In 2022, a Boston police officer named John O’Keefe was discovered unconscious on the snow-covered front lawn of a fellow police officer. O’Keefe was taken to the hospital, where he subsequently passed away. It was determined that he died not from spending the night lying in the snow but instead from blunt force trauma. O’Keefe’s girlfriend, Karen Read, was arrested and charged with the crime. Depending on who you asked, Karen Read was either a cold-hearted murderer or the victim of a frame-up. Because O’Keefe was himself a member of the force, it was easy make the argument that the Boston PD was so eager to arrest someone for his murder and “protect one of their own,” that they neglected to follow the evidence while making their case against Karen Read. Of course, one could also wonder if Karen Read would have received as much support from the public if she had been someone other than an attractive professional white woman.
It took two trials but eventually, Karen Read was acquitted. At the time, her trials dominated social media. It was not uncommon to see the second trial referred to as being “the trial of the century.” I think most of us understood that was hyperbole. The Karen Read trial was not “the trial of the century” as much as it was just “the trial of the moment.” After she was acquitted, people spent another week talking about her, the trial, and the Boston PD and then everyone moved on. There’s always a new murder to “solve” or a new trial to debate. In another year or so, no one will remember which side of the Karen Read debate they were on. That will probably include me as well.
(Online sleuthing is always entertaining but ultimately rather shallow. Those of us who have grown up consuming true crime books and movies often expect things to be more dramatic than they actually are and we tend to gloss over the fact that, while an online sleuth can bring attention to a case, it’s rare that they ever actually solve anything. As an example, for all the attention that was given to Michelle McNamara’s quest to identify the Golden State Killer, we tend to ignore the fact that most of her theories about his identity turned out to be incorrect.)
Still, the Karen Read case was prominent enough that everyone know that Lifetime would eventually make a movie about it. Accused: The Karen Read Story asks the question, “Did Karen Read kill John O’Keefe?” and then it answers it by saying, “Of course she didn’t! What are you, an idiot?” That’s not necessarily a complaint. As annoying as I sometimes found Karen Read’s most vehement online defenders to be, I actually agreed with them about her innocence. It’s just that, if you’re looking for a film that offers up any hint of ambiguity about the case, this is not the film for you. The film is firmly on the side of Karen Read, to the extent that the O’Keefe family is often presented as being villains.
It’s a well-made film, though. In the roles of Karen Read and John O’Keefe, both Katie Cassidy and Luke Humphrey give good performances. Humphrey is especially good in the role of O’Keefe and the film doesn’t shy away from portraying the tumultuous details of his relationship with Karen Read. (The film also deserves some credit for not turning O’Keefe into a cardboard bad boyfriend during his arguments with Read.) Linda-Lisa Hayter’s direction captures both the cold chill of the snowy night and the insular atmosphere of big city law enforcement. It’s a skillful film that will be best appreciated by people who are already convinced of Karen Read’s innocence.
Through the Shattered Lens 