In Dedham, Massachusetts, Judge Beverly J. Cannone has denied a defense request to disqualify or impose sanctions on Norfolk District Attorney Michael Morrissey regarding his extrajudicial comments and other decisions made in the controversial Karen Read murder case. The judge determined that no egregious misconduct had occurred that could substantially prejudice the defendant’s right to a fair trial, leading to her denial of the motion. Responding to the ruling, Read’s defense attorneys refrained from commenting.
This recent decision follows another denial by Judge Cannone on Tuesday, concerning the defense’s request to dismiss the case. The trial, which has garnered widespread attention, is scheduled to commence on April 16.
According to prosecutors, Karen Read allegedly struck Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, with her Lexus SUV outside a Canton residence in the early hours of January 29, 2022. Authorities assert that she left him there to succumb to the freezing temperatures. Read has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while under the influence of alcohol, and leaving the scene of a personal injury or death.
However, the defense has presented a third-party culprit theory, suggesting that at least one person attending a social gathering at the residence, including Brian Albert, a Boston Police Department sergeant and then-homeowner, killed O’Keefe. They claim that the crime was subsequently covered up by those involved, including the Canton and State Police. Albert, his sister-in-law Jennifer McCabe, and other external parties mentioned in the theory have obtained legal representation for the trial.
The defense has also accused Norfolk DA Morrissey of participating in the alleged conspiracy. They claim that he made unprecedented public statements on August 25, 2023, vouching for the implicated parties and criticizing the defense’s theory. Moreover, they contend that Morrissey failed to disclose details of a federal inquiry into his office’s handling of the murder investigation.
In response, Morrissey vehemently denied the allegations and defended his statements. He maintained that the individuals accused by the defense were not part of a conspiracy or involved in any criminal activity. He portrayed them as mere witnesses in the case and emphasized their cooperation with the authorities.
Regarding another point of contention, Trooper Michael Proctor of the Massachusetts State Police, the principal investigator in the case, has come under scrutiny. The defense alleges an improper relationship between Proctor and the Alberts, as well as investigatory misconduct. Morrissey strongly refuted these claims, stating that Proctor had no motive or opportunity to plant evidence and had no personal relationship or conflicts with the involved parties. The Massachusetts State Police revealed that an internal review of Proctor was underway but did not disclose specific details.
Despite acknowledging certain comments by Morrissey as violations of professional conduct rules, Judge Cannone did not deem them severe enough to warrant dismissal of the indictments against Read. Responding to allegations that Morrissey failed to disclose the U.S. Attorney’s office investigation into the Karen Read case, the judge disagreed, stating that the Norfolk DA’s office had limited information about the investigation.
As the trial date approaches, the unfolding developments continue to captivate local and national attention. This evolving story will likely shed light on the truth behind the tragic death of Officer John O’Keefe and potentially reveal any alleged misconduct or conspiracies surrounding the case.