The Karen Read verdict form was a single sheet listing three criminal charges from the January 2022 death of Boston police officer John O’Keefe, with lesser-included alternatives printed beneath two of them. On June 18, 2025, the retrial jury in Norfolk County Superior Court marked “not guilty” on all three primary charges — second-degree murder, motor vehicle homicide while operating under the influence, and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death — and found Read guilty only of the lesser charge of operating under the influence of alcohol. She was sentenced to one year of probation.
What the Jury Decided on Each Count
The form asked jurors to record a finding on three numbered counts, in order from most serious to least. For two of those counts, jurors could also mark a lesser-included offense if they rejected the top charge but still found criminal conduct.
Here is how the June 2025 verdict landed:
- Count 1, second-degree murder: not guilty. Involuntary manslaughter, the lesser-included alternative, was also rejected.
- Count 2, motor vehicle homicide while operating under the influence: not guilty. Motor vehicle homicide by negligent operation, the lesser alternative, was also rejected.
- Count 3, leaving the scene of a collision causing death: not guilty.
- Operating under the influence of alcohol, listed as a standalone lesser offense: guilty.
That single guilty finding was the entire criminal conviction that came out of the retrial.
The Three Primary Charges on the Form
Second-Degree Murder
Count 1 charged murder in the second degree under M.G.L. c. 265, § 1. Massachusetts defines second-degree murder as any murder that does not qualify as first-degree — it lacks deliberate premeditation, extreme atrocity or cruelty, or commission during a life felony, but still involves malice aforethought.1General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 265 Section 1 – Murder Defined Prosecutors had to prove Read acted with intent to kill, intent to cause grievous bodily harm, or intent to do something creating a plain and strong likelihood of death.
A conviction carries a mandatory life sentence, with parole eligibility set by the trial judge.2General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 265 Section 2 – Punishment of Murder
Motor Vehicle Homicide While Operating Under the Influence
Count 2 was brought under M.G.L. c. 90, § 24G, sometimes called OUI manslaughter. The statute applies when a driver operates while intoxicated (or with a BAC of .08 or higher), drives recklessly or negligently in a way that endangers public safety, and causes another person’s death.3General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 90 Section 24G – Homicide by Motor Vehicle; Punishment
The OUI version of the offense is punishable by two and a half to fifteen years in state prison and a fine of up to $5,000.3General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 90 Section 24G – Homicide by Motor Vehicle; Punishment
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury and Death
Count 3 charged Read under M.G.L. c. 90, § 24 with leaving the scene of a fatal collision. The statute reaches drivers who knowingly cause injury in a collision and then leave without identifying themselves. When the injuries prove fatal, the sentence is a mandatory minimum of two and a half years and a maximum of ten years in state prison, plus a fine of $1,000 to $5,000.4General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 90 Section 24 – Driving While Under Influence of Intoxicating Liquor; Reckless and Unauthorized Driving; Failure to Stop After Collision The sentence cannot be suspended below one year, and probation and parole are unavailable until at least a year has been served.
The Lesser-Included Options Beneath Them
Massachusetts permits verdict forms to include lesser-included offenses so the jury isn’t locked into an all-or-nothing choice. If the evidence falls short of the top charge but still shows a related, less serious crime, jurors can convict on the alternative.
Involuntary Manslaughter
Under Count 1, the form offered involuntary manslaughter as the alternative to second-degree murder. Where murder requires malice, involuntary manslaughter covers an unintentional killing caused by reckless or wanton conduct, and the maximum sentence is twenty years in state prison.5General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 265 Section 13 – Manslaughter; Punishment Massachusetts model jury instructions treat manslaughter as a standard lesser-included option whenever murder is charged, because every murder involves conduct that would qualify as manslaughter if malice cannot be proved.6Massachusetts Court System. Model Jury Instructions on Homicide
Motor Vehicle Homicide by Negligent Operation
Under Count 2, the alternative was motor vehicle homicide by negligent operation — the non-alcohol version of § 24G. It applies when a driver causes a death through negligent driving that endangered public safety, without any requirement that the driver was under the influence. Penalties are much lower: thirty days to two and a half years in a house of correction, a fine of $300 to $3,000, or both.3General Court of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Code Chapter 90 Section 24G – Homicide by Motor Vehicle; Punishment
Operating Under the Influence
At the bottom of the form was a standalone charge of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol under M.G.L. c. 90, § 24. This offense doesn’t require proof that Read caused anyone’s death — only that she operated a vehicle on a public way while impaired. It was the sole count on which the retrial jury returned a guilty verdict.
How the Jury Worked Through the Form
The form was structured so jurors moved top to bottom, most serious charge first. On each count, they marked “Guilty” or “Not Guilty.” If they rejected the primary charge, they then considered the lesser-included alternative printed beneath it.
Every finding had to be unanimous. Massachusetts requires all twelve jurors to agree on a criminal verdict for every count; a single holdout on a count blocks a verdict on it.7Congress.gov. Amdt6.4.4.3 Unanimity of the Jury The foreperson marks the form to reflect that unanimous agreement, and every box has to be filled in clearly. Conflicting marks or blanks send the jury back to fix the form before a verdict can be recorded.
Once the jury returns to the courtroom, either side can ask the court to poll each juror individually to confirm the recorded verdict matches that juror’s actual decision. If polling shows disagreement, the judge can send the jury back to deliberate further or declare a mistrial on the affected count.8Legal Information Institute. Rule 31. Jury Verdict After the jury affirms the verdict on the record, the judge orders it entered into the court file, and the form becomes the definitive written record of the jury’s findings.
Why the Acquittals Are Final
Read’s first trial ended in a mistrial in July 2024 after the jury reported it could not reach unanimous agreement. A hung jury creates a “manifest necessity” for ending the trial, and the case can be retried without triggering double jeopardy — which is why the 2025 retrial went forward on all three original charges.
The retrial produced a completed verdict form with actual not-guilty findings on murder, OUI manslaughter, and leaving the scene. Those acquittals are final. Double jeopardy now permanently bars the prosecution from bringing any of those three charges against Read again. The only conviction on the form — misdemeanor operating under the influence, carrying a year of probation — is the sole finding that could theoretically be challenged on appeal.