IT was January 28, 2022, and a blizzard was about to hit Canton, a suburban town 20 miles south of Boston, Massachusetts.
Police officer John O’Keefe was on a night out with his girlfriend of two years, Karen Read.
The couple had been drinking and socialising at the Waterfall Bar & Grille, when they were invited back to the home of retired Boston police officer Brian Albert.
Karen drove to the impromptu after-party in her black Lexus SUV, but en route, the couple had a drunken argument.
When they arrived at the house at 34 Fairview Road, only John got out of the car.
Karen, 41, drove back to the home they shared, but when she woke at 4am, John hadn’t returned.
Panicked, she went out to look for him in her car, along with two friends she’d called – Kerry Roberts and Jennifer McCabe, the sister-in-law of Brian Albert.
Jennifer claimed she heard Karen say: “John didn’t come home. We had a fight. What if he’s dead? What if a plough hit him? We drank so much, I don’t remember anything.”
By 6am, 4in of snow had fallen on Canton, and with no sign of John, the women drove to Fairview Road, where Karen called his number and heard a phone ringing from a bank of snow on the lawn, around 80ft from where she’d left him.
There, she discovered John lying on his back, with no coat on and no pulse. Frantically, she tried to resuscitate him, while Jennifer called 911, but he was pronounced dead on arrival at Good Samaritan Hospital.
An autopsy later revealed the 46-year-old had died from a combination of blunt impact injuries to the head and hypothermia.
Three days later, Karen was arrested and charged with second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and leaving the scene of bodily injury and death.
“The prosecution alleged that John’s fatal injuries were caused when Karen reversed over him on the driveway of 34 Fairview Road,” says Kristin Thorne, an investigative reporter and host of Wondery podcast, Karen: The Retrial.
A broken tail light on Karen’s SUV was key in supporting the prosecution’s theory.
However, it would also become a pivotal piece of evidence for the defence, who would claim that John had got into a fight with other police officers at the party and was then left outside to die as they plotted to cover their tracks.
As a result of the charges against her and the impending trial, Karen lost her job as a financial analyst and had to sell her house to fund her defence, moving in with her parents, Bill and Janet, who stood by her throughout.
‘John’s injuries were consistent with a fight – black eyes, a bloody nose and a cut over his right eye’
Her high-profile trial began on April 29, 2024, with many dubbing her “America’s happiest murder defendant”, because she was often seen smiling in court, posing for pictures and high-fiving supporters, who protested in the streets insisting she was a victim of a cover-up.
That trial ended in a hung jury and, three weeks later, a new trial date and jury of six men and six women was appointed. Paula Prado, 40, was one of them.
“I hadn’t followed Karen Read’s first trial because I was living in Brazil when it happened, so I had no bias,” reveals Paula.
Karen Read was very composed throughout and deeply involved with her lawyers. That stood out to me
Paula
“Once I was back in the city, as I drove around I noticed billboards and lawn signs that said: ‘Free Karen Read.’ I realised it was something important for people here, but I never looked into what they were about.”
After a series of hearings and delays, Karen’s retrial began on April 22, 2025.
The prosecution claimed “black box data” from Karen’s car would reveal that, after John got out of the SUV at 34 Fairview Road, Karen put the car into neutral, then reverse, and then accelerated.
“She clipped John O’Keefe – he fell backwards, hit his head, broke his skull,” asserted prosecutor Hank Brennan.
Meanwhile, Karen’s team set out to prove that, not only were John’s injuries not consistent with having been hit by the Lexus, but that several pieces of evidence were proof of a cover-up by the Massachusetts state police.
Over eight weeks, Paula and her fellow jurors heard from 49 witnesses during the retrial.
“Karen Read was very composed throughout and deeply involved with her lawyers. That stood out to me,” recalls Paula.
“At first, I thought she was guilty of something. But as witnesses testified, it became clearer that a collision hadn’t happened, and that Karen didn’t murder her boyfriend. By the second month, I was leaning toward acquitting her, because nothing the prosecution presented made sense compared to John’s injuries,” she says.
As well as John’s injuries being inconsistent with the impact from a car, Karen’s defence also focused on “notably deep” wounds to his right arm.
They argued it was likely they came from John trying to defend himself from an attack by Brian Albert’s dog, a German shepherd called Chloe, inside 34 Fairview Road.
His other injuries were consistent with a fight, as the coroner’s report detailed black eyes, a bloody nose and a cut over his right eye.
What Paula and the other jurors didn’t know was why a fight could have broken out inside the house that night.
