Karen Read trial features cross-examination of crash reconstruction expert Judson Welcher
The Karen Read trial was back in Norfolk Superior Court on Wednesday as crash reconstruction expert Judson Welcher continued testimony for a second day. Welcher, who could be the last witness before the prosecution rests its case, will be back on the stand when court resumes on Thursday.
Read is accused of hitting and killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in the snow outside Brian Albert's Canton home in January 2022. Read and her defense attorneys argue she is being framed and O'Keefe was killed during a fight inside the home.
Prosecutor Hank Brennan finished direct questioning around 10:30 a.m. and defense attorney Bob Alessi began cross-examination.
Welcher was still on the stand when court ended for the day and will be back to continue cross-examination Thursday morning at 9 a.m. Thursday is not a full day of court due to a juror appointment. As a result, testimony will end around 1:30 p.m.
Judge Beverly Cannone said after jurors left for that day that she is hopeful Welcher can complete his testimony Thursday so he does not have to return Friday for a fourth day. Alessi said he is about halfway through his cross-examination.
Tense exchange with witness
Earlier in the afternoon, Alessi tried to ask Welcher if Read's vehicle would have ended up on the lawn of 34 Fairview Road after backing up at nearly 24 miles per hour, allegedly hitting O'Keefe. During the tense line of questioning, Welcher said it was possible, but he can't say for sure because he would need to know where the vehicle started moving.
"Your first question was 'reasonable.' And I said no. Now you're asking 'possible.' Of course it is possible. Whether it is reasonable or not, I have to know the starting position," Welcher said. "If it's very close to the side, then it could be reasonable. If it's further toward the middle of the road because snow's building up on the side of the road, then it's probably not as reasonable. I would need more information to be able to determine whether it's reasonable or not. It's certainly possible. It's possible it could have shot into space as an engineer, but not probable."
"Oh you think it's possible it could have been shot off into space, sir?" Alessi asked.
"As an engineer, it's a possibility," Welcher replied.
Alessi then asked, "It's a possibility this Lexus could have been shot into space, sir?"
"Highly, highly unlikely. But again, you're asking an engineer about possibilities and probabilities," Welcher said.
Would John O'Keefe have broken his hand?
Alessi spent a significant amount of time after the afternoon recess focusing on how much force would have been required to break a bone in O'Keefe's hand if he had been struck by Read's SUV.
O'Keefe had a bruise on one of his hands, but no broken bones.
Welcher and Alessi went back and forth about force calculations. Welcher testified that there are some portions of the back of Read's SUV that could have broken O'Keefe's hand, but other areas where that may not have been the case.
At one point during the line of questioning, the judge had to warn Alessi and Welcher to stop interrupting each other.
Defense questions expert's report
On direct testimony, Welcher said it was important to visit the scene where O'Keefe's body was found. Alessi asked about Welcher's site visit on cross-examination. Welcher said he did not go into the yard because he did not want to trespass.
"I stayed in the street. It's my understanding there were new owners," Welcher said, adding that he photographed the area and laser scanned the yard from the street.
Alessi attempted to show that if O'Keefe was standing on the berm that separates the street from the yard, there would be a height difference of about four inches that could have changed Welcher's recreation. During Welcher's presentatation, he attempted to show that a cut on O'Keefe's face may have come from the spoiler on Read's SUV.
Welcher said the berm does not change his opinion because there are other possibilities and there is not way to know exactly how O'Keefe's body was positioned.
"That is one data point of many data points," Welcher said.
Expert grilled about amended timeline
Alessi asked Welcher several questions about the amended report submitted by his colleague at Aperture, Shanon Burgess, who testified earlier in the trial. Burgess' amended report changed the timeline of events by 21 to 29 seconds.
Burgess' report factored in the difference in the time on Read's Lexus compared to the time on O'Keefe's phone.
The adjustment was critical, because the prosecution said it meant that O'Keefe's phone stopped moving at the exact time Read's Lexus was backing up.
Alessi questioned Welcher about why the amended report was not filed until May 8 when the analysis was done based on data that has been available for long before that.
"I don't quite frankly care whether it's new or not, I just care what's in the data," Welcher said.
Who paid for Lexus used for construction in Karen Read trial?
Alessi referenced Welcher's statement on direct testimony that "I have no dog in this fight." Alessi highlighted that Welcher's company, Aperture LLC, agreed to be paid $44,500 by the Norfolk District Attorney's office, then later agreed to an amended contract of $325,000.
"We're an engineering company. We bill for our time," Welcher responded to Alessi.
Alessi also noted that the company was hired to investigate the case despite Massachusetts State Police having a crash reconstruction unit. During Read's first trial, Trooper Joseph Paul testified as a prosecution witness about the state's theory of what happened.
On Tuesday under direct questioning, Welcher testified that he purchased a Lexus that was the exact model as Read's so he could do more accurate testing. Alessi asked Wednesday who paid for the Lexus.
Welcher said Aperture paid for the Lexus and will keep it until the trial is over. When the trial ends, Welcher said the company will sell the Lexus and charge the District Attorney's office for the difference.
Judson Welcher cross-examination
Alessi began by asking Welcher about the importance of looking at data objectively versus subjectively.
The defense attorney questioned Welcher about the methodology he used while performing testing.
Alessi also asked Welcher about confirmation bias, when someone selectively gathers evidence to confirm a theory. He focused on if a hypothesis is developed at the beginning of a case.
"I generally have many working hypotheses as I'm working on the case. As the evidence comes in, I'm applying that to my hypotheses and either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis based on the factual information," Welcher said.
Ruling in Karen Read trial
Wednesday's proceedings began with a ruling from Cannone. The defense did not want the prosecution to be able to ask Welcher his opinion on "whether a collision occurred."
Cannone heard arguments from both sides after the jury left for the day on Tuesday and said she would rule Wednesday morning before testimony resumed.
On Wednesday, she ruled that Welcher could testify that his data is consistent with Read's vehicle being in a collision on January 29 at 12:32 a.m. Welcher can also testify that O'Keefe's injuries are consistent with having been struck by a Lexus.
Welcher cannot testify that Read's Lexus collided with O'Keefe, Cannone ruled, because it is drawing an inference based on more than the scientific method. Cannone said that jurors are able to draw an opinion on their own.
Following the ruling, the jury was brought into the room and Brennan asked Welcher for his opinions on those topics with the jurors present.
Judson Welcher completes direct questioning
Welcher confirmed that in his opinion, damage to Read's Lexus could have been caused if impact was more than eight miles per hour. He also was asked if O'Keefe's injuries were consistent with being hit by a Lexus identical to Read's.
"That it is consistent with being struck by a Lexus and ultimately contacting a surface such as frozen ground," Welcher testified.
Welcher testified about the differences between sideswipe collisions and direct impact.
The prosecution has argued that O'Keefe did not have injuries such as broken bones because he did not absorb full impact from Read's SUV.
Welcher showed an example of a trial he testified in where a person was killed in downtown Los Angeles. The victim was hit at speeds of between 25-25 miles per hour, but had no leg fractures. He had a severe brain injury following the crash.
Brennan finished his direct examination after about 15 minutes Wednesday morning and the defense took over cross-examination.
Judson Welcher testifies in Karen Read trial
Welcher first took the stand Tuesday for direct questioning from special prosecutor Hank Brennan. He was still on the stand when court ended for the day and is facing more questions from Brennan Wednesday, in addition to an anticipated cross-examination. Read said recently that Welcher is expected to be the last witness before the prosecution rests, but attorneys cannot confirm that due to a gag order.
Welcher testified that Read's Lexus SUV went in reverse at about 23.9 miles per hour for at least 54 feet in the area of 34 Fairview Road, where O'Keefe's body was found, at about the same time his phone stopped moving.
The reconstructionist also said he determined that Read's taillight would not have been broken while backing out of O'Keefe's garage and bumping his SUV as Read has claimed.
Karen Read trial schedule
Court started at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, instead of the usual 9 a.m. start time.
There will be a full day on Friday this week. Thursday is scheduled to be a half day.
