Pin It On The Girl: S1-E7

Summary

KAREN: THE RETRIAL – Episode: "Pin It On The Girl: S1-E7"

Released on November 27, 2024, "Pin It On The Girl: S1-E7" delves deep into the controversial retrial of Karen Reed, accused of murdering Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe with her SUV. This episode meticulously unpacks the pivotal moments and critical testimonies that have shaped the high-stakes courtroom drama.

---

Introduction to the Case

The podcast kicks off by setting the stage for the retrial, emphasizing the intense public scrutiny and the significant pressure surrounding Karen Reed's legal battle. Host Paula Barros introduces Trooper Michael Proctor, a central figure whose credibility is under intense examination.

Notable Quote:

“This is me speaking on June 9, 2022, at 4:56pm I text my wife waiting to lock this whack job up.”
— Trooper Michael Proctor [00:27]

---

Trooper Michael Proctor’s Troubled Testimony

Proctor, once a highly anticipated witness, became the focal point of the defense's strategy to undermine the prosecution's case. Throughout the episode, Proctor's behavior and communications reveal a troubling bias against Karen Reed.

Key Points:

• Early Bias: Proctor's swift conclusion that Reed was guilty, often without thorough investigation, cast doubt on his impartiality.

  Quote:

  “He must have been a puddle to accomplish that.”
  — Text from Proctor’s friend [26:03]

• Unprofessional Conduct: Text messages between Proctor and his friends and family were heavily scrutinized, showcasing derogatory language and dismissive attitudes towards Reed.

  Quote:

  “...she’s a whack job fuck her bitch.”
  — Trooper Michael Proctor [10:05]

• Impact on Credibility: These messages significantly tarnished Proctor’s reputation, leading legal experts to question the integrity of his investigation.

  Legal Analyst Insight:

  “He was biased against the suspect. Those texts definitely bring into the conversation his mental state about what he was thinking about Karen Reid.”
  — Legal Analyst [09:04]

---

The Missing Ring Video Footage

A critical element in the case was the missing Ring video footage that could have provided substantial evidence regarding the events of January 29, 2022. Proctor's handling of this evidence raised further suspicions.

Key Points:

• Possession and Access: Proctor had full access to O’Keefe’s Ring account but failed to produce the video of Reed arriving home, which was essential to the case.

  Quote:

  “I didn't ask for an explanation. I asked, did you in your mind have this case wrapped up? Was it cut and dry in your mind?”
  — Defense Attorney Alan Jackson [25:20]

• Discrepancies: The absence of the video despite Proctor’s access hints at potential mishandling or deliberate suppression of evidence.

---

Cross-Examination and Its Fallout

Attorney Alan Jackson’s aggressive cross-examination of Proctor unearthed a series of damning revelations that severely undermined Proctor’s testimony.

Key Points:

• Contradictory Statements: Proctor initially denied knowing any members of the Albert or McCabe families but was later found to have existing connections, contradicting his sworn testimony.

  Quote:

  “I did not know the McCabes. I don't know most of the Alberts, and I have little to no relationship with Chris and Julie.”
  — Trooper Michael Proctor [37:29]

• Dehumanizing Language: Proctor’s derogatory remarks about Reed were exposed, painting a picture of deep-seated animosity rather than objective investigation.

  Quote:

  “She's fucked.”
  — Trooper Michael Proctor [30:02]

• Public and Legal Reaction: The cross-examination not only damaged Proctor’s credibility but also ignited public outrage and calls for his immediate termination.

  Legal Analyst Commentary:

  “The defense didn’t destroy his reputation. He destroyed his reputation.”
  — Legal Analyst [52:33]

---

Aftermath and Implications

The fallout from Proctor’s testimony reverberated beyond the courtroom, casting a shadow over the Massachusetts State Police and prompting discussions about police integrity and accountability.

Key Points:

• Professional Repercussions: Proctor was administratively moved from the Norfolk County Detectives Unit pending a disciplinary hearing, with the possibility of termination looming due to union agreements.

  Legal Analyst Insight:

  “His statements in this case have the potential to haunt him in any other case that he ever testifies about, especially if there’s a female defendant or a female suspect.”
  — Trooper Michael Proctor [53:31]

• Systemic Issues: Legal experts argued that Proctor’s misconduct highlighted the need for significant internal reforms within the Massachusetts State Police to restore public trust.

  Expert Opinion:

  “If they’d done a proper investigation from the outset, where would we be sitting today?”
  — Ian Runkle [56:17]

---

Conclusion

The episode concludes by emphasizing the profound impact of Trooper Michael Proctor’s actions on Karen Reed’s case and the broader implications for the justice system. As the retrial proceeds, the integrity of the investigation remains under intense scrutiny, raising critical questions about bias, accountability, and the pursuit of truth in high-profile cases.

Final Thoughts:

“Regardless of your views on the guilt or innocence of Karen Reed, you have to at least acknowledge that no matter what the behavior of Trooper Michael Proctor and his handling of evidence compromised this case from the jump.”
— Ian Runkle [56:17]

---

Additional Information: "KAREN: THE RETRIAL" is available exclusively on Wondery+, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts. To stay updated on the latest developments, listeners are encouraged to follow the show’s page on these platforms.

---

Credits:

• Host: Paula Barros
• Executive Producer: Jessica Lowther
• Producer & Writer: Cooper Maul
• Editor: Corey Hiltman
• Researcher: Stephanie Doucet
• Bookers: Alyssa Fisher and Diane Kay
• Legal and Fact-Checking: Elizabeth Vouli
• Special Thanks: Shawn Panzera for key art design

Transcript

[Paula Barros]

Wondery subscribers can binge all episodes of Karen early and ad free right now. Join Wondery in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

[Legal Analyst]

This is a Law and Crime Network presentation.