At first, I thought she was guilty of something. But as witnesses testified, it became clearer that a collision hadn’t happened, and that Karen didn’t murder her boyfriend
Paula
Then a series of texts were revealed between Karen and Brian Higgins, a friend of John and an agent from the Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco And Firearms. Karen had been sending flirty texts to Brian from January 2022, up until the night John was killed. In one, they discussed a kiss they had shared.
“We all agreed the texts with Brian Higgins showed that her relationship with John wasn’t perfect,” says Paula. “But that alone didn’t mean she had the intent or even the thought of hurting John. People who think she’s guilty describe her as malicious and narcissistic. What I saw was just an independent woman.”
Instead, Karen’s defence team alleged that Brian was jealous to see Karen with John. This could have developed into an alcohol-fuelled fight, which eventually resulted in John’s death – and was then covered up by the policemen involved.
One of the defence’s key points in proving the cover-up focused on the smashed tail light on Karen’s SUV, and when exactly it got broken.
The jury was shown video footage from a Ring doorbell at the house John and Karen shared from 5.07am, when she set out to look for him. It showed her reversing out of the garage, towards John’s parked car, which jolted slightly, as though the right rear side of the SUV and the parked car had collided.
“The defence argued that Karen’s car had a damaged tail light from backing into John’s car in the driveway,” adds Kristin.
“They alleged that pieces of the light were only discovered after law enforcement had control of the vehicle, and that the timeline in some documents was inconsistent with evidence collected. This suggested, in their minds, the possibility that fragments found at the scene were planted or moved after the fact.”
‘Many supporters saw Karen as a symbol of the fight against police corruption in the town’
Police investigators at 34 Fairview Road logged 45 pieces of broken tail light as evidence, while Karen’s defence highlighted that none of the first responders saw any pieces of tail light at all.
Karen’s supporters were die-hards
Kristin
The jury also heard that Karen’s SUV was impounded by police and towed to the Canton Police Department garage.
An officer who was present when the SUV was towed testified that the right rear tail light was only cracked, with a piece missing.
The defence then compared this with a photo taken inside the police garage, where the light was completely smashed, which also suggested that the tail light had been tampered with.
As news of the potential conspiracy was reported by the media, support for Karen outside the courtroom swelled.
“Karen’s supporters were die-hards,” says Kristin. “If people believed she wasn’t guilty, they believed it with a fervour that I’ve rarely seen as a reporter. Many of them saw Karen as a symbol of the fight against police corruption in the town.”
Karen’s supporters were die-hards
Kristin
In his closing speech, defence attorney Alan Jackson insisted his client was innocent. He went on to refute testimony from one of the first responders who said in court that Karen was hysterical when he arrived on the scene, saying: “I hit him. I hit him. I hit him.”
Alan cited the testimony of the lead investigator in the case, who told the jury that the only statement Karen made at the scene was: “Could I have hit him? Did I hit him?”
“It wasn’t a confession,” Alan concluded. “It was confusion.”
While the jury was out deliberating, Karen told the waiting media throng: “I just hope they were listening, that’s all I can ask for.”
As far as Paula was concerned, her role as a juror was straightforward.
“Our job was simply to decide whether Karen Read backed up her car and hit John,” she says.
“We heard from the autopsy doctor, experts on both sides, and saw all the data about whether those marks could have come from tail-light plastic at 24mph. My conclusion was that they didn’t. All the jurors except one agreed. Anything else would be speculation. What I do know is what didn’t cause those injuries, and that was the Lexus.”
It took four days for the jury to reach their verdict, acquitting Karen of second-degree murder and manslaughter, but finding her guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol, for which she received one year of probation.
I believe Karen Read is totally innocent
Paula
“When the foreman read the ‘not guilty’ verdict, it was the first time I heard the crowd outside,” recalls Paula. “I was watching John’s family, because I knew they would be devastated by our decision. As a mother, it broke my heart to see Mrs O’Keefe walk out of the courtroom in tears.”
After the verdict, on the steps of the courthouse, Karen thanked her “amazing supporters” and said: “No one has fought harder for justice for John O’Keefe than I have.”
Currently, no one has been charged for John’s murder, but his family have filed their own wrongful death lawsuit against Karen.
Meanwhile, Karen appeared in court again in September, except this time she was bringing her own legal action against some of the trial’s witnesses, including Brian Albert and Brian Higgins, alleging they: “Collectively conspired to ensure that what happened in the house was not explored or investigated.” She has also filed a civil claim against Massachusetts State Police Department.
Paula has since returned to her family and has had time to reflect on her part in the sensational trial.
“I believe Karen Read is totally innocent of hitting John with her car and killing him,” she says. “I know the O’Keefe family wanted a conviction, but the investigation failed John’s family, not us. I just hope his family gets justice someday.”
