Karen Read Jurors Explain the Verdict

So why did jurors in Boston clear Karen Read of charges she fatally struck boyfriend John O'Keefe with her vehicle? Two have come forward to shed some light:

• "There were holes in the case that left reasonable doubt," one juror, identified only as Jason, tells TMZ. He voiced particular doubt about prosecutors' assertion that Read backed into O'Keefe and broke her taillight in the process.
• "We did a lot of review of the tapes," Jason said, per Boston25. "It seemed to me that in the videos of the car after the alleged incident happened, we could see the taillight lit up red where it shouldn't have been red. ... I don't believe that the SUV collided with John O'Keefe."

• Juror Paula Pardo had a similar complaint , reports CBS News. "The injuries on his arm didn't make much sense that (they came) from a taillight for us," she said. "We couldn't prove there was a collision and she was responsible for John's death."
• Prado added that she initially thought Read might be guilty of manslaughter. But "as the weeks passed by, I just realized there was too many holes that we couldn't fill. And there's nothing that put her on the scene in our opinion, besides just dropping John O'Keefe off."
• Read's team argued she had been framed by police, but the jury didn't necessarily buy that. "Do I know that they were corrupt?" says Jason. "Absolutely not. I don't know that there was any corruption going on."
• Lead investigator Michael Proctor, meanwhile, tells NBC's Dateline that accusations he cracked Read's taillight to make her look guilty are untrue. "I laugh because it's such a ridiculous accusation," Proctor told the show, per the AP. "There's not one piece of evidence or fact to support that because it did not happen."

(Read still faces a wrongful death lawsuit.)