Karen Read trial shifts to forensics testimony following days of grilling digital analyst

Defense attorney Robert Alessi questioned Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess on a federal court filing from a case Burgess was set to testify in showing he completed a bachelor’s degree. 

Burgess testified he previously intended to graduate in 2024 but was unable to complete the degree within the initial timeline. 

Following two days of testimony, Burgess was dismissed from the witness stand in Karen Read’s trial.

Karen Read walks past reporters covering her trial Tuesday, May 20, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Matt Stone/The Boston Herald via AP, Pool)

Karen Read’s trial resumed Tuesday afternoon following a lunch break, with special prosecutor Hank Brennan continuing redirect examination of Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess.

Karen Read heads to the bench for a sidebar with her defense team during her retrial in the Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, May 19, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Judge Beverly Cannone dismissed the jurors for a lunch break as special prosecutor Hank Brennan continued redirect examination of Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess.

Special prosecutor Hank Brennan questions digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess, during the murder retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, in Dedham, Mass., Monday May 19, 2025. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

On redirect examination, special prosecutor Hank Brennan looked to do damage control regarding Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess’ resume inconsistencies. 

“Have you ever represented in any court that you achieved your bachelor’s degree?” Brennan asked. 

“No,” Burgess replied. “I have not.” 

Brennan pointed to multiple well-known celebrities without bachelor’s degrees to further solidify his point, asking if Burgess has heard of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Oprah Winfrey. 

Burgess testified his analysis accounted for the three-second delay in Karen Read’s SUV data after being grilled by defense attorney Robert Alessi on the discrepancy during cross-examination. 

“Did you accommodate that three-second delay in your analysis and your conclusions?” Brennan asked. 

“Yes,” Burgess said. “That was included in my analysis.”

Defense attorney Robert Alessi cross-examines digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess during the retrial of Karen Read in the Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, May 19, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Following a morning recess, defense attorney Robert Alessi questioned Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess on his decision to label his data investigation into Karen Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s iPhone timestamps as a “collision.” 

Alessi pointed to data from Read’s SUV indicating a “trigger event” does not always point to a collision, with the SUV recording 30 trigger events within the eight months Read owned the vehicle. 

“As you sit here today, none of the information in that black box that you referred to on direct testimony indicates that there was a collision on Jan. 29,” Alessi said. “Does it?” 

“Not by itself,” Burgess replied. 

Burgess’ credibility has repeatedly been questioned throughout the defense team’s cross-examination, with Alessi pointing out Burgess’ mistakenly using the wrong dates on his report presentation. 

"This is a murder trial,” Grace Edwards, a Massachusetts defense attorney, told Fox News Digital. “And the fact that he got the beginning and the end date on the slide wrong just screams his work is sloppy, and he does not fact-check his work.” 

Edwards pointed to Burgess’ apparent mixup of bits and bytes when referring to data obtained from Read’s SUV. 

“Attorney Alessi set up a trap that he walked into, which destroyed Burgess on the stand,” Edwards said. “Precision matters when you are a tech expert.” 

Following two days of cross-examination, Alessi concluded his questioning of Burgess. 

On cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Alessi continued to grill Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess on discrepancies between Burgess’ initial and updated reports. 

“Did you keep your Jan. 30, 2025 report purposefully vague by merely noting a clock skew without engaging in any further analysis?” Alessi asked. “Such as tethering that clock skew or otherwise connecting it to the Tech Stream event in Dr. [Judson] Welcher’s slide presentation.”

“No,” Burgess replied. “I did not.” 

Alessi pointed out that Burgess’ May 8, 2025 report concluded Karen Read’s SUV was reversed after John O’Keefe’s iPhone recorded its last human interaction, while his Jan. 30, 2025 did not come to the same determination.

Alessi then took aim at Burgess’ May 8, 2025 report omitting Read’s SUV having a three-second delay in its data recording, despite the Jan. 30, 2025 report including the information. 

“You testified about this same three-second discrepancy yesterday during your direct examination in connection with your Jan. 30, 2025 report,” Alessi said. “Correct?” 

“Correct,” Burgess confirmed. 

“However, you did not mention this offset of three seconds in your May 8, 2025 report,” Alessi said. “Did you?” 

“No,” Burgess said. “I did not.” 

A slide pertaining to the timeline of data collected from Karen Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s iPhone is displayed during Read’s trial on Tuesday. (Pool)

Defense attorney Robert Alessi looked to poke holes in Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess’ testimony surrounding the timeline recorded by Karen Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s iPhone on Jan. 29, 2022. 

Alessi pointed to data showing O’Keefe’s iPhone was unlocked after Read’s SUV recorded the vehicle shifting into reverse. 

“Do you see the column ‘biometric device unlock with Face ID’ event at 12:32:04 a.m.?” Alessi asked. 

“Yes,” Burgess said. 

“Now that’s after the 12:31:38 a.m. Tech Stream event that’s in Dr. [Judson] Welcher’s slide,” Alessi said. “Correct?” 

