Day 22 - June 10, 2024

Jackson cross-examined Sergeant Yuriy Bukhenik about the Canton Police sally port video, including his earlier identification of people shown, the fact that the version previously displayed was mirrored, and motion-triggered gaps in recorded footage. The parties stipulated to the video's timestamps and five-minute, 51-second runtime. The court admitted Exhibit 542, an inverted version of the video, which Bukhenik agreed corrected the perspective; he also said he did not know all the recording system's inner workings and agreed the questioned interval was not on the screen.

Bukhenik testified that the sally port video accurately depicted activity despite being shown as a mirror image, and he denied that he or Trooper Proctor handled the defendant's rear passenger-side taillight area. He explained that his initial report to the medical examiner reflected information then available from first responders and collected evidence. After an objection, he stated that glass was most likely not the object used to cause the injury to the back of Mr. O'Keefe's head. At sidebar, the court barred a proposed question about the defendant's earlier taillight statements as outside the scope of cross-examination.

Jackson questioned Sergeant Yuriy Bukhenik about his OCME report, the source and documentation of reported statements attributed to Read, and the inverted sally port video. Bukhenik said the OCME report described a possibility that the decedent was struck in the face with a glass; he did not believe a single report memorialized an early account from Sergeant Goode that Read said she hit O'Keefe. He said he did not secure the video or know who did, but that it came from the Canton Police Department. The court sustained objections to questions about whether the department's recusal was based on a connection to the Albert family.

Dighton Police Sergeant Nicholas Barros testified that state troopers contacted him on January 29, 2022, for assistance retrieving a vehicle from the Read residence at 345 Country Hill Drive. He described arranging a plow and Diamond Towing because snow blocked the driveway, observing a black Lexus SUV, and seeing a cracked right rear taillight with a piece missing and a nearby dent. He said he did not see anyone touch or manipulate that rear passenger-side area while he was there.

Trooper Michael Proctor described the investigation from the initial call through evidence collection, the seizure and storage of Karen Read's Lexus and phone, searches at 34 Fairview Road, and review of Ring video. He testified that he saw substantial damage to the Lexus's right-rear taillight and described recovered footwear, plastic, and glass. The court limited testimony concerning video interpretation and struck a partial answer about whether missing Ring video would leave a digital footprint. Proctor also acknowledged derogatory texts about Read as unprofessional and regrettable, while maintaining they did not affect the investigation.

Proctor acknowledged using derogatory and unprofessional language about Karen Read while reviewing her phone and about Mr. Yanetti. After a sidebar concerning the text-message extraction and redaction of “confidential” from the pages, the court marked Exhibit 567 over the Commonwealth's objection. Proctor agreed that investigations must be impartial and free of bias, denied selecting Read first and seeking evidence to support that choice, and maintained that his messages did not affect the integrity or physical evidence in the case.