GIST: "The Karen Read defense team has delivered its motion to dismiss for “Extraordinary Governmental Misconduct,” just as promised late last month.
But just exactly what’s inside is not yet known, as the motion was filed Wednesday under seal. It will be open to the public once a redacted version is submitted, which was not available from the Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham before the clerk’s office closed.
Read’s attorneys first announced the motion in a footnote demanding that the state pay for costs incurred by a defense expert who was sent on what defense attorney Alan Jackson referred to as a “wild goose chase,” allegedly under a false impression that Canton Police Department video footage was available. It was not.
Page 2 of that motion revealed the upcoming motion for dismissal: “A Motion to Dismiss for Extraordinary Governmental Misconduct based on the destruction of this, and other, exculpatory evidence is forthcoming,” the footnote reads. “This motion should not be deemed a waiver of any such claims or issues.”
Motions to dismiss are par for the course in this case that has captured headlines for years.
Read’s attorneys filed a 49-page motion to dismiss, which was also under seal, ahead of her first trial last year. This motion was based on alleged failures of the prosecutor’s presentation of the case to the grand jury, which they say was “predicated entirely on flimsy speculation and presumption,” and the victim of “questionable and biased investigation.”
Then came the mistrial, followed by a string of defense appeals, based particularly on the defense’s claims that a number of jurors had said the jury wasn’t actually hung on all three charges against Read, but just one of them — and hadn’t known they could deliver a partial verdict.
Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of striking Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, with her car and leaving him to freeze and die on a Canton front lawn on Jan. 29, 2022. For that she was indicted on three charges: second-degree murder (Count 1), manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (Count 2) and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death (Count 3).
The jurors allegedly indicated it was only Count 2, OUI manslaughter, they couldn’t reach a decision on and that they were ready to acquit on the others.
Because of this, Read’s attorneys say, it would be “Double Jeopardy” to charge her with murder a second time. Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly J. Cannone denied that motion and the defense team appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which upheld Cannone’s decision. Read’s defense earlier this month filed a double jeopardy claim with the federal court in Boston.
Read’s second trial is scheduled to begin on April 1."
The entire story ca be read at:
https://www.bostonherald.com/2025/02/26/karen-read-defense-team-files-motion-to-dismiss-for-extraordinary-governmental-misconduct/PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
