Clues with Morgan Absher and Kaelyn Moore
Podcast: Crime House
Episode: INFAMOUS: Karen Read & John O'Keefe Pt. 2
Date: August 27, 2025
Episode Overview
This episode is the second installment examining the controversial case of Massachusetts police officer John O'Keefe's death and the closely watched retrial of his girlfriend, Karen Read. Hosts Morgan Absher and Kaelyn Moore meticulously break down the forensic evidence, courtroom drama, and internet-fueled conspiracy theories from the 2025 retrial. With new expert testimonies, questionable police conduct, and social media fervor, they piece through the complex web of relationships, evidence, and doubt that surrounded this headline-grabbing murder investigation.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Brief Recap of the Case (Starts 04:02)
- Victim: John O’Keefe, Massachusetts police officer found dead in snowy front yard after party, January 2022.
- Suspect: Karen Read, his girlfriend, accused of hitting him with her SUV after a night of drinking and arguing.
- Competing Theories: Either Karen killed John in a drunken argument or he was killed/covered up by others at the party, with Karen as the scapegoat.
- First Trial: Ended in a mistrial; jury deadlocked.
- Second Trial: Focus of this episode, with new witnesses, evidence, and intense media attention.
2. Media and Jury Selection Chaos (05:44)
- Between the two trials, Karen Read engaged in a “PR campaign”—doing interviews for HBO Max, Vanity Fair, etc.—making it nearly impossible to find unbiased jurors.
- “How do you find people that haven’t heard of her?” – Kaelyn (06:41)
- 600 potential jurors considered; final jury seated April 22, 2025.
3. Organization of Trial Coverage (07:24)
- Kaelyn presents prosecution side, Morgan presents defense evidence and theories, reflecting only structure, not personal opinions.
4. Opening Statements & Prosecution Case (08:09-11:55)
- Prosecution (Hank Brennan):
- Depicts Karen as jealous and angry, suggesting she intentionally struck John while backing up.
- Cites repeated “I hit him, I hit him” statements at crime scene as evidence of guilt.
- Defense (Alan Jackson):
- Argues John was never hit by a vehicle—“There was no collision...The facts will show that. The data will show that. The science will show that. The experts will tell you that.” (10:39)
- Allegations of police corruption and cover-up, specifically targeting fired lead investigator Michael Proctor and suggesting John was hurt elsewhere.
Day-by-Day Trial Highlights:
Days 1–5: Witnesses and Forensic Evidence (11:55–26:37)
-
Paramedics & Friends:
- Paramedic Timothy Nuttall, Carrie Roberts testify to Karen’s distressed “I hit him” statements.
- Carrie describes Karen as frantic, half-suspecting a snowplow hitting John.
-
John’s Mother:
- Margaret “Peggy” O’Keefe denies telling Karen or anyone that John looked like he'd been “hit by a car.”
-
Text Evidence:
- State Police trooper Nicholas Guarino reviews tense texts about infidelity and fighting between John and Karen the night he died.
- Karen texts: “Tell me if you’re interested in someone else.” John replies: “Nope, things haven’t been great… Sick of always arguing and fighting.” (18:34)
-
Alcohol Use:
- Karen admitted to heavy drinking in the HBO documentary (“I shouldn’t have gotten behind the wheel.” – 19:00), contradicting not-guilty plea for DUI.
-
Cell Phone and Forensic Data:
- Cell phone expert Ian Whiffin testifies John’s phone “never moved from the flagpole where he was found,” possibly undermining suggested timelines.
- Controversy over the exact time “how long to die in cold” was searched, and whether it happened before or after John was discovered.
Days 6–13: Partygoers, Police, and Cross-Examinations (26:37–47:24)
-
Jennifer McCabe (Key Witness):
- Claims she saw Karen’s car but never John or Karen enter the party; denied any collaboration to “get their stories straight.”
- Did not alert her sister or brother-in-law (inside, a cop) when John’s body found.
- “Is there any part of you that wouldn’t think to call him and let him know?” – Kaelyn (30:27)
-
Group Texts & Possible Collusion:
- Revealed texts among party hosts after John’s death: “Tell them the guy never went into the house.”
-
Forensic Finds:
- Officer Paul Gallagher describes using a leaf blower to uncover blood evidence—destroying potential clues.
- Pink cocktail glass found at scene, seen with John when leaving the bar.
-
Surveillance Footage:
- Witnesses saw Karen’s SUV and a man in the passenger seat upon arrival, but that man was gone by the time they left.
- Karen called John’s phone 50+ times after leaving, often leaving angry voicemails (“I fing hate you…you fing pervert”).
Days 12–14: Questionable Police Conduct (40:16–49:11)
-
Michael Proctor, Lead Investigator:
- Fired for sending derogatory, unprofessional texts about Karen, e.g., calling her a “whack job,” using slurs, etc.
- “Honor and integrity. You really said that on the stand after they read through all those texts?” – Kaelyn (41:45)
-
Evidence Handling Criticized:
- Inconsistent documentation of taillight fragments and other evidence, evidence bags filled out later, casual use of red Solo cups and leaf blowers.
Days 15–21: Forensic Details and Expert Debates (49:11–58:01)
-
DNA Evidence:
- John’s DNA found on taillight fragments, but timeline of deposit cannot be confirmed; uncertain about hair evidence.
