John Jefferson
Lawyers for the suspected Boston cop killer Karen Read said Monday that jurors in her trial over the death of John O’Keefe had an “agreement” to find her not guilty before the judge declared a mistrial.
They raised the issue in a motion to dismiss second-degree murder charges and leaving the scene of an accident, according to Boston 25, which published the filing.
Three of the 12 jurors sent “unsolicited communications” to the defense, purportedly “indicating in no uncertain terms that the jury had a firm 12-0 agreement that Ms. Read was not guilty of two of the three charges,” her lawyers wrote.
KAREN READ MURDER CASE ENDS WITH ‘DEEPLY DIVIDED’ JURY’S DECISION
The 44-year-old Read’s trial ended after five days of deliberations last week when Judge Beverly Cannone declared a mistrial over what jurors described as their inability to come to a unanimous verdict, however.
SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER
“Despite our commitment, we are deeply divided by fundamental differences,” jurors wrote in a note to the judge. “No lack of understanding or effort. Consensus is not reachable.”
O’Keefe, Read’s boyfriend at the time, died during a snowstorm in January 2022 after Read allegedly hit him with her SUV and drove off, leaving him to die outside the home of another officer.
WATCH: DASHCAM FROM THE NIGHT JOHN O’KEEFE WAS FOUND DEAD
GET REAL TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB
FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X
A key conflict between the defense and prosecution was whether she hit him intentionally – or even knew she hit him at all.
Read claimed that O’Keefe’s influential police colleagues set her up as the fall person.
Prosecutors, however, argued that the two had an alcohol-fueled argument on the night of his death.
“Despite our commitment to the duty entrusted in us, we find ourselves deeply divided by fundamental differences in our opinions and state of mind,” the jury wrote in its final note to the judge last Monday.
Prosecutors have said they plan to seek a new trial. Read’s lawyers countered with a constitutional double jeopardy argument, claiming that the jury had effectively rendered a not guilty verdict on at least two charges.
Fox News’ Stepheny Price and Chris Eberhart contributed to this report.
Read the full article here