Prosecutors oppose the defense dismissal motion

Read lawyers said in their dismissal motion that they received blurred images at the end of January that shows that someone approaches the Read SUV “immediately after the vehicle takes to Sallyport, and then comes out shortly after.”

Read lawyers say the police manipulated the rear light to reinforce her accusation that she backed her boyfriend, destroying the light.

The prosecutors said Thursday that the footage did not deliberately retained from the defense, saying that they had not seen the footage until the end of January after directing a review of all physical and data files and discovering it in a “case file file of researchers.”

“There is absolutely nothing in this video that is exculpatory or undermines the consistent evidence that the right rear light was broken and pieces” before the police towed their vehicle to Sallyport, the prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors acknowledged that the evidence was delivered in a “inappropriate” way, but said they would argue that the videos are not exculpatories.

In the first trial, the reading benefited “suggesting, without any substantive evidence, that the poor quality of the videos and/or the gaps over time due to a chamber system that works incorrectly was caused by an inadequate police investigation and misconduct of the systemic police,” prosecutors said.

Prosecutors also addressed the inverted video images of Sallyport that was reproduced for the jury during the first trial, which on the screen seemed to show the state police Soldier Michael Proctor Standing next to the rear light of left read, when in fact it was stopped near the disputed right rear light.

The defense said the images were deliberately invested, but prosecutors said On Thursday’s motion, the investment was due to the chamber configuration, and added that the garage images of the beginning of that month had also been invested.

The “corrected” video shows that Proctor was “standing” from the Read vehicle and “never touched” the appropriate rear light, prosecutors said.

“In addition to the presentation of the accused, it was that the DNA of the soldier Proctor was not in the right rear light,” prosecutors wrote.

Read45 years, declared himself innocent of second -degree murder positions, involuntary homicide while operating under the influence and left the scene of an accident that results in death.

Prosecutors claim that she supported her Lexus SUV in a drunk anger in her boyfriend, Boston Police officer John O’KeefeAt the beginning of January 29, 2022, after leaving him outside a Canton house after a bar jump night.

His lawyers say he was framed and? O’Keefe He entered the house, owned at that time by an official Boston partner, where he was fatally beaten in the basement and possibly attacked by a German shepherd Before his body was planted on the front grass.

The first Read trial ended in a jury hanging In July, and his new trial is scheduled to begin on April 1. She remains free on bail.

In his motion of dismissal, the defense also accused the prosecutors of saying incorrectly a witness of the key government, Jennifer McCabe, that Read lawyers had obtained data on the location of their cell phone that showed that he had gone to the house of one of the researchers the day after O’Kefe’s death.

McCabe testified After meeting with prosecutors, on May 10, a frantic reading told a paramedic in the scene that had hit O’Keefe with his car.

In the government’s motion, prosecutors said the defense on May 7 had given them the discovery about McCabe’s cell phone.

Three days later, they met with McCabe, as they do “with all the witnesses (of the Government),” prosecutors said.

The lieutenant of the State Police Brian Tully, presented a report from the May 10 meeting, in which McCabe was asked about cell phone data, and she told them that she had gone To the investigator’s house, the Canton Police Sergeant. Michael Lank, with another woman to pick up that woman’s daughter, prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors said they provided Tully’s report to the defense before Tully testifies.

“Lieutenant Tully was available to be interrogated about his recent meeting with Jennifer McCabe (May 10) and/or any perceived deza in the investigation related to the cell phone whereabouts of Mrs. McCabe,” the prosecutors wrote. “The defense refused to do it.”

Prosecutors also challenged the affirmation of the defense that the government had been involved in the jury’s manipulation in relation to a jury who was fired While the test was in process. Alternative were available.

The defense in his motion of dismissal wrote most of his reasons for the accusation of manipulation, writing that “a jury can never be fired due to their views on the case or for reasons that have to do with their relations with other jurors.”

In his opposition, the government said that a defendant claim, apparently contained in the text written of the dismissal motion, that state police lieutenant John Fanning was in charge of the “jury’s security” is “obviously false.”

Fanning was “one of the officers in command” assigned to the crowd control efforts outside the court, where Read followers And some opponents often met, prosecutors said.

Fanning never entered the court and never “saw, much less spoke with any member of the jury,” prosecutors wrote. “In addition, there is absolutely no evidence that the jury’s dismissal was inappropriate. … the absurd claim of the accused, one that (read) the lawyer (Alan) Jackson has declared that he had no “specific evidence of”, should be directly rejected. ”

Separately, on Thursday, Read lawyers filed a request to withdraw a hearing on the motion of dismissal, currently scheduled for next week, a week of March 17.

They said the prosecutors had informed them that they hope to provide more video from Sallyport on Friday and Monday. The footage and the new “chain reports” probably “will cause the defense to modify their motion,” read lawyers said.

The previous balloon stories material was used in this report.

You can contact Travis Andersen in [email protected].