video 153?
MR. BUKHENIK: The portion of this video and the still shot presented identifies a missing, damaged rear right tail light, exposing the white light coming from the right side of that tail light.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, using the laser pointer, draw the jury's attention to what you're talking about as far as that area. Now, earlier in that video, did you observe the defendant's vehicle coming close to or coming into contact with Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: And as far as Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle, at least from this video, what if any damage did you observe to Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: No damage.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the ground area around where Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle is parked, specifically the rear of that vehicle, what if any red pieces or anything did you observe on the ground around Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Nothing was observed.
MR. LALLY: If you can press— And Miss Gilman, from Exhibit 6, if I could have video number 165. If you can pause there, please. And Sergeant, have you reviewed this video as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I have.
MR. LALLY: And timewise, in relation to January 29th, approximately when is this video?
MR. BUKHENIK: It's approximately 12:30 in the afternoon.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the vehicles in the foreground area from this particular camera shot, do you know whose vehicles those are?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes. The vehicle on the top left corner is Mr. O'Keefe's vehicle, the vehicle in the middle left is the defendant's vehicle, and I do not know who the other two vehicles are.
MR. LALLY: If you can press — pause there just for a moment. And from the two individuals exiting from that vehicle, do you recognize who those individuals are?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, just using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to whom you recognize and identify who that person is.
MR. BUKHENIK: That there is the defendant, and that there is Mr. Read, the defendant's father.
MR. LALLY: Is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could press— Thank you. Miss Gilman, if you could pull up video 166 from the same Exhibit 6. If you pause there just for a moment — Sergeant, do you recognize the person that just exited from that vehicle, behind the defendant's vehicle?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: Who do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant's brother.
MR. LALLY: If you can press play. Thank you. Miss Gilman, if I could have from the same Exhibit 6, video 171. You can take that down, Mr. Officer. We can have the lights back on. Sergeant, from your review of those videos, at various points you observed the defendant's brother cleaning off the defendant's car, correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: At any point in time, did you observe the defendant's brother cleaning off the area of the right rear passenger side's tail light of the defendant's car?
MR. BUKHENIK: I did not.
MR. LALLY: Now Sergeant, turning your attention to February 1st of 2022 — yourself and Trooper Connor Keith, is that someone you're familiar with?
MR. BUKHENIK: I am.
MR. LALLY: And he works within your unit as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, he does.
MR. LALLY: And at some point, did you and Trooper Keith on that day go to the C.F. McCarthy's establishment?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, we did.
MR. LALLY: And what was the purpose of your visit to C.F. McCarthy's on that day?
MR. BUKHENIK: The purpose of our visit was to retrieve surveillance video during the target time in question that we knew the victim and the defendant had visited that establishment, also any transaction receipts that we could collect from that location.
MR. LALLY: And were you able to retrieve both video as well as transaction receipts from that establishment?
MR. BUKHENIK: We were.
MR. LALLY: And — I'm sorry, my apologies — before I get into that, may I approach the witness, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And Sergeant, I'm showing you a series of 14 photographs, or still shots. If you could just look at those and look up when you're finished. Do you recognize those, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize those to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: I recognize these to be still photographs of the Ring video that we just watched, and that would be video 153 — the one with the defendant backing out sometime after 5:00 a.m. on January 29th.
MR. LALLY: That's correct. Can I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Move to introduce and admit as the next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. JACKSON: No objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you.
COURT CLERK: Forty-seven. Thank you.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. Thank you so much, Your Honor. With the Court's permission, may I publish just a couple of these photographs? Miss Gilman, if I could have photograph number 30. And Sergeant, do you recognize what's up on the screen now as Exhibit 456?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could just move towards the rear of the vehicle — have a moment. Yes. And Sergeant, what's up on the screen now — if you could direct the jury's attention with that laser pointer to the area of the rear passenger side tail light that you were describing damage in. Thank you. Just — you can take that. Thank you, sir. Mr. Officer, you can have the lights back up. Thank you, sir. So Sergeant — I'm sorry — back on February 1st, to C.F. McCarthy's — you secured video and receipts from that establishment on that day?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the video and receipts, were you then able to subsequently review those at some point?
