Podcasts about Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

On the evening of May 10, 1988, a passing driver on Howard Street in Brockton, MA, stopped to investigate something unusual on the side of the road. When the driver got closer to what they thought was a bag, they realized it was actually the body of twenty-four-year-old Anthony LoConte, bleeding badly from injuries to his face and head.Initially, investigators believed LoConte was the victim of a hit-and-run accident; however, when the coroner examined the body, he discovered a bullet hole in the back of LoConte's head, indicating that he'd been murdered.It took twelve years for investigators to track down LoConte's killer, but in the winter of 2000, California Highway Patrol arrested Robert Morganti on drug charges and a quick background check connected them to a 1988 warrant for Morganti for the murder of Anthony LoConte. Robert Morganti was extradited back to Massachusetts, where he was tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for LoConte's murder. However, due to a controversial 2024 law concerning life sentences for young offenders, Robert Morganti could be granted parole in the near future.Consider signing the petition by visiting https://www.change.org/p/help-uncle-tony-uphold-mandatory-life-sentences-in-massachusetts-bill-s942 .Thank you to the Incredible Dave White of Bring Me the Axe Podcast for research and Writing support!ReferencesBoston Globe. 1988. "Police believe drugs are linked to slaying of Brockton man." Boston Globe, May 12: 35.Boyle, Maureen. 2000. "Murder suspect caught in Calif." The Enterprise (Brockton, MA), March 21: 1.Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Robert J. Morganti. 2009. SJC-09830 (Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Plymouth, November 25).Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Robert J. Morganti. 2014. SJC-11281 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, February 12).Peterson, Dave. 2000. "Murder suspect's long flght ends in Modesto." Modesto Bee, March 21: 1.Stern, Amelia. 2025. 'No remorse': Taunton woman devastated by ruling that could free her brother's killer. April 25. Accessed May 04, 2025. https://www.tauntongazette.com/story/news/courts/2025/04/25/taunton-ma-brockton-anthony-loconte-murder-victim-sjc-robert-morganti-parole/83271252007/.Stay in the know - wondery.fm/morbid-wondery.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Humanity is capable of great dualities. Elizabeth MeLampy explores that in the way we both venerate animals, even while we exploit them. MeLampy is an attorney with experience in animal law and environmental law. She worked on issues related to farmed animals, wild animals, and captive animals with Harvard’s Animal Law & Policy Clinic while she was in law school. She served in the inaugural cohort of Emerging Scholar Fellows with the Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy, where I worked on animal law scholarship. After two clerkships with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the Federal District Court in Arizona, MeLampy litigated with one of the top environmental nonprofits in the country. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this thought-provoking episode of Keep it Humane: The Podcast, Daniel Ettinger and Ashley Bishop sit down with Harvard-educated attorney and author Elizabeth MeLampy for a deep dive into the world of animal law, environmental justice, and the quirky cultural traditions that shape our relationships with animals. Elizabeth shares her journey from clerking for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to litigating high-impact environmental cases, and how her academic work with Harvard's Animal Law & Policy Clinic and the Brooks Institute helped shape her interdisciplinary perspective.We also explore her debut book, FORGET THE CAMEL: The Madcap World of Animal Festivals and What They Say About Being Human—a captivating blend of legal insight, cultural anthropology, and personal narrative that examines how animal-related celebrations reflect our human values, contradictions, and capacity for empathy. Tune in for an engaging conversation that challenges assumptions, celebrates curiosity, and redefines what it means to advocate for animals.

​During Karen Read's first trial in 2024, the jury deliberated for approximately 23 hours over several days but reported being "deeply divided" and unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Subsequent statements from jurors indicated they had unanimously agreed on not guilty verdicts for the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a fatal accident but were deadlocked on the charge of manslaughter. Due to this impasse, the judge declared a mistrial on July 1, 2024.​In July 2024, the trial of Karen Read, accused of the second-degree murder of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, concluded with a mistrial after the jury reported being "hopelessly deadlocked" following several days of deliberations. The jury informed Judge Beverly Cannone that they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict, leading to the declaration of a mistrial. Subsequently, Read's defense team sought to dismiss the charges, citing double jeopardy concerns and claiming that jurors had agreed on not guilty verdicts for certain charges during deliberations. However, these motions were denied, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that Read could be retried on all charges.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

​On the third day of jury selection in Karen Read's murder retrial, four new jurors were seated, bringing the total to ten—five men and five women. This progress came despite challenges, as 37 out of 40 prospective jurors had prior knowledge of the case, and 21 had already formed opinions. Judge Beverly Cannone permitted attorneys to access the daily list of potential jurors in advance, allowing for pre-screening, with strict instructions against contacting them. Additionally, the judge expanded the courthouse buffer zone to prevent outside influence, responding to reports of demonstrators during the first trial's deliberations.​Karen Read has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to dismiss two of the three charges against her—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death—on the grounds of double jeopardy. Her legal team contends that, during her initial trial, jurors unanimously agreed to acquit her on these two charges, but this decision was not announced before the trial ended in a mistrial due to a deadlock on the manslaughter charge. Lower courts, including the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and federal appeals courts, have denied her motions to dismiss these charges, leading her to seek relief from the nation's highest court. ​ In her appeal, Read poses two primary questions:​Whether a final and unanimous, but unannounced, jury decision that the prosecution failed to prove a defendant guilty constitutes an acquittal, thereby precluding retrial under the Double Jeopardy ClauseWhether a defendant who provides credible evidence of such a unanimous, unannounced acquittal is entitled to a post-trial hearing to substantiate this claim.Legal analysts suggest that the Supreme Court is unlikely to hear the case, given its selective docket and the absence of a formal acquittal on record. If the Court declines to review, the retrial on all charges will proceed as scheduled.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:10 jurors selected as empanelment continues in Karen Read retrialKaren Read appeals 2 of her charges up to the U.S. Supreme Court - CBS Boston

​On the third day of jury selection in Karen Read's murder retrial, four new jurors were seated, bringing the total to ten—five men and five women. This progress came despite challenges, as 37 out of 40 prospective jurors had prior knowledge of the case, and 21 had already formed opinions. Judge Beverly Cannone permitted attorneys to access the daily list of potential jurors in advance, allowing for pre-screening, with strict instructions against contacting them. Additionally, the judge expanded the courthouse buffer zone to prevent outside influence, responding to reports of demonstrators during the first trial's deliberations.​Karen Read has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to dismiss two of the three charges against her—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death—on the grounds of double jeopardy. Her legal team contends that, during her initial trial, jurors unanimously agreed to acquit her on these two charges, but this decision was not announced before the trial ended in a mistrial due to a deadlock on the manslaughter charge. Lower courts, including the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and federal appeals courts, have denied her motions to dismiss these charges, leading her to seek relief from the nation's highest court. ​ In her appeal, Read poses two primary questions:​Whether a final and unanimous, but unannounced, jury decision that the prosecution failed to prove a defendant guilty constitutes an acquittal, thereby precluding retrial under the Double Jeopardy ClauseWhether a defendant who provides credible evidence of such a unanimous, unannounced acquittal is entitled to a post-trial hearing to substantiate this claim.Legal analysts suggest that the Supreme Court is unlikely to hear the case, given its selective docket and the absence of a formal acquittal on record. If the Court declines to review, the retrial on all charges will proceed as scheduled.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:10 jurors selected as empanelment continues in Karen Read retrialKaren Read appeals 2 of her charges up to the U.S. Supreme Court - CBS BostonBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​On the third day of jury selection in Karen Read's murder retrial, four new jurors were seated, bringing the total to ten—five men and five women. This progress came despite challenges, as 37 out of 40 prospective jurors had prior knowledge of the case, and 21 had already formed opinions. Judge Beverly Cannone permitted attorneys to access the daily list of potential jurors in advance, allowing for pre-screening, with strict instructions against contacting them. Additionally, the judge expanded the courthouse buffer zone to prevent outside influence, responding to reports of demonstrators during the first trial's deliberations.​Karen Read has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to dismiss two of the three charges against her—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death—on the grounds of double jeopardy. Her legal team contends that, during her initial trial, jurors unanimously agreed to acquit her on these two charges, but this decision was not announced before the trial ended in a mistrial due to a deadlock on the manslaughter charge. Lower courts, including the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and federal appeals courts, have denied her motions to dismiss these charges, leading her to seek relief from the nation's highest court. ​ In her appeal, Read poses two primary questions:​Whether a final and unanimous, but unannounced, jury decision that the prosecution failed to prove a defendant guilty constitutes an acquittal, thereby precluding retrial under the Double Jeopardy ClauseWhether a defendant who provides credible evidence of such a unanimous, unannounced acquittal is entitled to a post-trial hearing to substantiate this claim.Legal analysts suggest that the Supreme Court is unlikely to hear the case, given its selective docket and the absence of a formal acquittal on record. If the Court declines to review, the retrial on all charges will proceed as scheduled.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:10 jurors selected as empanelment continues in Karen Read retrialKaren Read appeals 2 of her charges up to the U.S. Supreme Court - CBS BostonBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​During Karen Read's first trial in 2024, the jury deliberated for approximately 23 hours over several days but reported being "deeply divided" and unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Subsequent statements from jurors indicated they had unanimously agreed on not guilty verdicts for the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a fatal accident but were deadlocked on the charge of manslaughter. Due to this impasse, the judge declared a mistrial on July 1, 2024.​In July 2024, the trial of Karen Read, accused of the second-degree murder of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, concluded with a mistrial after the jury reported being "hopelessly deadlocked" following several days of deliberations. The jury informed Judge Beverly Cannone that they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict, leading to the declaration of a mistrial. Subsequently, Read's defense team sought to dismiss the charges, citing double jeopardy concerns and claiming that jurors had agreed on not guilty verdicts for certain charges during deliberations. However, these motions were denied, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that Read could be retried on all charges.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In January 2022, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe was found dead in the snow outside a fellow officer's home following a night of socializing. His girlfriend, Karen Read, was subsequently charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a deadly accident, with prosecutors alleging she struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him in the freezing conditions. The initial trial concluded in July 2024 with a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury.Since then, the case has seen significant developments, including the termination of lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor for misconduct related to the investigation. Additionally, a juror from the first trial has joined Read's defense team, highlighting concerns about the investigation's integrity. Despite defense efforts to dismiss charges on double jeopardy grounds, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that Read can be retried. Jury selection for the retrial is set to commence on April 1, 2025.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:Karen Read and John O'Keefe: Inside evolution of Boston murder mystery since mistrial | Fox News

