← 13th Juror Podcast
13th Juror Podcast
BONUS EPISODE: Explosive New Karen Read Lawsuit
00:23:31
One year after her acquittal, Karen Read is back in court—this time as the plaintiff. In this special update episode, we break down the explosive civil lawsuit Karen Read has filed against the Massachusetts State Police and the Town of Canton. The complaint alleges misconduct, bias, and institutional failures that Read claims contributed to her prosecution in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. We examine the text messages at the center of the lawsuit, the responses from law enforcement agencies, Karen Read's appearance on the Today Show, and the growing web of civil litigation surrounding the case—including the wrongful death lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family and the ongoing legal battles involving witnesses from the criminal trial. What happens next, and what could discovery reveal? All allegations discussed in this episode are claims made in court filings and have not been proven in court.
Loading summary
Transcript10 lines
- [00:01]
A
This heat isn't letting up and if your windows and doors aren't performing, your home is feeling it. Now's the time to replace your old worn out windows and doors during the Renewal by Andersen Summer Sizzler event for a limited time enjoy. Buy one get one 40% off plus $50 off each window and door with a minimum of four and buy now and pay later with our special financing. Stay cool with these summer Savings by visiting renewalbyandersonhome.com today and get your project from backyard barbecues to homegrown herbs, the best parts of summer start at Lowe's right now. Get three fairy Morse 1.3 quart vegetables and herbs for just $12 plus get four bags of Miracle Gro 0.75 cubic foot garden soil for only $10. Whether you're planting something new or giving your garden a refresh, now's the time to make the most of your outdoor space. Save more on what you need this summer at Lowe's. We help you save valid through 624 while supplies last selection varies by location, excludes Alaska and Hawaii.
- [01:00]
B
On June 18th of 2025, Karen Reed walked out of a Massachusetts courtroom a free woman. After two trials, years of headlines and one of the most divisive criminal cases in recent history, a jury acquitted her of murdering her boyfriend, Boston police Officer John o'. Keefe. Many people believed the case was finally over, but it wasn't. One year later, Karen Reed is back in court, this time as the plaintiff, and the allegations in her new lawsuit are explosive. She claims misconduct, negligence and investigative failures helped fuel the prosecution that nearly sent her to prison for life. The lawsuit also reveals a series of text messages and communications that raise troubling questions about the people tasked with investigating John Okeefes death. If you're new to the story, I first began covering the Karen Reed case in the spring of 2023, long before it became a national obsession. At the time, coverage was limited, but the allegations were extraordinary. Prosecutors claimed Reed struck o' Keefe with her SUV and left him to die in the snow outside the home of a fellow Boston police officer. She was charged with second degree murder, manslaughter, and leaving the scene of an accident causing death. Over the next two years, I released 58 episodes in my Conspiracy in Canton series, examining the evidence, the investigation, the witnesses, and the town at the center of it all. Today, exactly one year after Karen Reed's acquittal, we're heading back to Canton, Massachusetts. Because this new lawsuit isn't just about what happened to Karen Reed. It's about what may have happened behind the scenes of one of the most controversial criminal investigations in recent memory. And once you see the text messages at the center of these allegations, you may find yourself asking the same question that many people have been asking for years. What was really going on in Canton? This is the 13 Juror podcast, where we unravel complex court cases, investigations, and true crime stories. From high profile trials to mysteries that still leave questions unanswered. We examine the facts, weigh the evidence, and explore the arguments shaping each story, just as the jurors do. I'm your host, Brandi Churchwell. Today's episode is Karen Reed versus the Massachusetts State Police and the town of Canton. Before we get into Karen Reed's newest lawsuit against the Massachusetts State Police and the Canton Police Department, we need to zoom out and look at the other civil cases now surrounding this criminal case. After Karen Reed was acquitted In June of 2025 of murder and manslaughter and the death of John O', Keefe, the legal fight did not end. Back in August of 2024, while Karen Reed was still fighting the criminal charges against her, John o' Keefe's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Karen, as well as two Canton bars that the couple visited on the night that John o' Keefe died. In that lawsuit, o' Keeffe's family alleges that Karen struck him with her SUV and left him outside during the snowstorm. Now, that case largely sat on the back burner while the criminal proceedings played out. But once Karen Reed was acquitted of murder and manslaughter In June of 2025, the civil case began moving forward again. Depositions are now underway, meaning that even though Reed was acquitted in criminal court, she's still facing allegations in civil court related to John o' Keeffe's death. And it's important to remember that the rules are different in a civil case. We've talked about that before. On this podcast, John Okeefe's family doesn't have to prove their claims beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, they only have to show that their version of events is more likely than not. That's a much lower burden than what prosecutors faced in the criminal trial. But the wrongful death lawsuit isn't the only civil case that grew out of the Karen Reed saga. In fact, by the time Karen Reed filed this newest lawsuit, a whole