Mistrial in Karen Read’s case for killing her boyfriend

A judge has declared a mistrial in the case of US woman Karen Read. She is accused of running over her boyfriend, a police officer, and leaving him to die in a snowbank.

Jurors in the murder trial that has captivated true crime fans across the country were deadlocked after days of deliberations, unable to agree on a verdict.

Ms Read, 45, had pleaded not guilty to killing John O’Keefe after an argument outside a house party in the early hours of January 29, 2022.

But defense attorneys said her 46-year-old boyfriend was killed at the party hosted by a colleague, and that Ms. Read was set up to cover up the crime.

Supporters of the defendants from across the country gathered outside the courthouse wearing pink T-shirts that read “Free Karen Read.”

The jury in Norfolk Superior Court deliberated for five days before sending a note to Judge Beverly Cannone saying they remained “deeply divided by fundamental differences of opinion and spirit” and had “reached a point where consensus is no longer attainable.”

The judge then declared the trial invalid.

A hearing on next steps for Ms. Read is scheduled for July 22. Prosecutors in the Norfolk District Attorney’s Office have announced they plan to reopen the case.

Ms Read, an equity analyst and university finance lecturer, was charged with first-degree murder, manslaughter while under the influence of alcohol and hit-and-run causing personal injury or death.

She and O’Keefe were at two bars in the Boston suburb of Canton on the evening of January 28, 2022, when she said she drove him to an after-party at the nearby home of a fellow Boston police officer, Brian Albert.

Prosecutors said the couple argued and after O’Keefe got out of his girlfriend’s Lexus SUV in front of the house, an allegedly drunk woman Read deliberately backed into him and drove away.

O’Keefe suffered catastrophic head injuries, was incapacitated and froze to death, prosecutors said.

People in the house testified that O’Keefe did not make it back into the house that night.

Prosecutors also said the brake light on the defendant’s car was defective and that the vehicle’s internal systems indicated that she was reversing at high speed.

MS Read said that when her boyfriend did not come home, she and two other women went to look for him.

They found O’Keefe’s body in front of his colleague’s house.

Firefighters who arrived at the scene that morning said that Ms. Read told them, “I hit him, I hit him.”

MS Read said she asked in a state of panic and shock, “Did I hit him?”

The defense argued that O’Keefe went into the house, was killed in a fight, and his body was then taken outside and thrown into the snow.

A federal agent named Brian Higgins was also at the house at 34 Fairview Road, and it was revealed during the trial that he and Ms. Read exchanged flirtatious text messages and a kiss.

Text messages from the lead investigator fueled conspiracy theories about the case.

During testimony, Massachusetts State Police Officer Michael Proctor admitted Read a “nutcase” who told colleagues he found “no nude pictures” when he searched her phone for evidence and wrote to his sister that he wished Ms. Read would “kill himself”.

He apologized on the witness stand for the “unprofessional” comments.

Mr Proctor also acknowledged a friendship with the brother of Brian Albert, the police officer who hosted the house party, and his wife, but insisted that this personal relationship had not interfered with the investigation.

Defense attorney Alan Jackson said in his closing argument: “Ladies and gentlemen, in this case there was simply a cover-up.”

Prosecutor Adam Lally countered by telling jurors that the defense had invented a “three-card Monte”-style conspiracy theory.

MS Read and O’Keefe had a relationship for about two years before his death, which prosecutors said led to turmoil.

During the trial, it was said that she called him after leaving home and left him a voicemail message in which she screamed, “John, I (expletive) hate you!”

Ms Read’s lawyers said there had only been occasional arguments between the couple.

Some have compared the viral Read case to other true crime hits involving women accused of violent crimes, such as Casey Anthony, Amanda Knox or Jodi Arias.

Adam Golub, a professor at California State University, Fullerton, who specializes in true crime, told the BBC that cases like this go viral because they have a “rabbit hole effect.”

“They make us want to dig deeper, theorize and debate, become armchair detectives,” he said. “They make us gather at the water coolers of social media and talk about it. It has an addictive quality that creates an endless stream of content for us to consume.”

There is also a particular niche in true crime stories, namely women accused in such cases. Mr Golub said there was a heightened fascination with female suspects, partly because true crime stories were typically dominated by stories about men harming women.

“Femme fatale characters fascinate us because they challenge societal expectations of how women should behave,” he said. “They seem to do the unthinkable. They are seen as powerful, but in a dangerous way.”

Dr. NG Berrill, a forensic psychologist and executive director of the New York Center for Neuropsychology and Forensic Behavioral Sciences, added that a case like this can also attract more attention because people are “able to identify with the defendants on some level.”

“That’s why most cases go unnoticed. People don’t care about street crime,” he said.

“People would like to say they are not entertained, but they do when they learn horrifying details, especially when there is a catch – sex, relationships, violence. That’s what draws people in.”

(With additional reporting by Bernd Debusmann Jr.)