�Ӱ���Ƶ

Following a three-hour long evidentiary hearing, Judge Beverly Cannon dismissed court for the day.

Karen Read’s second trial is set to resume on Tuesday with continued testimony from Digital forensic examiner Ian Whiffin.

During the prosecution’s follow-up questioning, Dr. Daniel Wolfe admitted he broke a witness sequestration order during Karen Read’s first trial.

“When you were receiving information from the Department of Justice about witness testimony, that was before you testified, correct?” Brennan asked.

“Correct,” Wolfe said. 

Wolfe testified the DOJ provided him with key points of testimony from other witnesses.

“Did you know there was a sequestration order in this case that you were not supposed to consider or review other witnesses, testimony of information?” Brennan asked.

“I was never made aware of that,” Wolfe replied.

Dr. Daniel Wolfe insisted he saw nothing wrong with using encrypted messaging service Signal while communicating with Karen Read’s defense team as attorney Robert Alessi continued his cross-examination. 

“It was just another messaging app. I know people use all different types of applications, so I didn't have a problem with it,” Wolfe said. 

Alessi revealed the defense team opted to use Signal to protect the integrity of their case after Read’s cell phone was seized by investigators

Defense attorney Robert Alessi began cross-examining Dr. Daniel Wolfe, with Wolfe testifying he initially believed the Department of Justice would provide payment for ARCCA’s work on their crash analysis for Karen Read’s first trial. 

Wolfe went on to explain that the crash report by ARCAA, an expert firm providing accident investigations, prepared for the DOJ’s federal investigation was never altered by Read’s defense team and he never discussed the report with the defense prior to his testimony.

Wolfe testified the conversations he had with the defense team were solely to iron out logistics, along with discussing his background and experience. 

Wolfe conceded that he had never been in a situation where he was under contract with the federal government while also handling a private defense team, and doubled down on his choice to send attorney Alan Jackson an outline on his findings by asserting it is common practice. 

"Was it important to you that the jury got a fair and accurate presentation of the work you had performed in association with your February report?” Alessi asked. 

“Yes, I think that’s my job,” Wolfe said.

Prosecutor Hank Brennan continued questioning Dr. Daniel Wolfe regarding communications Wolfe had with Karen Read’s defense team offering information to potentially aid his testimony while on the witness stand.

Wolfe testified sending the notes is common practice within his industry.“I think ultimately it's to help the jury understand my report and my analysis,” Wolfe said.

In a heated exchange, Brennan asked Wolfe about his choice to communicate specific talking points to the defense that could help the jury’s understanding of Wolfe’s testimony.

“If you don’t want me to say this, that’s fine,” Brennan said, reading Wolfe’s comments to attorney Alan Jackson back to him.

Wolfe doubled down on his statements at a preliminary hearing where he told the court he had never spoken with Jackson about the substance of his testimony, telling Brennan he sent the comments but never discussed them with Jackson.

Dr. Daniel Wolfe testifies during an evidentiary hearing for Karen Read’s trial. (Pool)

Prosecutor Hank Brennan continued to grill Dr. Daniel Wolfe on his communications with Karen Read’s defense team. The special prosecutor questioned Wolfe on his decision to delete over 100 texts from defense attorney Alan Jackson after Read’s first trial concluded. 

“Did you ever delete texts from last year?” Brennan asked. 

“Yes,” Wolfe answered. 

“After you had text messages with the defense, did you delete those texts?” Brennan said. 

“Yeah, after the trial concluded,” Wolfe said. “I mean, that's something I routinely do. I'm not going to keep texts from Mr. Jackson, especially now that we're past a year. I would have no reason to keep those.”

Wolfe went on to admit he used the encrypted messaging app Signal to communicate with Read’s defense team, at Jackson’s request. Wolfe testified he did not turn over records of his communications on the app when required by the court because he no longer had access to the messages.

After a lunch break, Dr. Daniel Wolfe, an ARCCA forensic scientist and accident reconstructionist, appeared on the witness stand for an evidentiary hearing regarding his communications with Karen Read’s defense team. Wolfe testified, without the jury present, that he had emailed records to a third party instead of sending them directly to the Superior Court. 

The special prosecutor Hank Brennan questioned Wolfe about conversations with defense attorney Alan Jackson regarding receiving payment in return for his collaboration with Read’s team during her trial.

“So you talked about fees, scheduling and costs - what you charge,” Brennan said.

“I did talk about, yes, the contract in the retention letter,” Wolfe replied.

Karen Read listens to the testimony of Cellebrite digital intelligence expert Ian Wiffin, during her murder retrial, in Norfolk Superior Court, in front of Judge Beverly J. Cannone, in Dedham, Mass., Monday April 28, 2025. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Court resumed following a lunch break with a hearing between both sides in Karen Read’s trial after jurors were sent home for the day.

Ian Whiffin, a digital intelligence expert, with Celebrite, testifies under direct examination by special prosecutor Hank Brennan during Karen Read's murder retrial in Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Mass., Monday April 28, 2025. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Ian Whiffin continued to provide testimony on John O’Keefe’s health data provided by his cell phone, revealing O’Keefe was walking between 12:11 a.m. and 12:30 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022.