“Correct,” Burgess said. 

But Burgess said the timestamps have not factored in the variance of 21 to 29 seconds between Read's Lexus and O'Keefe's iPhone that he says exists.

Digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess testifies for the prosecution during the retrial of Karen Read in Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, May 19, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Judge Beverly Cannone called Court into session Tuesday morning with Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess returning to the witness stand for a second day of cross-examination. 

Defense attorney Robert Alessi immediately began grilling Burgess on his education credentials and the reliability of his report regarding the timeline recorded by Karen Read’s SUV and John O’Keefe’s iPhone in the moments leading up to O’Keefe’s death. 

“On your direct examination yesterday, your experience was brought up in questions,” Alessi said. “Correct?” 

“Correct,” Burgess answered. 

“On your direct examination, your certifications were brought up in questions,” Alessi said. “Correct?” 

“Correct,” Burgess said. 

“However, on your direct examination, no questions were asked of you at all about your supposed education,” Alessi said. “Correct?” 

“Correct,” Burgess confirmed. 

Burgess came under fire yesterday as Alessi confronted him on multiple resume “errors” surrounding his completion of a bachelor’s degree. 

Alessi continued to point out inconsistencies in the data expert’s testimony by noting the dates in the slides presented by Burgess yesterday were off by one day. 

“Are you aware that all of the relevant events in the timeline you described in your presentation in these slides actually occurred on Jan. 29, 2022?” Alessi asked. “Not Jan. 30, 2022, did you know that?” 

“That’s Jan. 29, 2022,” Burgess said. “Correct.” 

Alessi doubled down on Burgess’ apparent mistake. 

“So in actuality, these five timelines - as you testified to them yesterday - are not accurate down to the second,” Alessi said. 

“Correct,” Burgess conceded. 

“Because you got the wrong date,” Alessi replied.

Karen Read arrived at Norfolk Superior Courthouse on Tuesday flanked by her defense team to face Day 19 of her murder trial. 

Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess is expected to return to the witness stand to face continued cross-examination following yesterday’s heated testimony. 

Read is facing a possible sentence of life in prison for the alleged murder of Boston police officer John O’Keefe on Jan. 29, 2022.

Digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess is grilled by defense attorney Robert Alessi over errors in his CV and LinkedIn profile during the retrial of Karen Read in the Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, May 19, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Massachusetts murder suspect Karen Read returned to court Monday for her trial in the death of her former boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, as DNA experts and a digital forensic scientist testified for the prosecution, linking the victim to a lone hair sample found on Read's SUV and tightening up a timeline surrounding the final moments of his life.

But under cross-examination, a witness with key new evidence for the state revealed what appears to be an exaggerated resume.

The case took an unexpected turn when Shanon Burgess, a Texas-based expert on digital forensics for smartphones and vehicles, admitted that his credentials don't line up with those on his resume.

He was on the stand to explain the process and analysis of "black box" data extracted from Read's car. Key information had been missed during the first case, he said, and he found it on a micro SD card and was able to extract it, answering questions left unanswered by an earlier analysis from another expert.

On cross-examination, however, defense attorney Robert Alessi questioned Burgess' "mendacity," or untrustworthiness, after revealing inconsistencies in the expert's resume.

Several versions of it and his official Aperture bio pages describe him as having obtained a bachelor's degree from the University of Alabama, Birmingham, in various years. None of them were correct, he admitted. He does not have a bachelor's degree.

"I have represented I do not have a bachelor's degree," Burgess told Alessi.

"But in here," Alessi said, pointing to one of at least three resumes with conflicting dates he introduced as evidence, "you represented that you do, correct?"

"Yes," Burgess said. "It is in there."

Read the full story here.

Karen Read listens to the testimony of digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess during her retrial in the Norfolk Superior Court, Monday, May 19, 2025, in Dedham, Mass. (Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via AP, Pool)

Karen Read’s trial is resuming Tuesday with continued testimony from Aperture digital forensics analyst Shanon Burgess following an afternoon of tense cross-examination from Read’s defense team.

Yesterday, jurors heard from Burgess regarding his findings surrounding digital data pointing to the timeline of John O’Keefe’s death on Jan. 29, 2022. Burgess testified Read’s “black box” data from her SUV lines up with the timing of O’Keefe’s last interaction with his cell phone, further cementing the prosecution’s timeline. 

However, the trial took a turn when defense attorney Robert Alessi confronted Burgess on multiple resume “errors” surrounding his college education, pointing out inconsistencies suggesting Burgess misrepresented his academic credentials. 

Read is facing the possibility of life in prison for the alleged murder of O’Keefe, with the prosecution aiming to prove she struck O’Keefe with her Lexus SUV in a drunken argument before leaving him to freeze to death in the front yard of 34 Fairview Road. Read’s defense team insists she never struck O’Keefe and is not responsible for his death.