‘Trial by ambush’: Karen Read prosecutors want key piece of evidence removed from court record

DEDHAM, Mass. — The prosecution in Karen Read’s murder retrial filed a motion on Wednesday asking Judge Beverly Cannone to remove a key piece of evidence from the court record.

Read, 45, of Mansfield, is accused of striking John O’Keefe, her Boston police officer boyfriend, with her Lexus SUV and leaving him to die alone in a blizzard outside of a house party in Canton at the home of fellow officer Brian Albert on Jan. 29, 2022, following a night of drinking.

In a new Norfolk Superior Court filing, the Commonwealth argued that Shanon Burgess’ resume should not have been allowed as evidence by the defense during cross-examination because they didn’t provide the document to prosecutors to vet and review.

“Notably, the defense presented a CV provided in 2023 that noted a graduation date of 2024. The effort of providing documents as a witness is being confronted with documents is improper, trial by ambush...and creates needless delay resulting in objections, unnecessary sidebars, and a waste of time for the jury.”

Burgess, a digital forensics examiner from Aperture LLC, examined data from Read’s SUV, including timed events from the car like turning it off and on, as well as text stream events. He testified that data showed a three-point maneuver and a backing maneuver that he analyzed closely.

Prosecutors allege Read intentionally backed into O’Keefe after she dropped him off at the house party and returned hours later to find him dead. The defense has claimed that she was a victim of a vast police conspiracy and that O’Keefe was fatally beaten by another law enforcement officer at the party.

Burgress’ timeline of events surrounding O’Keefe’s death is crucial to the prosecution’s case.

During cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Alessi got Burgess to admit that he doesn’t have a Bachelor of Science in mathematics and business administration, despite what he has listed on his Curriculum Vitae.

Burgess testified that his LinkedIn page included an “expected graduation date.”

“Obviously, that has not been updated in quite some time,” Burgess told the court.

Alessi also questioned Burgess about the trigger events he said Read’s SUV recorded.

“None of the information in that black box ... indicates there was a collision on January 29?” asked attorney Alessi.

“Not by itself,” Burgess answered.

“Are Lexus SUVs trigger-happy?” Alessi asked.

“I do not know, sir,” Burgess said.

Yet, Burgess used the word “collision” in a report he wrote about the data, Alessi noted. Burgess said that information came from State Police reports, prompting Alessi to accuse him of confirmation bias.

Outside the court after Burgess’ testimony wrapped, Read said his analysis was flat-out wrong.

Also on Wednesday, Judge Cannone ruled in serparate motion that Dr. Judson Welcher of the accident reconstruction, biomechanics and digital forensics company Aperture LLC, can’t say Read’s SUV collided with O’Keefe. However, Welcher is allowed to say that his injuries are consistent with being struck by an identical vehicle.

Welcher said he bought an SUV similar to Read’s to conduct experiments, telling the jury that he concluded O’Keefe was struck by Read’s Lexus after conducting experiments with the vehicle.

A mistrial was declared last year after jurors said they were at an impasse and deliberating further would be futile.

Read has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence, and leaving the scene of a crash resulting in death.

Read Wednesday’s motions:

Get caught up with all of the latest in Karen Read’s retrial.

Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.

Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW

©2025 Cox Media Group