The ACLU has jumped into the Karen Learn Supreme Judicial Courtroom battle on the facet of the accused assassin.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts filed a quick in Learn’s enchantment to Massachusetts’ highest courtroom to have two of the three fees towards her — together with second-degree homicide — dropped in her second trial scheduled for January.
The 28-page temporary largely goes over the identical floor as Learn’s arguments, however this time it comes from a strong outdoors social gathering.
“Defendant-Appellant Karen Read faces the possibility of being retried on multiple criminal charges for which numerous jurors now claim they acquitted her,” the temporary authored by ACLU attorneys Jessie Rossman and Daniel McFadden and legal professional Michael Packard of the Boston agency Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan states.
The temporary argues for the SJC to vacate trial Choose Beverly J. Cannone’s resolution to disclaim Learn’s request to have these fees be dropped and for the trial courtroom to conduct an evidentiary listening to on the matter.
Learn, 44, of Mansfield, faces fees of second-degree homicide (Depend 1), manslaughter whereas working a motorized vehicle underneath the affect (Depend 2) and leaving the scene of an accident inflicting loss of life (Depend 3). The fees are associated to the Jan. 29, 2022, loss of life of John O’Keefe, her boyfriend and a Boston Police officer.
Prosecutors say she struck him together with her SUV after heavy ingesting and one more argument of their troubled relationship and left him to freeze and die on a Canton entrance yard. The protection counters that O’Keefe was killed contained in the Canton residence his physique was discovered outdoors of and that Learn was framed by a large police and prosecutor cover-up.
A trial was held earlier this yr however ended after 9 weeks with Choose Cannone declaring a mistrial on July 1 when she had acquired a 3rd be aware from the jury indicating that they have been deadlocked.
“Despite our rigorous efforts we continue to find ourselves at an impasse,” the jury foreman wrote in that be aware.
The ACLU’s temporary referred to as {that a} “hasty mistrial declaration” and located fault in Cannone’s dealing with of the occasion.
“The court did so without polling jurors to confirm they were deadlocked on all counts (or even asking the parties whether they consented to a mistrial or wanted the jurors polled),” the temporary states.
Not too lengthy after the mistrial, Learn’s attorneys submitted a movement to have Counts 1 and three dismissed within the subsequent trial as 5 jurors had allegedly come ahead to say that the jury was unanimously able to acquit Learn on these fees and have been really solely deadlocked on Depend 2 and didn’t know they may make a discovering on the others alone. Learn appellate legal professional Martin Weinberg additionally implored Cannone to convey the jurors again in and ballot them.
“But the trial court denied the motion to dismiss and refused to conduct a hearing—leaving open the possibility of Appellant being retried in violation of her right to be free from double jeopardy,” the ACLU temporary summarizes.
“The trial court had a clear path to avoid an erroneous mistrial: simply ask the jurors to confirm whether a verdict had been reached on any count. Asking those questions before declaring a mistrial is permitted—even encouraged—by Massachusetts rules. Such polling serves to ensure a jury’s views are accurately conveyed to the court, the parties, and the community—and that defendants’ related trial rights are secure,” the temporary states.
Initially Printed:
