Karen Reid’s defense highlighted its key witness, attempting to challenge Dr. Andrew Lenzschler’s assertions regarding the circumstances surrounding the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe.
The jurors are set to take a break on Thursday, where they will receive instructions from the judge, before starting their deliberations on Friday after the closing arguments.
Reid, aged 45, was accused of hitting O’Keefe, who was 46, with her 2021 Lexus SUV on January 29, 2022, resulting in his death from a fractured skull amidst a snowstorm.
Her defense contended that her vehicle did not strike O’Keefe, and Lenzschler spent two days in the witness stand detailing how the injuries sustained by O’Keefe did not align with being hit by a vehicle.
“I don’t think the injuries correlate with being struck by an SUV traveling at about 24 mph,” he testified.
Notably, O’Keefe had no broken bones in his right arm, just some superficial scratches, according to his testimony. Given his findings from ARCCA, a crash reconstruction firm, Lenzschler remarked that his arm should have shown more severe damage.
He ultimately expressed disbelief that Reid’s SUV could have inflicted the injuries O’Keefe sustained based on his analysis.
However, special counsel Hank Brennan pressed him during cross-examination, probing the thoroughness of his tests. He admitted that he had overlooked taillight fragments found near O’Keefe that were embedded in his clothing.
“We represent a team of defense attorneys from the Philadelphia area,” noted David Gelman. “Closure is important for both sides. Personalities like Brennan and [defense attorney Alan] Jackson are strong, which adds to the intensity.”
Brennan clarified on Wednesday that he would not call rebuttal witnesses before the case was handed over to the jury.
This situation underscores a kind of expert battle, and legal analysts suggest Lenzschler’s testimony provides a compelling conclusion to the defense’s case.
“He clearly articulated why the district attorney’s scenario of an SUV-pedestrian collision doesn’t hold up,” remarked Mark Bederow, a New York attorney, representing Leadery and blogger Aidan Kearney. “No arm injuries, no holes in the hoodie. None of it lines up with how O’Keefe was ultimately found.”
Bederow suggested that Lenzschler’s testimony might have prompted Brennan to consider withdrawing rather than returning Dr. Judson Welcher for rebuttal.
Welcher, on the other hand, reached a contrary conclusion from Lenzschler, claiming Reid’s SUV could have struck O’Keefe and thrown him off balance, causing him to fall and suffer the skull fracture.
Bederow added that the defense couldn’t have concluded the trial with any stronger witness testimony than they did.
Jack Lou, a retired judge from Massachusetts and law professor at Boston University, remarked that having Lenzschler speak last is a customary and effective strategy.
“What caught my attention was his assertion that Dr. Welcher’s testimony about simulating the contact was inaccurate. Counterpoint: Lenzschler’s assertions had their flaws too,” Lou shared.
He noted that both experts were part of the consulting industry and had displayed some absurdities in their tests.
“We have a scenario with an arm that supposedly doesn’t strike a Lexus, compared to a professional who claims to observe impacts at low speeds by the same,” he pointed out.
Judge Cannone granted the jury a break on Thursday to facilitate discussions between the parties involved.
The jurors will reconvene on Friday to receive final instructions and to deliberate.
