Testimony continued Friday in the murder trial of Karen Read, who is accused of backing her SUV into her Boston police officer boyfriend, John O’Keefe, and leaving him for dead.
The defense called crash reconstruction expert Matthew DiSogra as their first witness to the stand in order to contradict reconstruction experts who testified for prosecutors.
During his testimony, DiSogra said “none of” Read’s SUV techstream events “were triggered by a collision.”
Here’s how Friday unfolded.
Read questioned about fired investigator Michael Proctor as she leaves courthouse — 4:50 p.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
Karen Read left the courthouse around 4:20 p.m. and was immediately asked by reporters why the defense is not calling former State Trooper Michael Proctor to testify.
“That’s not Karen’s call,” Read attorney David Yannetti said. “It’s her attorneys’ call.”
Referencing Yannetti’s argument about the admissibility of Proctor’s offensive text messages, Read said “It’s about the dynamics of direct versus cross that David [Yannetti] just explained.”
Advertisement
Karen Read left the court and was asked about why Michael Proctor was not testifying in the case.
— Ava Berger (@Ava_Berger_) May 30, 2025
“That’s not Karen’s call,” said David Yanetti, Read’s attorney. “It’s her attorneys call.” pic.twitter.com/VzAXSdFT44
Judge does not make immediate decision on text messages — 4:18 p.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
After hearing opposing arguments from Read lawyer David Yannetti, who said the defense can choose which witness should testify about Michael Proctor’s text messages during the investigation, and prosecutor Hank Brennan, who said the defense should call Proctor to make their point, on the admissibility of the text messages, Judge Beverly Cannone said she would make a decision at a later time.
“It’s unheard of in a murder case that you don’t call the lead investigator, but that’s what’s happened in this case,” Yannetti said. “We should not be forced to call Michael Proctor so that Mr. Brennan can then cross-examine him and lead him through basically his entire closing argument.”
Advertisement
Yannetti said that Brennan is entitled to call Proctor in rebuttal.
Court will resume on Monday.
Voir Dire for Jonathan Diamandis continues — 3:58 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Diamandis identified the multiyear text chain he was on with Michael Proctor and other friends he “grew up with.”
”We’ve been friends for 30-plus years, probably," he said.
Diamandis, who had his lawyer present, also identified his phone number in the records.
He said he wasn’t very active himself on the multiyear thread, but he did chime in with one message on the afternoon of Feb. 2, 2022.
He said he referred to Proctor as “Chip,” his nickname, in that text.
Diamandis said one person identified on the text chain as “Local User” was Proctor.
“I believe this to be a record of our text chain for this period of time,” Diamandis said.
He told prosecutor Hank Brennan on cross-examination that he has no independent memory of the actual conversations.He then stepped down and was told to be ready to come back Monday.
Read lawyer David Yannetti later told Judge Beverly Cannone that prosecutors have filed “an opposition to these text messages being admitted.”
It wasn’t immediately clear if Cannone would allow the texts to be entered into evidence, or if Diamandis will ultimately testify before the jury to authenticate the messages.
Voir Dire for Jonathan Diamandis — 3:43 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
With jurors gone, Read attorney David Yannetti called Jonathan Diamandis to the stand.
Diamandis said he is a longtime friend of former State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator on the Read case who was fired after he was forced during the first trial to read boorish texts he’d sent about her to friends and coworkers.
Advertisement
Diamandis said he was on one text chain with Proctor that lasted a number of years.
Crash analyst concludes testimony — 3:31 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Following another sidebar, Matthew DiSogra told prosecutor Hank Brennan the calls could be “iPhone to iPhone too,” which “would change the total number of possibilities” for the timing on when John O’Keefe’s cellphone locked.
DiSogra said “the three-point turn is closer in time” than the “call at 5:32,” in terms of finding an event for syncing the Lexus and cellphone clocks, which were slightly different.
Brennan said prosecution expert Shanon Burgess determined that O’Keefe’s phone showed Read’s three-point turn began at 12:23:59 a.m.
“Are you suggesting it is in any way inaccurate?” Brennan asked.
“I don’t have any opinions as to the individual accuracy of the methods selected by either Mr. Burgess or Dr. [Judson] Welcher,” DiSogra said.
DiSogra said he’s aware Read lightly hit O’Keefe’s Chevy Traverse at 5:07 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022, and he doesn’t recall that event showing up in the data.