The phone did not register any additional movement until 6:04 a.m.Utilizing data from the transit app Waze, along with location information, healthcare data and topography data, Whiffin concluded O’Keefe was not actually walking upstairs at 12:24 a.m., as suggested by the health data, but was instead inside a vehicle.

Additionally, Whiffin pointed to data indicating the phone dropped in temperature beginning at 12:37 a.m., with the coldest temperature of 37 degrees being recorded at 6:14 a.m.

Whiffin also testified O’Keefe’s cell phone was locked for the last time at 12:32 a.m., with the phone remaining in a “pocket state” for over five hours.

“Based on the totality of all of the information that we've described, my opinion is that the device never moved far away from the flagpole,” Whiffin said.

Following a brief cross-examination from defense attorney Robert Alessi, Judge Beverly Cannone dismissed the jurors for the day. 

Location data shows John O’Keefe’s cell phone’s location outside the home from 12:25 a.m. until his body was found six hours later, according to the prosecution in Karen Read’s trial.

Digital forensic examiner Ian Whiffin went on to testify that, upon receiving John O’Keefe’s phone, he was primarily interested in looking into the device’s health and location data in the moments leading up to his death. 

Whiffin testified that O’Keefe’s phone showed multiple movements outside the home, with data indicating the device measured speed at approximately 12:19 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022. Whiffin pointed to various movements made by O’Keefe’s device but indicated the location data provides a radius where the phone could be at the specific time. 

O’Keefe’s phone pinged within the area of the front yard at approximately 12:24 a.m., with the device remaining within the general area until O’Keefe was found. 

Whiffin went on to explain that the data points from O’Keefe’s phone only showed locations within the front yard from 12:25 a.m. until his body was found six hours later. 

Whiffin testified that cold weather or an individual lying on top of a cell phone could impact the accuracy of the location data.

An internet search from Jennifer McCabe’s phone was conducted at 6:23 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022, digital forensic examiner Ian Whiffin testified during Karen Read’s trial. (Pool)

On Monday morning, prosecutors called Ian Whiffin, a digital forensic examiner working at Cellebrite, to testify on the validity of a key internet search - or query - made the morning of John O’Keefe’s death. Whiffin first learned of Karen Read’s case through a company public relations manager looking into questions from investigators regarding data from Jennifer McCabe’s phone. 

“The question was related to a timestamp of 2:27 a.m., and an internet query that appeared to have occurred at that time,” Whiffin said. “There was no other information on the device that suggested that that internet query had occurred at that time. So we wanted to know how relevant is that timestamp to when the query happened?” 

Whiffin testified that the internet browser tab was opened at 2:27 a.m. and “had no relevance to when the actual web query had been made.”

“Hos long to die in the cold,” the key internet search found on McCabe’s phone, was conducted at approximately 6:23 a.m., according to data compiled by Cellebrite, Whiffin told the court.

Prosecutor Hank Brennan brought up the internet search being deleted from McCabe’s phone. Whiffin testified that over 4,000 items were deleted from McCabe’s device, but that it was likely a result of the system removing the data  and not a human removing the information. 

Karen Read and John O'Keefe together in an undated photo. (Courtesy of Karen Read)

Was John O'Keefe alive to hear the "last words" from Karen Read when he died Jan. 29, 2022? That was a key question prosecutors and her defense sought answers to Friday in her retrial on murder charges in his death. 

Each side sought to fit them into the context of their respective cases.

During an ambulance ride after Read, Kerry Roberts and Jennifer McCabe found O'Keefe under a pile of snow outside another officer's house, Read told paramedics about an argument she'd had with her boyfriend, both sides agree.

But a key point of contention Friday arose during the testimony of a Canton firefighter and paramedic named Jason Becker. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan portrayed the remark Becker mentioned as a reference to an argument between the two.

"When you spoke to the defendant, and she shared with you that her last words with her ‘husband’ were (an) argument, why didn't you ask for more detail about that?" Brennan asked.

"I didn't feel it was my, you know — at the time, we went about the call as that we didn't think we would be witnesses in a murder trial," Becker replied. "We were there to support Karen and ultimately get her to the hospital safely."

Alan Jackson, one of Read's defense attorneys, questioned whether Read's statement could have had different context, something she said over voicemail or earlier in the evening.

"But she did — when she was having this conversation with you about her last words to him,” Jackson said. “She did actually take out her phone and show you a bunch of missed calls to him at the same time, didn’t she?"

"She tried to, yes," Becker said.

Read the full story here.

Karen Read, center, speaks with defense team during her trial, Friday, April 25, 2025, at Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Mass. (Josh Reynolds /New York Post via AP, Pool)

Testimony is set to resume on Monday in the second week of Karen Read’s retrial. Read is facing murder charges for allegedly ramming Boston police officer John O’Keefe with her Lexus SUV after the pair spent a night bar hopping in January 2022. 

The prosecution alleges Read struck O’Keefe with her vehicle during an emotionally-charged argument, leaving him to die in the front yard of a fellow officer’s home during a blizzard. Read’s defense team insists she is being framed in an elaborate cover-up, with disgraced former lead investigator Michael Proctor at the helm.

Last week, jurors heard from several key witnesses from the prosecution and took a trip to the home where O’Keefe’s body was found the morning of Jan. 29, 2022. If convicted, Read faces a maximum sentence of up to life in prison.