​In January 2022, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe was found dead in the snow outside a fellow officer's home following a night of socializing. His girlfriend, Karen Read, was subsequently charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a deadly accident, with prosecutors alleging she struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him in the freezing conditions. The initial trial concluded in July 2024 with a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury.Since then, the case has seen significant developments, including the termination of lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor for misconduct related to the investigation. Additionally, a juror from the first trial has joined Read's defense team, highlighting concerns about the investigation's integrity. Despite defense efforts to dismiss charges on double jeopardy grounds, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that Read can be retried. Jury selection for the retrial is set to commence on April 1, 2025.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:Karen Read and John O'Keefe: Inside evolution of Boston murder mystery since mistrial | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In January 2022, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe was found dead in the snow outside a fellow officer's home following a night of socializing. His girlfriend, Karen Read, was subsequently charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a deadly accident, with prosecutors alleging she struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him in the freezing conditions. The initial trial concluded in July 2024 with a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury.Since then, the case has seen significant developments, including the termination of lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor for misconduct related to the investigation. Additionally, a juror from the first trial has joined Read's defense team, highlighting concerns about the investigation's integrity. Despite defense efforts to dismiss charges on double jeopardy grounds, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that Read can be retried. Jury selection for the retrial is set to commence on April 1, 2025.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:Karen Read and John O'Keefe: Inside evolution of Boston murder mystery since mistrial | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Judge Halts Karen Read Pretrial Hearing After ‘Grave Concern' Over New Information A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. In an exclusive interview with Boston 25's Ted Daniel on Super Bowl Sunday, Read reiterated her stance, stating, “I have nothing to hide. I've been framed.” Her retrial, originally scheduled for early 2025, has now been pushed to April. The latest developments raise new questions about the role of federal forensic experts in the case and how their testimony might impact the outcome of the upcoming trial. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Judge Halts Karen Read Pretrial Hearing After ‘Grave Concern' Over New Information A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. In an exclusive interview with Boston 25's Ted Daniel on Super Bowl Sunday, Read reiterated her stance, stating, “I have nothing to hide. I've been framed.” Her retrial, originally scheduled for early 2025, has now been pushed to April. The latest developments raise new questions about the role of federal forensic experts in the case and how their testimony might impact the outcome of the upcoming trial. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. In an exclusive interview with Boston 25's Ted Daniel on Super Bowl Sunday, Read reiterated her stance, stating, “I have nothing to hide. I've been framed.” Her retrial, originally scheduled for early 2025, has now been pushed to April. The latest developments raise new questions about the role of federal forensic experts in the case and how their testimony might impact the outcome of the upcoming trial. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Judge Halts Karen Read Pretrial Hearing After ‘Grave Concern' Over New Information A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. In an exclusive interview with Boston 25's Ted Daniel on Super Bowl Sunday, Read reiterated her stance, stating, “I have nothing to hide. I've been framed.” Her retrial, originally scheduled for early 2025, has now been pushed to April. The latest developments raise new questions about the role of federal forensic experts in the case and how their testimony might impact the outcome of the upcoming trial. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com  

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com  

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A pretrial hearing in the Karen Read case took an unexpected turn when Judge Beverly Cannone abruptly ended proceedings, citing "grave concern" over newly disclosed information that could have "profound effects" on the defense. The dramatic moment unfolded after an open court discussion regarding federal involvement in the case, including expert witnesses from ARCCA, a forensic firm specializing in accident reconstruction. “The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern,” Cannone announced after returning from an unplanned recess. “The implications of that information may have profound effects on the defense and defense counsel.” Cannone then suspended the hearing, stating that when proceedings resume, all affected parties should be "appropriately prepared" to address the issues at hand. The abrupt decision followed a statement by special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who disclosed in open court that Read's defense team had previously communicated with ARCCA experts before her first trial. Brennan referred to what appeared to be emails between the defense and ARCCA, along with a $23,000 invoice the firm allegedly sent to Read's legal team. Brennan, who recently filed a motion to bar ARCCA witnesses from testifying at Read's retrial, accused the defense of concealing critical information about the experts' involvement. “Both Dr. Wolfe and Dr. Rentschler admittedly did not review all pertinent and relevant evidence that exists in this case,” Brennan's motion stated, referring to ARCCA's accident reconstruction specialists who testified in Read's defense in June 2024. Tuesday's pretrial hearing was the first since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied Read's appeal to dismiss two of the three charges against her. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, with her Lexus SUV in January 2022 and leaving him to die outside in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Her original trial ended in a hung jury, leading Cannone to declare a mistrial in July 2024. Read, who has consistently maintained her innocence, claims that she was framed and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the home of Brian Albert before being dragged outside. #KarenRead #JusticeForKarenRead #BostonPD #LegalNews #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #BreakingNews Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Commonwealth Beacon's Jennifer Smith chats with Greg Reibman, president of the Charles River Regional Chamber, and Luc Schuster, executive director of Boston Indicators at the Boston Foundation. They discuss how the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's ruling on the MBTA Communities Act impacts the state's power to mandate zoning reform in cities and towns. Listen to past Codcasts on this topic: 'Milton's dilemma in the face of housing reform' (10/13/24) , 'AG Andrea Campbell talks local power and gambling boom' (4/14/24) , 'MBTA Communities panel splits over state vs. local control' (4/7/24)