“It’s not there,” Brennan said.
Read lawyer Alan Jackson asked on redirect if DiSogra was being truthful when he said he wasn’t an expert on cellphone data but was an expert on vehicle data, and DiSogra said yes.
“Have you ever lied about your credentials?” Jackson asked.
“No,” DiSogra said.
He said he amended his PowerPoint presentation “to include the additional analysis and data points from Mr. Burgess’s supplemental report” filed May 8.
“You amended yours because he amended his,” Jackson said.
“Correct,” DiSogra said.
He told Jackson there were “a number” of techstream events recorded on Read’s SUV after the car went in reverse down Fairview Road.
DiSogra said “none of” Read’s techstream events “were triggered by a collision.”
Advertisement
”If you were told there was another interaction" on O’Keefe’s phone at 12:32:16 a.m. showing 36 steps taken, would that change the analysis, Jackson asked.
Under that scenario, DiSogra said, then it would mean there was no possibility that O’Keefe’s phone was locked before the backup event, versus his finding that 25 of 30 possibilities show it was locked afterward.
Jackson noted that Burgess had labeled several calls, which Brennan suggested never passed through the infotainment system, as coming from that system.
The basis of your opinion rests with “Mr. Burgess’s and Mr. Welcher’s analysis, correct?” Jackson asked.
“That’s correct,” DiSogra said.
Brennan said on recross that “this demonstrates the difficulty” of hazarding an opinion without studying the raw data.
“I’m relying on expert reports,” DiSogra said.
“You’re guessing as to what they thought or presumed,” Brennan said.
“I would say I’m reading the words that are in front of me and interpreting them for what they say,” DiSogra said.
He said he “did not make a guess” but used the data the analysts had provided in their reports.
Brennan asked if the SUV was “still moving” at the end of the techstream event showing the backup maneuver, when the vehicle was traveling close to 24 m.p.h.
“At the end of the record, there is a vehicle speed, the car is moving, that would be my assumption,” DiSogra said.
Brennan asked if DiSogra knew that O’Keefe’s phone stopped moving at 12:32:16 a.m.
“No,” DiSogra said.
He later stepped down and the lawyers were called back to a sidebar, and Judge Beverly Cannone sent jurors home for the day shortly before 3:30 p.m.
Advertisement
Testimony resumes Monday. “Monday will be a full day,” Cannone told the jury.

Crash analyst continues his testimony about Read’s SUV — 2:41 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told prosecutor Hank Brennan the techstream data is independent from the SUV’s infotainment system.
“In the exemplar testing, they documented this behavior of a three-second delay,” DiSogra said. “And that needs to be accounted for if you’re going to correct the timestamps.”
He said prosecution witnesses Shanon Burgess and Judson Welcher did not indicate whether they documented the “accuracy of the run time” in the model testing.
Brennan said DiSogra didn’t know whether Read’s SUV had the same three-second delay between the ignition turning on and the infotainment system lighting up, and DiSogra said that was correct, which is why he ran calculations with and without the delay.
DiSogra said the other analysts didn’t do any testing “in their work to look at the behavior of a timestamp in the infotainment [system] when a phone is synchronized after the fact.”
He said “I don’t know if adjustments are made to those times during a synchronization or not. I think that’s something that could be tested and to my knowledge was not tested.
”DiSogra also said “I don’t know how the clocks are synchronized when you plug an iPhone into a car,” and that he was relying on Burgess’s data.
He told Brennan he has no expertise on how closely two iPhone clocks can sync.
Brennan said DiSogra’s assumptions would be wrong if phone calls from Read’s phone to O’Keefe’s phone never passed through her SUV infotainment system, if her vehicle was off at the time.
DiSogra said Burgess stated that “calls placed in close succession would not necessarily be logged in the infotainment.”
Advertisement
”Did you ever look at phone records" for O’Keefe and Read to delve into the issue, Brennan asked.
“No,” DiSogra said.

Crash analyst returns to stand — 2:15 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra returned to the stand after the lunch break to continue his cross-examination from prosecutor Hank Brennan.
He told Brennan the data from the SD card correlates to the infotainment system on Read’s SUV.
He said most of what he looked at came from Shanon Burgess’s reporting. Burgess is a crash analyst who testified for the prosecution. DiSogra is testifying for the defense.
