Karen Read sits at the defense table between her attorneys on May 21, 2024, during her murder trial at Norfolk County Superior Court. (Pool Photo by Matt Stone/Boston Herald)
By Charlie McKenna | cmckenna@masslive.com
A lawyer representing the family of John O’Keefe argued that statements by his girlfriend, Karen Read, to the media constituted a weaponization of her 5th Amendment rights, which she now seeks to use to delay the wrongful death lawsuit filed against her.
During a nearly 45-minute hearing in Plymouth Superior Court in Brockton, which Read did not attend, an attorney representing O‘Keefe’s estate said Read was using her protection against self-incrimination as both a “sword and shield” as she seeks a stay in the civil trial. Read — and two Canton bars where the couple drank on the night of O‘Keefe’s death — have asked for a delay in the civil case proceedings until after Read’s second criminal trial takes place.
The attorney, Marc Diller, cited Read‘s interviews with ABC’s “20/20″, NBC’s “Dateline”, and a forthcoming Netflix documentary as opportunities for her to spread a self-serving narrative.
“Karen Reed is overtly weaponizing the Fifth Amendment to her advantage,” he said. “She’s not being held accountable for her actions in the public media, but we have the right and the opportunity to do so in a courtroom.”
But William Keville, who is representing Read in the civil case, argued that she must be allowed to adequately defend herself in both the impending criminal proceeding and the case brought by O‘Keefe’s family.
In a criminal case, he noted, jurors cannot hold a defendant’s right to testify against them. But in a civil case, where the burden of proof is lower, jurors could view someone invoking the 5th Amendment as concealing information.
“Proceeding with the civil matter will adversely affect Ms. Read’s, Fifth Amendment rights and her ability to vigorously defend herself,” he told Judge William White. “Without a stay, Ms. Read will be forced to decide between defending herself in the civil action and waiving her 5th Amendment rights.”
Read, 44, is accused of hitting O‘Keefe, 46, with her Lexus SUV after a night of bar-hopping as she dropped him off outside a Canton home. Prosecutors say she did so intentionally as her relationship with O’Keefe was crumbling.
But Read and her attorneys have contended that she was framed and that O’Keefe was fatally beaten inside the home before being dumped in the snow.
Diller, the attorney for O‘Keefe’s family, who was present during the hearing, argued that the estate has a compelling reason to compel Read’s testimony under oath to test the credibility of the statements she is making in the press.
“Her media barrage is significantly influencing the public, and it is poisoning the perception of our jury pool,” he said.
O‘Keefe’s estate wants to depose Read by the end of the year.
Keville, Read’s lawyer, argued that the stay would not negatively impact the civil trial, which is not scheduled until 2027. The stay does not seek to prevent Read from giving testimony in the civil case, only to delay her obligation to do so until the close of the second criminal proceeding.
“The questions can be answered sometime after that trial is done, and we’ll still have enough time to do everything that anyone could think of to discover the facts in this civil case,” he said.
Any statements Read gives to the media cannot be considered equivalent to her waiving her 5th Amendment rights, Keville said, noting that those interviews are not conducted under oath, as a deposition would be.
In response to questioning from White on that point, Keville said Read‘s interviews may not have a negative impact on a potential jury pool, as argued by O’Keefe’s estate because the civil trial is scheduled so far out.
“By the time the jury is set to be impaneled in this particular case, two years will have passed,” he said.
Both Canton bars, the Waterfall Grille and C.F. McCarthy’s, are also seeking a stay in the criminal case.
Attorneys representing both bars acknowledged that they are not making any 5th Amendment claims, but said beginning depositions in the civil case while the criminal trial is about to get underway would be a problem for all of the involved parties.
“It’s unprecedented that we’d be initiating discovery on the eve of a criminal case,” said attorney David Hassett. “A very brief stay in a very complicated case like this is in order.”
Diller, who got the final word, argued that the estate is not attempting to accelerate the process, but simply trying to secure testimony from those involved as to the events of the night of O‘Keefe’s death.
And as he had in a court filing, Diller noted that Read has put her house up for sale. He has argued she has “one foot out of Massachusetts.”
“We would like to have them sit in our office under oath and assume the right to testify or invoke the fifth,” he said. “Either way, we’ll be satisfied knowing that we preserved the testimony while it was still relevant and before it was too late.”
White took the motions under advisement. It was not clear when he would rule on the stay and no decision was available in court records as of 5 p.m. Monday evening.
Read’s second trial is slated to begin in January.