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision has far-reaching implications for the Karen Read case and similar trials involving digital evidence. The court upheld David Cronin Jr.'s conviction for possession of child sex abuse materials, affirming that testimony on data extracted with Cellebrite software could be admitted without the witness being an expert. Cronin's appeal rested on claims that Police Officer Michael McLaughlin, who testified on the Cellebrite report from Cronin's phone, was not qualified to do so as an expert. McLaughlin admitted he lacked technical expertise but explained that Cellebrite's software presented data in a layperson-friendly format. The court concluded that McLaughlin's testimony “required no scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” making it admissible as lay testimony. However, the court also found parts of his testimony, such as claims about Cellebrite's reliability, ventured into expert territory but ruled that this did not unfairly influence the trial's outcome. This decision is particularly relevant to the Karen Read case, where Cellebrite plays a pivotal role. Read, accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, is building her defense around allegations that a prosecution witness, Jennifer McCabe, conducted suspicious Google searches. According to Read's expert, Richard Green, McCabe searched phrases like “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m., hours before O'Keefe's body was found. Green, who reviewed Cellebrite data from McCabe's phone, testified that the searches were in a “deleted state” and that several phone calls had been erased. However, prosecutors argue Green's findings are flawed, citing their own Cellebrite expert, Ian Whiffin, who found no evidence of such searches or deletions. Additionally, Cellebrite software updates introduced after Read's initial trial have reportedly invalidated the 2:27 a.m. timestamp central to Green's claims. Prosecutors noted that Cellebrite's new software update prevents manipulation of timestamp data and removes unreliable timestamps from Safari searches. When McCabe's phone was re-analyzed with the updated version, the searches were shown to have occurred at 6:24 a.m., closer to when O'Keefe was found, and without evidence of deletion. The defense's reliance on Green's earlier analysis has led prosecutors to file a motion to bar him from testifying, asserting that his opinions are “completely discredited” by both Cellebrite and their own expert. They argue that presenting Green's findings in court risks confusing jurors with inaccurate information. A hearing to determine the admissibility of Green's testimony is scheduled for Jan. 31, a critical juncture in Read's case as her team seeks to challenge the prosecution's narrative. This latest legal development underscores the complexities of using Cellebrite software in criminal cases. As digital forensics evolves, courts continue to grapple with how best to evaluate and admit such evidence, setting significant precedents for future trials. #DigitalForensics #KarenReadCase #Cellebrite #LegalPrecedent #Massachusetts #CourtRuling #ExpertTestimony Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision has far-reaching implications for the Karen Read case and similar trials involving digital evidence. The court upheld David Cronin Jr.'s conviction for possession of child sex abuse materials, affirming that testimony on data extracted with Cellebrite software could be admitted without the witness being an expert. Cronin's appeal rested on claims that Police Officer Michael McLaughlin, who testified on the Cellebrite report from Cronin's phone, was not qualified to do so as an expert. McLaughlin admitted he lacked technical expertise but explained that Cellebrite's software presented data in a layperson-friendly format. The court concluded that McLaughlin's testimony “required no scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” making it admissible as lay testimony. However, the court also found parts of his testimony, such as claims about Cellebrite's reliability, ventured into expert territory but ruled that this did not unfairly influence the trial's outcome. This decision is particularly relevant to the Karen Read case, where Cellebrite plays a pivotal role. Read, accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, is building her defense around allegations that a prosecution witness, Jennifer McCabe, conducted suspicious Google searches. According to Read's expert, Richard Green, McCabe searched phrases like “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m., hours before O'Keefe's body was found. Green, who reviewed Cellebrite data from McCabe's phone, testified that the searches were in a “deleted state” and that several phone calls had been erased. However, prosecutors argue Green's findings are flawed, citing their own Cellebrite expert, Ian Whiffin, who found no evidence of such searches or deletions. Additionally, Cellebrite software updates introduced after Read's initial trial have reportedly invalidated the 2:27 a.m. timestamp central to Green's claims. Prosecutors noted that Cellebrite's new software update prevents manipulation of timestamp data and removes unreliable timestamps from Safari searches. When McCabe's phone was re-analyzed with the updated version, the searches were shown to have occurred at 6:24 a.m., closer to when O'Keefe was found, and without evidence of deletion. The defense's reliance on Green's earlier analysis has led prosecutors to file a motion to bar him from testifying, asserting that his opinions are “completely discredited” by both Cellebrite and their own expert. They argue that presenting Green's findings in court risks confusing jurors with inaccurate information. A hearing to determine the admissibility of Green's testimony is scheduled for Jan. 31, a critical juncture in Read's case as her team seeks to challenge the prosecution's narrative. This latest legal development underscores the complexities of using Cellebrite software in criminal cases. As digital forensics evolves, courts continue to grapple with how best to evaluate and admit such evidence, setting significant precedents for future trials. #DigitalForensics #KarenReadCase #Cellebrite #LegalPrecedent #Massachusetts #CourtRuling #ExpertTestimony Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision has far-reaching implications for the Karen Read case and similar trials involving digital evidence. The court upheld David Cronin Jr.'s conviction for possession of child sex abuse materials, affirming that testimony on data extracted with Cellebrite software could be admitted without the witness being an expert. Cronin's appeal rested on claims that Police Officer Michael McLaughlin, who testified on the Cellebrite report from Cronin's phone, was not qualified to do so as an expert. McLaughlin admitted he lacked technical expertise but explained that Cellebrite's software presented data in a layperson-friendly format. The court concluded that McLaughlin's testimony “required no scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” making it admissible as lay testimony. However, the court also found parts of his testimony, such as claims about Cellebrite's reliability, ventured into expert territory but ruled that this did not unfairly influence the trial's outcome. This decision is particularly relevant to the Karen Read case, where Cellebrite plays a pivotal role. Read, accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, is building her defense around allegations that a prosecution witness, Jennifer McCabe, conducted suspicious Google searches. According to Read's expert, Richard Green, McCabe searched phrases like “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m., hours before O'Keefe's body was found. Green, who reviewed Cellebrite data from McCabe's phone, testified that the searches were in a “deleted state” and that several phone calls had been erased. However, prosecutors argue Green's findings are flawed, citing their own Cellebrite expert, Ian Whiffin, who found no evidence of such searches or deletions. Additionally, Cellebrite software updates introduced after Read's initial trial have reportedly invalidated the 2:27 a.m. timestamp central to Green's claims. Prosecutors noted that Cellebrite's new software update prevents manipulation of timestamp data and removes unreliable timestamps from Safari searches. When McCabe's phone was re-analyzed with the updated version, the searches were shown to have occurred at 6:24 a.m., closer to when O'Keefe was found, and without evidence of deletion. The defense's reliance on Green's earlier analysis has led prosecutors to file a motion to bar him from testifying, asserting that his opinions are “completely discredited” by both Cellebrite and their own expert. They argue that presenting Green's findings in court risks confusing jurors with inaccurate information. A hearing to determine the admissibility of Green's testimony is scheduled for Jan. 31, a critical juncture in Read's case as her team seeks to challenge the prosecution's narrative. This latest legal development underscores the complexities of using Cellebrite software in criminal cases. As digital forensics evolves, courts continue to grapple with how best to evaluate and admit such evidence, setting significant precedents for future trials. #DigitalForensics #KarenReadCase #Cellebrite #LegalPrecedent #Massachusetts #CourtRuling #ExpertTestimony Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision has far-reaching implications for the Karen Read case and similar trials involving digital evidence. The court upheld David Cronin Jr.'s conviction for possession of child sex abuse materials, affirming that testimony on data extracted with Cellebrite software could be admitted without the witness being an expert. Cronin's appeal rested on claims that Police Officer Michael McLaughlin, who testified on the Cellebrite report from Cronin's phone, was not qualified to do so as an expert. McLaughlin admitted he lacked technical expertise but explained that Cellebrite's software presented data in a layperson-friendly format. The court concluded that McLaughlin's testimony “required no scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” making it admissible as lay testimony. However, the court also found parts of his testimony, such as claims about Cellebrite's reliability, ventured into expert territory but ruled that this did not unfairly influence the trial's outcome. This decision is particularly relevant to the Karen Read case, where Cellebrite plays a pivotal role. Read, accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, is building her defense around allegations that a prosecution witness, Jennifer McCabe, conducted suspicious Google searches. According to Read's expert, Richard Green, McCabe searched phrases like “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m., hours before O'Keefe's body was found. Green, who reviewed Cellebrite data from McCabe's phone, testified that the searches were in a “deleted state” and that several phone calls had been erased. However, prosecutors argue Green's findings are flawed, citing their own Cellebrite expert, Ian Whiffin, who found no evidence of such searches or deletions. Additionally, Cellebrite software updates introduced after Read's initial trial have reportedly invalidated the 2:27 a.m. timestamp central to Green's claims. Prosecutors noted that Cellebrite's new software update prevents manipulation of timestamp data and removes unreliable timestamps from Safari searches. When McCabe's phone was re-analyzed with the updated version, the searches were shown to have occurred at 6:24 a.m., closer to when O'Keefe was found, and without evidence of deletion. The defense's reliance on Green's earlier analysis has led prosecutors to file a motion to bar him from testifying, asserting that his opinions are “completely discredited” by both Cellebrite and their own expert. They argue that presenting Green's findings in court risks confusing jurors with inaccurate information. A hearing to determine the admissibility of Green's testimony is scheduled for Jan. 31, a critical juncture in Read's case as her team seeks to challenge the prosecution's narrative. This latest legal development underscores the complexities of using Cellebrite software in criminal cases. As digital forensics evolves, courts continue to grapple with how best to evaluate and admit such evidence, setting significant precedents for future trials. #DigitalForensics #KarenReadCase #Cellebrite #LegalPrecedent #Massachusetts #CourtRuling #ExpertTestimony Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled on a challenge to the controversial housing law, the MBTA Communities Act. The court ruled in favor of the state ruling the law is constitutional however the regulations are unenforceable and requested that the detailed zoning guidelines that shape the law be re-written. We discussed it with Denny Swenson, a local resident and Attorney Paul Hogan.Ask Alexa to play WBZ NewsRadio on #iHeartRadio and listen to NightSide with Dan Rea Weeknights From 8PM-12AM!

