“No Nudes So Far”: Police Texts and New Video Shake Up Karen Read Trial

Summary

Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield

Episode: “No Nudes So Far”: Police Texts and New Video Shake Up Karen Read Trial
Release Date: May 13, 2025

---

Introduction

In this riveting episode of Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield, host Ashleigh Banfield delves deep into day 14 of the high-stakes Karen Read trial. With 14 days of courtroom drama unfolding, Banfield provides listeners with a comprehensive and engaging breakdown of the most pivotal moments, uncovering critical evidence and expert testimonies that could sway the jury's verdict.

---

Trial Overview and Key Developments

Day 14 Highlights:
Ashleigh opens the episode by setting the stage: “It feels like it's been longer. But it's only day 14 in the Karen Reed trial.” She emphasizes the intense focus on Sergeant Yuri Buchenik, who has been a central figure in the trial, testifying for three consecutive days amidst rigorous examination.

Perry Mason Moment:
A defining moment occurred on [04:30], when defense attorney Alan Jackson introduced a game-changing piece of evidence: surveillance video that wasn't presented in the first trial. Banfield describes it as a "Perry Mason moment," referencing those classic courtroom revelations that dramatically shift the case’s trajectory.

---

Unveiling New Evidence

Surveillance Footage Revelation:
At [07:15], Jackson showcased surveillance footage from the Canton Police Department, timestamped just after 1:30 AM—the same timeframe when the incident at 34 Fairview Road occurred. The video depicted a white Jeep Wrangler entering the police station, driven by a man in a hoodie identified as ATF Agent Brian Higgins. This evidence was pivotal because:

• Alibi Discrepancy: Higgins testified he was asleep and not using his phone, yet the footage showed him holding a phone, contradicting his statement.
• Questionable Timing: The video was recorded mere hours before John O' Keefe was found frozen outside the party house, raising suspicions about Higgins's involvement.

Dismissal of Previous Evidence Omission:
Banfield points out the significance of this evidence not being presented in the initial trial, questioning, “Why didn't the jury in the first trial get to see this mysterious hooded figure walking into the Canton police station?”

---

Controversial Text Messages Exposed

Group Text Scrutiny:
Defense lawyer Alan Jackson unearthed notorious group text messages between Sergeant Buchenik and former Trooper Michael Proctor. At [11:30], Jackson read aloud a text from Proctor: “funny, I'm going through his client's phone,” highlighting the unprofessional conduct that led to Proctor's dismissal from his position.

Unprofessional Conduct Admission:
Sergeant Buchenik admitted to responding with a thumbs-up emoji to inappropriate messages, labeling them “unfortunate” and “unprofessional” yet maintaining Proctor acted with integrity. Banfield underscores the irony, noting Proctor's history of misconduct, including drinking and driving on duty.

---

Defense's Strategic Maneuvers

Questioning Proctor's Integrity:
Jackson pressed Sergeant Buchenik on the relationship between Trooper Proctor and the Albert family (owners of 34 Fairview Road), revealing messages where the Alberts offered gifts and babysitting services to Proctor. At [13:45], Jackson insinuated potential corruption, questioning why such gifts were permissible and highlighting Proctor's failure to disclose these communications.

Surveillance Video Manipulation:
At [15:00], Jackson presented altered surveillance footage from the Sally Port garage. Initially appearing to show Proctor detached from Karen Reed's SUV, the video was later revealed to be a mirror image, accurately depicting Proctor approaching the vehicle's critical tail light—a crucial detail linking him directly to the incident scene.

---

Impact on the Jury and Trial Progress

Emotional and Critical Testimony:
The introduction of new surveillance footage and text messages served to cast significant doubt on the prosecution's case. Banfield notes the jury’s intense focus on the "magical" placement of the SUV in the surveillance video and Proctor’s questionable actions. This tactical revelation led to Judge Kanoni dismissing the jury temporarily to address the admissibility of the new evidence.

Final Arguments and Jury Dismissal:
As the day concluded, the defense shifted focus to motive, particularly jealousy, insinuating a personal vendetta from Agent Higgins towards John O' Keefe. Sergeant Buchenik’s responses, especially regarding "liquid courage," added layers of complexity and raised further questions about personal motives influencing the investigation.