[Paula Barros]

This podcast explores themes of violence and death and contains harsh language. Courtroom testimony has been edited for clarity and time. Please listen with care.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

This is me speaking on June 9, 2022 at 4:56pm I text my wife waiting to lock this whack job up.

[Legal Analyst]

Quote, she waffled him. I looked at his body at the hospital. You used the phrase waffled about a Boston police officer who had fallen in the snow and died in someone's yard and you decided to use the word waffled in correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

These are your words, Trooper Proctor. Yes, you, Honor. Go ahead and say them. Cunt. Yes, she's a babe. We had Fall river accent though. No ass.

[Legal Analyst]

I think that for all intents and purposes, his credibility is shot.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

These juvenile, unprofessional comments have zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation and Trooper Proctor.

[Legal Analyst]

It would be far easier to pin it on the girl who's just a whack job cunt who you hope just kills herself. Shame on you, sir.

[Paula Barros]

From Law and Crime, I'm Paula Barros and this is Karen. It would be an understatement to say that Michael Proctor's reputation preceded him. He was arguably the most anticipated and buzz worthy witness in the case of the Commonwealth versus Karen Reed.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

Trooper Proctor has definitely been on the spotlight in this case. He knew the Alpert family. There was some testimony. He basically said they were acquaintances, sort of having been in the same law enforcement community that of course they knew each other but they weren't really friendly. But then there was evidence and testimony that came out that Trooper Proctor's sister was actually very close with one of the Alpert wives and that there was more of a personal connection than what Trooper Proctor had originally testified to. The theory from the defense around Trooper Proctor is that because of this personal relationship that he had with the Alpert family and he knew it was their residence, but he was certainly a large part of planting physical evidence to make it seem like this crime occurred or that something happened outside of the home rather than taking the attention of the responding officers into the home.

[Paula Barros]

In the two years leading up to this moment, Proctor had been portrayed by the defense and their supporters as the central figure in the COVID up theory, accused of planting and tampering with evidence, having close ties to the Albert family and and harboring a bias against Karen.

[Legal Analyst]

Reed, he's the lead investigator here.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

He's the one that had his metaphorical fingerprints all over all of it, so to speak.

[Paula Barros]

And after being invoked in multiple reports and testimonies, on June 10, day 22 of the trial, prosecutor Adam Lally called him to the stand in an attempt to clear his name in the witness box. Donning a navy blue suit, you got a sense that Proctor knew all eyes were on him.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

He came across on the witness stand as rather stiff.

[Paula Barros]

In an attempt to loosen him up, Lally began the direct examination with basics from the early days of the investigation. Proctor describes seeing John o' Keefe's body for the first time in the emergency room.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The first thing I notice on Mr. O' Keefe is he had abrasions on his right arm. On the top of his right arm, there's approximately six to eight, ranging from his forearm to his lower bicep. There was no injuries underneath that forearm. Both eyes were swollen in black and blue. He had a cut on, I believe it was his right nostril. Another smaller cut, I believe it was on his left eye. Those are the injuries that kind of jumped out to me.

[Paula Barros]

After observing John at Good Samaritan Hospital, Proctor and Massachusetts State Police Sergeant Yuri Buchenik then made their way to Dighton to interview Karen at her parents home. That's when he first observed the alleged murder weapon, Karen's suv.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

We walked down the driveway and then we observed the Ms. Reed's Alexis parked in the driveway, the front of it facing one of the garage doors. That's where we observed the broken taillight on the right side of the vehicle. We then proceeded to the front door. The snow was about up to our waist and knocked on the door and was greeted by Mr. Reeden.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Can you describe to the jury what it was specifically that you observed as far as damage to that area of the vehicle?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Yeah, the right rear tail light had large pieces missing from it.

[Paula Barros]

Karen's car was put on a tow truck for transfer to the Sally Port garage where the defense had previously alleged Proctor and Buchanan tampered with the taillight. With that allegation in mind, Lally got right in front of it.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Now, as far as the vehicle was concerned, either in Dighton or at the Sally Port garage or at any point in time that you were in the presence of that vehicle, what, if any contact did you have, what if anything you or observed Sergeant Mechanic to do with regard to that damaged area you described on the right rear passenger side?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Sergeant Mechanic and I never touched any part of that vehicle.

[Paula Barros]

While Proctor claimed to have never come into physical contact with the suv, another piece of evidence was seized that day. He wouldn't be able to deny having his hands all over.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Now, in addition to the defendant's vehicle, what, if anything, else was taken and seized as evidence from the defendant on that morning?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

After confirming the phone Ms. Reed was holding was in fact hers. We told her we were seizing the phone and we'd be writing a search warrant for that.

[Paula Barros]

Suddenly, Proctor's direct examination took a hard pivot. His opportunity to settle the score on the allegedly botched investigation would soon be fully eclipsed by a nearly two day deep dive into what came after getting that warrant signed off. In an ironic turn of events, Karen's phone wasn't the one on trial. And Lally made both a bold and curious choice to dive headfirst into the suggestion made in the defense's opening remarks.

[Legal Analyst]

Michael Proctor was texting with his high.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

School buddies about this supposedly secret investigation using his personal cell phone.

[Paula Barros]

Presented with a thick stack of papers, records of nearly two years worth of his personal text messages, verbatim, Proctor looked like a deer in headlights.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

It's revealed through a series of text messages sent by Trooper Michael Proctor that he's clearly biased against Karen Reid, willing to cover for fellow law enforcement officers.

[Paula Barros]

External investigations, both internally at the Massachusetts State Police and by the federal government are what brought said text messages to light. And they would completely change the course of Proctor's long awaited time on the.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

Stand on his direct examination. They make him read his awful text messages that don't make him look good, that don't make the investigation look good, that doesn't make the state look good. He has to read these text messages from his personal phone because clearly they're trying to get ahead of it.