The retrial of Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has been delayed following a joint motion from both the defense and prosecution. The delay, granted by Judge Beverly Cannone, allows additional time for both sides to prepare as they navigate disputes over key evidence and expert testimony. Read, 44, is charged with second-degree murder and related offenses in connection with the January 2022 death of O'Keefe. His body was discovered in the snow outside a Canton home after a night of drinking. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him to die, while her defense argues she is the victim of a cover-up involving law enforcement and others. The retrial was initially scheduled to begin in January 2025. Both parties, however, requested the delay, proposing an April 1, 2025, start date. In their motion, attorneys cited the need for "adequate time" to prepare due to new evidence and expert analysis that will be presented. Judge Cannone approved the motion and indicated that final scheduling details would be discussed at a Dec. 12 hearing. This hearing will also address the defense's attempt to introduce testimony from Dr. Marie Russell, a veterinarian who testified in the first trial. Dr. Russell has argued that O'Keefe's injuries could be attributed to dog bites rather than being struck by a vehicle. Prosecutors are challenging her qualifications as an expert witness, with a Daubert hearing set to assess whether her testimony meets the legal standards for relevance and reliability. Read's defense continues to assert her innocence, alleging she has been framed in a conspiracy involving law enforcement and others. Her attorney, David Yannetti, has pointed to perceived irregularities in the investigation, including inconsistencies in how damage to Read's SUV was documented. “There is overwhelming evidence that Karen Read is the victim of a miscarriage of justice,” Yannetti said. “We are confident the retrial will expose the truth.” The first trial, which ended in a mistrial in July 2024, saw jurors deadlocked on a manslaughter charge but reportedly leaning toward acquittal on more serious counts. Read's legal team has since appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss some of the charges, arguing that the jury's findings in the first trial support her claims of innocence. Prosecutors maintain that Read acted with reckless disregard for O'Keefe's safety. They contend that she struck him with her SUV and failed to seek help, leaving him to succumb to the elements. Efforts to strengthen their case in the retrial have included requests for additional forensic testing of Read's SUV and obtaining recordings from interviews involving Read and her family. Judge Cannone recently denied a prosecution request to access phone records from Read's parents but approved their request to analyze unedited interview recordings. Complicating matters further is a civil lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family against Read and the establishments where the couple had been drinking before his death. A judge has paused depositions and discovery in the civil case until the conclusion of the criminal retrial. As both sides prepare for the upcoming trial, the Dec. 12 hearing will play a crucial role in determining the scope of evidence and testimony that can be presented. The retrial remains a focal point for those closely watching the legal battle, which has raised questions about the intersection of law enforcement, justice, and personal relationships. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #Retrial #JusticeSystem #LegalNews #MassachusettsCrime #CourtUpdates Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

The retrial of Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has been delayed following a joint motion from both the defense and prosecution. The delay, granted by Judge Beverly Cannone, allows additional time for both sides to prepare as they navigate disputes over key evidence and expert testimony. Read, 44, is charged with second-degree murder and related offenses in connection with the January 2022 death of O'Keefe. His body was discovered in the snow outside a Canton home after a night of drinking. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him to die, while her defense argues she is the victim of a cover-up involving law enforcement and others. The retrial was initially scheduled to begin in January 2025. Both parties, however, requested the delay, proposing an April 1, 2025, start date. In their motion, attorneys cited the need for "adequate time" to prepare due to new evidence and expert analysis that will be presented. Judge Cannone approved the motion and indicated that final scheduling details would be discussed at a Dec. 12 hearing. This hearing will also address the defense's attempt to introduce testimony from Dr. Marie Russell, a veterinarian who testified in the first trial. Dr. Russell has argued that O'Keefe's injuries could be attributed to dog bites rather than being struck by a vehicle. Prosecutors are challenging her qualifications as an expert witness, with a Daubert hearing set to assess whether her testimony meets the legal standards for relevance and reliability. Read's defense continues to assert her innocence, alleging she has been framed in a conspiracy involving law enforcement and others. Her attorney, David Yannetti, has pointed to perceived irregularities in the investigation, including inconsistencies in how damage to Read's SUV was documented. “There is overwhelming evidence that Karen Read is the victim of a miscarriage of justice,” Yannetti said. “We are confident the retrial will expose the truth.” The first trial, which ended in a mistrial in July 2024, saw jurors deadlocked on a manslaughter charge but reportedly leaning toward acquittal on more serious counts. Read's legal team has since appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss some of the charges, arguing that the jury's findings in the first trial support her claims of innocence. Prosecutors maintain that Read acted with reckless disregard for O'Keefe's safety. They contend that she struck him with her SUV and failed to seek help, leaving him to succumb to the elements. Efforts to strengthen their case in the retrial have included requests for additional forensic testing of Read's SUV and obtaining recordings from interviews involving Read and her family. Judge Cannone recently denied a prosecution request to access phone records from Read's parents but approved their request to analyze unedited interview recordings. Complicating matters further is a civil lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family against Read and the establishments where the couple had been drinking before his death. A judge has paused depositions and discovery in the civil case until the conclusion of the criminal retrial. As both sides prepare for the upcoming trial, the Dec. 12 hearing will play a crucial role in determining the scope of evidence and testimony that can be presented. The retrial remains a focal point for those closely watching the legal battle, which has raised questions about the intersection of law enforcement, justice, and personal relationships. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #Retrial #JusticeSystem #LegalNews #MassachusettsCrime #CourtUpdates Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The retrial of Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has been delayed following a joint motion from both the defense and prosecution. The delay, granted by Judge Beverly Cannone, allows additional time for both sides to prepare as they navigate disputes over key evidence and expert testimony. Read, 44, is charged with second-degree murder and related offenses in connection with the January 2022 death of O'Keefe. His body was discovered in the snow outside a Canton home after a night of drinking. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her SUV and left him to die, while her defense argues she is the victim of a cover-up involving law enforcement and others. The retrial was initially scheduled to begin in January 2025. Both parties, however, requested the delay, proposing an April 1, 2025, start date. In their motion, attorneys cited the need for "adequate time" to prepare due to new evidence and expert analysis that will be presented. Judge Cannone approved the motion and indicated that final scheduling details would be discussed at a Dec. 12 hearing. This hearing will also address the defense's attempt to introduce testimony from Dr. Marie Russell, a veterinarian who testified in the first trial. Dr. Russell has argued that O'Keefe's injuries could be attributed to dog bites rather than being struck by a vehicle. Prosecutors are challenging her qualifications as an expert witness, with a Daubert hearing set to assess whether her testimony meets the legal standards for relevance and reliability. Read's defense continues to assert her innocence, alleging she has been framed in a conspiracy involving law enforcement and others. Her attorney, David Yannetti, has pointed to perceived irregularities in the investigation, including inconsistencies in how damage to Read's SUV was documented. “There is overwhelming evidence that Karen Read is the victim of a miscarriage of justice,” Yannetti said. “We are confident the retrial will expose the truth.” The first trial, which ended in a mistrial in July 2024, saw jurors deadlocked on a manslaughter charge but reportedly leaning toward acquittal on more serious counts. Read's legal team has since appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss some of the charges, arguing that the jury's findings in the first trial support her claims of innocence. Prosecutors maintain that Read acted with reckless disregard for O'Keefe's safety. They contend that she struck him with her SUV and failed to seek help, leaving him to succumb to the elements. Efforts to strengthen their case in the retrial have included requests for additional forensic testing of Read's SUV and obtaining recordings from interviews involving Read and her family. Judge Cannone recently denied a prosecution request to access phone records from Read's parents but approved their request to analyze unedited interview recordings. Complicating matters further is a civil lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family against Read and the establishments where the couple had been drinking before his death. A judge has paused depositions and discovery in the civil case until the conclusion of the criminal retrial. As both sides prepare for the upcoming trial, the Dec. 12 hearing will play a crucial role in determining the scope of evidence and testimony that can be presented. The retrial remains a focal point for those closely watching the legal battle, which has raised questions about the intersection of law enforcement, justice, and personal relationships. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #Retrial #JusticeSystem #LegalNews #MassachusettsCrime #CourtUpdates Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