---

Notable Quotes

• Ashleigh Banfield [00:07]: “But day 14, we've covered a lot of ground.”
• Alan Jackson [05:22]: “Was this footage recorded before the tail light shards were found at the scene?”
• Sergeant Yuri Buchenik [17:27]: “My common sense dictates that it was not the case.”
• Ashleigh Banfield [18:18]: “Having the guts to walk up to someone you might not otherwise walk up to in a bar because you... you had too much to drink. Is that what beer muscles could mean?”

---

Insights and Analysis

Ashleigh Banfield provides a nuanced analysis of the trial's progression, highlighting how strategic defense maneuvers and the introduction of overlooked evidence have shifted the narrative. The pivotal surveillance footage and incriminating text messages not only challenge the prosecution's stance but also unveil potential internal conspiracies within the police investigation team.

Banfield underscores the defense's effective use of character assassination against key witnesses, particularly focusing on Sergeant Buchenik and Trooper Proctor’s questionable professionalism. Additionally, the portrayal of Agent Higgins's possible motives adds a dramatic twist, suggesting personal biases may have tainted the investigation.

---

Conclusion and Future Implications

As day 14 concludes, the trial remains intensely unpredictable, with the newly introduced evidence poised to significantly influence the jury's perception. Banfield teases future developments, including the potential reintroduction of the Aruba incident, where Karen Reed allegedly accused John O' Keefe of infidelity during their vacation—a claim that could further complicate the case dynamics.

Listeners are left anticipating the next day's proceedings, understanding that each revelation deepens the mystery and underscores the complexities of criminal investigations influenced by personal relationships and professional misconduct.

---

Subscribe Alert:
Ashleigh Banfield encourages listeners to subscribe to Drop Dead Serious to stay updated with ongoing revelations and bonus episodes that offer deeper dives into the truth behind the headlines.

---

Remember: “The truth isn't just serious, it's a Drop Dead series.”

Transcript

[Unknown Speaker]

Foreign.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hi, everybody. I'm Ashley Banfield and this is drop dead serious. I've been counting. I know you've been counting. And it feels like it's been longer. But it's only day 14 in the Karen Reed trial. But day 14, we've covered a lot of ground. But I do want to say that if there's one thing I feel, it's as though Yuri Buchenik, Sergeant Yuri Buchenk, has been on the stand for almost all 14 days. But it's not. It's only three. He's on the stand for three days in a row, and he's undergone a direct exam, a cross exam, a redirect, a recross, a redirect again. But let me tell you something. Day three was a biggie. There was actually a Perry Mason moment. Now, if you are too young to remember Perry Mason on tv, you may have heard of the expression a Perry Mason moment, even having not seen it on tv. But if you don't know what a Perry Mason moment is, it's one of those aha moments in court, like bum, bum, bum, when something happens, somebody walks in through the back or a witness shows up or a piece of evidence comes up or some fact comes out of the blue. We had one of those today, and it was like, sweet. If you're a trial watcher, it's what you wait for, right? And this was a surveillance video, A surveillance video that was never brought up in Karen's first trial. Wait, what? How is there evidence that we never saw in the first trial? How. Well, there was, and it was big, and I'm going to get to it. So do not go anywhere until you hear this. But it's video that. That could be make or break for this jury, right? And right out of the gate, this trial hot. So let's just get right to it. Before the jury came in, special prosecutor Hank Brennan told the courtroom that he was worried about something. He said that Karen's defense attorney's questions about the police investigation were, in his view, going too far. And he argued that those questions were excessive, that they weren't relevant, and that they could, quote, inflame the jury. That's always the barometer, you know, is it probative or is it prejudicial? But judge Kanone did not rule on it. Instead, she just reminded both sides to follow the rules. And then in came the jury. And Sergeant Buchanak picked up his testimony where he left off. And that is when Karen's hotshot defense lawyer Alan Jackson, pounced. Now, if you have heard me talk about this case prior to now because I've been doing it for more than 14 days. We had jury selection before it actually got started. You've probably heard me refer to Alan Jackson as a hotshot lawyer. It is not a derogatory term. It is actually a term that I decided upon because I have watched Alan Jackson litigate in criminal trials for over two decades and he is a hotshot. When I first saw Alan Jackson in action, he was a prosecutor and he was prosecuting Phil Spector, the music legend, for murder. And he was so incredibly slick and so smart and so good. And now he's a defense attorney. So hence I have decided for myself on the description hotshot lawyer. It means he's really good, in my opinion. So Alan Jackson brought up those now notorious group text messages. You know the ones, the ones between Sergeant Buchanak and former trooper Michael Proctor, who was like the lead investigator in this case and a handful of other police officers. And Alan Jackson went there, he did it. He read those messages out loud in court. Here was Michael Proctor's text referring to Karen's lawyer's cell phone. Quote, funny, I'm going through his client's phone, end quote. Now that is a word that does not go over well in a court of law, or frankly, anywhere else for that matter. So back to the texts. Quote, no nudes so far. End quote. Goes without saying. This one was not about Karen's lawyer. No, it wasn't about David Gannetti. It was about Karen. Read clearly. How unprofessional can you get, right? He lost his job over it. On the stand, Sergeant Buchanak had to admit that he responded with a thumbs up emoji to that garbage. He called the messages, quote, unfortunate, unprofessional, but he still stood by his claim that former trooper Michael Proctor acted, quote, with integrity. Can I remind you that former trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator, is a former investigator because of that unprofessionalism, among other things like drinking and driving in a cruiser on the job. But reminder, this witness said he still acted with integrity.

