Livestream: Karen Read trial returns with additional testimony from State Police sgt. (2024)

Livestream via NBC10 Boston.

On the stand:

• Trooper Michael Proctor, Massachusetts State Police

Previously:

• Sgt. Nicholas Barros, Dighton Police Department
• Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik, Massachusetts State Police

10:45 a.m. update: Dighton police sgt. says Read’s taillight was cracked when he saw the vehicle outside her parents’ home

The right rear taillight on Karen Read’s SUV was cracked when law enforcement arrived at her parents’ home in Dighton to seize the vehicle the afternoon of Jan. 29, 2022, Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testified.

As he began his shift at 8 a.m. that day, Barros said he learned that a Dighton resident — later identified as Read’s father — had called 911 earlier that morning for a ride to a hospital in Brockton “due to his daughter’s boyfriend passing away.”

He testified he received a call from Massachusetts State Police troopers assigned to the Norfolk District Attorney’s Office around 2:30 p.m. on the 29th, informing him they were coming to Dighton to retrieve a vehicle involved in a homicide. Barros said State Police Trooper Michael Proctor asked him to contact the police department’s contracted tow company to meet officers at Read’s parents’ home.

Barros confirmed he saw a black Lexus SUV sitting in the driveway upon his arrival.

“I saw that there was some damage to the right rear taillight,” he recalled. “To my best ability and recollection, that taillight was not completely damaged. It was cracked, and a piece was missing. But not completely damaged.”

He said he also saw a dent on the vehicle’s rear quarter panel, near the taillight.

The defense team did not cross-examine Barros.

10:35 a.m. update: Sgt. Bukhenik maintains he and Proctor ‘absolutely did not’ touch taillight area on Read’s SUV in the Canton police garage

Defense attorney Alan Jackson put the mirrored Canton Police Department sallyport garage footage under the microscope Monday as Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik’s testimony resumed.

Jackson revisited Bukhenik’s earlier statements on the video, which shows Karen Read’s SUV sitting in police custody the evening of Jan. 29, 2022. He confirmed that Bukhenik did not acknowledge the footage was inverted until prompted during cross-examination last week.

“Would you agree with me now, as you sit here, that this video as we’re looking at it is not a true and accurate depiction of what you viewed in that sallyport that night?” Jackson asked.

“I would not agree with you, no,” Bukhenik replied. He contended the video was accurate, just inverted. However, Bukhenik also acknowledged that the video is “not a smooth recording of the events” and skips around at points, with people popping suddenly into frame as the motion-triggered camera starts recording.

Jackson proceeded to play a non-inverted version of the sallyport video, showing the driver’s side of Read’s SUV. He also questioned Bukhenik about the much grainier footage from the other side of the garage, noting that the timestamp jumps about 42 minutes, from approximately 5:08 p.m. to 5:50 p.m. The damage to the passenger side of Read’s vehicle — specifically her broken taillight — has been a central focus during the trial.

“Is there any other video, other than this one, that would show the exact condition of that taillight as it pulled into the … sallyport, or is this the only one?” Jackson asked.

“That is the video that captures that timeframe,” Bukhenik replied. He confirmed the video does not show the roughly 42-minute period after Read’s car arrived at the garage.

On redirect examination, Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally asked Bukhenik whether the mirrored sallyport video had been modified before it was shown to the jury.

“There was no manipulation, alteration of the video between … when we received it from [the] Canton Police Department, when I played it, and when it was played for you,” Bukhenik testified.

At Lally’s prompting, he confirmed the sallyport video was captured after Read’s vehicle was caught on home surveillance footage at John O’Keefe’s house and at her parents’ home in Dighton. Bukhenik previously testified that surveillance video from O’Keefe’s driveway shows “a missing, damaged rear right taillight” on Read’s car shortly after 5 a.m. on the 29th.

“At any point in time that you were in the sallyport area of the Canton Police Department garage, did you or Trooper [Michael] Proctor ever go near, touch, manipulate the rear passenger side taillight area or the rear passenger side quarter panel of the defendant’s vehicle?” Lally asked.

“We absolutely did not,” Bukhenik replied.

Lally turned his attention to Bukhenik’s previous testimony about informing the medical examiner’s office that O’Keefe had possibly been involved in a domestic assault and might have been struck in the face with a co*cktail glass.

Bukhenik confirmed the conversation took place at about 10:41 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022 — before he’d gone to Good Samaritan Medical Center in Brockton to view O’Keefe’s body. He said he was simply coordinating with the medical examiner’s office as directed by law.