This Day in Legal History: Goodridge v. Department of HealthOn November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a historic decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, becoming the first court in the United States to rule that a state ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. In a narrow 4–3 decision, the court held that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples violated the Massachusetts Constitution's guarantees of equality and liberty. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall emphasized that marriage is a civil right and that excluding same-sex couples from this institution created a second-class status inconsistent with constitutional protections.The court ordered the Massachusetts legislature to take corrective action within 180 days, either by revising existing laws or crafting a new framework that would extend marriage rights to same-sex couples. Importantly, the ruling did not permit civil unions as a substitute for marriage, affirming that anything less than full marriage rights would perpetuate discrimination. This groundbreaking decision made Massachusetts the first state in the U.S. to legalize same-sex marriage, sparking national debates over marriage equality.The Goodridge decision laid the foundation for subsequent legal battles over marriage rights and catalyzed movements for LGBTQ+ equality nationwide. While celebrated as a milestone in civil rights history, the ruling also ignited opposition, prompting efforts to pass constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Despite the controversy, Massachusetts began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in May 2004, cementing its role as a trailblazer in the fight for marriage equality.Former President Donald Trump's hush money criminal case is at a crossroads following his election victory. Trump was convicted in May of falsifying business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels during his 2016 campaign, but sentencing has been paused at the request of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Prosecutors must now propose how to proceed, balancing the political implications of prosecuting a president-elect with the need to uphold legal standards. Their recommendations are due Tuesday.Options for prosecutors include indefinitely delaying sentencing, postponing punishment until Trump exhausts appeals, or pursuing a sentence with minimal consequences, such as an unconditional discharge. Legal experts suggest Bragg is unlikely to seek aggressive penalties before the inauguration, given the potential political fallout.Trump's defense has long claimed the case is politically motivated, arguing that it should be dismissed to avoid unconstitutional interference with his presidency. They also contend that his actions are protected by presidential immunity, though the court has yet to rule on this argument. The judge, Justice Juan Merchan, will ultimately decide whether the case moves forward, with both sides expected to appeal any unfavorable decisions.What's next in Trump's hush money criminal case | ReutersFormer IRS Contractor Sentenced for Disclosing Tax Return Information to News Organizations | United States Department of JusticeKathi Vidal, outgoing director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), will rejoin her former law firm, Winston & Strawn, as a partner on December 16 after leaving the agency. Nominated by President Joe Biden in 2021, Vidal focused on policies addressing artificial intelligence (AI) in patents, international intellectual property (IP) issues, and diversity in innovation during her tenure. She emphasized transparency and patentability standards for AI-assisted inventions to promote innovation without stifling it.Deputy Director Derrick Brent will serve as acting director until President-elect Donald Trump appoints a replacement. Trump has not announced his pick, though his first-term USPTO head, Andrei Iancu, prioritized policies favoring patent owners. Vidal noted that IP policy tends to be less partisan and highlighted the agency's unique funding model, which relies on processing fees rather than taxpayer dollars.At Winston, Vidal will advise clients on tech-related legal issues, including AI, cybersecurity, and antitrust law, leveraging her USPTO experience. The firm's leadership praised her ability to guide clients through challenges posed by technological advances and geopolitical pressures. Vidal expressed her intention to continue shaping tech policy at the intersection of law and innovation.US Patent Office's Vidal returns to law firm Winston ahead of Trump term | ReutersSpirit Airlines Inc. has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy amid financial challenges and intense competition from rival carriers. The filing in New York lists the company's assets and liabilities as between $1 billion and $10 billion. Spirit's troubles escalated after a federal judge blocked its proposed $3.8 billion merger with JetBlue Airways Corp., citing antitrust concerns that the deal would harm budget-conscious travelers by raising ticket prices. Previous merger talks with Frontier Group Holdings Inc. also collapsed.The discount airline has faced increasing pressure from major carriers offering competitive basic economy fares, which have eroded Spirit's market share. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the company has posted consistent losses, with its stock plummeting 93% in 2023.Spirit's bankruptcy follows an agreement with bondholders on a debt restructuring plan. Bondholders will convert $795 million of debt into equity, take control of the company, and inject $350 million in fresh equity along with $300 million in debtor-in-possession financing to sustain operations during the bankruptcy process. The airline also plans to delist as part of the restructuring.In an effort to remain competitive, Spirit recently introduced upgrades such as extra legroom and free checked baggage to attract travelers seeking more premium options. However, these efforts have been insufficient to counter the financial strain. The case is being handled in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.Spirit Airlines (SAVE) Files Bankruptcy Following Failed JetBlue Tie-Up - BloombergThe U.S. Supreme Court announced it will release its first opinion of the term on November 22, earlier than in recent years, where the first opinions appeared in December or January. The specific case or cases to be decided have not been disclosed, but they are likely from the nine argued in the October session. These include issues like federal court jurisdiction, attorneys' fees, and the requirement to exhaust administrative remedies before suing in federal court. Complex cases, such as challenges to Biden's ghost gun regulations and an Oklahoma death penalty case, are expected to take longer.The timing recalls the court's earlier practice of releasing initial opinions in November, a pattern often attributed to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's quick writing pace. In contrast, recent terms have seen delays, with the first opinion in the 2022 term arriving as late as January 23, 2023, marking an unprecedented delay since the court's October term structure began in 1917.This term, the court has already agreed to hear 45 cases, avoiding controversial social issues and focusing on lower-profile matters. The November 22 release could include an opinion or even a dismissal of a case as “improvidently granted,” as suggested during recent arguments in an investor lawsuit against Nvidia.US Supreme Court Bucks Recent Trend, Announces Opinion ReleaseThe court ruling in Mem'l Hermann Accountable Care Org. v. Commissioner underscores the flaws in the current 501(c)(4) tax-exempt classification and the need for reform to address the issue of dark money in politics. This tax code section groups together vastly different organizations, from advocacy groups like the NRA to local sports leagues, under a single classification. The lack of clear, enforceable standards allows some organizations to exploit their tax-exempt status to fund political campaigns while avoiding donor disclosure. This lack of transparency fuels the dark money problem.501(c)(4) organizations can engage in political activity as long as it's not their primary purpose, a vague standard that has led to inconsistent enforcement by the IRS. The Fifth Circuit's decision in Mem'l Hermann challenges this leniency by applying a stricter “substantial nonexempt purpose” test, signaling a potential shift towards greater scrutiny of political spending by these organizations.One solution is creating a new tax-exempt subcategory—501(c)(4)(C)—for politically active social welfare groups. This would establish clearer rules, such as capping political expenditures at 50% of revenue and requiring donor disclosure for contributions above $10,000. It would also separate traditional social welfare organizations from politically active ones, reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens on the former.Breaking 501(c)(4) into more specific classifications would ensure that transparency requirements target politically active organizations without disrupting community-focused groups. It would also help regulatory bodies focus enforcement efforts and prevent misuse of tax exemptions for untraceable political contributions. This reform aligns with public demand for accountability in campaign finance while preserving the integrity of non-political nonprofits.In sum, the 501(c)(4) designation is problematic as currently drafted because it combines a wide variety of organizations with vastly different purposes under the same tax code section. This allows political advocacy groups to hide behind the same classification as traditional social welfare organizations, avoiding stricter scrutiny. This structural ambiguity hampers transparency efforts, suggesting the need to separate these groups into distinct categories for effective regulation.Getting Rid of Dark Money Requires a New Tax-Exempt Designation This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

How will the outcome of the presidential election affect enforcement actions and litigation? Join Steve Shappell, David Finz and Mike Radak as they discuss their predictions for a possible shift in SEC enforcement priorities, massive deregulation and an increase in civil litigation under the Trump administration. The team also examines the dismissal of a data privacy case by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, a decision that could influence website tracking litigation across the nation.

