BOSTON — Karen Read’s lead attorney has accused a special prosecutor of violating ethical standards following a jury’s verdict that acquitted Read of murder charges in connection with the death of her boyfriend, a Boston police officer. Attorney Alan Jackson asserted that prosecutor Hank Brennan’s comments attacking the jury’s decision were inappropriate and unprofessional.
Read was found not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter last week for her role in the death of Officer John O’Keefe, which occurred in 2022. After a five-day silence regarding the verdict, Brennan expressed disappointment, asserting that there was “only one person” accountable for O’Keefe’s death. In his statement, he also condemned what he termed “witness abuse” during the proceedings.
Jackson rebuffed Brennan’s assertions in a detailed rebuttal, claiming that the special prosecutor was attempting to undermine the jury’s credibility. “Brennan’s actions constitute an egregious breach of prosecutorial ethics as he seeks to publicly shame and discredit the jury,” Jackson stated. He characterized Brennan’s attempts to impose his views in place of the jury’s as a desperate effort to maintain his reputation following the jury’s decisive verdict.
The attorney further criticized the prosecution’s approach, arguing that their focus seemed less about seeking truth and justice for O’Keefe and more a personal vendetta against Read. He accused District Attorney Michael Morrissey and his team of prosecutors of misusing public resources and stated that their actions ultimately cost the people of Norfolk County millions.
Despite the controversy, Morrissey has remained largely silent on the outcome of the trial. In a brief statement to local media, he acknowledged the jury’s decision but did not elaborate further, saying simply, “The jury has spoken.”
In addition to the criminal case, Read now faces a civil wrongful death lawsuit filed by O’Keefe’s family in August 2024. The family claims that Read is responsible for his death and is seeking damages in the matter, which could lead to further legal challenges for her.
The case has drawn significant public attention, raising questions about prosecutorial conduct and the implications for justice in high-profile criminal cases. Read’s legal team continues to argue against the character attacks leveled by the prosecution, maintaining that the jury’s decision reflects the appropriate outcome based on the evidence presented.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.