Read accused of weaponizing Fifth Amendment to try and delay civil trial
By Kristina Rex,
2 days ago
BROCKTON - Lawyers for Karen Read want a wrongful death lawsuit against her to be delayed until after her second criminal trial, an issue they argued before Judge William White, Jr. in Plymouth Superior Court in Brockton on Monday.
Read's attorneys want proceedings delayed
Read's lawyers, who are not the same attorneys who represent her in her criminal trials, argued that to proceed with a wrongful death lawsuit at the moment could violate her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. They asked the court to stay – or delay – the proceedings until her second criminal trial ends.
The reason, they say, is that requiring Read to be deposed or answer questions in the civil trial could incriminate her in the ongoing criminal case. The standard for a criminal case – which can result in jail time – is beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas in civil court – where the outcome is money damages – is a preponderance of the evidence, or more likely than not that Read's actions caused O'Keefe's death.
"The charges in the criminal trial are profoundly serious," argued attorney William Keville on behalf of Read, who was not physically present at court Monday. "If she chooses to plead the fifth, she'd be giving up the right to defend herself." Her lawyer explained that her words in the civil trial could be used against her in the criminal trial.
"Totally unprecedented"
Marc Diller, the attorney representing the O'Keefe family, accused Read of weaponizing the Fifth Amendment to her convenience. "Karen Read is overtly weaponizing the Fifth Amendment to her advantage," Diller said. "She gave an in-depth interview with Vanity Fair. She has a Netflix documentary in the works."
Diller also pointed out a raffle currently being held by Read's team – for $50 per ticket, two winners will get to have dinner with Karen Read. "This is totally unprecedented," Diller said. He told the judge that Read can't "have it both ways," by staying silent in court while being vocal in the court of public opinion.
Lawyers on behalf of CF McCarthy's and the Waterfall Bar & Grille, two local restaurants also named as defendants in the wrongful death suit, also asked the court to delay the case. "Karen Read is the core of this case," one attorney said, explaining that it would be logistically challenging to coordinate witness testimony with the same witnesses in the civil trial during Read's criminal trial. The two bars are accused of overserving Read the night of John O'Keefe's death in January 2022 .
Judge White said he would take the issue under advisement, meaning he would issue a written decision in the future.
Read's second criminal trial is currently scheduled for January 27, 2025 in Norfolk Superior Court. Her lawyers for her criminal case will be at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Wednesday, November 6, to argue that the state's highest court dismiss two charges against her based on post-trial jury polls.
Who is Karen Read?
Read, 44, is charged with second-degree murder, leaving the scene and manslaughter in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police officer John O'Keefe. Prosecutors said she hit him with her SUV after a night of heavy drinking and left him to die in a snowstorm.
Read's attorneys said she was framed, and that O'Keefe was actually killed inside the Canton home of another Boston police officer and dragged outside.
She's not "weaponizing" the 5th Amendment. She has every right to plead the 5th. What she does outside of the courtroom does not eviscerate her rights. From what I've seen up until now, I believe they are trying to frame her for murder, to protect a law enforcement "friend "!
anynomous
13h ago
If she was incarcerated like every other defendant with her charges she would have been plaeded guilty
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.