Fox News True Crime Newsletter: Bryan Kohberger 'smoking gun,' Scott Peterson attack, Menendez bros. 'lies'
'SAVE MYSELF': Karen Read, accused killer of cop boyfriend, showed no emotion until jury deliberations: documentary.
DEADLY DESTINATION: Spring break murder victim's family awarded $700M in civil suit.
ARMED TO THE TEETH: Dentist from wealthy coastal enclave accused of killing boyfriend.
'GOD'S PLAN': Scott Peterson attacked in California prison by fellow murderer: corrections dept.
JUSTICE SERVED? Luigi Mangione's police station snack could help prosecutors link Ivy League suspect to crime scene: experts.
TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE: If Menendez brothers admit to 'lies,' Los Angeles DA may reconsider resentencing motion to free them: report.
SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER
'SMOKING GUN': Bryan Kohberger's Amazon records are 'catastrophic' for defense: experts say.
HOUSE OF HORRORS: "A Child Called 'It'" author says abuse case is 'attempted murder'.
LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? FIND MORE ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
Cross-examination exposes gaps in defense expert's crash testing for Karen Read
Karen Read's legal team is nearing the end of the case for her defense with crash reconstruction expert Dr. Daniel Wolfe called to the stand Friday. Wolfe testified about a series of testing he performed that he said showed the damage to Read's SUV is "inconsistent" with the type of pedestrian strike that prosecutors say killed her former boyfriend John O'Keefe – and he instead found that the damage to her taillight could have been inflicted by throwing a cocktail glass at the car at a speed of at least 37 mph. But on cross-examination, he conceded that flying fragments of a taillight could have been the source of injuries to O'Keefe's face and nose before he suffered a fractured skull. As part of the prosecution's case, special prosecutor Hank Brennan played a clip of Read telling an interviewer she pulled a "piece of glass" out of O'Keefe's nose. Wolfe also admitted to having to "retake" part of his certification exams and that he used a crash dummy arm that is about 26% lighter than O'Keefe's real arm. He ultimately obtained his certification. "When you're bringing that much more kinetic energy from the vehicle, that's going to overcome any mass that that arm has," he said. "Kinetic energy is equal to one-half times the mass times the velocity squared, so even if you go up a few miles per hour, you're exponentially increasing that amount of kinetic energy from the vehicle." Wolfe denied that the weight difference in the dummy arm would have made an impact on the tests he performed, but he acknowledged that O'Keefe, who stood at 6 feet, 1 inch tall and weighed over 200 pounds, was larger than the crash dummy that is 5 feet, 9 inches tall and 170 pounds. WATCH: Crash expert plays video reconstruction of Lexus SUV on crash dummy There are crash dummy arms weighing around 12 pounds which would have been closer to the real weight of O'Keefe's arm, Wolfe agreed. Brennan questioned the validity of his testing overall and called out Wolfe for swapping out dummy arms and not mentioning that detail in his direct examination. "I'm asking for a third time, name one journal, one paper, one study that supports your proposition that you're relying on the basis for your opinion in front of this jury today," Brennan said. "Name one." "I did not cite any in my report," Wolfe replied. "No." "Can you think of one that you didn't cite?" Brennan followed up. "Not that I'm aware of, no," Wolfe said. Brennan grilled Wolfe about his use of the Signal app to share encrypted messages with the defense and about his inability to produce communications under a court order because his texts were deleted. Earlier, Wolfe played video for the jury that showed multiple recreations of an impact involving a 2021 Lexus LX 570 SUV and a crash dummy to simulate that alleged impact of Read's vehicle of the same make and model on O'Keefe, whom she is accused of killing in a drunken hit-and-run. In each simulation, at speeds ranging from 10 to 29 mph, the damage to the vehicle's taillight was "inconsistent" with that damage