[Unknown Speaker]

And you would agree that your supervision has a direct impact on the character and quality of the subordinate investigators that you supervise?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Yes.

[Unknown Speaker]

The whole point of having supervision and a chain of command is to establish a certain amount of, for lack of a better phrase, quality control of the subordinates.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Yes.

[Unknown Speaker]

That would also include quality control over the subordinates investigations.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

And then Alan Jackson floored everybody. He did something we did not see in the first trial. He hauled out some Evidence that never made it in front of the first jury. And there's a damn good reason why jury number one did not see this evidence. And it ain't right. And I'm going to fill you in on it in just a second. But that evidence was video. And Alan Jackson put it up there on the big screen for everybody to see. It was surveillance footage from the Canton Police Department. Time stamped just after 1:30am that happens to be just after the party at 34 Fairview Road. And just a few hours before John O' Keefe was found frozen in the snow outside that party house. Jurors fixed their eyes on that video. It was a white Jeep Wrangler pulling into the parking lot of the Canton Police Department. Who was driving that Jeep? Well, should be easy enough to figure out, right? Because in the video, a man in a hoodie walks right into the Canton police station. And Sergeant Buchanak had to confirm on the stand that the man in the hoodie appears to be ATF Agent Brian Higgins. You know Brian Higgins, He's a pretty important part of this case. Right. Brian Higgins with the atf was at that party that night. Brian Higgins had a phone that he apparently decided to destroy. Part of it he smashed and the other party got rid of. On a military base, of all places. Not a military base that he worked at. Right. Brian Higgins also had, like, a thing with Karen Reed. Even though Karen Reed had a boyfriend who ended up dead on the front lawn at the party where Brian Higgins was partying and drinking. You hear where I'm going? Right? So that Brian Higgins, he, according to this witness, is the hooded man. The hooded man stays inside the police department for about six minutes and then walks back out and can be seen holding what looks like a phone up to his face. One of the vehicle's headlights then flickers on. Alan Jackson told the jury what the footage did not show. And that was that no one ever pulled Brian Hagan's phone records from the phone that he held up to his face on that video. And why didn't the jury in the first trial get to see this mysterious hooded figure walking into the Canton police station at 1:30 in the morning, Right when that party wrapped up. Where a dead man was found outside the next morning. Because Trooper Michael Proctor, former. Never turned the surveillance video over. And what's worse, Agent Brian Higgins from the atf. The hooded figure, he testified in the first trial that he was asleep and not using his cell phone when phone records actually showed he was making calls. Indeed, he was making calls. Late into the night, he claimed they were just butt dials between himself and the homeowner where the party happened, another police officer named Brian Albert. So you see why this was such a Perry Mason moment, right? A cop who says he didn't use his phone must have been a butt dial. Is actually seen on video using his phone. Out of all places, a police station where Karen's lawyers say a massive conspiracy was underway among officers to frame her for a police officer's murder. I mean, this is a hard act to follow, right? But Helen Jackson wasn't even finished yet. He then pivoted to something more personal. He asked about Trooper Michael Proctor's relationship with the Albert family, the Alberts, the owners of 34 Fairview Road, where the party happened. Alan Jackson told the courtroom there were messages from the Alberts offering Trooper Proctor, the lead investigator, a gift for his help in the investigation. Now, if you and I aren't allowed to give a gift to the cops to help in an investigation, then why on earth are the Alberts allowed to? The people who lived at the home where John was found frozen? Sergeant Buchanak said Michael Proctor told him that he knew