Among the many fireworks at the most recent hearing in the case of Karen Read, charged with killing her boyfriend John O’Keefe last year, is the defense’s claim that the investigation is so troubled that the federal government has opened up a case to look into it.

“It’s been reported that federal authorities have now gotten involved in the circumstances surrounding this case and have impaneled a grand jury, federal grand jury, to investigate some of these circumstances,” defense attorney Alan Jackson said in Norfolk Superior Court Wednesday afternoon.

“But Karen Read should not have to wait for the feds to figure out which heads should roll.”

A day later, the feds didn’t have much to say to clarify the matter. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s office said: “We do not confirm or deny investigations.” The FBI had the same answer, “as a matter of longstanding policy.”

The case has brought about significant public attention — from both sides — which filled the second-floor courtroom in Dedham to standing room only.

The first set are those who believe Read has been made a “scapegoat,” in the words of defense attorney David Yannetti, by a prosecutor who “has hid evidence, manipulated evidence, stalled, delayed, obfuscated.” Many of these people yelled out their support on the courthouse steps as Read walked down with her lawyers and family members at her side.

The other side are those who, as prosecutor Adam Lally argues, believe the entire defense theory is a “fanciful” conspiracy and that their discovery requests are “the epitome of a fishing expedition” and that Read is guilty. Many of these sported Boston Police Department-branded clothing and “Justice for JJ” — JJ being O’Keefe’s initials — pins.

Following the hearing, the Herald reported largely on evidence the defense is requesting regarding O’Keefe’s wounds — which the defense has long argued could not have been caused by Read backing into him with her SUV during a 3-point.

In particular, they wanted animal control records for Chloe, the German Shepherd owned by Boston Police Sgt. Det. Brian Albert, who owned the home at 34 Fairview Road where O’Keefe was killed, as well as trace evidence that could put the dog as a member of the attack they say killed O’Keefe.

But that’s not all they wanted. The defense painted a picture of a discovery process they say has been anything but helpful or transparent, with Yannetti calling the commonwealth’s discovery work “outrageous” in comments to media following the hearing.

“For 15 months, this has been a quest for the truth conducted by one party, in this case, the defense,” he said. “We have made substantial progress in this case to the point where anybody familiar with this case knows that Karen Reed is innocent.”

That evidence is needed, they say, to prove their version of events: which is that O’Keefe was beaten to death in the home — they say Apple Health data indicates he was walking around in the house — and then his body was dragged to the front yard where by the next morning local responders found it “cold to the touch,” according to prosecutor filings.

But they also are requesting evidence to damage the prosecution’s version of events. The prosecution contends that the couple were out drinking in downtown Canton, where O’Keefe lives, when they met up with acquaintances at Waterfall Bar and Grill and were then invited to Albert’s house.

The prosecution contends that nobody at the gathering saw O’Keefe come in and that Read struck O’Keefe with her vehicle, leaving him to die in the cold and snow, and that a busted passenger-side tail light — and possibly a hair matter sample from the passenger rear door that had not been tested by the Wednesday hearing — points to this version of events.

But the defense argues that Read’s tail light was not busted when she dropped O’Keefe off — she didn’t stay, they say, because she has many health issues and was not feeling well — and that if they had unedited footage from the Canton Public Library security cameras they would be able to prove this.

Yannetti said that the footage they received from the library has a crucial two-minute gap from 12:37 to 12:39 a.m., a time when they say their client would have been driving past on her way back to O’Keefe’s home on Meadows Avenue.

Prosecutor Lally said “I would have a large issue with that” on the defense’s contention that all the evidence points to Read’s innocence. As for the defense not receiving evidence, he said that he has personally reached out to expedite testing and release and that the video they received from the library is the same video he received.

But defense attorneys are not just targeting Lally’s prosecution, but police investigators and in particular State police Trooper Michael Proctor, who they repeatedly characterize as “conflicted” and say has familial connections with those present in the home. More specifically, connections with homeowner Brian Albert and Jennifer McCabe, Albert’s sister-in-law, who they say searched for “ho[w] long to die in cold” hours before O’Keefe’s body was found.

The president of State Police Association of Massachusetts, the union for troopers, came out to throw his support behind Proctor and the investigation.

“This case is actively going on. Our homicide detectives here in Massachusetts are arguably the best in the country. Our solve rate is indicative of that,” SPAM President Patrick McNamara said outside the courthouse Wednesday. “The association supports our members across the commonwealth and the facts of this case will speak for itself.”

Both Albert and McCabe have retained attorneys who were present in the courtroom Wednesday.