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: I ask pause just — as far as the individuals around Mr. O'Keefe and Mr. Camerano, do you observe or recognize anybody else in the bar area around them at this time?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I was.
MR. LALLY: Now, first starting with respect to the video — you may approach.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you two photographs, still shots. Just ask you to look at those, look up when we finish. Did you recognize those, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize those to be?
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: pause there. Now from your review of this video what if anything of significance do you observe in this part of the video?
MR. BUKHENIK: Those are still shots of the C.F. McCarthy's surveillance video that we collected from the establishment, from the dining room camera angle.
MR. LALLY: May I approach again, Your Honor?
MR. JACKSON: No objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Move to introduce and admit as the next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, Your Honor. With the Court's permission, if I could ask those be published to the jury at this point.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: Sergeant, again from that about one minute portion from that video, what if anything of significance did you observe the defendant receive and do with any items?
MR. LALLY: And Sergeant, do you recognize what's up on the screen?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, using the laser pointer, draw the jury's attention to what if anything of significance you observe in this still shot from C.F. McCarthy's.
MR. BUKHENIK: We observe the victim, Mr. John O'Keefe, here — appears to be communicating with the defendant here. Mr. Camerano is over here as well. Mr. Sullivan is down here as well. Mr. O'Keefe is wearing the gray, light two-tone sweatshirt that I held up earlier, as well as the jeans and the—
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: thank you Miss Gilman. So Sergeant, from this particular video, what if anything of significance do you observe the defendant receiving during this time
MR. LALLY: And the next — excuse me, Sergeant, you—
MR. BUKHENIK: Recognize what's depicted in this still shot here? Yes, it's again the victim on the other side of the defendant, still dressed in the same outfit, and the defendant standing in front of them.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the bar area adjacent to the defendant, what if anything of significance do you note there?
MR. BUKHENIK: The bar area is located near the taps, the draft beer taps at C.F. McCarthy's. So if you were to look at the bar from the street, that is the left side of the bar, orientation on the way to the restrooms.
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: if you could pause there for just a moment — I'm going to ask you to play this until about 27:40. plays thank you Miss Gilman. During that period Sergeant, what if anything of significance did you observe the defendant to receive during that time frame?
MR. LALLY: And I'm sorry, I should have been more specific — as far as the sort of shelf of the bar immediately adjacent to the defendant's left arm, what if anything do you observe there?
MR. BUKHENIK: I observe a cylindrical vase-style cocktail glass on the bar, as well as other beer bottles.
MR. LALLY: You can take that down. With reference to the C.F. McCarthy's video, with the Court's permission I would ask to publish certain portions of that — it's already been marked as Exhibit 50.
JUDGE CANNONE: okay.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if you could, from the first video, if I could ask you to pull it up to about 7 minutes and 50 seconds. And Miss Gilman if you could pause just a moment — I'm just going to ask you to play from 7:50 to about 8 minutes and 20 seconds in, but I may ask you to pause it. if you pause there. Sergeant, as far as just — again for orientation purposes — with reference to the entrance or exit point, the ingress/egress of the bar, do you observe that somewhere within this video?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, at the top of the screen is the front door to C.F. McCarthy's bar. And as we just viewed, the two gentlemen walking in — they walked in through the front door heading to the taps area, the draft beer location of the bar.
MR. LALLY: And if you could just, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to that front door area you're talking about.
MR. BUKHENIK: The front door area is located right here.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to those two individuals that came in, do you recognize those two individuals?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, that is the victim Mr. John O'Keefe dressed in the same outfit as before, and Mr. Camerano.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could ask you from the same exhibit — same Exhibit 50 — from the third video now, if I could ask you to go about 6 minutes and 10 seconds in. And I'm going to ask you to play that till about 6 minutes and 43 seconds.
MR. BUKHENIK: Mr. O'Keefe is sitting next to Mr. Camerano. I believe Mr. Curt Roberts is there as well, next to Mr. Camerano.
