How did Juror #11 know who Tess Chart was?
Karen Read juror Paula Prado asked me to clear up the rumors on why she misspoke on the trial one witness.
It might be necessary to address what some are calling an issue with a statement made by Juror #11, Paula Prado, in our first interview together.
When Prado was asked what witness she trusted the most, she responded: "...forensic scientists from the Massachusetts State Police Lab, like Maureen Hartnett and Tess Chart." Having followed both trial one and trial two, I immediately knew Tess Chart was not a witness in the second trial. I paused when I read the response. Like many of you, my first thought was that she had followed the case prior to being selected as a juror. I had to think very carefully about what to do next. I felt if I even asked Prado about this, it would compromise the integrity of the initial response. As someone who supports Karen Read, I thought about eliminating the question from the interview, to avoid any negative feedback. I also thought about it being a simple mistake but again, even talking about it seemed wrong. Ultimately, I made the decision to publish the article with the responses exactly as they were given to me. My integrity as an independent journalist is paramount and that felt right.
I never mentioned it to Prado.
Today, unsolicited, she texted me asking if I wanted her to correct the statement. In her text to me, she offered this explanation: "Unfortunately, I wasn't able to memorize 30 plus names, and when I was writing about the witness who stood out to me, I was thinking of one of the forensic scientists from the MSP Lab. I don't remember her name. Maureen stuck with me because we had just talked about her specifically during deliberation."
Prado went on to say:
"So I Googled "Forensic Expert Soft Voice Karen Read," and that name (Tess Chart) came up. The picture looked similar to the person I had in mind, so I just copied it."
Prado went on to send me a screenshot of Massachusetts State Police forensic scientist CHRISTINA HANLEY, who did testify in this trial,
and a photo of Tess Chart. Both women are young with straight brown hair that they wore pulled back while on the stand. Both women wore a black suit jacket with a white shirt underneath, adding to the confusion Prado had when looking up the witness.


I want to be clear. This was not something I missed. I knew. But as you all know, I maintain that my one job is to ask questions and share responses with you. I also did not add any narrative to my interview, so it remained authentic and as Prado intended. This may have allowed bad characters to cultivate a false narrative but as you all know, the truth eventually comes to light.
,I am confident Paula Prado is being honest in her explanation and I applaud her for her commitment to telling her story. On the left: Hanley On the right: Chart
*This was first published as a post on X for further clarification of the previously posted interview with Paula Prado.
As someone who hasn’t followed either trial closely, I appreciate your addressing of this issue. It is refreshing to see integrity in reporting.
It is difficult to remember all names and a variety of witnesses. If after you are released from your obligations you look up stuff and that can be confusing to remember and identify folks. Also that was a loooong trial.. That happened to a recent juror in another widely popluar case. Especially when there is more than one trial or trials of the same person for different charges.