[Paula Barros]

At the request of Adam Lally, Michael Proctor began by reading texts exchanged with childhood pals the night of January 29, 2022, the night John O' Keefe died.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

There's a message there sent at 10:56pm Is that correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Who's that from?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The friend who lives in Tennessee.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what does he say in that text?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I'm sure the owner of the house will receive some shit.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And you respond at 1056 as well as 1057, is that correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what is it that you respond?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

My first response was, nope, homeowner is a Boston cop too.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what, if anything, were you saying or what was the purpose of that text in regard to the homeowner?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I was just letting him know that essentially Mr. O' Keefe is a Boston cop, and the homeowner was a Boston cop as well.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Sir, if you could read through that page, as far as who's texting and what are they saying?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Again, for my friends from Tennessee and myself, I hope not, but I can't see it. I responded with she waffled him. I looked at his body at the hospital. He was banged up.

[Paula Barros]

From this exchange, one could discern that Proctor was not only asserting that because the homeowners were law enforcement that they would be impervious to further investigation, but that he had also already made up his mind mere hours into the developing case that Karen was the culprit.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Have you seen response toward the bottom of the page from yourself, January 29, 2022 at 1104pm?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And can you read that response from the jury?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Yeah, but there'll be some serious charges brought on the girl.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what did you mean by that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That throughout the course of the day, we had compelling evidence that Ms. Reed struck Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle.

[Paula Barros]

Legal analyst Rich Showenstein says these texts made one thing crystal clear.

[Legal Analyst]

He was biased against the suspect.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

And also it demonstrates he didn't do a great job.

[Paula Barros]

Investigating attorney Ian Runkle had similar observations.

[Legal Analyst Ian Runkle]

Basically, he seems really early on to have decided that it's definitely Karen Reed. And depending on who you're talking to, it may be that it's for very good reason or it may be for very bad reasons because he made comments about like, nope, these people are not going to have a problem because they're Boston cops. This is a big problem. It creates all of these issues.

[Paula Barros]

And the more he read from his own text exchanges, the deeper the hole that Proctor was digging for himself became.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I can only imagine what internal affairs of the BPD are trying to get out there. Second response, same number. She hud, at least. So these came from me. From all accounts, he didn't do anything wrong. She's a whack job. Cunt.

[Legal Analyst]

Objection.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

So don't spell it.

[Legal Analyst]

So these are your words, Trooper Proctor?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Yes, your honor.

[Legal Analyst]

Go ahead and say them.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Cunt. Yes, she's a babe. We had Fall river accent, though. No ass.

[Paula Barros]

The text had gone from bad to worse. In what world could this ever be perceived as appropriate behavior by a law enforcement officer? Lally wanted to know, and sir, what.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Is it that you were referring to there? Why would you text him?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

These were, from all accounts, he didn't do anything wrong. Is talking about the homeowner. Mr. Albert, I had mentioned the compelling evidence against Ms. Reed. At this point indicated that Mr. Albert had nothing to do with Mr. O' Keefe's death. The rest of the unprofessional and regrettable comments are something I'm not proud of and I shouldn't have wrote in a private or any type of setting.

[Paula Barros]

Lally also got clarity on just how long it took Proctor to arrive at his decision that Karen Reid was undeniably John's killer.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Sixteen, 18 hours later. And we conducted multiple interviews. We knew Mr. O' Keefe never went into Fairview Road. We knew there was one shoe at the scene, one shoe at the hospital. Mr. O', Keefe's. Based off Mr. O' Keefe's injuries, Ms. Reed's statements when Sergeant Buchanak and I interviewed her, her broken taillight, the missing taillight, some taillight pieces found at the scene, compelling evidence pointing directly at Ms. Reed that she struck Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle, led me to make those comments. Whether, like I said, it was not. They weren't professional comments. But based on the day's investigation, it was clear that Ms. Reed had struck Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle.

[Legal Analyst]

Those text messages definitely bring into the.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

Conversation his mental state about what he was thinking about Karen Reid.

[Legal Analyst]

Sixteen hours into that investigation.

[Paula Barros]

On the stand, Proctor may have displayed regret for his disparaging and inexcusable remarks, but one could argue that was merely hindsight. Because days following the death of John o', Keefe, he continued to text with his buddies, this time with pictures.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

There's a photograph that's shared within this text communication, is that correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Yes, sir.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And who is depicted in that photograph that was shared within the group text?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It's Ms. Reed being escorted out of the State Police Milton Barracks.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And these are all from February 1st of 2022, around that time frame, is that correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And, sir, if I could direct you to the top of the page and ask you to read through that page, indicating who's speaking and what the content of those communications.

[Legal Analyst]

Go.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Okay. Number ending in 4146. Question is that chick or smoke? Again, 4146, question mark. I respond, eh. I respond again, nut bag, as Chief would say. I also respond with, she's got a leaky balloon knot. Leaks poo.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what, if anything, is that in reference to?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

To Ms. Reed's some medical conditions there.

[Paula Barros]

Karen Reid suffers from both multiple sclerosis and Crohn's disease, two chronic and debilitating illnesses. How would Proctor even begin to explain himself for mocking something so private and sensitive?

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

As far as attitudes expressed within these text messages and other text messages, what, if any, impact did that have as far as your investigation was concerned regarding this?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

These juvenile, unprofessional comments have zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation. They said these are unprofessional comments, but they absolutely do not detract from the integrity of the investigation or the facts and evidence of it.

