In a pivotal moment in the Karen Read murder trial, the defense rested its case after presenting expert testimony that challenges the prosecution's narrative. Read, a Mansfield woman, is charged with second-degree murder in the death of her Boston police officer boyfriend, John O'Keefe, whose body was found outside a Canton home in January 2022.
The defense's final witness, Dr. Daniel Wolfe, an expert in accident reconstruction from Arcca, testified that there is not enough evidence to definitively determine what happened to O'Keefe.
Prosecutor Adam Lally questioned Wolfe about the omission of O'Keefe’s shoe and hat in his reconstruction report. Wolfe acknowledged this but maintained that these omissions did not affect his overall conclusions.
Wolfe described an experiment where he and colleagues used an air cannon to launch a cocktail glass at a taillight, replicating the damage found on Read’s vehicle. He explained, “We aimed at a portion of the taillight where the clear and red met because that’s where the damage seemed to emanate from.”
When asked about first responders hearing Read say “I hit him” three times, Wolfe admitted he was unaware of this, as well as the presence of O'Keefe’s DNA on Read’s taillight. Despite this, Wolfe stood by his analysis, stating, “Absolutely not,” when asked if this new information changed his conclusions.
Following Wolfe, Dr. Andrew Rentschler, a biomechanical engineer and accident reconstructionist, took the stand. Rentschler's testimony focused on the inconsistencies between the injuries O'Keefe sustained and the damage to Read’s SUV. “The injury to O’Keefe’s head was not consistent with being struck by a vehicle. In that scenario, there would be damage to a person’s spine,” Rentschler explained.
He further noted that a car driving at 24 miles per hour would cause significant damage to both the taillight and O’Keefe’s arm, which was not observed in this case. “I would expect to see significant trauma, more so than simply the abrasions diagnosed in this case,” Rentschler said.
The defense also called Dr. Frank Sheridan, a retired chief medical examiner, who testified about the injuries on O'Keefe's arm. Sheridan, who has conducted over 12,000 autopsies, stated that the cuts on O’Keefe’s arm were more consistent with a dog attack than a vehicle strike. “No bruising here. We have linear abrasions without any bruising. It does not look remotely like an impact from a motor vehicle,” he said.
Sheridan explained that the pattern and type of abrasions suggested they were caused by an animal's claws or teeth. He used a laser pointer to highlight clusters of abrasions on O’Keefe’s arm, describing how most appeared to be claw marks.
During cross-examination, Lally asked Sheridan about the absence of other injuries typical of a vehicle strike. Sheridan reiterated that the injuries observed were inconsistent with being hit by a vehicle and more aligned with a dog attack.
He also noted that there was no canine DNA found on O’Keefe’s arm, but this did not alter his professional opinion.
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, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Más
Menos
9 m
Jun 26 202410 m
7 m
12 m