Brennan asked if DiSogra could cite anywhere in Burgess’s report where Burgess suggests that another prosecution witness, Judson Welcher, shouldn’t have aligned the two clocks around the three-point turn. DiSogra said he could not.
The clocks in Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s phone displayed slightly different times.
“When you are suggesting that three seconds should be added ... do you think maybe you made a mistake in considering it that way?” Brennan asked.
“No,” DiSogra said.

Read returns to the courthouse after lunch break — 2:11 p.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
Karen Read returned to the courthouse around 1:55 p.m. to continue hearing from the defense’s witness Matthew DiSogra.
Her supporters, with two large American flags, were there to welcome her, yet again.
Read returned to the courthouse after the lunch break . Her supporters held two large American flags. pic.twitter.com/J6ivy9tMyp
— Ava Berger (@Ava_Berger_) May 30, 2025
A closer look at this morning’s argument over defense motion for not guilty verdict — 1:51 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Before testimony began Friday, Judge Beverly Cannone as expected denied a defense motion for a directed verdict of not guilty before the case even reaches jurors.
Defense attorneys frequently make such motions after prosecutors rest their case, and they’re rarely if ever granted. But while the exercise is relatively pro forma, it can provide tantalizing clues to what both sides may assert during closing arguments.
To that end, here’s a detailed rundown of what Read attorney Alan Jackson said in pressing his case for Cannone to take the extraordinary step of clearing his client before deliberations, and what prosecutor Hank Brennan said in response. Jurors weren’t in the courtroom for the arguments.
“There was no collision proven to have occurred,” Jackson said. “There was no eyewitness presented. There was no video evidence, no audio evidence, no evidence in the form of physical evidence at the scene by searches that were done by officers on the morning of Jan. 29, 2022.”
He said prosecutors used “suspect experts” who presented “circumstantial technical data” in an effort to prove that Read’s SUV went in reverse on Fairview Road.
“They did not prove, and every single one of their experts was asked this question, they did not prove that there was actually a collision associated with that backing event,” Jackson said.Jackson said “it was suspect” whether the SUV “went in reverse at 34 Fairview or [at] some other place, time, or date.”
(Cannone did not permit Read’s lawyers to ask a government witness about an initial State Police finding suggesting the backup maneuver occurred later, when the SUV was in law enforcement custody.)
In addition, Jackon said, the medical examiner who conducted John O’Keefe’s autopsy, Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, found “no injuries, none mind you, indicative of a vehicle strike” on his body, and she “was arguably their most important witness.”
He said there’s also evidence that Brian Higgins, an ATF agent who swapped flirtatious texts with Read in the weeks before O’Keefe’s death, harbored animus towards O’Keefe.
“There is evidence that Brian Higgins was lovestruck,” Jackson said. “That he was jealous. That he was aggressively coaxing John O’Keefe out of the Waterfall” bar, which everyone left before heading to an afterparty at the Fairview Road home.Jackson also cited the testimony of Jennifer McCabe, a witness who was present at the Fairview house and whose sister lived there with her husband.“
Jennifer McCabe testified that she basically watched the SUV the entirety of the time it was in front” of the residence, Jackson said. “She saw it pull up once, she saw it pull up twice, she saw it pull up a third time, and then she saw it was gone. And at no time, at no time, did she ever see the car go in reverse. She certainly didn’t see the SUV going in reverse at a high speed. And she darned sure didn’t see the car go in reverse at a high speed and strike a pedestrian.”
McCabe’s focus, Jackson said, was “defined enough to see thin tire tracks and a dusting of snow thin enough, I think the phrase was, ‘to track a cat.’ That’s how detailed she was in her observations, yet she did not see John O’Keefe hit by an SUV.
She did not see John O’Keefe’s body in the snow, in the yard, laying prostrate, [a] 216-pound, 6-foot-1 man in the snow directly in front of the SUV she was tracking the entire time.”T
wo other witnesses in another vehicle, Jackson said, noted that O’Keefe wasn’t in the SUV when it was parked in front of them with its dome light on.
“He was not outside the vehicle, he wasn’t standing, he wasn’t sitting, he wasn’t laying down,” Jackson said.
“There’s only one place you could be: inside the curtilage of the home, inside the house, or inside the garage. Not one witness that was inside the house, not one passerby, not one neighbor, not one plow driver ever saw John O’Keefe’s body laying prostrate in the snow that morning. Not one,” until Read found him on the lawn just after 6 a.m.Scordi-Bello indicated that O’Keefe had injuries “consistent with a physical altercation,” he said.