[Paula Barros]

Proctor's communication about Karen and the investigation wasn't limited to his old friends. He discussed it with family too.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

These are text messages from January 29, 2022. Between yourself and your sister.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct. So I texted my sister at work, what's up? She responds, what? Why? I respond, I just found a frozen to death on a front lawn in Canton this morning. Morning, actually. Just interviewed Jen McCabe. Said she knows you and they knows you.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Who are you referring to?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

My sister.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And how did your sister respond to that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Cut the shit. Yeah, she knows Jack very well. She's really good friends with Julie. My sister continues on. Her sister is married to Brian Albert. My sister asks, you still working question mark?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yeah.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Gonna be out for a while. Homicide.

[Paula Barros]

Tipping culture is out of control.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

Yesterday I tipped someone just for handing me a napkin.

[Paula Barros]

So when hotels.com gives me up to 20% off for being a member, I finally get tipped. And you know what?

[Legal Analyst]

It feels good.

[Paula Barros]

Hotels.com, members save up to 20% off at hundreds of thousands of hotels. So as it turns out, Trooper Proctor's sister Courtney has connections to the Alberts. Remember, it was how he began the conversation. The ethics of sharing information about the case with her in particular are certainly questionable. Proctor felt otherwise.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

As far as your answers to those questions or as far as your communications that you had with your sister at this time on the afternoon of January 29, what were those in regard to? Or why were you communicating that kind.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Of sister at that time? It was just in the news. I was just kind of letting her know I was out working. She didn't share anything specific. I wouldn't share anything specific specific on cases with my family or anyone. It was just kind of an overall innocent conversation.

[Paula Barros]

Innocent, you say? Lally continues.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Now turning your attention to the next page, 2669. You could read from that page as far as who was talking and what the content is.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

My sister starts off, the can thing is a homicide. I respond, this is at 3 in the afternoon on the 29th. Don't say a word to anyone. She said, of course not. I respond, in the very least, it's Suspicious, she responds, this is your livelihood. And then I would Never miss with that 307. I respond, Julie and Chris were at the bar with the victim and girlfriend. Gotta interview them.

[Paula Barros]

Sharing private case details with a family member, requesting that Courtney keep her mouth shut. The conversation certainly strayed from innocent to concerning fast. And just when you think it can't possibly get any worse.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

These are messages from February 1, 2022, is that correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct. I texted my sister, what's up? She responded, nothing, I just saw Julie and she said, when this is all over, she wants to get you a thank you gift. And I respond, get Elizabeth one. Elizabeth's my wife. And my sister responds, because I guess her and Chris were friends with John and she's so proud of you for leading this. And then she writes, elizabeth. I respond with, she's been stuck with the kids for the last 10 nights. My sister responded, yeah, but she knew what life is like married to a cop.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And, sir, as far as the gift that's mentioned, as far as Julie Albert, is that anything that you have received at any point in time?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I never received a gift. I never asked for a gift. My wife never received a gift. She never asked for a gift.

[Paula Barros]

Speaking of Proctor's wife, Elizabeth, there were texts between the two of them, too.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

This is me speaking on June 9, 2022 at 4:56pm I text my wife, waiting to lock this whack job up.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

What are you referring to in that text, sir?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I'm referring to the arrest after Ms. Reed was indicted by the grand jury.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And again, as far as the terminology you use in that text message to.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Your wife, why is that, again, unprofessional messages I should not have sent. I don't have an explanation other than they're regrettable and something I'm not proud of. The language I used to believe it.

[Paula Barros]

Or not, there was even more for which Proctor would have to explain. Perhaps the most damning exchanges were with his own colleagues. In this series of texts, Proctor was messaging a fellow trooper named Da Chico about a conference call with the medical examiner.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

So I start out, of course it's undetermined. She was a whack job. Tripod. Da Chico responds, dear God, wtf? What the hell is inconclusive about the whole thing?

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And as far as your indication there, as far as she was a whack.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Job, who are you referring to there, Ms. Reed?

[Paula Barros]

In another string of texts with fellow troopers, Proctor makes light of Karen's illnesses.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Again, if you could read what you wrote on June 9, if you like.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Women who shit themselves again, sir, what.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Is it that you're referring to?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

There again, a regrettable comment I made about Ms. Reed's medical condition.

[Paula Barros]

The text continued into the summer of 2022 where in a group text with Trooper Dechico and another trooper named Kakowski, the three remark on the statement Karen gave while being processed at the police barracks after being charged with murder in the second degree.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I'm speaking right now. The statement she made tonight at age 7 was mental. Thank Christ it was on BWC which is body worn camera Drew Pkowski responds. That's her smoke troupa Kakowski again. What'd she say? I respond said the Alberts beat the shit out of o', Keefe, left him for dead. That's why her taillight was cracked. She's gross Troopa to Chico. Oh fuck her bitch.

[Paula Barros]

Then things take an even more abhorrent turn in August 2022 when Proctor finally gets the green light to go through Karen's phone himself.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Another text thread with members from my office. Troopers.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And who are the troopers that are listed within that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Trooper Chris Moore, Trooper Jeff Kokowski, Lieutenant John Fanning, Trooper Dave Dico, and Sergeant Yuri Buchanak.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Now sir, if I could direct your attention to a message Sent from Trooper DeCicco Aug 17, 2022 at 9:42pm yes. And is that an image contained on the next page, which is 2683?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes, it is.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

And what is the image of?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That is A picture of Mr. Yannetti. Appears to be from quite some time ago.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Now turning your attention to the next page, there's a response from you. August 17, 2022 at 9:44pm Is that correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

If you could just read the three responses from yourself, sir.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

These came from me. Funny, I'm going through his retarded client's phone. No nude so far. I hate that man. I truly hate him.

[Paula Barros]

Proctor attempted to walk back the comment about not finding nudes on Karen's phone by explaining the intended purpose of going through her phone in the first place.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

So after obtaining a search warrant from Ms. Reed's phone, we weren't able to extract any data from it until August of 2023. Troopers in my office knew I was going through the phone that evening. I was most interested in location data, text messages, Google searches. That was the update I gave the troopers in the office. It was a distasteful joke. I should have gave a proper update instead of that.