MR. LALLY: Now from this time we're at about 8:51 p.m. or so within the video, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Now as far as the time stamp on this video, what if any information were you provided when you retrieved this video on February 1st, in relation to that time and its accuracy — for what time was during video surveillance extraction?
MR. BUKHENIK: We verify the time and date on the system, and that is to show us how far behind in the past or in the future — sometimes devices are timestamped as in the future; it hasn't happened yet in real time but the video is stamped — so what we do is prior to extracting video, we identify the difference in time between real time and video time. In this case C.F. McCarthy's video was 12 minutes behind real time.
MR. LALLY: And thank you. And Miss Gilman if you could play this till about six minutes — just pause there briefly. As far as anyone else within the area of the bar, Roberts, anyone else you recognize in that area at this time?
MR. BUKHENIK: I recognize the defendant walking in and interacting with the victim Mr. John O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman if you could, within that same video three, I would ask you to go to about 13 minutes and 15 seconds. I'm going to ask you to play from here to about 14 minutes and 45 seconds.
MR. BUKHENIK: This part of the video I observed the defendant reaching over and retrieving a cylindrical tall cocktail glass from the bartender.
MR. LALLY: And again given the understanding that the video is about 12 minutes off as far as the time stamp, the defendant entered about 8:51 p.m. and is receiving this drink about 8:58 p.m. — is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And if you could — Miss Gilman if you could go up to about 32 minutes in the same video, and I'm going to ask you to play that for the next 30 seconds or so, to about 32 minutes and 30 seconds. and Sergeant, during that about 30 seconds or so, what if anything of significance did you observe?
MR. BUKHENIK: The defendant to receive at that point a cylindrical cocktail glass.
MR. LALLY: And so that would be the second drink, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And that's at approximately 9:15 p.m., is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman if you could go forward to about 37 minutes into this same video, if you could play that for about the next minute or so, about 38 minutes.
MR. BUKHENIK: She received the shot glass beverage and poured it into the tall cylindrical cocktail glass, and then Mr. John O'Keefe stirred it for her.
MR. LALLY: And so that would now be the third drink, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is correct.
MR. LALLY: And that's about 9:20 p.m., is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman if I could direct you to the fourth video, video number four, and ask you to go about 50 seconds into this video. And I'm going to ask you to play this Miss Gilman from 50 seconds to about 13.
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. LALLY: for the time stamp — I'm sorry — now from this portion of the video, Sergeant, what if anything do you observe the defendant and Mr. O'Keefe doing in reference to —
MR. BUKHENIK: She receives another shot glass beverage and then places that liquid into her tall cocktail glass and stacks the second shot glass into the first shot glass — into the first tall cylindrical cocktail glass she had previously received and consumed.
MR. LALLY: So this would now be the fourth drink, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is correct.
MR. LALLY: And per the video that's about 9:33 p.m., is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is correct.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman within this same video if I could ask you to go to about 26 minutes and 30 seconds.
MR. BUKHENIK: She received a tall cylindrical cocktail glass.
MR. LALLY: And in addition to that, what if anything else did she receive from the bartender during that time?
MR. BUKHENIK: A shot glass — shot glass size beverage.
MR. LALLY: And what if anything did she do with the shot glass in regard to the larger cylindrical glass?
MR. BUKHENIK: It was placed inside the tall cylindrical cocktail glass.
MR. LALLY: So that would be drink five and six, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: And per the time stamp on the bar video this is now about 9:57 p.m. is that correct?
PARENTHETICAL: [sidebar]
JUDGE CANNONE: returning from sidebar
MR. BUKHENIK: Correct.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman if I could direct you to video number five and ask you to go to about 3 minutes in, and ask you to play that till about 3:30 or so. plays and if I could ask you to go to about 10 minutes and 30 seconds in, and I would ask you to play that for about a minute, to about 11:30 or so. plays thank you. So Sergeant — [unintelligible] — and during this portion of the video, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's —
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, sustained. You can ask it differently.
MR. LALLY: What if anything of significance did you observe the defendant and/or the group that she was with do in this portion of the video?