Karen Read's case centers on the death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, found outside another officer's home during a snowstorm in January 2022. Prosecutors allege that Read ran over O'Keefe with her car after a dispute, leaving him to die in the snow. Read maintains her innocence, arguing that O'Keefe was harmed by other officers and that she's being framed. Following a mistrial in Karen Read's case due to a jury deadlock, her defense has requested the dismissal of some charges that jurors reportedly agreed she was not guilty of. This request rests on the argument that retrying these charges would constitute double jeopardy. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently heard arguments on this issue, though a decision has yet to be reached.For more the case, CLICK HERE. (https://www.courttv.com/tag/karen-read/)Watch 24/7 Court TV LIVE Stream Today https://www.courttv.com/Join the Investigation Newsletter https://www.courttv.com/email/Court TV Podcast https://www.courttv.com/podcast/FOLLOW THE CASE:Facebook https://www.facebook.com/courttvTwitter/X https://twitter.com/CourtTVInstagram https://www.instagram.com/courttvnetwork/TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@courttvliveYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/COURTTVWATCH +140 FREE TRIALS IN THE COURT TV ARCHIVEhttps://www.courttv.com/trials/HOW TO FIND COURT TVhttps://www.courttv.com/where-to-watch/

Karen Read and her defense team appeared before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to get two criminal charges against Read, thrown out on the grounds of double jeopardy. Read's second criminal trial is supposed to start in January of 2025. However, this week both the prosecution and defense teams filed a motion to delay the retrial until April 1, 2025. Dan Rea and criminal defense attorney Phil Tracy discussed the ongoing Karen Read case!Ask Alexa to play WBZ NewsRadio on #iHeartRadio and listen to NightSide with Dan Rea Weeknights From 8PM-12AM!

Man Faces Charges in “Duckgate” Scandal Linked to Karen Read Case A Massachusetts man is facing criminal charges after allegedly distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills in support of Karen Read, a woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Richard Schiffer Jr., 65, has been charged with witness intimidation, criminal harassment, and littering, according to Stoughton District Court. The incidents, some locals are calling "Duckgate," have sparked controversy in the Boston suburb of Canton, where the case has divided the community. Schiffer is accused of leaving rubber ducks and counterfeit bills near homes and businesses connected to witnesses in Read's case, which has attracted a fervent group of supporters. Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV outside a Canton home on January 29, 2022, and leaving him to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. O'Keefe's body was found the next morning outside the home of a fellow Boston police officer. Read has pleaded not guilty, and her defense team argues that she was framed as part of a conspiracy to protect individuals who were present at the home that night. They claim O'Keefe was fatally beaten, and his body was left outside to divert suspicion onto Read. Her first trial ended in a mistrial in July 2023 after the jury was deadlocked. Judge Beverly Cannone, who oversaw that trial, will return to the bench for Read's second trial, scheduled for early next year. Cannone rejected the defense's request to drop certain charges, and that decision is now being appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In addition to overseeing the retrial, Cannone will also rule on recent requests by Special Assistant District Attorney Hank Brennan, who was appointed to lead the case last month. Brennan has asked for court authorization to reassemble and retest electronics from Read's SUV, seeking more evidence before the retrial. He has also requested cellphone records for William Read, Karen Read's father, and records related to a 2023 local media interview the Read family gave about the case. Schiffer, who admits to distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills, claims his actions are protected under the First Amendment. "Through the First Amendment and my right to free speech, I expressed my opinion and belief that Karen Read is innocent," Schiffer wrote in an online fundraiser seeking help with his legal fees. Schiffer's attorney has not yet been listed in court records, and CNN has reached out to him for comment. The rubber ducks reportedly reference a comment made by Read's defense attorney, Alan Jackson, during a pre-trial hearing, when he said, "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck." Police claim Schiffer used these ducks to harass witnesses by implying they could not "duck the truth" about O'Keefe's death. Surveillance footage, traffic cameras, and witness testimony were used to link Schiffer to the incidents. The first incident occurred in March 2023, when fake $100 bills were found near D&E Pizza & Subs in Canton, a restaurant owned by a relative of the homeowner where O'Keefe's body was discovered. Over the next several months, more fake bills and rubber ducks appeared near O'Keefe's home, two bars he visited before his death, and outside homes of other witnesses. Some of the ducks carried stickers implicating a family member of the property owner where O'Keefe was found, and the fake bills bore the message “Justice for BPO John O'Keefe.” In May, investigators executed a search warrant on Schiffer's Toyota Tundra and found rubber ducks and stickers inside the vehicle. Rubber ducks were also discovered outside the home of Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case. Proctor has been accused of mishandling the investigation, and after Read's first trial, he was suspended from the force without pay following revelations of inappropriate comments he made about Read in a private group chat with colleagues. Schiffer, however, maintains that his actions were peaceful and lawful expressions of his belief that Read is innocent. "Charging innocent citizens with manufactured crimes is weaponizing our justice system to silence law-abiding citizens," Schiffer wrote in a second online fundraiser. As Read's retrial approaches, the case continues to gain national attention, and the community remains divided. Schiffer's criminal charges could carry serious consequences, with witness intimidation alone carrying a potential 10-year prison sentence. Despite this, Schiffer shows no signs of backing down, asserting that he will continue to advocate for Read's innocence as she prepares to stand trial again in January. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A Massachusetts man is facing criminal charges after allegedly distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills in support of Karen Read, a woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Richard Schiffer Jr., 65, has been charged with witness intimidation, criminal harassment, and littering, according to Stoughton District Court. The incidents, some locals are calling "Duckgate," have sparked controversy in the Boston suburb of Canton, where the case has divided the community. Schiffer is accused of leaving rubber ducks and counterfeit bills near homes and businesses connected to witnesses in Read's case, which has attracted a fervent group of supporters. Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV outside a Canton home on January 29, 2022, and leaving him to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. O'Keefe's body was found the next morning outside the home of a fellow Boston police officer. Read has pleaded not guilty, and her defense team argues that she was framed as part of a conspiracy to protect individuals who were present at the home that night. They claim O'Keefe was fatally beaten, and his body was left outside to divert suspicion onto Read. Her first trial ended in a mistrial in July 2023 after the jury was deadlocked. Judge Beverly Cannone, who oversaw that trial, will return to the bench for Read's second trial, scheduled for early next year. Cannone rejected the defense's request to drop certain charges, and that decision is now being appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In addition to overseeing the retrial, Cannone will also rule on recent requests by Special Assistant District Attorney Hank Brennan, who was appointed to lead the case last month. Brennan has asked for court authorization to reassemble and retest electronics from Read's SUV, seeking more evidence before the retrial. He has also requested cellphone records for William Read, Karen Read's father, and records related to a 2023 local media interview the Read family gave about the case. Schiffer, who admits to distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills, claims his actions are protected under the First Amendment. "Through the First Amendment and my right to free speech, I expressed my opinion and belief that Karen Read is innocent," Schiffer wrote in an online fundraiser seeking help with his legal fees. Schiffer's attorney has not yet been listed in court records, and CNN has reached out to him for comment. The rubber ducks reportedly reference a comment made by Read's defense attorney, Alan Jackson, during a pre-trial hearing, when he said, "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck." Police claim Schiffer used these ducks to harass witnesses by implying they could not "duck the truth" about O'Keefe's death. Surveillance footage, traffic cameras, and witness testimony were used to link Schiffer to the incidents. The first incident occurred in March 2023, when fake $100 bills were found near D&E Pizza & Subs in Canton, a restaurant owned by a relative of the homeowner where O'Keefe's body was discovered. Over the next several months, more fake bills and rubber ducks appeared near O'Keefe's home, two bars he visited before his death, and outside homes of other witnesses. Some of the ducks carried stickers implicating a family member of the property owner where O'Keefe was found, and the fake bills bore the message “Justice for BPO John O'Keefe.” In May, investigators executed a search warrant on Schiffer's Toyota Tundra and found rubber ducks and stickers inside the vehicle. Rubber ducks were also discovered outside the home of Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case. Proctor has been accused of mishandling the investigation, and after Read's first trial, he was suspended from the force without pay following revelations of inappropriate comments he made about Read in a private group chat with colleagues. Schiffer, however, maintains that his actions were peaceful and lawful expressions of his belief that Read is innocent. "Charging innocent citizens with manufactured crimes is weaponizing our justice system to silence law-abiding citizens," Schiffer wrote in a second online fundraiser. As Read's retrial approaches, the case continues to gain national attention, and the community remains divided. Schiffer's criminal charges could carry serious consequences, with witness intimidation alone carrying a potential 10-year prison sentence. Despite this, Schiffer shows no signs of backing down, asserting that he will continue to advocate for Read's innocence as she prepares to stand trial again in January. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A Massachusetts man is facing criminal charges after allegedly distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills in support of Karen Read, a woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Richard Schiffer Jr., 65, has been charged with witness intimidation, criminal harassment, and littering, according to Stoughton District Court. The incidents, some locals are calling "Duckgate," have sparked controversy in the Boston suburb of Canton, where the case has divided the community. Schiffer is accused of leaving rubber ducks and counterfeit bills near homes and businesses connected to witnesses in Read's case, which has attracted a fervent group of supporters. Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV outside a Canton home on January 29, 2022, and leaving him to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. O'Keefe's body was found the next morning outside the home of a fellow Boston police officer. Read has pleaded not guilty, and her defense team argues that she was framed as part of a conspiracy to protect individuals who were present at the home that night. They claim O'Keefe was fatally beaten, and his body was left outside to divert suspicion onto Read. Her first trial ended in a mistrial in July 2023 after the jury was deadlocked. Judge Beverly Cannone, who oversaw that trial, will return to the bench for Read's second trial, scheduled for early next year. Cannone rejected the defense's request to drop certain charges, and that decision is now being appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In addition to overseeing the retrial, Cannone will also rule on recent requests by Special Assistant District Attorney Hank Brennan, who was appointed to lead the case last month. Brennan has asked for court authorization to reassemble and retest electronics from Read's SUV, seeking more evidence before the retrial. He has also requested cellphone records for William Read, Karen Read's father, and records related to a 2023 local media interview the Read family gave about the case. Schiffer, who admits to distributing rubber ducks and fake $100 bills, claims his actions are protected under the First Amendment. "Through the First Amendment and my right to free speech, I expressed my opinion and belief that Karen Read is innocent," Schiffer wrote in an online fundraiser seeking help with his legal fees. Schiffer's attorney has not yet been listed in court records, and CNN has reached out to him for comment. The rubber ducks reportedly reference a comment made by Read's defense attorney, Alan Jackson, during a pre-trial hearing, when he said, "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck." Police claim Schiffer used these ducks to harass witnesses by implying they could not "duck the truth" about O'Keefe's death. Surveillance footage, traffic cameras, and witness testimony were used to link Schiffer to the incidents. The first incident occurred in March 2023, when fake $100 bills were found near D&E Pizza & Subs in Canton, a restaurant owned by a relative of the homeowner where O'Keefe's body was discovered. Over the next several months, more fake bills and rubber ducks appeared near O'Keefe's home, two bars he visited before his death, and outside homes of other witnesses. Some of the ducks carried stickers implicating a family member of the property owner where O'Keefe was found, and the fake bills bore the message “Justice for BPO John O'Keefe.” In May, investigators executed a search warrant on Schiffer's Toyota Tundra and found rubber ducks and stickers inside the vehicle. Rubber ducks were also discovered outside the home of Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case. Proctor has been accused of mishandling the investigation, and after Read's first trial, he was suspended from the force without pay following revelations of inappropriate comments he made about Read in a private group chat with colleagues. Schiffer, however, maintains that his actions were peaceful and lawful expressions of his belief that Read is innocent. "Charging innocent citizens with manufactured crimes is weaponizing our justice system to silence law-abiding citizens," Schiffer wrote in a second online fundraiser. As Read's retrial approaches, the case continues to gain national attention, and the community remains divided. Schiffer's criminal charges could carry serious consequences, with witness intimidation alone carrying a potential 10-year prison sentence. Despite this, Schiffer shows no signs of backing down, asserting that he will continue to advocate for Read's innocence as she prepares to stand trial again in January. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Karen Read, the Massachusetts woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, in 2022, is attempting to delay a wrongful death lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family until after her criminal trial. Read faces a second trial for second-degree murder and other charges in January, after her initial trial ended in a mistrial three months ago. According to documents filed by her attorneys, the civil suit should be postponed until the criminal case concludes to avoid compromising her Fifth Amendment rights. The wrongful death lawsuit also names Waterfall Bar & Grill and C.F. McCarthy's as defendants, alleging they continued to serve Read alcohol on the night of the incident, despite her visible intoxication. The lawsuit claims that Read backed her SUV into O'Keefe during a snowstorm and left him outside, where he later succumbed to his injuries. Read's criminal trial in July ended in a mistrial after jurors could not reach a verdict on a manslaughter charge but agreed to acquit her on charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. “My best guess right now is they will dispense with the first argument pretty quickly,” Suffolk University law professor Chris Dearborn commented on the upcoming appeal. “The second argument… is the one I think has a little more promise.” In the lead-up to the retrial, Read's legal team is set to argue before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in hopes of having two charges dismissed, including the second-degree murder charge. This appeal could have significant repercussions for the January trial date, especially if the court takes months to reach a decision. “I don't know if that is fair to either side,” Dearborn said, noting the challenges of preparing for trial amid ongoing legal uncertainties. Meanwhile, the decision to bring in special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who previously represented mobster James “Whitey” Bulger, has sparked interest. Brennan's involvement is seen by some, including Dearborn, as an effort to underscore the prosecution's commitment to a rigorous and ethical handling of the case. “I think this is the DA Morrissey trying to send a message to everybody that we don't want anyone to think there is anything going on here that is untoward or not ethical,” Dearborn explained. With these pending legal battles, both criminal and civil, and heightened media scrutiny, the case continues to captivate Massachusetts and beyond, as Read faces another showdown in court on January 27. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