the Alberts from, quote, around town, but that that was it. But Jackson said there was more to it than that. A whole lot more. Like text messages where Julie Albert offered to babysit for Michael Proctor just 10 days before John O' Keefe died. And another message where Proctor's sister said that Julie Albert wanted to give him a thank you gift. Sergeant Buchanak said he never saw those text messages and thus did not investigate further. The judge dismissed the jury so that Alan Jackson could drill down on this very, very important issue. Right. But do it outside of the jury's presence. But Judge Canoni ultimately ruled that the line of questioning wouldn't be allowed in front of the jurors. Even so, after lunch, the heat cranked up even more. Alan Jackson introduced more surveillance video, this time from the Sally Port garage at the Canton police station. Do you remember how the first jury saw the Canton police Sally Port with Karen Reed's SUV parked inside? If you don't remember, let me describe it for you. You know, your point of view is looking towards the passenger side of Karen Reed's car. Right. And there's a guy who seems to be behind the other side, the driver's side, the rear, the tail light in the rear of Karen's suv. But the passenger side and the rear tail light has no one standing around it. You have a clear view broadside passenger side with a Guy on the other side at the rear tail light. So driver's side, tail light, that's where the guy's standing. Passenger tail light, nobody's standing. That guy was Trooper Michael Proctor in the Sally Port. And it looked as though Proctor never touched that rear tail light on Karen Reed's Lexus. Wasn't even standing near it. The problem was that that was not an accurate video. That video where you think you're looking at the passenger side of Karen's suv, it was a mirror image. It had been flipped and handed over to the court. Flipped. And when you see it in its accurate form, the correct orientation, you can clearly see Trooper Michael Proctor walking right up to the rear tail light on the right hand side. On the passenger side, the same alleged tail light the cops say they found shattered at 34 Fairview Road. The scene where John was found. Right. You flip the scene and suddenly what you're really looking at is the broadside of the driver's side of Karen's suv, the driver's side. So the tail light, suddenly the tail light that matters is on the opposite side that you can't see. And that's exactly where Trooper Michael Proctor standing. So Alan Jackson asked a critical question. Quote, was this footage recorded before the tail light shards were found at the scene and Sergeant Buchanak had to confirm on the stand? Yes. And then Jackson dropped the hammer. He pointed out that the video has a big piece missing, maybe edited out, that the video jumps from an empty garage at Sally Port to the SUV suddenly and magically parked in place with no shot of that vehicle actually rolling in. And that just so happens to be a five second gap. Alan Jackson says the SUV is just, quote, magically there. And Sergeant Buchanak could not dispute it. When Prosecutor Brennan returned for redirect, he asked whether Sergeant Buchanak had ever seen anyone remove a piece of taillight from Karen's suv. And Sergeant Buchanak responded, no. Quote, that would be absurd. Prosecutor Brennan pressed on. Why were key witnesses like Jennifer and Matt McCabe and Brian Albert interviewed at home instead of at the station? Sergeant Buchanak said there were two reasons for that. The snowstorm and the fact that these were friends of the victim who had just found his body. Keeping them comfortable, he said, was the priority. But Karen's defense lawyer, hotshot defense lawyer Alan Jackson, wasn't done on re cross examination. He turned the conversation to motive, specifically jealousy. He reminded the jury that Brian Higgins, Agent Brian Higgins from the ATF, you know the guy 1:30 in the morning scene with the hoodie going into the police station. Yeah. Alan Jackson reminded the jury that Brian Higgins had been exchanging flirty text messages with Karen Reed in the weeks before she showed up at the Waterfall Bar with her boyfriend, John o' Keefe. That night, Higgins sent a message to Karen saying simply, well, end quote. Alan Jackson described it as a classic scenario. A man who's been drinking sees the woman that he likes walk in with somebody else.