“The Commonwealth at the end of the day has presented their best case. They’ve done their best. Some would say they’ve done their worst. And their case has failed.”
No it hasn’t, Brennan told Cannone.
“There are taillight fragments from the defendant’s own Lexus from her shattered right taillight that are found in Mr. O’Keefe’s clothes,” Brennan said. “Mr. O’Keefe is left at the very spot where she expects to find him, according to her statements, where her car does a backing maneuver [of] at least 24 m.p.h.”
O’Keefe is “left with injuries” on his right arm that are “consistent with the damage to her Lexus right rear taillight,” he said. “The scientific data is substantial. The telestream data, Apple healthcare data, battery temperature data. And again, [we have] Ms. Read’s statements herself about clipping, hitting” O’Keefe.
“The evidence of a collision in this case is overwhelming,” Brennan said. “The defendant engaged in intentional conduct - that was her maneuver of driving forward, stopping, and then driving back to Mr. O’Keefe on Jan. 29, 2022, under the conditions that night after being intoxicated.”
Read’s conduct “was intentional, and any reasonable person could find that her conduct that night created a plain and strong likelihood of death,” he said.
Brennan said jurors have seen text messages showing the couple’s relationship was under heavy strain and have also heard “the words of Karen Read when she leaves numerous voicemails that night, and you can hear her voice.”
She said in the voicemails, among other things, that she hated O’Keefe.
”There are statements from the defendant herself where she acknowledges an injury to Mr. O’Keefe," Brennan said. “She’s the last one with him, [knows] where to find him, and [voices] her hypotheses about hitting and clipping him.”
Read also said, Brennan added, that “when she leaves, he doesn’t look mortally wounded. She leaves him, makes dozens and dozens of calls, but never goes back to help him, and leaves him to die.”
Scenes as Read leaves the courthouse for lunch — 1:11 p.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
Read and her attorneys left the Dedham courthouse shortly after 1 p.m. A crowd of about 20 supporters cheered and some called to her attorneys by name.
“Great job, David,” one woman said to attorney David Yannetti.
“Way to go, Bob,” a man next to a large American flag said to attorney Robert Alessi.
Read and her attorneys pulled away in a black SUV. Minutes later, a gray car drove by the courthouse. A woman rolled down her window, pumped her fist, and shouted:
“Free Karen Read, Free Karen Read.”
Defense crash expert cross-examined — 12:48 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told prosecutor Hank Brennan that experts “do work that our clients ask us to do.”
”You did no testing whatsoever," Brennan said.
“I did not,” DiSogra said.
He said he looked at expert Judson Welcher’s report and understands “how the exemplar [Lexus] testing by Aperture laid the foundation” for aligning the clocks of Read’s Lexus and John O’Keefe’s phone.
He said he determined the reverse trigger event ended at 12:31:43 a.m. and the time of O’Keefe’s phone locking at 12:32:09 a.m. based on data culled by the government experts.
“I just want to be clear that I adopted their convention” for clock adjustments, DiSogra said. “I kept that convention consistent in my analysis.”
Brennan said “you would not add five seconds for the heck of it.”
The lawyers were later called to a sidebar.
Following the sidebar, Cannone called a lunch recess shortly before 1 p.m.
Crash analyst cross-examined — 12:37 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told prosecutor Hank Brennan that he focuses on event data recorders in vehicles and has written widely on the subject.
He told Brennan that data forensics is a broad field.
“You specialize in EDRs,” or event data recorders, Brennan said.
DiSogra said that was accurate, and he told Brennan he doesn’t specialize in phones, nor has he written on mobile forensics, attended any formal classes on the subject, or promoted himself as an expert on such forensics.
Brennan asked if DiSogra tried to obtain any data independently.
“No,” DiSogra said, adding that he did not test Read’s SUV or test an “exemplar vehicle” as a government expert had done.
He said his role was to “provide clarity” on the work that expert, and his colleague, had done.
“Did you ever speak to me?” Brennan asked.
“No,” DiSogra said.
He said he did not view the reports of Jessica Hyde and Ian Whiffin, two phone analysts who testified for the government. He said he took the 12:32:09 a.m. lock event on O’Keefe’s phone from the report of Judson Welcher, who testified for the prosecution.
