Karen Read Jury Asks Three Key Questions as Deliberations Stretch Into Day Two
Inside the courtroom and out on the street, tension builds as jurors weigh OUI timing, interview evidence, and verdict language
Dedham, June 17: The Suffolk County courthouse was quieter than usual this morning, but you could still hear the tension in the air. Inside, jurors deciding the fate of Karen Read—the woman accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend John O’Keefe—sent three pointed questions to the bench. Outside, the crowd in pink kept growing, a sea of supporters that’s become impossible to ignore.
Three Questions, and a Glimpse Into the Jury Room
By mid-morning, the jury had clocked around ten and a half hours of deliberation in a case that’s gripped Massachusetts and, thanks to TikTok and HBO, a chunk of the country. Then came the notes—three of them. Quiet, typed, but loud in implication.
They wanted clarity on a few things: First, the exact window of time that matters for the OUI charge—12:45 a.m. when Read last saw O’Keefe, or closer to 5 a.m. when his body was discovered. Second, whether video clips from her police interviews are actually evidence they can use. And third, a legal tangle: if they convict on a lesser included offense, does that count as a conviction on the main charge?
Judge Beverly Cannone called them back in and walked a careful line. “You are the fact-finders,” she reminded the panel. The timeline? That’s theirs to interpret based on the evidence. The video clips? Yes, they’re in bounds. And that third question—that’s where things got more interesting.
After a brief back-and-forth, and a formal request from the defense to clean up the language on the verdict slip, Cannone adjusted the instructions. The jury now has a clearer map of how to weigh those lesser charges—something that could shape everything in the hours ahead.
A Case That’s Never Just Been About the Evidence
This case has always had layers, and not just legal ones. There’s a public belief, nurtured by months of social media speculation and a wildly popular docuseries, that Read is being framed. Not by some shadowy cabal, but by the very police department her boyfriend served. The theory goes that O’Keefe didn’t die under her wheels, but after entering a Canton home owned by another Boston officer—and that the scene was cleaned up, with Read left holding the bag.
Inside the courtroom, the prosecution says otherwise. They paint a picture of a woman drunk, angry, and reckless—who hit her boyfriend with her Lexus and left him in the snow. It’s not clean. No part of this is. And that’s exactly why these jury questions hit so hard.
Legal analysts across Boston say they’re a window into doubt. “These questions show the jury is working through the legal weeds,” one attorney said on local radio this morning. “They’re thinking critically about the difference between murder and manslaughter, and whether intoxication was a factor. That’s not a jury marching toward a swift conviction.”
Outside, the Pink Tide Hasn’t Let Up
Back on the courthouse steps, the energy was something else. Dozens of people—some from as far as New Hampshire and Connecticut—stood in silence, holding signs, or huddling under umbrellas as the skies darkened. Dogs wore pink bandanas. Teenagers handed out flyers. One man, a retired cop himself, said he’s been here nearly every day since April.
“We’re not just supporting Karen,” he told me. “We’re saying we see what’s going on. And we don’t buy it.”
Some folks brought lawn chairs. Others prayed. But no one seemed ready to go home. In their view, this trial is about more than Read. It’s about accountability, and who gets protected when the blue line is involved.
What Happens Next
The judge told the jury to continue working, asking them to check back in by 4 p.m. unless they reach a decision sooner. As of Tuesday afternoon, no verdict had been announced.
If and when it comes, it’s likely to hit fast. Cannone has kept proceedings efficient, and the courtroom will likely fill within minutes once word spreads. There’s a palpable sense that things are close—that all it might take is one more session to tilt the balance.
But this is a jury that’s moving carefully. And given the stakes—a murder conviction that could send Read to prison for life—that caution feels more like civic duty than delay.
Until then, the pink-clad crowd will be back on the sidewalk tomorrow morning. The attorneys will return to the same wooden benches. And somewhere behind those closed doors, 12 jurors will keep doing what they’ve done all along—trying to decide what happened in that snowy driveway, and whether Karen Read is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
New Jersey Times Is Your Source: The Latest In Politics, Entertainment, Business, Breaking News, And Other News. Please Follow Us On Facebook, Instagram, And Twitter To Receive Instantaneous Updates. Also Do Checkout Our Telegram Channel @Njtdotcom For Latest Updates.
A former college-level cricketer and lifelong sports enthusiast, Arun Upadhayay brings the heart of an athlete to the sharp eye of a journalist. With firsthand experience in competitive sports and a deep understanding of team dynamics, Arun covers everything from grassroots tournaments to high-stakes international showdowns. His reporting blends field-level grit with analytical precision, making him a trusted voice for sports fans across New Jersey and beyond.