[Paula Barros]

But Proctor's possession of Karen's phone didn't last long.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I wasn't Able to go through the phone as thoroughly as possible because I came across some texts between an attorney and Ms. Reed. So I had to stop going through her phone. And it made my supervisor aware of those communications.

[Paula Barros]

One might say this was a rare instance of Proctor doing anything by the book. The direct examination of the commonwealth's own witness had stained this already splashy trial, so what damage could the defense do? The following morning, Cooper Proctor returned with his tail between his legs for a fiery cross examination with Alan Jackson. Reporter Christina Rex, who was in the courtroom that day, remembers it as humiliating.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

Alan Jackson made him reread all those texts all over again multiple times. That was so uncomfortable.

[Paula Barros]

And Rich Showenstein says, for the legal community, this cross was the dream scenario.

[Legal Analyst]

Those text messages that Michael Proctor wrote were defense gold because they showed that he reached a conclusion immediately as to who was guilty. Every defense attorney in America was salivating at the prospect of cross examining him.

[Paula Barros]

Alan Jackson dove in head first by bringing up the text exchanged between Proctor and his longtime friends.

[Legal Analyst]

So this is a group text or a group chat with you and eight of your high school friends about this investigation, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Triple. Proctor, you never thought when you were engaged with these other eight individuals that this particular set of chats would ever become public, did you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, I did not.

[Legal Analyst]

You recognize that this chat, this group chat, was taking place on January 29th at about 10:52pm, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And the person that I'll identify as 5051 indicates chip, name of that BPD cop, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

First of all, you indicated on Monday that you're Chip, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

You responded at 10:53pm John O', Keefe, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

So you were willing to tell just a few hours into an investigation of the death of a Boston police officer, you were willing to tell a bunch of high school buddies details about the investigation, including the name of the victim, Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

At this point, it's 16 hours later, sir. Not a few.

[Legal Analyst]

16 is a few hours. Correct. Not talking about days later.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It was about 16 hours later, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

Correct. You also inform these same folks, these same high school buddies that quote, all the powers that be want answers asap, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

You knew, Trooper Proctor, that there was brass that wanted this case wrapped up quickly and efficient, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, the people wanted answers, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

They didn't just want answers. They wanted answers asap. What does ASAP mean?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's as soon as possible, Right.

[Legal Analyst]

You are texting this to your high school friends again, 16 hours into this investigation, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You knew at that time, Trooper Proctor, that this was not going to implicate in any way, shape, form or fashion another cop, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

In this text exchange at 10:56pm your buddy Byrd writes, I'm sure the owners of the house will receive some shit. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

How did you take that to me? Did you take that to mean that he could get in trouble?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yeah.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I'm not sure exactly what my friend was getting at.

[Legal Analyst]

Well, you had some idea.

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yeah.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Maybe.

[Legal Analyst]

The owners of the house isn't going to get any shit for this, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's how I interpreted it, yeah.

[Legal Analyst]

You interpreted it like, he's not going to get in any trouble, he's not going to be a suspect. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And he's not going to be implicated in any way, is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And your answer was one word, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

What was that word?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Nope.

[Legal Analyst]

And then you followed that up with an explanation as to why you said no, didn't you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That wasn't the explanation why I said nope. I simply said, homeowner's a Boston cop, too. Meaning? Mr. O' Keefe was a Boston cop. The homeowner was a Boston cop as well.

[Legal Analyst]

The question that preceded your answer of nope, the homeowner's a Boston cop, too, was the homeowner's gonna get some for this. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's not what I meant with that text. That's what you wrote, not what I meant, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

All right, let's take it in order. The homeowner's gonna get some shit for this answer. Nope. Next text. He's a Boston cop, too. That doesn't sound like an explanation for your note.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, that's just saying he's a Boston cop as well. Mr. O' Keefe is a cop and.

[Legal Analyst]

That'S why he's not going to get any shit. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Trooper Proctor? Well, he's not gonna receive any shit, sir, because Mr. Albert, the homeowner had nothing to do with Mr. O' Keefe's death.

[Legal Analyst]

And you knew this 16 hours into your investigation?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Than a day?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

To your satisfaction?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

To my satisfaction. To all the members of my unit who investigated that day.

[Paula Barros]

Jackson then revealed that Proctor had arrived at the conclusion that the Alberts couldn't have been involved without taking one seemingly crucial step to determine that as a fact.

[Legal Analyst]

The fact of the matter is you hadn't been to the crime scene by the time you wrote this text, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You hadn't been inside the home. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No.

[Legal Analyst]

You had questioned a grand total of three percipient witnesses at this point? Correct.

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And two of the three were named McCabe, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And one of the three was named Albert, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And it's against that backdrop that you wrote, nope. The homeowner's not going to get any shit because he's a cop. Right.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's not what I meant by that.

[Legal Analyst]

At 10:57, Byrd goes on to write, he, the homeowner must have been a puddle to accomplish that. And then he writes, who's the homeowner? Then he writes, I hope not, but I can see it. Correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

A puddle means drunk. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's a term for a. Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

In other words, Bird wrote that the homeowner must have been so drunk, so wasted to have killed him. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Just the puddle part, the term, that.

[Legal Analyst]

Term and the puddle part means drunk or wasted, right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And what Byrd actually wrote was, he must have been a puddle to accomplish that. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's what he wrote.

[Legal Analyst]

And then you write back, quote, she waffled him. I looked at his body at the hospital. Right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You used the phrase waffled about a Boston police officer who had fallen in the snow and died in someone's yard, and you decided to use the word waffled him. Correct. And then Berg questioned, she waffled him. Correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And then you responded, he was banged up, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Then a person with the phone number 0095 wrote, I thought he was drunk. Did he get beat up? You see that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I do.