Brennan asked if DiSogra made all the calculations “in your head” and he said he used a calculator and a computational feature in Excel.
He said he submitted his PowerPoint presentation on May 25, 17 days after prosecution witness Shanon Burgess filed his amended report. He said the defense asked him via phone to “update” the presentation on the 25th.
DiSogra said he first became involved in the case last fall.
He said he wrote an affidavit at the time flagging what he deemed oversights in Burgess’s initial report.
He said Burgess indicated that he initially “miscalculated the size of the chips” in Read’s SUV, at first confusing megabits and megabytes when he felt data was missing.
Brennan said the only person to find the key-on and key-off times in the infotainment system was Burgess.
DiSogra said it became “very apparent” to him that “the focus was not on those chips” during a chip-off process he observed Burgess doing, but instead was on “this SD card that had previously been unmentioned.”
Burgess, he said, never spoke “throughout the three days at all about what kind of data he expected from the car.”
DiSogra said he never wrote a report on what he observed Burgess doing.
“He ended up with a successful acquisition of the [SD] card at the end of the process,” DiSogra said.
He said time variances between devices, such as Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s phone, are “common.”
”No amount of variance would shock me," DiSogra said.
Crash analyst for defense testifies on cross-examination — 12:14 p.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Following the coffee break, Matthew DiSogra told prosecutor Hank Brennan that he wasn’t offering an opinion that Karen Read did not hit John O’Keefe with her SUV.
“You’re just saying that there’s no data” suggesting a collision, Brennan said.
“None of the events were triggered by a collision,” DiSogra said.
“So when you’re saying it wasn’t triggered by a collision, it’s never going to be triggered by a collision, ever, on techstream data,” Brennan said.
“Not the collision in and of itself, correct,” DiSogra said.
Brennan asked if it would be “abnormal” for a sideswipe impact to show up in the vehicle data.
DiSogra said a “pedestrian impact generally wouldn’t meet” the threshold for a triggering event.
He said a trigger event would be captured by the accelerator pressing down at least 30 percent.
He told Brennan techstream data only “tells us about the window of time the data captures,” nothing before or after.
Brennan asked if DiSogra knows what happened with the Lexus after the triggering event, and he said no.

Read greets supporters outside courthouse during morning recess — 12:03 p.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
Shortly before noon, during the court’s brief morning recess, Read spent time outside the courthouse, hugging some of her supporters.
As Read walked back into the courthouse, they let out cheers of encouragement and support for her “to be strong.”
“The truth is on your side, Karen,” one supporter shouted.
During the morning recess, Read went outside to greet and hug her supporters across the street. pic.twitter.com/n4fpS5zjfv
— Ava Berger (@Ava_Berger_) May 30, 2025
Crash analyst continues his testimony for defense — 11:21 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Following the sidebar, Matthew DiSogra said he detected 19 trigger events in Read’s SUV over the preceding eight months.
Of those, he said, none “were triggered by a collision.”
As for the trigger events on Jan. 29, 2022, DiSogra said he determined “neither of those events were triggered by a collision.”
Cannone called a morning recess at 11:20 a.m. Prosecutor Hank Brennan will cross-examine DiSogra after the coffee break.
Crash analyst continues his testimony for defense — 11:11 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Following the sidebar, Matthew DiSogra said he determined that “of the 30 possibilities,” John O’Keefe’s phone locked after the reversal for “25 of them.”
He said he also looked at the download from the airbag module of Read’s SUV.
“There were no recorded events whatsoever on the” module, DiSogra said.
He said the separate techstream data does not indicate whether there was a collision.
The lawyers came back to sidebar.

Crash analyst continues his testimony — 11:05 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told Read lawyer Alan Jackson that prosecution expert Shanon Burgess had taken “a valid approach” but that “results from the additional analysis should be included.”
DiSogra said he found with his adjustments that 25 of 30 scenarios result in O’Keefe’s phone locking after the reversal event.
He said three out of 30 scenarios show the phone locks before the reversal, while two show them happening simultaneously.
The lawyers were called back to a sidebar.
Crash reconstruction expert continues his testimony — 10:56 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told Read lawyer Alan Jackson he prepared his own PowerPoint presentation to look at the reports of government expert witnesses Shanon Burgess and Judson Welcher.