web of litigation had developed around the same events that happened in Canton on January 29, 2022. In November 2025, Reed went on the Offensive, filing her own lawsuit against several investigators and witnesses who played major roles in the criminal case. Among those named were members of The Albert and McCabe families, along with Brian Higgins. Reid's lawsuit alleges that people connected to 34 Fairview Road, together with members of law enforcement, worked to direct the investigation away from themselves and toward her. That case was initially filed in state court before eventually being moved to federal court a few months later. In April of 2026, several of those same individuals fired back. Jen McCabe, Brian Albert, Colin Albert, and Brian Higgins filed a defamation lawsuit against Karen Reed and black blogger Aiden Carney, better known as Turtle Boy. They claim that Reed and Carney helped spread false accusations that tied them to John o' Keefe's death and fueled a public campaign against them. So when Karen Reed filed this latest lawsuit in June 2026, it wasn't happening in a vacuum. By that point, there were already multiple lawsuits moving through the courts, all stemming from the same night and all centered around the same fundamental questions. What happened to John o'? Keefe? And was the investigation that followed conducted fairly? But what makes this newest lawsuit different is who it's targeting. This time, Reid isn't primarily focusing on the witnesses from 34 Fairview Road or the people she believes helped shape the narrative against her. Instead, she's taking aim at the institutions themselves, specifically the Massachusetts State Police and the town of Canton. In this complaint, Reed argues that the problems went beyond the actions of a few individuals. She alleges that the agencies responsible for hiring, training, and supervising those officers failed to do their jobs. The lawsuit relies heavily on text messages and communications involving former State Trooper Michael Proctor and former Canton Police Sergeant Shawn Good, arguing that those messages reveal deeper issues within the departments themselves. So as we sit here today, there are really three separate civil battles unfolding. There's the wrongful death lawsuit filed by John o' Keefe's family against Karen Reed. There's Karen Reed's federal lawsuit against the House defendants and investigators. And now there's this newest lawsuit against the Massachusetts State Police and the town of Canton, which is taking aim at not just individual officers, but at the institutions that employed them. And that's where things take a turn. Because if you thought the last lawsuits were dramatic, wait until you see what's inside this newest complaint. The texts contained in the filing have made headlines nationwide. And once you see the messages at the center of it, you'll understand why. We'll be right back. The complaint filed by Karen Reed against Massachusetts State Police and the Canton police Department wastes no time. It starts off with a bang right from the opening pages. Karen Reed's attorneys argue that her acquittal did more than end what they described as a wrongful prosecution. They claimed that it exposed something much larger, what they call an entrenched culture of bigotry, misogyny, misconduct, and institutional failure within both the Massachusetts State Police and the Canton Police Department. The lawsuit alleges that those failures allowed investigators to violate Reed's rights and pursue a prosecution that never should have happened. Now, these are allegations. This is a civil complaint, and attorneys are presenting their side of the story and what they intend to prove in court, not findings that have already been proven in court. But even with that disclaimer, y', all, the language in this filing is striking. They aren't holding back. At one point, the lawsuit describes former state Trooper Michael Proctor and former Canton police sergeant Shawn Good as, quote unquote, virulent bigots, arguing that their private communications revealed deep seated prejudice against women, black Americans, Asian Americans, Jews, Hispanics, Arabs, and members of the LGBTQ community. And then the attorneys begin showing their work. The lawsuit contains examples of text messages and communications allegedly exchanged by Proctor and Good over the course of years. Most of the messages are so graphic and offensive that I would never repeat them. But according to the complaint, the communications contain repeated racial slurs, derogatory comments about minority and immigrants, misogynistic remarks about women, graphic sexual comments, and statements that mock people based on their race, gender, appearance, or sexual orientation. The lawsuit argues that these were not isolated jokes or occasional lapses in judgment. Instead, Reid's attorneys say the messages reveal a pattern of hostility and prejudice that existed long before either man became involved in her case. The filing provides numerous examples. In one message, Proctor allegedly expressed surprise at the number of black students he saw while visiting Canton High School. Here is a reading of that.
- [10:54]
C
Went into Canton High this morning to get a transcript and saw more in 10 minutes than the four years I spent there combined. Everywhere I looked, there was monkeys running around. Wanted to ask the woman in the guidance office, where were all the white kids? Where the funk did all these come from?
- [11:13]
B
Yeah, I warned you it was bad. There are also texts where Proctor seems to casually remark that it would be nice if black people were still enslaved so that he could order them to go fetch his wings and pizza so he didn't have to go get it. Another message includes additional jokes about slavery and enslaving people for personal convenience, noting that his car needed Washington. In yet another example, he jokes that cities like Flint and Detroit should be destroyed because they were, in his words, breeding grounds. Here's a reading of that text.