[Unknown Speaker]

As an investigator, as a reasonable, objective investigator, as a possible scenario for Brian Higgins to be jealous about John o' Keefe.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

There's a possibility there, but I don't. I didn't see it.

[Ashley Banfield]

Then Jackson showed footage from the Waterfall Bar and pointed to a gesture that Agent Higgins made towards the bar, towards where o' Keefe had been standing.

[Unknown Speaker]

Did that seem realistic to you? Let me ask it a different way. Did that seem to you as a reasonable interpretation? Hey, come on outside. Come here.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Very reasonable, since they've been invited to 34 Fairview.

[Ashley Banfield]

From there, Alan Jackson circled back to the tail light evidence in John o' Keefe's clothing. Prosecutor Brennan had already presented the black winter hat and the jeans stained with green. The sergeant Buchen said the stain was on the left glute, consistent with falling in the grass. He also noted there was very little snow on the ground about 12:32 in the morning, the time they believe that John O' Keefe was struck by Karen Reed's car, they say. But Karen's lawyer said, could that stain have instead been from dragging? Like he's assuming right now. Right. That maybe dragging, Being dragged out of a house where he'd already been beaten up to be laying out in the snow.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

I've never dragged anybody. So from my experience, I can't tell you.

[Unknown Speaker]

I didn't ask if you've ever dragged anybody. You've never murdered anybody either. But you're a homicide investigator, right? Did you get those things from being dragged? It's just a common sense question.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

My common sense dictates that it was not a drag, a mark, because it would have linear characterizations, and it would be both buttocks that are engaged in contact with the ground while being dragged.

[Unknown Speaker]

He was being dragged and he had something in his pocket, or being dragged at an ankle, dragged through a free spot that was only on the left. What about all those impossibilities?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Again, my opinion. Common sense dictates it was not the case.

[Ashley Banfield]

Then came one final moment. And believe it or not, it was a moment of levity. Yeah, I know. Levity in a trial like this. Jackson asked whether Buchanan had ever heard of beer guts or beer mussels. The idea that alcohol gives you the courage to act. Buchanan said he had heard it described another way, as liquid courage.

[Unknown Speaker]

You had evidence that Brian Higgins had been drinking most of the afternoon and evening? That that or most of the night? That evening and night at the time that John o' Keefe and Karen Reed walked into the waterfall. Correct.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

I had information that Brian Higgins had returned from a police officer's funeral and then went to Waterfall after he changed clothes and took a shower.

[Unknown Speaker]

Went to the hillside before he went to Waterfall, started drinking there. Correct.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

I don't have an independent memory of that, no.

[Unknown Speaker]

You heard of beer mussels? That's a common phrase, right?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Never heard that before, no.

[Unknown Speaker]

Beer guts. Ever heard that one?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

I've heard of beer gut, but not beer guts.

[Unknown Speaker]

Having the guts to walk up to someone you might not otherwise walk up to in a bar because you. You had too much to drink. Is that what beer muscles could mean?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

I would say maybe liquid courage.

[Unknown Speaker]

Even better. What does liquid courage mean?

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Giving you courage that truly shouldn't be.

[Unknown Speaker]

There, that you might not otherwise have if you weren't drinking.

[Sergeant Yuri Buchenik]

Yeah.

[Ashley Banfield]

And with that, Sergeant Yuri Buchenik was finally excused. Three very, very long days on the stand. So, three long days, hundreds of questions, surveillance footage, missing timestamps, offensive text messages, and stained blue jeans. And it all ended with a comment about beer guts or liquid courage. Judge Kanoni dismissed the jury. And just like that, day 14 is in the record books tomorrow. Could bring another twist, though. Prosecutors want to bring back the infamous Aruba incident, where Karen Reed allegedly accused John o' Keefe of kissing someone else during their tropical vacation. Can't wait, right? We'll see you right here tomorrow for day 15. I always encourage you to subscribe because every so often I get a little crazy and I drop a bonus episode. And if you aren't subscribed, subscribe. You won't know it's there, and I don't want you to miss a beat. For now, I'm Ashley Banfield. Thank you so much for listening. Thank you for watching. And remember, the truth isn't just serious, it's a Drop Dead series.