“Up to that point, we had learned that the defendant stated that she hit him,” he testified. “The Canton Police Department had collected a broken glass, so based on the physical evidence and the statements made by the defendant to the first responders at the scene at that point in time, I had communicated those facts to the medical examiner’s office. That way, they would document it but also be prepared to investigate the case with the most up to date information available.”

8:55 a.m. update: Prosecution, defense go head to head over expert witnesses

Prosecutors accused Karen Read’s lawyers of dealing in bad faith Monday, asserting that the defense team’s delayed disclosure of expert witness materials was “intended to ambush the commonwealth and conduct a trial by surprise.”

The defense only provided notice of all its experts on April 15, a day before jury selection was set to begin in Read’s trial, Assistant District Attorney Laura McLaughlin told Judge Beverly Cannone during a brief hearing Monday morning without jurors present.

According to McLaughlin, prosecutors filed a motion for reciprocal discovery during jury impanelment, and the defense was ordered to produce documentation for expert opinion testimony within a week. Now, eight weeks into Read’s trial, “the commonwealth has not received any intended expert opinions, … any written reports, opinions, or anything that those experts have based their opinions on,” McLaughlin alleged.

“Essentially, the defendant’s strategic decisions not to retain their own expert, but rather rely on the U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation, does not alleviate them or relieve them from the Rule 14 obligations,” she argued, citing the federal probe of Read’s case.

McLaughlin argued to exclude one particular defense expert, Dr. Marie Russell, because the prosecution did not receive notice of Russell’s background or expected testimony until late May.

Speaking for Read’s camp, defense attorney David Yannetti labeled some of the prosecution’s assertions “outrageous and false.” Pointing to prosecutors’ written motion, Yannetti took particular exception to the allegation that he previously indicated the defense would not argue that John O’Keefe was attacked by a dog.

“I was astounded to read that for two reasons,” Yannetti said. “First of all, it is false. It is a lie. Second, the commonwealth has knowingly lied about something where it’s easily verifiable that they lied.”

He clarified that he was answering a question about outstanding DNA tests, rather than waiving the defense team’s claims of a possible dog attack.

Cannone noted that the defense has not complied with its Rule 14 pretrial discovery obligations.

“We can’t, your honor. We can’t,” Yannetti countered, pointing to the constraints of the federal investigation.

“So you can’t, but you haven’t,” Cannone replied. She said the experts will likely need to be brought in for voir dire, or preliminary questioning without the jury present.

“It looks like at least a day of voir dire hearings here,” the judge said.

The audio for the livestream broadcast cut out for the last few minutes of the hearing, leaving the outcome immediately unclear.

Jurors in the Karen Read murder trial are slated to hear additional testimony from a Massachusetts State Police sergeant who faced the third degree over the search for evidence on Fairview Road and the inexplicably mirrored surveillance footage from the Canton Police Department’s sallyport garage.

State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik returns to the stand Monday after testifying two days last week and walking jurors through the initial investigation into Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe’s death.

Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of deliberately backing her SUV into O’Keefe — her boyfriend of two years — while dropping him off at a house party in Canton after midnight on Jan. 29, 2022. Prosecutors allege Read was driving drunk following a night out at two local bars, and Bukhenik testified Thursday that surveillance footage from the bars “shows nine drinks being consumed by the defendant” in the hours before she drove O’Keefe over to the afterparty at 34 Fairview Road.

Read’s lawyers have a different theory. According to the defense, O’Keefe entered 34 Fairview Road on the 29th and was beaten and possibly attacked by homeowner Brian Albert’s dog, a German shepherd. Read, they say, was framed.

Jurors last week heard a brief audio clip of Read blaming others for O’Keefe’s death while speaking with Bukhenik following her indictment and arrest on June 9, 2022.

“You’re aware he was beaten up by Brian and Colin Albert? I mean, we’re all in on the same joke, right?” Read says in the clip. “My taillight is cracked, and John … was pulverized.”

Parts of Bukhenik’s testimony have raised questions among those following the trial online, including the flipped surveillance footage jurors saw of Read’s SUV sitting in the Canton police station’s sallyport after the vehicle was seized by State Police. Bukhenik did not confirm the footage was mirrored until prompted by defense attorney Alan Jackson on cross-examination.

“I do not know why it is inverted, but that’s the way it was collected and presented from Canton police,” Bukhenik testified.

Court will convene earlier than usual Monday, with lawyers on both sides set to argue a motion from prosecutors to compel reciprocal discovery on some of its expert witnesses and block testimony from one defense expert, Dr. Marie Russell.