-
Car’s Black Box Data:
- “Trigger event” (could be collision, but also hard braking or swerving) at 12:31am; phone activity close in time but inconclusive.
-
Medical Examiner & Accident Experts:
- Dr. Scordabello: John’s injuries—cuts, compound wound to head—but not consistent with being struck by a car.
- Prosecution accident reconstructionist: taillight height matches injuries on John’s arms.
Days 22–30: Defense’s Second Theory and the Dog Evidence (58:01–72:11)
-
Dog Bite Theory:
- Defense expert Dr. Marie Russell explains John’s arm wounds resemble dog bites, not car injuries.
- Albert family's dog “Chloe,” rehomed shortly after John’s death, never tested forensically.
- “That’s what you tell little kids, ‘they’re living on a farm upstate’” – Kaelyn (59:39)
-
More Chain-of-Custody Problems:
- Tail light’s damage reportedly worse in police custody than at recovery.
- No initial photos, opening questions about possible evidence tampering.
-
Snowplow Driver’s Testimony (Lucky Loughran):
- Didn’t see body during two passes at ~2:45 and ~3:30 am, suggesting John’s body placed after 3:30 am.
- “Ford Edge” seen near scene (common police and civilian SUV).
Final Days: Butt Dials, Weak Forensics, and Jury Deliberation (66:31–73:09)
-
Suspicious Phone Records:
- Multiple party attendees claim accidental (“butt dialed”) calls to John and each other plausible cover for coordinated communication.
- “I feel like your ass can’t keep calling the same person seven times.” – Morgan (69:29)
-
Expert Clashes:
- Defense’s experts assert John’s injuries inconsistent with car strike; prosecution disagrees.
- Forensic analyst’s (Shannon Burgess) credentials questioned (no college degree after 17 years “in progress”).
5. The Verdict & Aftermath (73:09–80:26)
- Jury deliberated five days (200+ pieces of evidence, 50 witnesses); found Karen Read not guilty of second degree murder, manslaughter, or leaving the scene, but guilty of DUI (one year probation).
- Hosts discuss overwhelming “reasonable doubt”—conflicting expert opinions, mishandled evidence, police bias.
- “How can you conclude someone’s guilty based on that? It’s confusing.” – Morgan (75:42)
- Theories abound: accident, party fight/cover-up, dog mauling, snowplow, or sober slip-and-fall.
- No clear justice, many loose ends, and continued speculation online.
6. Quotes & Memorable Moments (with Timestamps)
-
Opening Statement, Defense:
“There was no collision with John O’ Keefe. There was no collision. There was no collision. John O’ Keefe did not die from being hit by a vehicle. Period. The facts will show that. The evidence will show that. The data will show that. The science will show that. And the experts will tell you that.”
– Alan Jackson (Defense Attorney), (10:39) -
On Evidence Handling by Police:
“Honor and integrity. You really said that on the stand after they read through all those texts?”
– Kaelyn (41:45) -
On “Butt Dial” Alibis:
“I feel like your ass can’t keep calling the same person seven times.”
– Morgan (69:29) -
On Dog “Chloe” Rehoming:
“That’s what you tell little kids, ‘they’re living on a farm upstate’.”
– Kaelyn (59:39)
7. Notable Investigation Critiques & Lingering Questions
- Evidence chain of custody was repeatedly questioned—damage to the taillight seemed worse after impound with police; officers did not photograph the car before towing.
- Multiple law enforcement and party guests appeared connected, prompting cover-up theories.
- Karen’s friends and partygoers had opportunities to collude on stories, with texts indicating instructions on what to say.
- Physical forensic evidence provided competing, inconclusive interpretations.
Timestamps for Key Segments
- Recap & Competing Theories: 04:02–05:44
- Jury Selection & PR Coverage: 05:44–06:44
- Opening Statements: 08:09–11:55
- Text Evidence & Timeline: 17:44–21:06
- Key Forensics & Cell Phone Analysis: 23:03–26:37
- Jennifer McCabe Testimony: 26:37–32:31
- Questionable Police Conduct & Evidence Handling: 40:16–43:13
- Dog Bite Theory & Taillight Tampering: 49:11–63:34
- Snowplow Testimony (“Lucky”): 64:41–66:31
- Butt Dial Discussion & Alternate Theories: 66:31–71:52
- Jury Deliberations & Verdict: 72:11–73:09
- Speculation & Unanswered Questions: 74:54–80:26
Host Reflections & Community Engagement
- Both hosts express confusion and empathy for the victim’s family. The proliferation of alternate theories and the lack of clear answers leave “too much reasonable doubt” (78:54).
- The podcast closes by encouraging community discussion of theories and reaction to the case’s unresolved nature.
Final Thoughts
The Karen Read retrial exemplifies a modern true crime saga, propelled by media, Internet detectives, and persistent community skepticism toward official narratives. With muddied forensics, unreliable investigations, tight-knit party guests, and rumors of a cover-up, the jury—like listeners—was left with far more questions than answers. The hosts highlight both the tragedy and the enduring mystery at the core of the case:
“At the center of this was a real person, John O’Keefe. He was a son, a brother, a father figure. He is the one whose voice has been missing from all of this.” – Kaelyn (80:44)
For the full experience—including images, exhibits, and more the hosts couldn’t cover—check out @CluesPodcast on Instagram and YouTube.