[Legal Analyst]

And you wrote, nope. Is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Yet again, this is before 11 o' clock at night on January 29, 2022, some 16 hours into your investigation, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

So before you ever went to the crime scene, before you ever went into the house, only having interviewed three folks, you had this case nice and wrapped up, didn't you?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Based on the evidence my office uncovered that day, the one shoot discovered at the scene, the one shoot at the hospital, Mr. O' Keefe's injuries, the broken tail, eye pieces underneath the snow, Super Proctor.

[Legal Analyst]

I didn't ask for an explanation. I asked, did you in your mind have this case wrapped up? Was it cut and dry in your mind?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Byrd then writes, so the owner of the house was a woman cop that beat him, question mark, right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And then you wrote, that's what I initially thought after talking to Canton paramedics, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And then you said, then I saw the guy. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

So what you meant by that, Trooper Proctor, was, according to you, based on your initial conversations with the paramedics, the first responders, you were under the impression that this was a beating death. He'd been beaten to death, Correct.

[Paula Barros]

As it turns out, there was, in fact, a time where Proctor had yet to rule out the prospect that a fight could have led to John's untimely death. But on top of that, despite receiving information from medical personnel that a fight wasn't out of the question, Proctor continued to double down on his theory that Karen deliberately hit John with her car. Jackson was curious how Proctor arrived at such a rash conclusion.

[Legal Analyst]

Byrd writes, something stinks, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And then Trooper Proctor, you responded, yeah, but there will be some serious charges brought on the girl, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's right.

[Legal Analyst]

So in that text exchange, you were saying, yeah, we're out to make it cut and dry, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No.

[Legal Analyst]

You didn't write, yeah, we're gonna follow the evidence wherever it takes us. You didn't, did you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did not write that.

[Legal Analyst]

You didn't write, yeah, we're gonna make sure that we investigate this thing fully and thoroughly before making any decisions. You didn't say that, did you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did not.

[Legal Analyst]

You wrote, yeah, but there will be some serious charges brought on the girl, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And the reason you wrote that is because you knew, as the text above, it says, this has to be cut and dry because it involves cops, Right. What did you mean by the girl, by the way?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The defendant, Karen Reed.

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

So the way that you were going to make it cut and dry, pretty simple. Just pin it on the girl, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not. Follow the facts and the evidence from that day on the 29th and everything led to Ms. Reed hitting Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle.

[Legal Analyst]

But that wasn't the question that you were answering, was it? We're gonna follow the evidence and make sure we do this thoroughly. The question you were answering was, I assume you guys, you, Trooper Proctor, and your team are gonna, quote, make it cut and dry since it involves cops, meaning Brian Albert, Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Incorrect. Doesn't matter to me if the homeowner's a cop, if the victim's a police officer. Myself and everyone in my office investigated this case that Saturday. Had an overwhelming amount of evidence that misread struck Mr. O'. Keefe. So it didn't matter to us what their occupation was.

[Legal Analyst]

We'll see. Let's keep reading, shall we? A little further down says, gotta be. I could only imagine what Internal affairs at BPD are trying to get out there. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Meaning this person 5051, was opining. @ least in your mind, you interpreted that as being, Boston Police are gonna Have a lot to answer for given the fact that another Boston police officer was found dead on that officer's lawn. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I can't speak to the mindset to that comment. I'm not. I wasn't sure how to interpret that one.

[Legal Analyst]

Then 5051 changes gears and he writes, she hot at least? Correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And what was your response to that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

From all accounts, he didn't do a thing wrong. She's a whack job cunt.

[Legal Analyst]

From all accounts, he didn't do a thing wrong. She's a whack job cunt. That's what you wrote, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

16 hours into this investigation.

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Into your objective and unbiased, thorough investigation. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Did you or did you not have all accounts in your investigation?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The account we had was Ms. Reed struck Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle, discovered taillight pieces at the scene. Those are the accounts we had.

[Legal Analyst]

The accounts you had, Trooper proctor, were from two people named McCabe and one named Albert, who happened to be the homeowner, and a Boston cop. Those are the accounts from percipient witnesses that you had, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It was another additional witness that we had. Investigators had interviewed Mr. Roberts as well.

[Legal Analyst]

And from all accounts, he didn't do a thing wrong. That was your decision 16 hours into the investigation, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Paula Barros]

Jackson proceeded to pull at some of the pettier comments exchanged between Proctor and his colleagues.

[Legal Analyst]

What else did you say in response to? She hot at least question mark?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

So following that text, I responded, yet she's a babe. Weird Fall river accent though. No ass.

[Legal Analyst]

Yeah, she's a babe. Who's the she?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Ms. Reed.

[Legal Analyst]

Weird fall river accent though. You talking about her? The way she talks, the accent and no ass. Now you're talking about her body, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Think that's appropriate?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

Then bird chimes in with a little comedy. Ah, not newsworthy then? Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

In other words. Well, she doesn't have an ass. Nothing to see here. Correct. And then 50, 51 says, oh, she's skating, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And what did you write after that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

My response was zero chance she skated.

[Legal Analyst]

And then what did you write?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

She's fucked.

[Legal Analyst]

Zero chance she skates. She's fucked, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You decided on the 29th of January, 17 hours into this investigation, you decided individually. Trooper Proctor, you're not only going to put it on the girl, you decided you're going to make sure this is cut and dried. And the way you're going to do it is to make sure that she's fucked.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That's what you were Saying, no, absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

What did you mean then when you said, she's fucked?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

After the day's investigation, with multiple troopers conducting multiple tasks, debriefing, I can't PD amongst detectives in my office who went through the overwhelming amount of evidence against Ms. Reed that she struck Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle. That's what I meant by that comment.

