Supervisor Defends Fired Trooper’s Conduct in Karen Read Investigation as ‘Honorable and Honest’

The conduct of a former Massachusetts state trooper, who was dismissed due to mishandling the Karen Read murder investigation, was a focal point during her retrial this week. Defense lawyers spent considerable time questioning the trooper’s supervisor, Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik.

Bukhenik acknowledged receiving disciplinary action related to allegations against Michael Proctor, the case agent responsible for the investigation into the death of Boston police officer John O’Keefe. Despite this, Bukhenik maintained that Proctor conducted the investigation with “honor and integrity,” asserting that personal biases did not impact the investigation’s outcome. Proctor, who was fired after allegations of misconduct were made during Read’s first highly publicized trial, has yet to testify in the retrial, and it remains uncertain whether he will.

Karen Read, 45, faces charges including second-degree murder and manslaughter due to a collision that resulted in O’Keefe’s death. Her first trial concluded unsuccessfully after nine weeks, with jurors failing to reach a unanimous verdict. The retrial has reached its third week.

Prosecutors accuse Read of intentionally striking her boyfriend, O’Keefe, out of anger stemming from their troubled relationship. After the incident on January 29, 2022, O’Keefe was discovered in the yard of a retired Boston police sergeant and later died due to hypothermia and blunt force trauma. Read has continuously proclaimed her innocence, asserting that she is a victim of a conspiracy, alleging that O’Keefe was likely attacked prior to being left outside.

Defense attorneys have alleged that Proctor manipulated evidence during the investigation and carried out biased practices. Proctor was ultimately dishonorably discharged after a state police review found evidence of rule violations, including sending derogatory messages about Read. Bukhenik, who received some disciplinary measures himself for oversight with Proctor, claimed that the investigation was conducted impartially and that Proctor’s involvement did not compromise its integrity.