Karen Read, the Massachusetts woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, in 2022, is attempting to delay a wrongful death lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family until after her criminal trial. Read faces a second trial for second-degree murder and other charges in January, after her initial trial ended in a mistrial three months ago. According to documents filed by her attorneys, the civil suit should be postponed until the criminal case concludes to avoid compromising her Fifth Amendment rights. The wrongful death lawsuit also names Waterfall Bar & Grill and C.F. McCarthy's as defendants, alleging they continued to serve Read alcohol on the night of the incident, despite her visible intoxication. The lawsuit claims that Read backed her SUV into O'Keefe during a snowstorm and left him outside, where he later succumbed to his injuries. Read's criminal trial in July ended in a mistrial after jurors could not reach a verdict on a manslaughter charge but agreed to acquit her on charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. “My best guess right now is they will dispense with the first argument pretty quickly,” Suffolk University law professor Chris Dearborn commented on the upcoming appeal. “The second argument… is the one I think has a little more promise.” In the lead-up to the retrial, Read's legal team is set to argue before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in hopes of having two charges dismissed, including the second-degree murder charge. This appeal could have significant repercussions for the January trial date, especially if the court takes months to reach a decision. “I don't know if that is fair to either side,” Dearborn said, noting the challenges of preparing for trial amid ongoing legal uncertainties. Meanwhile, the decision to bring in special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who previously represented mobster James “Whitey” Bulger, has sparked interest. Brennan's involvement is seen by some, including Dearborn, as an effort to underscore the prosecution's commitment to a rigorous and ethical handling of the case. “I think this is the DA Morrissey trying to send a message to everybody that we don't want anyone to think there is anything going on here that is untoward or not ethical,” Dearborn explained. With these pending legal battles, both criminal and civil, and heightened media scrutiny, the case continues to captivate Massachusetts and beyond, as Read faces another showdown in court on January 27. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

