Every now and then, a real crime case comes alongside that appears to be a Rorschach take a look at — the place there’s a lot difficult, compelling, and contradictory proof on all sides that it turns into simple to imagine what you need to imagine.
That’s arguably the easiest way to explain why the case of Karen Learn, which deadlocked a “starkly divided” jury after an intense nine-week trial, has hypnotized and polarized town of Boston, and more and more the remainder of the nation. Following Decide Beverly Cannone’s declaration of a mistrial, the prosecution instantly vowed to pursue a retrial. That seemingly means heightened public curiosity and additional entrenchment of the bitter camps on this case.
The prosecution alleges that Learn, a profitable finance analyst and adjunct professor who’s removed from the “typical” homicide suspect, killed her boyfriend, 46-year-old Boston police officer John O’Keefe, within the early, snowy morning hours of January 29, 2022. In accordance with prosecutors, Learn, who stood trial for second-degree homicide and manslaughter, intentionally backed into O’Keefe together with her SUV whereas she was intoxicated, then drove house, leaving him mendacity within the chilly. O’Keefe died from blunt power trauma and hypothermia.
Among the many fundamental items of proof within the state’s favor: Learn herself asking varied witnesses, “May I’ve hit him?” the subsequent morning, after awakening and returning to the home to search for him.
Learn, then again, alleges that she’s been framed, in a spiraling conspiracy that started with a celebration filled with witnesses mendacity about what occurred and shortly encompassing all the Boston Police Division (BPD) and the prosecutor’s workplace. Whereas from one standpoint, Learn’s protection could also be greedy at straws in its try to color the case as a frame-up; from one other, it’s the type of police work Bostonians — and people in different cities throughout the nation — have come to count on.
The trial has developed from what initially appeared to investigators like an open-and-shut case right into a reckoning with a legal justice system the general public now not trusts.
The murky info of the case
Learn claims that after she and O’Keefe spent till round midnight consuming at a neighborhood bar, she dropped O’Keefe off to hang around on the house of retired BPD officer Brian Albert. A number of individuals who have been both members of the BPD or affiliated with the native justice system have been additionally on the home, however nobody who was there corroborates her story. Not certainly one of them says they noticed O’Keefe enter the constructing; as an alternative, all of them declare they’d no thought O’Keefe had even arrived on the home till his physique was situated outdoors of it within the snow the subsequent morning.
Learn, nonetheless, maintains that she watched O’Keefe go into the home earlier than she left the scene. She alleges that O’Keefe will need to have been injured inside the home, that the partygoers staged the crime scene to seem like a hit-and-run, and that they’ve lied about it ever since. Her protection argues that the accidents O’Keefe sustained resulted from a bodily combat and a canine assault from a German shepherd combine Albert owned.
The protection alleges the investigation was hindered from the beginning by a failure to deal with the Albert home as a potential crime scene and a failure to deal with the witnesses as potential individuals of curiosity; two of the first investigative crew members even have private hyperlinks to the witnesses. Additional undermining the police have been the weird strategies they used, together with utilizing leaf blowers to clear away snow (and probably proof) on the crime scene, and utilizing solo cups and grocery baggage to gather proof. Add to {that a} parade of unprofessional conduct and feedback from officers, significantly from a lead investigator who was fired instantly after the mistrial, and the case has morphed into a real public scandal.
All through the investigation and the extensively publicized trial, a extremely vocal contingent of supporters from Boston and past have made Learn into a real crime trigger célèbre; one Fb group supporting her has over 50,000 members. Due to a decade of thriving curiosity in true crime, trial-watchers are hyper-vigilant to potential injustices and the shortcomings of legislation enforcement. Within the eyes of many, the case has develop into a referendum on corrupt cops — a topic Bostonians know all too properly after a long time of police misconduct starting from cover-ups to kickbacks.
Learn’s relentless conspiracy protection has been pushed by incendiary star lawyer Alan Jackson, a former prosecutor turned protection legal professional who’s defended each Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey. O’Keefe, the sufferer, has been absolutely overshadowed by the dialog across the case, with Learn’s supporters allegedly harassing his relations.
This polarization outdoors of the courtroom appears to have been mirrored within the jury. After deliberating for lower than per week, the jury tried repeatedly to declare themselves deadlocked to Decide Cannone, sending her notes to that impact. “We discover ourselves deeply divided by basic variations in our opinions and mind-set,” a word from the day of the mistrial learn, citing “deeply held convictions that every of us carry, in the end main to a degree the place consensus is unattainable.”