Jackson put the PowerPoint on the monitor.
DiSogra said Welcher found John O’Keefe’s phone locked “within” about 26 seconds of the end of Read’s SUV reversal.
“But if we do the math, and he actually does the math, he really means after” the event logging the reversal, DiSogra said.
Judge Beverly Cannone overruled a government objection to that remark.
DiSogra said data shows O’Keefe’s phone locks at 12:32:09 a.m.
He said the phone interaction window was “positive,” meaning the lock occurred after the end of the reversal event in the Lexus data.
DiSogra said Burgess and Welcher proposed a number of different ways of adjusting the Lexus and iPhone clocks, which were slightly different.
“Based on the initial reports, the phone interaction always occurs after the end of the vehicle event,” DiSogra said.
He said the replica Lexus SUV that Welcher tested showed a three-second delay from when the ignition was turned on and the infotainment system started.
Read’s Lexus wasn’t tested for the same delay, DiSogra said, but the Aperture analysts observed four different instances of the three-second difference in the key cycles.
Welcher “did not” apply the three-second delay in his analysis, DiSogra said, nor did he explain why he didn’t.
Applying the three-second delay, he said, now puts the lock on O’Keefe’s iPhone at 34 seconds after the backup event.
Best practice, DiSogra said, is to run the analysis with and without the three-second adjustment.
He said the Aperture analysts used a methodology based on “phone calls” and another based on “the three-point turn” Read made near Fairview Road.
He said Welcher identified one GPS data point as .154 aligning “with the end” of the three-point turn.
“The Aperture reports consistently reference everything from the end of the event,” DiSogra said.
He said that “regardless of what adjustment we make,” O’Keefe’s phone always locks after the end of the reversal event.
Jackson asked if Burgess had undertaken “all possible offset calculations,” and DiSogra said no.
Tense courtroom as defense begins its case — 10:40 a.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
There was little movement in the Dedham courtroom on Friday morning, other than reporters typing on their computers in one corner. Six court bailiffs watched over the room intently, barring any use of phones and talking during sidebars.
When Read attorney Alan Jackson clapped for emphasis while asking crash analyst Matthew DiSogra questions about “the trigger” point recorded by Read’s SUV, the sound echoed throughout the small courtroom.
Heads snapped up, bringing new energy to the room. But as the questioning continued, a familiar lull returned.
Crash reconstruction expert testifies for the defense — 10:23 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra told Read lawyer Alan Jackson after the sidebar that if the reversal occurred at 12:31:38 a.m. according to the data, “there was not” any circumstance in which O’Keefe’s iPhone was locked before that moment.
DiSogra said he received an amended PowerPoint presentation from government expert witness Shanon Burgess, which Burgess said he had submitted earlier this month.
“Was there any difference in the two reports?” Jackson asked.
DiSogra said “there was,” and that in the original report, Burgess laid out methodologies for syncing the clocks on Read’s Lexus and O’Keefe’s phone based on calls shared between the vehicle and O’Keefe’s device.
In the latest report, DiSogra said, Burgess “moved away from the phone call analysis” and tried to align the Lexus and iPhone clocks “using a shared maneuver” between the two, referring to a three-point turn Read made before the backup maneuver.
The lawyers came back to sidebar.

Defense calls crash reconstruction expert — 10:16 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Matthew DiSogra ran through his education and training under questioning from Read lawyer Alan Jackson and said he reviewed the work of two government expert witnesses, Shanon Burgess and Judson Welcher.
DiSogra said Welcher found Read’s backup maneuver in front of the Canton home ended at 12:31:43 a.m., beginning at 12:31:38 a.m.
“Does a techstream event last five seconds?” Jackson asked.
“The trigger is a singular point in time,” DiSogra said.
He said that when an event’s triggered, the car produces data from five seconds before and after. But the event itself, such as a sudden stop or move in reverse, is a single moment, DiSogra said.
“Everything in the Aperture reports” from Burgess and Welcher referenced the “end of the event” rather than the trigger itself, DiSogra said.
He said he applied Burgess’s clock adjustments on the SUV and John O’Keefe’s iPhone to the backup maneuver.
DiSogra said he concluded “based on all the data in those two original reports, regardless of what adjustment is made ... the phone lock event [on O’Keefe’s iPhone] always occurs after the end of the [reversal] event,” based on the methods of Burgess and Welcher, he said.
