In a rare and revealing post-verdict interview, one of the jurors in the high-profile Karen Read murder trial has come forward to share the moment her perspective shifted—transforming what began as a likely conviction into a stunning acquittal.

Janet Jimenez, a personal trainer from Medfield, Massachusetts, served as juror No. 12 in the retrial of Karen Read, the woman accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend John O’Keefe by allegedly backing her SUV into him and leaving him to die in a snowbank outside a house party in 2022.

In an exclusive interview with WCVB-TV on Friday, Jimenez said she started the trial leaning toward a guilty verdict. But after weeks of testimony and sifting through more than 200 pieces of evidence, doubt crept in—and ultimately overwhelmed the prosecution’s case.

“I went in with a very open mind but definitely leaning towards she was guilty,” Jimenez admitted. “But there were just too many holes.”

Read, 45, a financial analyst and former professor, was facing second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence, and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death. On Wednesday, the jury returned a not guilty verdict on all charges.

The retrial followed a mistrial in 2023 and was watched closely by a public divided between two competing narratives: prosecutors claimed Read struck O’Keefe with her car while intoxicated and fled the scene. The defense argued that O’Keefe never died from a collision, but was instead beaten inside the home of fellow officers, dragged outside, and abandoned—while Read became the convenient scapegoat.

From her spot in the jury box, Jimenez had an up-close view of both arguments. “I think I had the best view in the house,” she said. “She was right there. The defense was right there.”

But it wasn’t emotional testimony or dramatic courtroom moments that swayed her—it was the absence of something she expected to find. Jimenez wouldn’t specify exactly what evidence she felt was missing, but she was clear about its impact. “There was one thing I was looking for, and it wasn’t there,” she said. “That’s what created the doubt.”

“I’m not here to say the defense’s story was right or wrong,” Jimenez added. “But there were things we saw, things we heard … it could have fit that scenario. So again, that’s the whole doubt thing.”

Jimenez wasn’t alone in that reasoning. At least two other jurors have come forward with similar sentiments. One, Paula Prado, told WBZ that although it was possible Read’s car made contact with O’Keefe, the victim’s injuries didn’t match a typical vehicle strike.

“He definitely went inside,” Prado said. “Something happened inside that house.”

Another juror, identified only as Jason, took it a step further. In comments to TMZ, he said he never believed Read’s SUV touched O’Keefe at all—and that reasonable doubt wasn’t even necessary for him to vote not guilty. He simply didn’t see the state prove a collision had occurred.

Despite the unanimous jury verdict, some witnesses and law enforcement figures have expressed deep frustration over the outcome. In a joint statement, several key witnesses called the verdict “a devastating miscarriage of justice.”

Prosecutors have been tight-lipped since the ruling. Norfolk County District Attorney Michael Morrissey issued only a brief response: “The jury has spoken.”

The case has captivated Massachusetts and beyond for more than two years, with viral speculation, conspiracy theories, and questions about police misconduct looming large. Supporters of Read flooded social media in celebration following her acquittal, hailing it as a triumph against institutional corruption. Critics argue that the decision leaves more questions than answers—and a dead police officer without justice.

For Jimenez, the case will forever be part of her personal story. “I’m very comfortable with how I came to my decision,” she said. “We weren’t there to say who was right or wrong. We were there to determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. And I didn’t see it.”

The legal battle may be over, but the public debate is far from settled.