- [11:47]
C
Detroit should be destroyed along with places like Front, Michigan. They are breeding grounds for to run wild.
- [11:54]
B
The lawsuit also cites messages in which Proctor used derogatory language towards Arabs, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Jews and members of the LGBTQ community. In one example, Proctor allegedly made comments about keeping Jewish people in concentration camps. In another, he says that Hitler was really onto something. Here's a reading of that text.
- [12:17]
C
America sucks. Hitler was really onto something. Then the fucking US had to step in and ruin it.
- [12:23]
B
In one particularly troubling example, the lawsuit claims that Proctor texted Good about a multi car accident and used a racial slur to describe one of the people involved, writing that because a black person was involved in the crash, that Good should not be in a hurry to respond. Here's a reading of that text.
- [12:44]
C
Actually, take your time. I saw a N was involved so I wouldn't rush. If you're working, let them die.
- [12:52]
B
And that is where this lawsuit shifts from offensive speech to something far more concerning. These aren't just random private citizens exchanging offensive jokes. These were law enforcement officers entrusted with enormous power. Imagine having two men who have taken an oath to protect and serve and then reading these messages suggesting that they just choose who to protect and serve based on their skin color. It's alarming, to say the least. The lawsuit asks a simple question. If these men expressed such hostility towards certain groups of people behind closed doors, and how can the public be confident that that bias didn't affect the way they exercised their authority? The complaint also contains allegations that go beyond racism. According to the lawsuit, Proctor and Good exchanged messages about sharing private, intimate photographs of women and made graphic comments about women that Reid's attorneys describe as degrading and predatory. The filing also points toward numerous examples that it says demonstrate deeply misogynistic attitudes towards women. The lawsuit also brings up Sandra Birchmore's case. Burchmore was a young woman whose death was initially ruled a suicide before a federal investigation led to a former police officer being charged with her murder. Against that backdrop, the complaint states that Shawn Good made a dismissive and derogatory comment about Birchmore in a private message. That message is included in the filing. Reed's attorneys argue that that remark reflects the same attitude and lack of empathy they claim appears throughout many of the communications uncovered in this. And there are other issues with Proctor and Goode having authority as well. Karen's attorneys argue that Proctor wasn't shy about the things he felt and believed that made him patently unfit for service. They say that there are multiple messages where Proctor discussed planting drugs on people. There are texts where Goode warned his friends about sobriety checkpoints and told them to avoid those areas. And he even relished his ability to use his power and access to illegally obtain information about women he encountered in his daily life. I know it's a lot, right? And according to the lawsuit, this wasn't information that suddenly surfaced overnight. The complaint alleges that Canton police had reviewed and analyzed many of these communications nearly a year before this lawsuit was filed. Yet Shawn Good remained employed as a sworn officer until just days before the complaint became public, resigning just days before the allegations were revealed. For Reid's attorneys, these messages are not just shocking, they're foundational to the entire case. The lawsuit argues that it didn't take long for that hostility to be directed toward Karen Reed herself. According to the complaint, investigators weren't approaching the case with an open mind. Instead, her attorneys alleged, they quickly settled on her as the culprit and began treating her guilt as a foregone conclusion. Conclusion Listeners may remember some of the messages that surfaced during the criminal trial, including comments that Proctor made about Reed's appearance, her medical conditions, and his now infamous statement that he had searched her phone but hadn't found any nude pictures yet. Well, this lawsuit goes even further. The complaint alleges that Sean Good also made comments about Reed that her attorneys describe as sexualized, degrading and dehumanizing together. Reed's legal team argues these communications demonstrate that key investigators were incapable of conducting an impartial investigation. But the lawsuit doesn't stop with Proctor and Good. Karen Reed's attorneys argue that the real issue is institutional. They claim that the Massachusetts State Police and the Canton Police Department either knew or should have known about the conduct, attitudes, and biases of the officers they hired, trained, supervised and promoted. According to the complaint, warning signs existed long before Karen Reed became a suspect. Yet the lawsuit alleges that those warning signs were ignored. The filing claims supervisors were aware of Proctor's close relationships with the members of the Albert family, and they were aware of troubling conduct long before it became public. It also alleges that the state police leadership was learned about controversial messages months before Reid's first trial, but failed to take meaningful action. Ultimately, the lawsuit argues that what happened in the Karen Reed investigation was not simply the result of a few bad decisions by a few individuals. Instead, Reid's attorneys contend, it was the predictable result of agencies that failed to police their own ranks. And that leads to perhaps the most significant allegation in the entire lawsuit. Karen Reed's attorneys claim that once investigators settled on her as the suspect, the goal ceased to be finding the truth and became building a case. The lawsuit alleges investigators ignored alternative theories, failed to