Karen Read, the Massachusetts woman accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, in 2022, is attempting to delay a wrongful death lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family until after her criminal trial. Read faces a second trial for second-degree murder and other charges in January, after her initial trial ended in a mistrial three months ago. According to documents filed by her attorneys, the civil suit should be postponed until the criminal case concludes to avoid compromising her Fifth Amendment rights. The wrongful death lawsuit also names Waterfall Bar & Grill and C.F. McCarthy's as defendants, alleging they continued to serve Read alcohol on the night of the incident, despite her visible intoxication. The lawsuit claims that Read backed her SUV into O'Keefe during a snowstorm and left him outside, where he later succumbed to his injuries. Read's criminal trial in July ended in a mistrial after jurors could not reach a verdict on a manslaughter charge but agreed to acquit her on charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. “My best guess right now is they will dispense with the first argument pretty quickly,” Suffolk University law professor Chris Dearborn commented on the upcoming appeal. “The second argument… is the one I think has a little more promise.” In the lead-up to the retrial, Read's legal team is set to argue before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in hopes of having two charges dismissed, including the second-degree murder charge. This appeal could have significant repercussions for the January trial date, especially if the court takes months to reach a decision. “I don't know if that is fair to either side,” Dearborn said, noting the challenges of preparing for trial amid ongoing legal uncertainties. Meanwhile, the decision to bring in special prosecutor Hank Brennan, who previously represented mobster James “Whitey” Bulger, has sparked interest. Brennan's involvement is seen by some, including Dearborn, as an effort to underscore the prosecution's commitment to a rigorous and ethical handling of the case. “I think this is the DA Morrissey trying to send a message to everybody that we don't want anyone to think there is anything going on here that is untoward or not ethical,” Dearborn explained. With these pending legal battles, both criminal and civil, and heightened media scrutiny, the case continues to captivate Massachusetts and beyond, as Read faces another showdown in court on January 27. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The legal team for Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, is petitioning the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two charges she faces, including second-degree murder. Read is charged with allegedly hitting O'Keefe with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm in January 2022. Read's defense attorneys argue that retrying her on these charges would violate her constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The brief filed by her attorney, Martin Weinberg, challenges an August decision by a lower court judge, who ruled that the case could proceed to retrial in January. "Where there was no verdict announced in open court here, retrial of the defendant does not violate the principle of double jeopardy," said Judge Beverly Cannone in her ruling. Weinberg's petition, however, argues that statements from five jurors after the mistrial show that they had unanimously decided Read was not guilty on two of the three counts. The mistrial was declared after jurors were deadlocked on a manslaughter charge, but according to the defense, they had already agreed to acquit her on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. "Surely, that cannot be the law. Indeed, it must not be the law," Weinberg wrote in the brief, contending that jurors' post-trial statements should be taken as evidence that they had reached a conclusion on the other counts. “And, in the context of this highly publicized case, it strains credulity to suggest that, if the unequivocal statements of five jurors quoted above did not, in fact, represent the unanimous view of all 12, the remaining jurors would allow the inaccuracy to go uncorrected,” the attorney added. The defense argues that had the remaining jurors disagreed, they would have notified the court. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office disputes this narrative, asserting that no official verdict was reached on any of the charges before the mistrial was declared. Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally emphasized that the jury was given clear instructions and had ample opportunity to indicate if they had reached a decision. "The jury never indicated they had reached a verdict on any of the charges," said Lally. He also argued that the defense is relying on “hearsay, conjecture and legally inappropriate reliance as to the substance of jury deliberations.” The case has garnered significant attention, in part due to the allegations raised by Read's defense team, who claim that she is being framed. They argue that O'Keefe was killed inside the home of fellow Boston officer Brian Albert, where O'Keefe was dropped off after a night of drinking, and that his body was later dragged outside. According to the defense, law enforcement focused on Read because she was a “convenient outsider.” An autopsy concluded that O'Keefe died from a combination of hypothermia and blunt force trauma. Prosecutors allege that Read hit O'Keefe with her SUV and drove away, leaving him in the snow. The defense also pointed to troubling behavior from some of the law enforcement officials involved in the investigation. State Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator, was removed from duty after it was revealed during the trial that he had sent offensive text messages, referring to Read as a “whack job” and expressing a desire for her to "kill herself.” Proctor later said his comments were a "figure of speech" and admitted to letting his emotions get the better of him. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office is expected to respond to the petition by mid-October, and the court will determine whether Read's retrial will proceed as scheduled. Prosecutors remain firm in their stance that Read should be retried on all charges, citing the lack of a formal verdict and maintaining that their case is grounded in the evidence presented at trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

The legal team for Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, is petitioning the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two charges she faces, including second-degree murder. Read is charged with allegedly hitting O'Keefe with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm in January 2022. Read's defense attorneys argue that retrying her on these charges would violate her constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The brief filed by her attorney, Martin Weinberg, challenges an August decision by a lower court judge, who ruled that the case could proceed to retrial in January. "Where there was no verdict announced in open court here, retrial of the defendant does not violate the principle of double jeopardy," said Judge Beverly Cannone in her ruling. Weinberg's petition, however, argues that statements from five jurors after the mistrial show that they had unanimously decided Read was not guilty on two of the three counts. The mistrial was declared after jurors were deadlocked on a manslaughter charge, but according to the defense, they had already agreed to acquit her on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. "Surely, that cannot be the law. Indeed, it must not be the law," Weinberg wrote in the brief, contending that jurors' post-trial statements should be taken as evidence that they had reached a conclusion on the other counts. “And, in the context of this highly publicized case, it strains credulity to suggest that, if the unequivocal statements of five jurors quoted above did not, in fact, represent the unanimous view of all 12, the remaining jurors would allow the inaccuracy to go uncorrected,” the attorney added. The defense argues that had the remaining jurors disagreed, they would have notified the court. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office disputes this narrative, asserting that no official verdict was reached on any of the charges before the mistrial was declared. Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally emphasized that the jury was given clear instructions and had ample opportunity to indicate if they had reached a decision. "The jury never indicated they had reached a verdict on any of the charges," said Lally. He also argued that the defense is relying on “hearsay, conjecture and legally inappropriate reliance as to the substance of jury deliberations.” The case has garnered significant attention, in part due to the allegations raised by Read's defense team, who claim that she is being framed. They argue that O'Keefe was killed inside the home of fellow Boston officer Brian Albert, where O'Keefe was dropped off after a night of drinking, and that his body was later dragged outside. According to the defense, law enforcement focused on Read because she was a “convenient outsider.” An autopsy concluded that O'Keefe died from a combination of hypothermia and blunt force trauma. Prosecutors allege that Read hit O'Keefe with her SUV and drove away, leaving him in the snow. The defense also pointed to troubling behavior from some of the law enforcement officials involved in the investigation. State Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator, was removed from duty after it was revealed during the trial that he had sent offensive text messages, referring to Read as a “whack job” and expressing a desire for her to "kill herself.” Proctor later said his comments were a "figure of speech" and admitted to letting his emotions get the better of him. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office is expected to respond to the petition by mid-October, and the court will determine whether Read's retrial will proceed as scheduled. Prosecutors remain firm in their stance that Read should be retried on all charges, citing the lack of a formal verdict and maintaining that their case is grounded in the evidence presented at trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The legal team for Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, is petitioning the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two charges she faces, including second-degree murder. Read is charged with allegedly hitting O'Keefe with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm in January 2022. Read's defense attorneys argue that retrying her on these charges would violate her constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The brief filed by her attorney, Martin Weinberg, challenges an August decision by a lower court judge, who ruled that the case could proceed to retrial in January. "Where there was no verdict announced in open court here, retrial of the defendant does not violate the principle of double jeopardy," said Judge Beverly Cannone in her ruling. Weinberg's petition, however, argues that statements from five jurors after the mistrial show that they had unanimously decided Read was not guilty on two of the three counts. The mistrial was declared after jurors were deadlocked on a manslaughter charge, but according to the defense, they had already agreed to acquit her on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. "Surely, that cannot be the law. Indeed, it must not be the law," Weinberg wrote in the brief, contending that jurors' post-trial statements should be taken as evidence that they had reached a conclusion on the other counts. “And, in the context of this highly publicized case, it strains credulity to suggest that, if the unequivocal statements of five jurors quoted above did not, in fact, represent the unanimous view of all 12, the remaining jurors would allow the inaccuracy to go uncorrected,” the attorney added. The defense argues that had the remaining jurors disagreed, they would have notified the court. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office disputes this narrative, asserting that no official verdict was reached on any of the charges before the mistrial was declared. Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally emphasized that the jury was given clear instructions and had ample opportunity to indicate if they had reached a decision. "The jury never indicated they had reached a verdict on any of the charges," said Lally. He also argued that the defense is relying on “hearsay, conjecture and legally inappropriate reliance as to the substance of jury deliberations.” The case has garnered significant attention, in part due to the allegations raised by Read's defense team, who claim that she is being framed. They argue that O'Keefe was killed inside the home of fellow Boston officer Brian Albert, where O'Keefe was dropped off after a night of drinking, and that his body was later dragged outside. According to the defense, law enforcement focused on Read because she was a “convenient outsider.” An autopsy concluded that O'Keefe died from a combination of hypothermia and blunt force trauma. Prosecutors allege that Read hit O'Keefe with her SUV and drove away, leaving him in the snow. The defense also pointed to troubling behavior from some of the law enforcement officials involved in the investigation. State Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator, was removed from duty after it was revealed during the trial that he had sent offensive text messages, referring to Read as a “whack job” and expressing a desire for her to "kill herself.” Proctor later said his comments were a "figure of speech" and admitted to letting his emotions get the better of him. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office is expected to respond to the petition by mid-October, and the court will determine whether Read's retrial will proceed as scheduled. Prosecutors remain firm in their stance that Read should be retried on all charges, citing the lack of a formal verdict and maintaining that their case is grounded in the evidence presented at trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

This week on The Horse Race, Steve Koczela and Jennifer Smith speculate on Governor Healey joining a future Harris-Walz administration, new polls showing Harris with an edge over Trump, and how heartbreak and engagement made their way to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.