Reading Karen Read offers public prosecutor's explanations for the “reverse” video as an answer to the last request for dismissal

Dedham, mass. –

For the first time, the prosecutors offer an explanation for the reverse video, which became a decisive point of view during Karen Read's first murder trial.

It was in a edited copy of the response from special prosecutor Hank Brennan on Read's recent application to dismiss the case.

At the beginning of this week, Read's defense demanded that the case was rejected due to allegations of an “extraordinary government misconduct”, which contained complaints about how the public prosecutor dealt with video evidence.

“The Commonwealth denies all ethical violations or misconduct, let alone misconduct that defines the legal system or violates the accused's right to a fair procedure,” wrote Brennan, who now heads the persecution.

The READ team complained about the piece of disclosure of film material and discovery, which according to the public prosecutor's office, complained that it was defended. They visit several arguments that were of central importance for defense during the first process than they bothered the public prosecutor by pointing out that an important video piece of the police authority was inverted.

This specific clip is remarkable, since the public prosecutor claims that the review of the SUV was damaged when he beat O'keefe, but the defense argues that the light could be damaged in the context of a cover-up and that the inversion of the video shows that the law enforcement authorities approached this part of the vehicle while the police dealt with the police in the cantonal police officers.

“In addition to not supported claims and vague alludes, the defense struggles to determine how the condition of the defendant's broken taillight in the Sallyport canton police is actually relieving,” wrote Brennan.

Read, 45, from Mansfield, is accused of beating her friend John O'keefe with her SUV in front of a cantonal house on January 29, 2022 and dying in two bars in a blizzard after a night of drinking.

Read's defense has long argued that she was the victim of a cover -up and that other law enforcement officers were responsible for O'keef's death.

The defense accused the deputy administrative prosecutor Adam Lally, chief prosecutor during the first trial, to “brazenly present” the reverse video and to trigger false statements by an investigator.

In his answer, Brennan tells the court that the video was inverted “due to the settings of the camera”.

“The Commonwealth has not manipulated or changed a video and entered the video as a test exhibition in the state in which it was received,” wrote Brennan.

Brennan also argues that even after the defense has tried to “correct” the video, it shows Proctor “feet from the accused's vehicle”.

“The submission of the accused is the fact that the DNA of Trooper Proctor was not on the right rear light,” wrote Brennan.

In his argument, Brennan said that the defense “had no evidence of bad belief” and suggested that the case of the public prosecutor's office was “equally damaged” by the quality of the video evidence.

“The accused benefited during the first process by suggesting without significant evidence that the poor quality of the videos and/or the gaps in time was caused by an improper investigation by the police and systemic police due to an unsolicitive camera system,” wrote Brennan.

Read's application for dismissal was submitted in the shade of a recent hearing in which the truthfulness of her defense team was attacked by the public prosecutor. It is also carried out after sources 5 examinations that a federal investigation of the case was not filed with any charges against the police.

As proof of the truthfulness of the public prosecutor, Brennan refers to a protocol of the Federal Grand Jury. Parts of these arguments are reduced from the public document.

Other reduced sections appear in Brennan's argument against allegations regarding the security of the court and the dismissal of a juror.

“The accused's absurd assertion, one who explained the lawyer (Alan) Jackson that he had no specific evidence of ', should be rejected immediately,” wrote Brennan.

In a separate submission of Newscenter 5 on Friday, Read's defense asks to delay the planned hearing in the next week, since law enforcement expects the chain protocols for video evidence and additional videos-are unclear whether one of the videos will be a new material. The defense said you need time to check the documents, but Brennan argued that the hearing should continue as planned.