On Tuesday, Judge Beverly Cannone denied a request from Karen Read for a mistrial in her second murder trial concerning the death of her boyfriend, police officer John O'Keefe. This ruling came after Read's attorneys argued that the prosecution's questioning of a defense witness regarding the absence of dog DNA on O'Keefe's sweater represented grounds for a mistrial with prejudice.
During the proceedings, the defense presented Dr. Marie Russell, a dog bite expert and forensic pathologist. Dr. Russell testified that the markings found on O'Keefe's arm were consistent with dog bites and scratches, bolstering the defense's theory that O'Keefe had been attacked by a dog and subsequently assaulted by others before being left in the snow on the night of his murder.
For the first time in this trial, prosecutors introduced O'Keefe's sweater into evidence, referencing a forensic report that indicated no dog DNA was present. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the residence of fellow officer Brian Albert, resulting in the injuries on his arm, and then abandoned him during a severe blizzard.
Read is facing serious charges, including second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence, and leaving a scene of personal injury and death. She has consistently denied these allegations and maintains her innocence. Her first murder trial ended in a mistrial after the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict, with at least four jurors confirming she was found not guilty of murder and leaving the scene.
As the trial progressed, the prosecution questioned Dr. Russell about the forensic testing on O'Keefe's sweater, asking if she was aware that holes in the sweater had been swabbed for traces of dog DNA. The defense objected before Russell could respond, leading to a sidebar discussion involving the judge and attorneys. Following this, the defense team requested a mistrial.
Defense Attorney Robert Alessi argued that the introduction of DNA evidence by the prosecution was both intentional and inappropriate, stating, "The prosecution has to suffer the consequences of its own intentional actions." Alessi emphasized that the defense had deliberately avoided mentioning DNA throughout the trial, asserting that the prosecution's actions had irreversibly influenced the jury's perception.
In response, prosecutors asserted that they had always intended to introduce an expert to discuss DNA evidence as part of their rebuttal. Prosecutor Hank Brennan defended their questioning of Dr. Russell, claiming it was necessary and permissible. He stated, "The defense is on notice that there is no dog DNA in the sweater of John O'Keefe."
Alessi countered this by raising concerns about the chain of custody for O'Keefe's sweater, highlighting that it had been left on the floor of an ambulance and a hospital, potentially compromising the integrity of the DNA testing.
After a brief recess, Judge Cannone permitted prosecutors to resume questioning Dr. Russell about the DNA evidence. During her testimony, Russell addressed the absence of dog DNA, explaining that various factors could account for this result. However, she maintained that her assessment of the injuries on O'Keefe's arm as being caused by a dog remained unchanged regardless of the DNA findings.
This ongoing trial continues to captivate public attention as it unfolds, with both the defense and prosecution presenting their cases regarding the tragic events surrounding John O'Keefe's death.