MR. BUKHENIK: In this portion of the video, the two gentlemen to the right of the defendant consume a shot size beverage.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the shot glass that the defendant received, what if anything do you observe her to do with that?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it — or strike that. Just what did you observe, not what she had. What did you observe the defendant to do during that portion?
MR. BUKHENIK: Prior to the shots being taken, a shot glass was poured into the cylindrical tall glass.
MR. LALLY: And again, so that would be drink number seven at that point?
MR. BUKHENIK: That would be drink number six.
MR. LALLY: And I'm sorry, so the previous portion was a cylindrical drink and then a shot glass — that was five and six, is that correct?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I think that was the testimony, but ask it differently.
MR. LALLY: As far as that drink during that portion, is that drink number six or drink number seven?
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yeah, in that form I'll sustain it. At this point in time in the video, after watching what you've watched, how many drinks has the defendant consumed at this point?
MR. BUKHENIK: She's consumed — or is in possession of —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it.
MR. BUKHENIK: Six drinks.
MR. LALLY: And it's at approximately 10:29 p.m., is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, that's correct.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman if you could go to about 20 minutes and 30 seconds — the next 20 seconds. During that portion of the video, what if anything do you observe as to the drink the defendant has and how full it is at that point?
MR. BUKHENIK: She has a cylindrical tall cocktail glass in her hand.
MR. LALLY: And can you observe — or did you observe — how full that glass was?
MR. BUKHENIK: Drink number six is empty or near the bottom — almost empty.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman if I could ask you to go to about 22 minutes and 40 — I'm sorry, 22:40 or so within —
MR. BUKHENIK: Once the defendant got drink number seven, the defendant and Mr. O'Keefe walk out of C.F. McCarthy's, the ...defendant holding the beverage — tall cylindrical glass — in her hand.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, sir. May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. Miss Gilman, you can take that down.
MR. LALLY: I'm sorry. I'm showing you a five-page document. I ask you to review that, look up when you're finished. And do you recognize that document, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize it to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: I recognize it to be a series of transaction receipts from the tabs at C.F. McCarthy's.
MR. LALLY: And are these the transaction receipts, or tabs, that you received — you and Trooper Keith received from C.F. McCarthy's on February 1st, 2022?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, the—
MR. LALLY: And with reference to those receipts or tabs, to whom, if anyone, of significance—
MR. BUKHENIK: Those tabs pertain to — the first one, for $52.80, was opened under the bar tab Karen A. Read.
MR. LALLY: And is there also a receipt from John O'Keefe?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, it is. The transaction through the credit card, being a MasterCard, for $52.80, was paid by Mr. John J. O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: And with reference to the items listed within that particular receipt, what if any items of significance do you observe listed on the receipts?
MR. BUKHENIK: Under Karen A. Read's receipt: one Tito's, $10; one Tito's, $10; one Coors Light, $5. Sustained. / sidebar — exhibit introduction, garbled
JUDGE CANNONE: We probably should approach.
MR. LALLY: Sergeant Bukhenik, on those receipts from C.F. McCarthy's — under both Miss Read's receipt and Mr. O'Keefe's receipt, there was Tito's vodka listed on the receipt. Correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: Correct.
MR. LALLY: Now, also on February 1st, what if any other establishments did you go to in the town of Canton?
MR. BUKHENIK: Myself and Trooper Keith went across the street to the Waterfall Bar & Grille and retrieved transaction receipts and video from there as well.
MR. LALLY: As far as the video is concerned from that establishment, have you reviewed that video as well?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: And with regard to the receipts from that establishment, you reviewed those as well, is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you four photographs, or still shots. You can review those and look up when you're finished. And you recognize those, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize those to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: Those are still shots of surveillance video from the Waterfall Bar & Grille on the night of January 29th, after midnight. And Mr. O'Keefe is depicted in the still shots. And those are both interior as well as exterior camera shots of Mr. O'Keefe's sort of exit from the Waterfall.
MR. LALLY: Is that correct?
