What Do the Karen Read and Lindsay Clancy Trials Have in Common? Key Similarities Explored

Karen Read and Lindsay Clancy's trials ultimately followed a similar path despite involving very different criminal cases.

Read's first trial drew renewed attention following the latest turn in Clancy's triple-murder case, another high-profile Massachusetts proceeding to end without a unanimous verdict. The cases have also been compared in reports discussing the so-called "Karen Read effect," which has also been called a "trial by TikTok" due to the intense social media-driven attention, polarization and public debate that can surround a high-profile criminal trial.

Here's how Read and Clancy's cases compare.

The deaths at the center of both cases occurred in Massachusetts.

Read was arrested on February 1, 2022, and initially charged with manslaughter, motor vehicle homicide and leaving the scene of a motor vehicle causing death, just days after her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, was found unresponsive outside a Canton, Mass., home and later pronounced dead. She pleaded not guilty to the charges in Stoughton District Court the following day.

On June 10, 2022, a Norfolk County grand jury indicted her on charges of second-degree murder, leaving the scene of personal injury and death and manslaughter while operating under the influence of alcohol.

Meanwhile, Clancy was accused of killing her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan — by strangulation in the basement of the family's home in Duxbury, Mass., on January 24, 2023. She does not deny killing her kids but pleaded not guilty, with her lawyers arguing she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and therefore should not be held criminally responsible.

A grand jury indicted Clancy on three counts each of murder and strangulation in September 2023.

Both Read and Clancy saw their trials end in mistrials after jurors remained divided following deliberations.

Read's first trial began in April 2024, with Judge Beverly Cannone declaring a mistrial on July 1, 2024, as the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict.

"Despite our rigorous efforts we find ourselves at an impasse," the judge read the note aloud. "The deep division is not due to lack of consideration but to a severe adherence to our personal beliefs and moral compasses. To continue to deliberate would be futile."

The Norfolk District Attorney's Office said it would retry the case following the mistrial announcement.

Read's second murder trial commenced with a jury selection on April 1, 2025. She was acquitted of the most serious charges — second-degree murder, leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death and manslaughter while operating under the influence — but was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and sentenced to one year of probation.

Clancy faced a similar fate when Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on September 4 after jurors remained deadlocked following six weeks of testimony and seven days of deliberations.

Veteran Boston reporter Dave Wedge told The U.S. Sun he was concerned high-profile criminal cases could be shaped by intense social media coverage and outspoken supporters of the defendants — a phenomenon dubbed the "Karen Read effect."

"What people are seeing at Lindsay Clancy, it's some people around here are referring to it as the Karen Read effect," he said. "Those people were out there every day at the Karen retrial, both trials, but even louder and bigger. And the jury walked through this every day. So I have to believe that the jury at least knew that this was a big deal."

He further explained, "When that verdict was read in the courtroom, the outside erupted in cheers. The Lindsay Clancy people are kind of mimicking that. And I'm told that a lot of them are the same people. There's a lot of those same Free Karen folks that are now out there wearing pink T-shirts for Lindsay Clancy. So it's become a sort of movement, you know?"

While Wedge said he supports people's right to protest peacefully, he cautioned problems can arise when activism turns into harassment of victims' relatives.