A deadlocked or hung jury ends in a mistrial, after which the prosecution has to resolve whether or not to retry the case. On this case, the prosecution appears intent on a retrial — regardless of the numerous, many issues with their arguments.
The prosecution’s case is a circumstantial mess
Regardless of presenting over 70 witnesses at trial, the prosecution’s major proof in opposition to Learn stays largely circumstantial — that means there’s little or no direct or bodily proof backing their idea of what occurred — and Learn’s protection has provided up various theories for a lot of it. The timeline of the night goes like this: After leaving a bar in Canton, Massachusetts, Learn — whose blood alcohol content material was seemingly over the authorized restrict — drove O’Keefe to Albert’s home. There, she both noticed him safely inside or backed over him within the snow. In both occasion, she left the scene and drove house.
Afterward, she left him an offended voicemail declaring, “John, I fucking hate you.” All through the night time, Learn referred to as O’Keefe and quite a few different individuals. Early the subsequent morning, she met up with two buddies, together with main prosecution witness Jennifer McCabe, who can also be Albert’s sister-in-law, and drove again to Albert’s home, the place they found O’Keefe within the snow. In accordance with witnesses, Learn repeatedly requested whether or not O’Keefe may have been hit by a snow plow, or whether or not she may have hit him. A number of first responders additionally testified to listening to Learn repeatedly exclaiming that she hit him, although none of them famous this of their preliminary stories from the scene.
This alleged repeated chorus of, “May I’ve hit him?” and “I hit him,” was one the prosecution leaned on closely as an argument for guilt. Nevertheless, per witness accounts, Learn additionally appeared to haven’t any clear thought what had occurred to O’Keefe.
What concrete proof the prosecution did supply was hotly contested inside in addition to outdoors the courtroom. One essential piece: a damaged taillight. An investigator who interviewed Learn at her mother and father’ home that night time reported seeing “some injury” to the appropriate rear mild of Learn’s SUV; he testified that it was allegedly “cracked and a bit was lacking.”
Practically three weeks after O’Keefe’s demise, the state’s lead investigator, Michael Proctor, allegedly situated extra fragments of a tail mild on the crime scene and transported the proof to the crime lab. Prosecutors say they discovered minute traces of O’Keefe’s DNA on these fragments, in addition to tiny particles from the tail mild on a few of O’Keefe’s garments. But the protection hammered house the big delay in finding what would have been an extremely important piece of proof, in addition to the unreliability of proof abruptly unearthed by Proctor.
That’s as a result of Proctor has a number of private ties to each the sufferer and the witnesses. In texts he despatched a day after the investigation started, he used a misogynistic slur to check with Learn, made it clear he thought Learn’s guilt was apparent from the start, and even texted his sister that he hoped Learn would kill herself. The protection alleges Proctor helped body Learn for the homicide, intentionally damaging her tail mild with a view to declare the injury was brought about when she hit O’Keefe together with her automobile. In reality, a mysteriously altered video of Learn’s automobile that purportedly confirmed the injury made all of it the best way to trial earlier than the protection identified that the picture was misleadingly altered — a “mirror” video with the tail mild in query inverted from its precise place.
It doesn’t assist any of those optics that Proctor’s sister texted him that Albert’s spouse Julie needed to ship Proctor “a present” after the investigation was over. Proctor protested on the stand that none of those texts impacted the integrity of the police investigation, however given Monday’s mistrial, some jurors could have disagreed with him. They evidently weren’t alone: State police introduced that they’d fired Proctor instantly after the mistrial primarily based on “details about critical misconduct [that] emerged in testimony” — an terribly uncommon transfer on their half.
Different info of the case that on their floor may need supported the prosecution proved murkier on nearer inspection. O’Keefe died of blunt-force trauma from a cranium fracture and hypothermia, in keeping with the medical expert. He additionally had gashes on his arms that appeared unlikely to have been produced from a automobile impression. The protection alleged these resulted from a canine assault on O’Keefe inside the home. O’Keefe additionally lacked lots of the accidents you’d count on to see from a automobile impression, akin to damaged bones or important bruises.