[Legal Analyst]

What you meant by that comment, Trooper Proctor, was you were going to make sure because 5051 had said, she's going to skate, she's skating. When you said, zero chance she skates, she's fucked, what you meant was, I am going to make sure Ms. Reed doesn't skate. She's fucked. That's what she meant. And then Bird decides to chime in. Good no ass bitch, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Yes, that's what he wrote.

[Paula Barros]

Then Jackson really began to rub Proctor's nose in it.

[Legal Analyst]

How did you respond to Bird saying, good no ass bitch?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I laughed.

[Legal Analyst]

Thought that was funny. Did you? Trooper Proctor thought that was funny.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It was unprofessional of me that. Something I shouldn't have done.

[Legal Analyst]

Well, I think we all know it was unprofessional. It was a lot of things I'm asking you, did you think it was funny?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

A quarter of my response at the time, apparently.

[Paula Barros]

For hours, they painstakingly revisited every text brought forward the day before, illuminating every inappropriate remark, from commenting on Karen's medical condition to her appearance. And though Proctor previously stated his regret, Jackson wasn't buying any of it.

[Legal Analyst]

On Monday, you indicated that your conduct in this case, and specifically your conduct, is reflected in these messages. How did you put it? It did not affect the integrity of the investigation. Of your investigation. Correct. That's what you said to the jurors.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Do you know what the definition of integrity is?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Doing the right thing when no one's looking to quality.

[Legal Analyst]

Being honest and having strong moral principles. Correct. Do you believe that integrity means being honest and having strong moral principles?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I believe that's part of it as well.

[Legal Analyst]

Do you stand by that testimony that you were showing strong moral principles in this investigation, sir?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

In the investigation part? Absolutely. Through these text messages? Absolutely not. They were juvenile and regrettable.

[Legal Analyst]

When you say they're juvenile and regrettable, sounds like you're almost apologizing to the jury for your conduct. Is that what you're doing? Trooper Proctor, have you ever apologized to Ms. Reed?

[Paula Barros]

He never did. After much ado about the texts, Jackson called Proctor's relationships with the witnesses into question. In pre trial testimony, Proctor had stated to the Norfolk County District Attorney's office that he did not know any members of the Albert or McCabe families.

[Legal Analyst]

As a lead investigator in this case, you were tasked with the responsibility of making sure that the investigation remained free of any conflicts of interest. It's part of your job, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Throughout the pendency of this investigation in this case, you've denied having any conflict of interest in this case, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

In fact, a couple of months ago, In February of 2024, you testified in a different proceeding, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And you testified under oath in that proceeding on February 1st that you did not know any members of the Albert family or McCabe family. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Certain members of the Albert family, I did not know. I know Chris and Julie and Colin. I don't know the McCabes.

[Legal Analyst]

That wasn't my question. Let's take them one at a time. Did you testify under oath, same oath you took here today in a former proceeding in February of 2024, that you did not know and did not have any relationship with members of the Albert and McCabe families. Did you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I haven't had a chance to review those minutes. I've only had one opportunity to. That was a couple months ago. So I would want to review those minutes in order to answer that accurately.

[Legal Analyst]

You can't remember how you testified whether or not you knew or had relationships with the Alberts and the case. As you sit here right now, you need to refresh your recollection.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

You can't remember what you said during that proceeding? No.

[Legal Analyst]

Would it refresh your recollection if you took a look at those grand jury minutes?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Paula Barros]

Proctor and Jackson take a few minutes to get on the same page.

[Legal Analyst]

You were asked the question, quote, did you communicate with First Assistant DA Bielen that you did not know and had no relationship with the Albert and McCabe families? And you answered, quote, I. To the best of my recollection, the same conversation took place with everyone I talked to about this. Because it's the same answer. It's the facts that I shared with everyone. Question. Meaning you told First Assistant Eland that you didn't know, didn't have a relationship with members of the Albert and McCabe family's answer, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Do you recall that?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And that's your testimony that you in fact told members of the DA's office that you did not know and did not have a relationship with The Alberts or McCabes, is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did not know the McCabes. I don't know most of the Alberts, and I have Little to no relationship with Chris and Julie. So that's what I meant by that answer.

[Legal Analyst]

Well, the question wasn't, did you know most of the Alberts? Question was, did you have a relationship with or did you know the Alberts? And your answer was no.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, I don't have a relationship with.

[Legal Analyst]

The Alberts or know them.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I don't know the McCabe's. I don't have a relationship with the Alberts.

[Legal Analyst]

So you do know the Alberts, Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I know some of them.

[Legal Analyst]

Julie and Chris and you and Colin. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And Colin, meaning you told first assistant Beeland that you didn't know, didn't have relationships with members of The Albert and McCabe families. Answer correct. Was that ambiguous in your mind?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The way I interpreted relationships was basically being like friends or communications, Frequent communications. That's how I interpret it.

[Legal Analyst]

That might have been a good time to pipe up and say, well, I know Chris and I know Julie and I know Colin. Correct. That might have been a good time to answer the question. I know these three individuals from the Albert family. Right. But your answer was one word, correct? Right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

You further testify that you never have gone to any supervisor at Massachusetts State Police to disclose even a potential conflict of interest in this case that you might have. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You indicated the needs never come up, is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You also told Ada Lally that you, quote, did not have relationships or know members of the Albert or McCabe families. Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And that's just not true, is it? You did know you do know members of the Albert family, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It's different from having a relationship with people.

[Legal Analyst]

But what about part of the question, did not have relationships or no members of the Albert or McCabe families? How about that part of the question?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Well, that's lumped in with the McCabes. I don't know the McCabe family, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

I see. So what you did, Trooper Proctor, is you dissected the sentence, and where relationships are concerned, you ignore that in terms of the Alberts because you don't have relationships. Where no is concerned, you link that to the McCabes because you don't know the McCabes. That's what you did.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No.

