DEDHAM, Mass. — After a long and contentious 10-week trial, a Massachusetts jury remains unable to decide the fate of Karen Read, accused in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police officer John O’Keefe. Deliberations have stretched over 23 hours, during which jurors have found themselves at an impasse, unable to align their deeply held convictions into a unanimous decision.
The deadlock persisted despite a directive from Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who on Monday issued a last-ditch instruction known as a “Tuey-Rodriguez” for the jury to attempt one final round of deliberations. If they fail to reach a verdict following this instruction, a mistrial may be declared.
The latest communication from the jury highlighted the depth of their division. “Despite our commitment to the duty entrusted to us, we find ourselves deeply divided by fundamental differences in our opinions and state of mind,” read a note from the panel, indicating that their differences were rooted not in a misunderstanding but in “deeply held convictions.”
Read has steadfastly maintained her innocence facing charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence of alcohol, and leaving the scene of an accident where there was personal injury and death. Central to the case iswhether Read struck O’Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, in Canton, Massachusetts. From there, jurors must determine the appropriate charge, if any, to convict her of.
The procedural complexity of the case adds to the jury’s challenge. Before they can even consider the charges, they must first concur that Read’s actions directly led to O’Keefe’s death. This initial agreement is crucial for moving forward with the case’s details.
Legal expert Phil Tracy previously expressed skepticism about the possibility of reaching a conclusion. He mentioned that the charged nature of the situation might lead to a hung jury, hinting at the possibility of the case dragging on or concluding without a verdict before midsummer.
Should the jury remain deadlocked, resulting in a mistrial, it will then fall upon prosecutors to decide whether to retry the case. The decision is heavy, influenced by the quest for justice for the victim, and the implications such actions have on both the accused and the victim’s family.
Each stage of deliberation and every additional instruction from Judge Cannone underscores the weight and complexity of the decisions at hand. As the community of Canton, law enforcement colleagues of O’Keefe, and all involved await the outcome, the case exemplifies the intricate balance of justice, where legal principles, personal convictions, and the quest for truth converge in the courtroom.
As the jury resumes its deliberations under the weight of their solemn duty, the potential outcomes loom large—reaching a verdict, affirming their deadlock again, or facing a declaration of a mistrial. Each possesses significant implications for the legal narrative and for the lives connected to this case, illustrating the profound impact of jury deliberations in the criminal justice system.