As Karen Read Was Acquitted of Murder, a Crowd Outside the Courthouse Erupted in Cheers

The highly publicized murder retrial of Karen Read — who was accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend — continued to hold the attention of the masses as soon as it began with the jury selection on April 1, 2025.

Read, who worked as an adjunct professor at Bentley College, claimed that she dropped off her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, at a friend's house on the evening of Jan. 28, 2022. When he didn't return by the next morning, she drove back to the friend's house — only to find O'Keefe's body lying dead in the snow.

Police eventually charged Read with second-degree murder in addition to a manslaughter charge and leaving the scene of an injury/death. Her defense claimed that law enforcement framed her, and that O'Keefe had been beaten inside the house and dragged outside. But prosecutors said Read hit O'Keefe with her car and left him to die. Her first trial ended in a hung jury, but the second got the verdict she was hoping for. Details to follow.

After a retrial that lasted 11 weeks, Read finally learned her fate on June 18, 2025. The jury foreman proceeded to say "not guilty" when asked about the second-degree murder charge as well as the charge of leaving the scene of an accident causing death. She was convicted of operating under the influence of liquor. Read opted to be sentenced for the OUI immediately and was given 12 months probation.

As the second not guilty verdict was read, the crowd outside the courthouse immediately began cheering. Read smiled and hugged her attorney, Alan Jackson, while the celebrating could still be heard. The embattled Read also turned and smiled at her family, who were present at both trials. Judge Beverly Cannone dismissed the jury. At this point, O'Keefe's family also exited the courtroom.

The jury for Read's first murder trial was unable to reach a unanimous decision, which led to Judge Cannone declaring a mistrial on July 1, 2024. They began deliberations on June 28, but on day four, they sent a note out to Judge Cannone stating that "despite [their] exhaustive review of the evidence and [their] diligent consideration of all disputed evidence, [they were] unable to reach a unanimous verdict."

The Commonwealth stated that the jury did spend sufficient time discussing the case. Read's lawyers sided with the jury and focused on the word "exhaustive."

"They are communicating to the court that they've exhausted all manner of compromise, all manner of persuasion, and they're at an impasse," said David Yannetti. He pointed to the fact that they only asked one question and had already been working hard for nearly four full days.

Judge Cannone reminded the court that she ultimately decided, and disagreed with the amount of time the jury had spent looking at evidence, as they only had one full day of deliberation on June 26.

The jury was dismissed early on the other days. "We heard from 74 witnesses. There were 657 exhibits. There are very complex issues in this case. I'm not prepared to find that there have been due and thorough deliberations at this point," said the judge.

On July 1, after deliberating for two hours, the jury once again sent a note to Judge Cannone stating they were still conflicted, but it had nothing to do with the available evidence. They were divided by their "fundamental differences" as well as their "deeply held convictions."

Judge Cannone sent them back in to deliberate, stating that a new jury would be pulled from the same pool of people and would be no more equipped to come to a decision.

They finally sent a third note, which resulted in the mistrial.