collect and preserve important evidence and overlooked key witnesses, bypassed standard investigative procedures, and maintained undisclosed communications with individuals connected to 34 Fairview roads. Perhaps most importantly, the complaint alleges, investigators shaped the evidence and narrative to support the conclusion that Karen Reed struck John o' Keefe with her vehicle while disregarding information they believed pointed elsewhere. Those allegations form the basis for several legal claims, including negligence, failure to supervise, and one of the most serious accusations in the complaint, civil conspiracy. In plain English, Karen Reid's attorneys are alleging that investigators, agencies, and certain individuals connected to 35 before Fairview Road were not acting independently. Instead, they claimed those parties worked together toward a common goal, directing suspicion toward Karen Reed and away from others. The complaint goes on to argue that these alleged failures and misconduct ultimately led to Karen Reed being prosecuted twice for murder, costing her her career, finances, reputation, and years of her life. Those are extraordinary allegations. Now, whether Karen Reed can prove them remains to be seen. But one thing is clear. This lawsuit is about far more than a handful of offensive text messages. It is an attempt to put the entire investigation of John o' Keefe's death on trial. We'll be right back. Not surprisingly, the response to the lawsuit was swift. Massachusetts State Police Superintendent colonel Jeffrey Noble issued a statement calling the messages attributed to Michael Proctor racist, sexist and abhorrent. Noble said the communications reinforced his decision to terminate Proctor's employment and made clear that the comments did not reflect the values of the department. He also emphasized that the investigation into John Okeefes death began before he became superintendent and pointed to reforms that have been implemented under his leadership. In the statement, Noble said, these disturbing messages are entirely inconsistent with any basic standard of decency and certainly with the expectations of a Massachusetts state trooper. He added that the agency is, in his words, keenly aware of the ways in which this misconduct harmed the public trust on which their mission depends. Now, the town of Canton also pushed back against the allegations. Town officials said they learned of the lawsuit through media reports and had not yet been formally served with the complaint. While acknowledging the controversy surrounding the case, officials rejected what they described as broad characterizations of the Canton Police Department. They pointed to recommendations that have already been implemented following an outside audit of the department and said they have full confidence in Police Chief Michael Daniels, as efforts to modernize the agency continue. Michael Proctor's attorney, Matt Hamill, also responded. He argued that focusing on anything other than Karen Reed's own conduct was, in his words, telling and predictable. Hamill maintained that any comments Proctor made in his private life years before John Okeefes death had no bearing on the investigation itself. Karen Reed sees it very differently, though. Shortly after filing the lawsuit, Reid and her attorneys appeared on the Today show to discuss why they chose to move forward with the case. Reid explained that this had always been a part of the plan, but before she could pursue accountability, she first had to save her own life. She told viewers that while her acquittal was deserved, it did not undo everything that had happened over the previous several years. She said the wrongs have not been completely righted and added that she always knew this was going to happen if she could get any help to legally do this. And that may be the key to understanding what this lawsuit is really about. Because while this is a civil case and civil cases ultimately measure accountability in dollars rather than prison sentences, Alan Jackson says money is not the point. According to Jackson, Karen's goal is exposure. He argues that the text messages and communications uncovered in this case reveal what he describes as corruption embedded within the culture of both Massachusetts State Police and the Canton Police Department. In his view, the lawsuit is an attempt to drag those issues into the light and force public accountability. So now the case enters an entirely new phase. The criminal trials are over. Karen Reed has been acquitted, but the civil litigation is just beginning. And that's important because allegations in a complaint are only the opening. The next phase is discovery. Depositions, document requests, internal records, testimony under oath. In other words, the process where both sides will have to back up their claims. For years, the central question in this story has been, what happened to John o'? Keefe? But as this case has evolved, another question has emerged alongside it. What happened inside the investigation? Karen Reed believes this lawsuit will provide answers. The Massachusetts State Police and the town of Canton strongly disagree with many of her allegations. And somewhere between those competing narratives lies the next chapter of a story that more than four years after John Okeeffes death, still refuses to end. And as those answers emerge, you can be sure we'll be following every development. My name is Brandi Churchwell, creator and host of the 13th Juror podcast. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to follow the show on your favorite podcast platform and leave a rating or review. It helps more listeners to discover the podcast and if you know someone who would find this case as fascinating as you did. Share this episode with them. For additional episodes, case updates, and more information about the podcast, visit our website@13jurorpodcast.com the evidence has been presented, the arguments have been made, and now comes the same question faced by every juror. What do you believe? Thank you for listening.