MR. BUKHENIK: That's correct. Interior, him leaving at 12:11 a.m., which the time stamp on the surveillance video at the Waterfall was accurate to real time. He is holding a beverage — shorter cocktail glass — in his right hand as he exits the establishment. He's seen on the exterior camera walking towards Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I move to introduce this as next exhibit.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, Your Honor. With the Court's permission, if I could ask that it be published for the jury.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could just show the first one I have. And Sergeant, do you recognize what's up on the screen, which has now been marked as Exhibit 464?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do.
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. BUKHENIK: That is the still shots presented to me and entered into the exhibit of Mr. O'Keefe walking out of the Waterfall Bar & Grille at 12:11 a.m. ...on the night of — the early morning hours of January 29th — holding a cocktail glass.
MR. LALLY: And if I may, the second. And again, do you recognize what's up on the screen, sir?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, sir.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, using the laser pointer, please direct the jury's attention to where you observe — and what if anything you observe him holding — as he exits the Waterfall.
MR. BUKHENIK: Mr. O'Keefe is observed here. He's holding that shorter, fatter cocktail glass as he's walking out of the establishment.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could have the exterior — just the second one, please. And again, Sergeant, you recognize what's up on the screen, which is now marked as Exhibit 467?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I do.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, please direct the jury's attention to what if anything of significance you observe.
MR. BUKHENIK: This is Mr. O'Keefe walking out of the Waterfall establishment, holding the cocktail glass in his right hand as he walks towards Washington Street.
JUDGE CANNONE: We can have the lights. Thank you, sir.
MR. LALLY: Do you want me to approach the witness?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you what's been previously marked as Exhibit 54. And you recognize what's contained in Exhibit 54?
MR. BUKHENIK: I do, yes.
MR. LALLY: And are those the receipts that you received from the Waterfall when you went there on February 1st?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, they are.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. May I approach again?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, with reference to the Waterfall — in regard to the time stamp on that surveillance video, what if anything were you told as far as the accuracy of that time stamp when you retrieved that video?
MR. BUKHENIK: That video was confirmed to be accurate in time, as in real time — no discrepancy.
MR. LALLY: Your Honor, with the Court's permission, if I could just publish three quick clips from what's been marked as Exhibit 53.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if I could ask — from channel three, the second video down — if I could ask you to go from the time stamp on the top of the screen to 10:54, in about 25 seconds. I ask you to pause right there. So, Sergeant, from that particular portion of the video, what if anything of significance did you observe occur?
MR. BUKHENIK: That portion of video depicts Mr. John O'Keefe walking in with the defendant, the defendant gesturing to a group of people at the top of the screen, and then Mr. O'Keefe walking over and giving a hug to an individual that's part of the group.
MR. LALLY: So, from the same channel three — Miss Gilman, if I could have the video down — if I could ask you to go to 11:39 and 40 seconds there. And in about five to ten seconds or so, I'm going to ask — if you could pause it — and I'm just going to ask Sergeant if you could direct your attention to sort of the top right corner. From that portion of the video, do you observe the defendant?
MR. BUKHENIK: Yes, I did.
MR. LALLY: And what if anything did you observe her to be doing?
MR. BUKHENIK: She retrieves a drink from the table and appears to consume it.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the drink and the tall cylindrical glass that you observed walking out of C.F. McCarthy's — what if anything do you observe from the glass that she's taking a sip of from this portion of the video?
MR. BUKHENIK: At the Waterfall, it's a shorter, fatter-style glass compared to the cylindrical tall style that she walked out of C.F. McCarthy's with.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, sir. Miss Gilman, you can take that down. Court Officer, if we could get the lights. Thank you, sir.
JUDGE CANNONE: Mr. Lally, why don't we end for the day. It's been a long day. Everybody ready to go home? murmuring Yeah. Okay. All right. So, Sergeant, we need you back tomorrow, and I'll ask you to just follow the jurors out when they leave. So, jurors, those same reminders: please do not discuss this case with anyone. Don't do any independent research or investigation into the case. If you happen to see, hear, or read anything about the case, please disregard it and let us know. We'll see you tomorrow.
COURT OFFICER: All rise for the court. Please follow me.
JUDGE CANNONE: And I will see counsel at sidebar about scheduling. Please, sidebar. end of court session — audio artifacts