The prosecution’s witnesses are additionally controversial. Along with Learn’s former good friend McCabe, who had ties to each O’Keefe and the Alberts, the celebration attendees included a number of those that Learn’s protection argued ought to have been investigated by police earlier than taking the stand. Amongst them: Brian Higgins, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent who’d been sporadically flirting with Learn within the lead-up to O’Keefe’s demise, and Albert’s son Colin, who as a teen had made violent threats in opposition to different teenagers.
Lots of the witnesses who have been on the celebration, together with McCabe and the Alberts, exchanged a litany of telephone calls to at least one one other all through the time O’Keefe supposedly lay on the garden, per telephone information. A number of later testified that the calls have been “butt dials,” positioned randomly and by full mistake. As circumstances go, it’s eyebrow-raising, to say the least.
The protection’s proof is equally unreliable
Regardless of all the issues with the prosecution’s case, the strongest proof for the protection is likewise absolutely debatable. One of many protection’s key witnesses was a veteran snowplow driver who made a number of journeys previous the Alberts’ home throughout the time O’Keefe was allegedly wounded within the snow, but claimed he noticed no physique mendacity anyplace on the garden. Nevertheless, snow impedes visibility, even with a brilliant snowplow mild, and eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
One other piece of essential proof that many Learn supporters think about a “smoking gun” for the protection has additionally been absolutely debunked by prosecution analysts. At subject: Two searches McCabe made on her cellphone in some unspecified time in the future throughout the early morning hours surrounding O’Keefe’s demise, together with a misspelled question, “Hos lengthy to die in chilly.” The prosecution claims, and McCabe testified, that she made the searches round six within the morning when she and Learn discovered O’Keefe mendacity within the snow. The official cellphone information for the search, nonetheless, present the timestamp for the search at 2:27 am.
The implication is that if McCabe looked for this then, she was a part of a conspiracy to stage the scene and body Learn. However McCabe claims she merely opened that tab on her telephone browser at 2:27 am, left it open, and searched the phrase hours later, after she and Learn discovered him collectively. A number of knowledge analysts for the prosecution corroborated this interpretation of the cellphone knowledge. Nonetheless, the protection scored some extent of their favor by noting that their skilled witness, who argued the search occurred at 2:27, arrived at his conclusion by utilizing a way developed by one of many prosecution’s witnesses.
Different findings that leaned towards the protection included O’Keefe’s health tracker app, which confirmed him taking about 80 steps across the time Reed claimed she dropped him off. But right here once more, nothing concerning the timeline or O’Keefe’s exercise is obvious or corroborated by witnesses. The protection’s argument that O’Keefe was attacked inside the home, together with by the household canine, can also be speculative and unsupported by a lot proof — which they declare is as a result of the police by no means correctly investigated. A medical skilled testified on the stand in assist of the canine chunk idea, however forensic chunk mark proof is extremely unreliable and has been kind of absolutely debunked, a minimum of in instances involving people.
So the place does all of this go away us?
Paradoxically, outrage for the police’s conduct on this case has united Bostonians throughout political strains, with neighborhood activists becoming a member of the likes of native conservative pundit Howie Carr. In the meantime, tons of of Learn supporters traveled from throughout the nation to protest for her freedom outdoors the courthouse. They generally clashed with O’Keefe’s household and their supporters, who argue Learn’s protection has turned a transparent case of homicide right into a distorted media circus and fueled unfounded accusations of conspiracy.
The mistrial signifies that the narrative of the case has additionally expanded.
On the one hand, in style resistance to the concept a profitable, articulate white girl may commit such a brutal homicide could be fueling a great deal of the assist for Learn — which speaks to a lot of assumptions about how we view class, privilege, and who will get to be seen as a sufferer. We’re accustomed, in any case, to seeing ladies like Learn within the function of the sufferer, irrespective of that she is the one on trial right here. With regards to true crime, the media offers extra consideration and sympathy to engaging middle-class white ladies than it does to male victims, a lot much less victims who’re poor or individuals of colour.
Alternatively, Boston police are famously corrupt, with a protracted historical past of bribery, fraud, and racial bias. The Learn case is being in comparison with one other potential murder involving a horrifying allegation of police conspiracy in close by Stoughton, however this is not only a regional subject. American cities are ceaselessly beset by precise, confirmed police corruption. Boston isn’t distinctive. What does really feel distinctive is the quantity of public consideration and scrutiny being given to the function of potential corruption in such a high-profile trial. All of it provides as much as what might be a hopelessly irreconcilable pursuit of reality.
