Blogs
Devang Johari

Author

  • Published: Jun 02 2025 07:16 PM
  • Last Updated: Jun 02 2025 07:19 PM

Get the latest on the Karen Read trial, from expert witnesses to digital clues that may change the case. Discover what the defense is revealing and what it means for the verdict.


Newsletter

wave

Where Things Stand in the Karen Read Trial

It’s been a long few weeks in the Karen Read trial, and emotions are definitely running high. The case has brought a lot of tension, with people watching closely to see where the truth lies. Now that the prosecution has wrapped up its side, the defense is trying to flip the narrative and make the jury question everything they’ve heard so far.

Defense Experts Try to Break the Prosecution’s Story

So the defense brought in some experts, and they didn’t hold back. One of them, a retired medical examiner, looked at the injuries John O’Keefe had and said they didn’t really line up with someone being hit by a car. He described them as more like friction injuries—possibly from something else.

Then there was another doctor who studies dog bites. She looked at photos of O’Keefe’s wounds and said, honestly, they looked a lot like they could’ve come from a dog. It wasn’t just a hunch—she pointed out the shape and pattern of the injuries and seemed pretty confident.

There was also a digital forensics guy who focused on O’Keefe’s phone. He said the phone showed that John was walking around at about 12:21 a.m., which doesn’t totally line up with the timeline the prosecution gave. On top of that, there was a big moment when the expert brought up a strange Google search someone made that night—"how long to die in cold." That happened around 2:27 a.m., and the defense is using it to ask: why would someone be searching that before they even claim to have found his body?

 

A Lot of Eyewitness Testimony Doesn’t Quite Match Up

One of the most talked-about witnesses was Jennifer McCabe. She says she heard Karen Read say, “I hit him, I hit him,” which would obviously be huge if true. But the defense is raising eyebrows over that claim. They’re pointing out that Jennifer also made that weird Google search and questioning if her timeline even makes sense. There’s definitely doubt being cast on whether her memory is reliable—or if there’s more going on.

Some first responders also shared what they saw and heard. One officer said Karen had blood on her and looked totally out of it. A paramedic mentioned someone at the scene said, “I hit him,” but couldn’t say for sure who said it. The defense picked apart those stories too, pointing out things they left out in earlier reports or changed later on.

FAQ

Karen Read is facing charges in connection to the death of her boyfriend, John O'Keefe. The prosecution believes she hit him with her SUV and left him outside in the cold, leading to his death. The defense, however, says there’s more to the story and that she’s being wrongly accused.

The defense has brought in medical experts, a dog bite specialist, and a digital forensics expert. They’re trying to show that John’s injuries don’t match a car accident and that his phone data and other digital clues point to a different timeline than what the prosecution says.

One of the prosecution’s witnesses, Jennifer McCabe, reportedly searched “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m.—before they claim to have found John’s body. The defense is using this to suggest that maybe she knew more than she said or that the timeline doesn’t add up.

The judge allowed crash experts to testify for the defense but didn’t let a retired FBI agent talk about how the investigation may have been mishandled. These decisions shape what the jury can hear and how the story is told in court.

It looks like the trial is getting close to the end. The defense is almost done, and then both sides will give their closing arguments. After that, the jury will start deciding the verdict.

Search Anything...!