The lawyers were later called to a sidebar.
Karen Read’s defense calls Matthew DiSogra — 9:53 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
After the jury entered the courtroom, the defense called Matthew DiSogra, a crash reconstruction expert, to the stand.
He’s apparently being called to contradict reconstruction experts who testified for prosecutors and told the jury that data from Read’s Lexus show the SUV sped 24 miles per hour in reverse on Fairview Road around 12:30 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022, the time of the alleged collision.
DiSogra, who’s employed by the Charlotte, N.C.- based company DELTA [v], said he specializes in examining various elements of vehicle data.

Defense asks judge to issue finding of not guilty — 9:39 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Before the jury entered Friday, Read’s lawyers asked Judge Beverly J. Cannone to issue a finding of not guilty, a common move after prosecutors rest their case that jurists rarely if ever grant. Cannone denied the motion.
“The Commonwealth has simply not proven, even in light most favorable to them, that there was a collision on Jan. 29, 2022, at 34 Fairview in Canton, Massachusetts,” said Read attorney Alan Jackson.
Jackson cited a number of factors, including that expert testimony that Read’s SUV sped down the street in reverse around 12:30 a.m. relied on “circumstantial technical data” that doesn’t prove a collision.
“This case never should have been brought in the first place,” Jackson said. “This is a vindictive prosecution.”
Prosecutor Hank Brennan countered with several points, including that there’s clear evidence of Read’s intoxication, and that data from Read’s SUV showed her reversing at 24 miles per hour on Fairview Road at the time John O’Keefe was allegedly struck. [The defense wasn’t permitted to ask the jury about a State Police report they said initially suggested the backing maneuver occurred while Read’s SUV was in law enforcement custody].
In addition, Brennan said, pieces of Read’s broken taillight and a broken drinking glass were found near O’Keefe’s body, items the defense says were planted.
Cannone denied the defense motion from the bench.
Read supporters rally outside courthouse — 9:26 a.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
A pair of pink platform shoes shone in the sun outside of the courthouse on Friday morning. They belonged to Denilee Dedek, 53, who came from New York to support Karen Read.
“I do feel that she is being railroaded,” Dedek said.
Denilee Dedek is outside the courthouse supporting Karen Read with shiny pink platform shoes. @BostonGlobe pic.twitter.com/rvWmGLMRMj
— Ava Berger (@Ava_Berger_) May 30, 2025
Karen Read supporters gather outside of courthouse — 9:10 a.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
A group of Karen Read supporters gathered across the street from the courthouse under sunny skies on Friday — the first day of the defense’s case.
Jason Grant, 50, of Dedham, stood outside the courthouse in the face of “corruption,” he said.
Grant has been following the case for two years, since the start of the first trial. He took the week off without pay last week from his job for the City of Boston to be at the trial.
“Everyone’s happy,” Grant said, gesturing to about a dozen Read supporters around him. “[The prosecution] just rested their case. They didn’t prove nothing.”
“The defense has been knocking down every witness they brought,” Grant said.
Karen Read enters the courthouse — 9:01 a.m.
By Ava Berger, Globe Correspondent
Karen Read walked into the courthouse at 8:43 a.m. to shouts from about a dozen supporters, waving American flags and decked out in pink.
“Fabulous suit, Karen,” one supporter yelled.
“I’m feeling great,” Read said in response to a question from a reporter.
I’m at the Karen Read Trial for the @BostonGlobe. Karen Read entered the courthouse at 8:43 a.m. to shouts from supporters waving American flags. pic.twitter.com/I07wKSQjIv
— Ava Berger (@Ava_Berger_) May 30, 2025
Defense to begin presenting its case — 8:44 a.m.
By Travis Andersen, Globe Staff
Testimony resumes Friday in Karen Read’s murder retrial, with her defense team slated to begin presenting its case in Norfolk Superior Court.
Prosecutors rested their case Thursday.
Read, 45, has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and other charges for allegedly backing her SUV in a drunken rage into her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, early on Jan. 29, 2022, after dropping him off outside a home on Fairview Road in Canton following a night of bar-hopping.
Her lawyers say she was framed and that O’Keefe entered the house, owned at the time by a fellow Boston police officer, where he was fatally beaten and possibly mauled by a German Shepherd before his body was planted on the front lawn.
Read’s first trial ended with a hung jury in July and she remains free on bail.
