Karen Read timeline: What court docs, attorney statements reveal about the federal probe into her case (2024)

Crime

While details about the investigation's scope remain scant, court documents and attorneys’ comments reveal further information about the federal inquiry into Read’s case.

By Abby Patkin

February 2, 2024

Months before authorities’ unsealed letters confirmed the existence of a federal probe into the murder case against Karen Read, the defendant herself allegedly leaked information about the investigation to Turtleboy blogger Aidan Kearney, according to new court documents.

Using her college friend as an intermediary, Read “sent Kearney information regarding the federal investigation in real-time beginning in April,” according to a search warrant application filed in Norfolk Superior Court last month. Read would allegedly text her college friend on the encrypted messaging app Signal, and the friend would copy and paste the message or forward a screenshot to Kearney.

Investigators say those tips were just a fraction of the non-public information that flowed between Read and Kearney as the Mansfield woman’s case inched closer to trial.

Prosecutors allege that after a night out with friends, the 43-year-old backed her SUV into her boyfriend — Boston police officer John O’Keefe — and left him to die outside a home in Canton on Jan. 29, 2022. But Read’s lawyers have alleged a coverup, offering a theory that O’Keefe was beaten inside the home and attacked by the family’s dog.

Kearney, for his part, is facing a slew of charges after he was accused of intimidating witnesses in Read’s case.

While details about the scope and purpose of the federal investigation remain scant, court documents, news reports, and attorneys’ statements reveal further information about how word spread of the inquiry into Read’s case. Here’s an abridged timeline.

April 12, 2023: Read’s defense team files a motion in Norfolk Superior Court saying they uncovered new evidence that will clear her name. They claim that hours before O’Keefe’s body was found outside fellow Boston police officer Brian Albert’s home, Albert’s sister-in-law — Jennifer McCabe — made a Google search at 2:27 a.m. for “hos [sic] long to die in cold.” Prosecutors dispute that timestamp, but the revelation kickstarts widespread interest and speculation in Read’s case.

April 13, 2023: While texting about the case with a friend of Kearney’s, Read’s college friend sends a message saying, “the feds are involved,” and describes how people connected to the case are “going down.”

April 18, 2023: Kearney publishes the first article in his series on Read’s case: “Canton Cover-Up Part 1: Corrupt State Trooper Helps Boston Cop Coverup Murder Of Fellow Officer, Frame Innocent Girlfriend.”

April 20, 2023: Kearney publishes an article about the federal grand jury investigation titled, “Multiple Witnesses In Home Where John O’Keefe Was Killed Subpoenaed By Federal Grand Jury, FBI Visits Homes, Basem*nt Floor Reportedly Replaced.” In the article, he writes: “Breaking News – according to reliable sources close to the matter a federal grand jury has subpoenaed multiple witnesses who were in the home of Boston Police Officer Brian Albert on the night fellow BPD Officer John O’Keefe was killed.”

April 23, 2023: Read’s college friend texts Kearney about an investigation conducted by the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts. The friend writes, “Not public: the feds have been involved longer than anyone is likely guessing.”

Late April, 2023: Norfolk District Attorney Michael Morrissey’s office learns that witnesses in Read’s case have received subpoenas to appear before a federal grand jury. Soon after, then-First Assistant U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy contacts the DA’s office to suggest that federal prosecutors are conducting an investigation that may involve several witnesses in Read’s case.

April 28, 2023: Read’s college friend has the following text exchange with Kearney.

Friend: “But I don’t understand why he doesn’t mention more that the feds are involved. The 1st Asst US Atty. They don’t shoot and miss – they have a case – and way more evidence than we do. I know this for a fact. Jen McCabe testifies this coming week. I’m not sure about the others.”

Kearney: “Has there been any new information about the fbi investigation and handing out subpoenas?”

Friend: “No new info. Just that they are already present [sic] the case [to] the [grand jury] as we speak. … And the DA’s office has been informed. That is confirmed. 1000%.”

May 3, 2023: Read is back in Norfolk Superior Court for a hearing. Addressing the court, defense attorney Alan Jackson states: “It’s been reported that the federal authorities have now gotten involved in the circ*mstances surrounding this case and have empaneled a grand jury, a federal grand jury, to investigate some of these circ*mstances. But Karen Read should not have to wait for the feds to figure out which heads should roll.”

In a July motion, fellow defense attorney David Yannetti clarifies that Jackson’s statement “was not the defense revealing publicly that a federal grand jury had been empaneled — something about which the defense team would have no knowledge. Instead, as Attorney Jackson stated, this was Ms. Read’s counsel reiterating what had already been publicly reported.”

May 7, 2023: After Kearney mentions a rumor that 20 FBI agents were seen in Canton for “possible arrests,” Read’s college friend replies, in part, “NOT PUBLIC: Levy confirmed no swarms of FBI were in Canton two days ago.”

The college friend also sends a follow-up message: “No rush – but you can tell him: Josh Levy is the 1st Asst. There’s only one 1st Asst, and he doesn’t typically prosecute. Like, he never prosecutes, he just delegates to the assistants within the divisions. … But he’s running this [grand jury].”

May 18, 2023: Morrissey asks the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility to look into federal prosecutors’ investigation into the Read case and requests that the probe be “transferred to another office without history of conflict, bias, and abuse of prosecutorial discretion.” He cites past conflicts with then-U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins — who formally resigns on May 19 after a federal watchdog determined she abused her power — and a federal prosecutor whose wife was once an attorney in the DA’s office.

Aug. 3, 2023: Jay Macklin, general counsel for the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, tells the DA’s office that federal officials see no basis for recusing the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney’s Office from the investigation into Read’s case.

Dec. 5, 2023: Boston 25 News reports that the U.S. Attorney’s Office is conducting an inquiry into Read’s arrest and prosecution, citing Morrissey’s then-sealed May 18 letter to the DOJ.

December 2023: Investigators speak with Kearney’s former girlfriend, who accused him of assaulting her after she received a subpoena to appear before a grand jury in connection with his witness intimidation case. She says Kearney told her Read’s lawyers were working with the U.S. Attorney’s Office — specifically Levy, who is now the acting U.S. attorney. The woman also states that federal law enforcement had interviewed Read.

Jan. 18, 2024: During a hearing in Norfolk Superior Court, Yannetti suggests federal authorities may soon release information from their investigation to attorneys in Read’s case. He also alleges that letters between the DA’s office and federal officials paint Morrissey as the investigation’s target — a claim the U.S. Attorney’s Office denies.

“In connection with this matter, at no time has the U.S. Attorney’s Office named any person or entity as a target of an investigation, to anyone,” the office says in response.

Jan. 22, 2024: A state judge unseals several letters between the DA’s office and federal authorities concerning Read’s case. The letters confirm the existence of a federal inquiry, though they do not specify the investigation’s focus.

In a statement the following day, Morrissey’s office asserts that “federal interference in an open state murder case is highly unusual if not unprecedented.”