The judge presiding over the Karen Read case on Thursday indefinitely extended an order impounding the jury list, writing that one juror believed panelists would face “a real and present risk” of harm if their names were made public.
In her order, Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly J. Cannone said the juror, identified as Juror Doe, submitted an affidavit outlining a range of concerns if the jury were publicly identified, as is typical in criminal cases. The juror did so unsolicited, through attorney.
Cannone had initially impounded the jury list for 10 days.
“This case has garnered significant and divisive attention in Massachusetts and across the nation,” Cannone wrote. “Juror Doe is in reasonable fear for their safety and the safety of their family if the list of jurors is made available to the public.”
Advertisement
Cannone declared a mistrial in Read’s murder case July 1 after jurors said they were deadlocked. Prosecutors say they’ll retry her and a status conference in Norfolk Superior Court is set for July 22.
Prosecutors allege that Read, 44, drunkenly and intentionally backed her SUV into her boyfriend, Boston police Officer John O’Keefe, early on Jan. 29, 2022, after dropping him off outside a Canton home following a night of bar-hopping.
Read’s lawyers say she was framed and that O’Keefe entered the home, owned at the time by a fellow Boston police officer, where he was fatally beaten in the basement before his body was planted on the front lawn.
Read pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence, and leaving the scene of personal injury and death. Read’s lawyers recently filed a motion to dismiss the murder and leaving the scene counts, writing that four jurors have told them, either directly or through intermediaries, that the panel unanimously agreed to acquit on those charges but remained divided on manslaughter. Prosecutors say the motion is without merit and should be rejected, as no verdict was ever delivered in open court.
In a related development, her lawyers said Thursday that a fifth juror had come forward to say the 12-member panel unanimously voted to acquit her of second-degree murder and the lesser, leaving-the-scene count at her trial.
Advertisement
In the juror’s affidavit asking that the impoundment order be extended, the person cited criminal charges filed against Aidan Kearney, a controversial blogger known as Turtleboy who has championed Read’s claims of innocence and currently faces charges of intimidating and harassing witnesses in the case. He has pleaded not guilty.
“I am frightened for my personal safety as a result of learning that someone associated with this case has been criminally charged with intimidation,” the juror wrote. “I also recall testimony from at least one witness who described being harassed by individuals and her family being harassed because of their involvement in this case.”
Without knowing the specifics of that harassment, the juror said they fear their family’s safety could be “seriously compromised” if jurors’ names are released.
Norfolk District Attorney Michael W. Morrissey “believes that given the level of harassment in this case, the judge has made a wise decision to shield jurors,” his spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. Read’s lawyers didn’t return a request for comment.
In the affidavit, the juror said that “we could hear protesters outside screaming and yelling” during deliberations. After the mistrial, media photographers were waiting for the jurors by their bus in what “was supposed to” be a secret location, the juror wrote.
“I was so much in fear on my way home that I pulled over to the side of the road to see if I was being followed,” the juror wrote. “Thankfully I was not being followed, but that was (and remains) my mindset. If juror names are made public, we will be constantly threatened and harassed and there will likely be a physical confrontation at some point.”
Advertisement
Since the mistrial, the juror wrote that they have read articles in The Boston Globe and elsewhere about the high-profile case.
“There are clearly people who have very strong opinions about the case and about the jurors who deliberated over many days,” the juror wrote. “I have seen articles, comments to articles, and postings about the [lack of a] verdict saying some very nasty and dangerous things.”
Members of a starkly divided public have “expressed outrage” that Read was not either convicted or acquitted, the juror wrote.
The juror cited a July 15 Boston Globe article highlighting a “rising rage” among case observers following the mistrial.
In another apparent reference to Kearney, the juror cited an online video from a blogger “charged with witness intimidation related to this case” who claims to have identified the jury foreperson.
In the same video, Kearney said the jury “‘helped cover up for a murder, as far as I’m concerned,’” according to the affidavit.
“If, as he has stated, this blogger believes that members of jury on which I served ‘helped cover up for a murder’ ... I fully expect that members of the jury will be subjected to efforts to harass and shame them with the very real probability that some physical confrontation will inevitably occur,” the juror wrote.
The juror said it’s clear people on both sides of the debate have acted “irrationally and aggressively” over the past couple of years.
“In light of the mistrial, there is no end in sight to this irrational behavior, which clearly continues today,” the juror said.
Advertisement
The juror said the affidavit shouldn’t be interpreted as an indication of how they or any other juror voted.
Regardless of how they voted on the charges, all jurors will likely face “backlash” from people who closely followed the trial, the juror wrote.
Despite the acrimony surrounding the trial and its aftermath, the juror said it was “an honor” to serve on the case.
“It was also a significant sacrifice of time, which I understood and anticipated when I was selected,” the juror wrote. “What I did not anticipate, however, was the likelihood that I and other members of the jury would become targets of intense public scrutiny and likely harassment campaigns strictly due to the outcome of our private deliberations.”
Juror Doe also fears “nonstop” media requests if the jury list is disclosed, the affidavit said.
“I would prefer to not have to respond to these inquiries,” the juror wrote. “However, what I fear is not only will I be subject to requests for interviews, but that I will be targeted and harassed because of what I did, or did not do on that jury.”
Verbal harassment could escalate to a physical attack, the affidavit said.
“I am not prepared or equipped to anticipate and prepare for any surprise personal attack,” the juror wrote. “More importantly, I fear that I will not be able to protect myself and my family.”
Danny McDonald of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
Read Juror Doe’s affidavit:
Read the judge’s order:
Travis Andersen can be reached at [email protected]. John R. Ellement can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him @JREbosglobe.