police recorded on Read's actual taillight. While most of the impacts shattered the outer lens, internal components that were destroyed in Read's vehicle remained intact in multiple test taillights. "Did you reach any opinions or conclusions as to whether the damage to the right rear tail light of the subject vehicle is consistent or inconsistent with an impact to a right arm during a high-speed reversing maneuver?" asked defense attorney Alan Jackson. "It was inconsistent," Wolfe replied. Wolfe also obtained sweatshirts that were the same brand and fabric blend of the one O'Keefe was wearing when he died. Notably, the impacts did not produce similar holes in the cloth. "Do you have an opinion or conclusion as to whether or not the damage that you saw to the hoodie related to John O'Keefe is consistent or inconsistent with an impact from a right rear taillight of the subject SUV?" Jackson asked. "It was inconsistent," Wolfe replied. "And what do you base that opinion on?" Jackson followed up. "Based upon all of the impact testing that we did with the closed ATD arm in the laboratory, as well as the field," Wolfe said, using an acronym that refers to the formal name for crash dummies -- Anthropomorphic Test Device. Judge Beverly Cannone called a midday lunch break around 12:40 p.m. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan was expected to kick off cross-examination when court resumes. Friday marks the 28th day of her retrial on murder and other charges in the death of her former boyfriend, a 46-year-old Boston police officer. Wolfe is the director of accident reconstruction at a firm called ARCCA. Earlier in his testimony, he said ARCCA designed a specialized "cannon" to simulate throwing a cocktail glass at Read's taillight and determined that similar damage could have been caused if someone threw the glass at around 31 mph and 37 mph. "From the 37 mile per hour test, we are getting damage that's generally consistent, and by that I mentioned we have portions of the outer lens missing, the underlying diffuser," he said. "There was also some fracturing on the backside of the assembly. So again we observed damage that was generally consistent with that of the subject taillight." Wolfe said he gave an opinion that the damage Read's SUV was generally consistent with someone throwing that drinking glass at at least 37 mph. In another ARCCA test, the reconstructionists wanted to see if an impact between the taillight and the back of O'Keefe's head could've caused his skull fracture. Wolfe said he tested at 15 mph. Damage to the test taillight was significantly more than Read's taillight at that speed – but it didn't generate enough force to cause a skull fracture. ARCCA obtained sweatshirts from the same company and of the same fabric blend as the one O'Keefe was wearing when he died and also simulated strikes to see if the fabric would puncture in the same way. At 10 and 17 mph, the taillight sustained different levels of damage but the fabric remained undamaged. Prosecutors accused Read, 45, of hitting O'Keefe with her 2021 Lexus SUV and driving away as he died on the ground with a skull fracture during a blizzard. Investigators recovered a broken cocktail glass and a black straw from the scene and found additional glass on Read's bumper. However, experts testified earlier at trial that the bar glass was not a match for the fragments found on her car. The defense denies that she struck him and has called witnesses who have attributed his injuries to other causes, including a dog bite and a potential fistfight with a man Read was flirting with behind his back. GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB Brennan unsuccessfully tried to have Wolfe and a colleague, Dr. Andrew Renstchler, blocked from testifying before the start of the trial. Wolfe testified during the first trial, which ended with a deadlocked jury, that damage to Read's SUV is inconsistent with a collision involving O'Keefe. Read told reporters outside court Wednesday that her defense could rest as soon as next Tuesday. There was no court on Thursday. She could face up to life in prison if convicted. Her first trial, in which the defense claimed she had been framed, ended with a deadlocked jury last year.
Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
Defense expert delivers devastating blow to prosecution theory in Karen Read murder trial as case nears end
A crash reconstructionist returned to the stand in Karen Read's murder trial Monday, the proceeding's 29th day, as her defense prepares to rest its case this week. She is accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, by clipping him with her 2021 Lexus LX 570 SUV on Jan. 29, 2022, and leaving him to die on the ground in a record-setting blizzard. Before jurors arrived, Judge Beverly Cannone heard motions regarding rebuttal testimony and to preclude or limit expert witnesses. She said she would hold an additional evidentiary hearing to determine what Dr. Elizabeth Laposata, a Rhode Island forensic pathologist and professor at Brown University, can testify in front of jurors. David Yannetti, one of Read's defense lawyers, told the court that her legal team believes O'Keefe was "placed" on the ground near a flagpole outside 34 Fairview Road in Canton, Massachusetts. Laposata is expected to discuss O'Keefe's injuries and how and where he could have suffered them. The home is about 20 miles south of Boston. Read, O'Keefe and others went there for an after-party on Jan. 28, 2022. Dr. Daniel Wolfe, the reconstrucitonist from a firm called ARCCA, testified last week that damage to Read's SUV is inconsistent with the type of impact that prosecutors allege left O'Keefe dead early the following morning. GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB But on cross-examination, he conceded that flying fragments of a taillight could have been the source of injuries to O'Keefe's face and nose before he suffered a fractured skull from what prosecution experts testified was a backward fall. Read has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, drunken driving manslaughter and leaving the scene. Her defense maintains that her vehicle never struck O'Keefe and that his injuries were caused in some other manner after she left. Read could face life in prison if convicted of the top charge. Jurors deadlocked at her first trial last year on the same charges.
USA Today
4 hours ago
- USA Today
Karen Read trial live updates: Crash expert testifies, defense prepares to wrap case soon
Karen Read trial live updates: Crash expert testifies, defense prepares to wrap case soon Show Caption Hide Caption Karen Read's second murder trial begins with new jury Karen Read is starting her second trial after being prosecuted for the 2022 death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, last year. Karen Read's second murder trial entered its eighth week Monday, with more testimony from a defense accident reconstruction expert who says Read's SUV never hit John O'Keefe. On Friday, Daniel Michael Wolfe showed jurors crash-test videos he created to simulate how Read's Lexus could have struck O'Keefe and what damage his body would have caused to the vehicle at different speeds. Wolfe said that the shattered plastic patterns created on the car's taillight during the tests did not match the cracks found on Read's car. Catch up: Karen Read trial: Can crash reconstruction expert help the defense? Prosecutors accuse Read, 45, of backing into O'Keefe, her Boston police officer boyfriend, in a drunken rage and then leaving him to die in the snow outside the home of another cop after a night drinking with friends. She has been charged with second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. Read's defense team maintains that she was framed for O'Keefe's 2022 death. They say O'Keefe was beaten by law enforcement officers who were having a house party inside the home, then bitten by a dog and thrown outside in the middle of a blizzard. The defense's case largely rests on accusations that the investigation into O'Keefe's death was mired by deceit, incompetence and bias. A jury will soon deliberate over Read's fate – again. Her first trial ended in July 2024 in a mistrial after the jury could not come to a unanimous verdict. Read told local media the defense in this case could wrap up its testimony by Tuesday, June 10. Jury instructions filed by Read's lawyers suggest that the Massachusetts woman may not testify in the retrial. They include a section informing the jury of Read's Fifth Amendment right not to testify, telling them they 'may not hold that against her.' Christopher Dearborn, a law professor at Suffolk University in Boston who has followed the case closely, said the instructions are likely a 'harbinger' that Read's attorneys are not going to call her to the stand, though he noted that they could change their mind. 'Frankly, I don't think it would make a lot of sense to call her at this point,' Dearborn said, noting the number of public statements Read has made that could be used against her. The court has already heard from Read in the trial through clips prosecutors played of interviews conducted in which she questioned whether she 'clipped' O'Keefe and admitted to driving while inebriated. Dearborn told USA TODAY that there are two schools of thought around whether to include a section on a defendant's right not to testify in jury instructions. Some defense lawyers don't include the section because they don't want to "draw a bull's eye" around the fact that the defendant didn't testify and cause jurors to "speculate," Dearborn said. Other times, he said, it is the "elephant in the room" and the specific instructions telling the jury they can't hold the defendant's lack of testimony against them are necessary. CourtTV has been covering the case against Read and the criminal investigation since early 2022, when O'Keefe's body was found outside a Massachusetts home. You can watch CourtTV's live feed of the Read trial proceedings from Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Massachusetts. Proceedings begin at 9 a.m. ET.
