Legal analyst says Karen Read’s lawyers are pressuring prosecutors not to reopen the case

CANTON – Karen Read’s lawyers said Wednesday they received a message from her another jurorsaying the panel voted to acquit her of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident involving injury or death.

The defense’s latest motion serves as additional evidence to support a motion to dismiss both charges because, it argues, it would violate the double jeopardy clause of the U.S. Constitution.

On Monday, Read’s team filed a motion to dismissclaiming that a juror and two informants told them they would find her not guilty on those charges as well.

Read’s attorneys argue the jury was unable to reach a decision on the murder charge.

Protest outside Norfolk District Attorney’s Office

The filing of the lawsuit Wednesday comes after Karen Read’s steadfast supporters again appeared before the Norfolk County District Attorney’s Office, this time calling on Michael Morrissey not to retry the high-profile murder case.

“Now we have jurors coming out one by one and not everything is right. I think we have to wait and see what comes of it,” said supporter Jessica Finch Reid.

Karen Read sits with her legal team as she waits for the jury to return to the courtroom.

Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

In an effort to dismiss the second-degree murder charge against Karen Read in the death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, Read’s lawyers say another juror has testified since the case dramatic invalidated trialstating that the jury was ready to acquit Read of two of the three charges she faced: second-degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident.

In court filings Wednesday, Read’s defense said an anonymous juror said, “Many of the jurors seemed uncomfortable with the end of the case, wondering if anyone would know that we acquitted (Karen Read) of counts 1 and 3? No one ever asked about those counts.”

However, there is no mention in the jury’s notes to Judge Beverly Cannone that the jury was close to reaching a verdict on any of the three counts.

One memo read that “the deep division is not due to a lack of effort or diligence, but rather to a sincere commitment to our individual moral principles and beliefs.”

Legal analyst says the result would be the same

WBZ legal analyst Jennifer Roman says the jury should not have been given that information.

Roman believes the jury must reach a unanimous verdict on each count, then the result of a mistrial would be the same.

“You have to be unanimous on all the charges or none of them,” Roman said. “So the defense doesn’t get to pick and choose which charges Judge Cannone rules on…and the defense knows that. It’s really a strategy to try to pressure the prosecution not to retry this case.”

“It’s unusual for the defense to come in and say these things to a judge, but it’s equally unusual for the jurors to come out after the trial and say, ‘We want to tell you what really happened there,’” Roman added.

The district attorney’s office said it will review the motion to dismiss the case pending a response and intends to set a new trial date at the next hearing on July 22.