[Legal Analyst]

How about if I just ask it this way? That was a lie.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

You stand by that testimony?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

That you, at the time that you testified that you didn't know the Alberts or any members of the Albert family.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

They don't have relationships with them.

[Legal Analyst]

My question is, you keep going back to relationships. I'm asking you, did you testify that you didn't know them.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I knew Chris, Julie and Colin.

[Legal Analyst]

So if you were to say, I don't know any members of the Albert family, that would have been a lie? Correct.

[Paula Barros]

This damning testimony from the lead investigator in the case against Karen Reed ended in another sustained objection. When the court returned from a midday break, Jackson called attention to Ring video footage from John o' Keefe's home that Proctor was entrusted with investigating.

[Legal Analyst]

You've already testified that there were several hundred Ring videos from One Meadows facing the driveway and the front door camera, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

As the case officer, you obtained and controlled those Ring videos from One Meadows from the moment that they came into Massachusetts State Police custody until they were handed over to Kombalov, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

They were archived.

[Legal Analyst]

You drafted the search warrant for the Ring video access records, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did.

[Legal Analyst]

You obtained the warrant returns once those search warrants were executed, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did.

[Legal Analyst]

You took possession of Mr. O' Keefe's cell phone physically, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And you had access to Mr. O' Keefe's Ring account in that cell phone, is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You indicated that you reviewed several of the videos on his Ring app on his cell phone, is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

So you obviously had not only possession of his cell phone, you had possession of his login account information to get into the app on his cell phone, is that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I don't think we had the password. We had his email account associated with the Ring.

[Legal Analyst]

Which means some way or another, you could get access to the Ring videos.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And watch those Ring videos on his app on the phone?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Which means you had full access to the app, keep videos you could save for later. You could delete videos you could do anything you wanted to within that app, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Those are the capabilities within that app.

[Legal Analyst]

Trooper Proctor, did you delete any of the Ring videos ever from John o' Keeffe's phone?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

Did you delete a video of Ms. Reed arriving to One Meadows at approximately 12:41am on January 29, 2022?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not.

[Paula Barros]

Yet the video was nowhere to be found. Jackson played the surveillance footage for the court.

[Legal Analyst]

You will agree, Trooper Proctor, that The video of Ms. Reed returning home from 34 Fairview at approximately 12:41am is not there.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct?

[Paula Barros]

No argument there. But it still doesn't account for what happened to it. Jackson dug deeper in hopes of getting to the bottom of the fate of the Ring footage. And as it turns out, Proctor wasn't the only trooper tasked with reviewing the tape.

[Legal Analyst]

As the case officer, you're aware that Trooper De Chico also reviewed some or all of those videos, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And he did that at your request, Correct. He took notes of his review of those videos, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And then he provided those notes to you so that you could then memorialize those notes and your notes in a broader report that you then drafted in November of 2022, correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Memory serves me the report I wrote regarding the Ring camera was based off my observations of the videos that I had watched.

[Legal Analyst]

But you certainly did have, as you just indicated, you did accumulate his notes and review his notes as well as your notes, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

My recollection, I wrote that report off of my notes.

[Legal Analyst]

Did you actually, at any point before writing your report, did you review his notes?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I can't recall.

[Legal Analyst]

Your report is dated June 1, 2022, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And reflected in this report are the bullet points of the times that you found of some note in your review of all of the Ring footage from one Meadows, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

In your report, there is no mention of the footage showing Karen Reeve arriving home at 12:41am Correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And that's notwithstanding the fact that in Trooper Chico's handwritten notes, he makes note of an event at 12:41am indicating, I think she arrived home, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

So sometime between when Trooper DeCicco wrote his notes and when you wrote your report, that video footage vanished.

[Paula Barros]

Two reports in DeCicco's, the 12:41am footage of Karen arriving home was seen and in Proctor's, it's nowhere to be found. What could explain this?

[Legal Analyst]

Well, you're aware that video footage from 12:41am Gone, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

It's something I've tried to find through Ring for months, as well as the video. When Ms. Roberts, Ms. McCabe, Ms. Reed arrived back at John's and they're looking at the broken taillight, that video is gone as well.

[Legal Analyst]

So at some point, while this footage was in Massachusetts State Police custody and being reviewed by Trooper dechico, that video.

[Paula Barros]

Existed before Jackson could get closer to a solid answer for the missing video. Lally objected.

[Legal Analyst]

Sustain. The fact is, notwithstanding Trooper Dico's handwritten notes, there's no video of 1241 on January 29, is there?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, there isn't.

[Paula Barros]

It appeared the court couldn't expect this piece of the puzzle to be wrapped up in any sensical way. And with the day already running long, Jackson had to make the most of the rest of his time with one of the case's star witnesses. He used this as an opportunity to sum up every instance of unethical conduct and Also present a particularly alarming text that had yet to come to light.

[Legal Analyst]

Trooper Proctor, would you agree that from the very beginning of your investigation, you treated Karen Reed very differently than you treated the alberts and the McCabes in this case?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not. We've. Like I said before, we follow the facts and the evidence. An open mind.

[Legal Analyst]

Did you consider her to be, want of a better phrase, an outsider?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, not at all.

[Legal Analyst]

Not somebody from Canton?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, not at all.

[Legal Analyst]

Not family? Not friends with the Alberts?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

At some point, your view of this case caused you to turn what could be described as a bias into an out and out hatred. Would you agree with that? Did you develop some sort of hatred for Ms. Reed?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

We follow the facts and evidence which showed Ms. Reed hit Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle. And yes, at times I got emotional because of that and I said some stuff, texted some things I shouldn't have, but it was based off the evidence.

[Legal Analyst]

As a matter of fact, you did express your feelings about Ms. Reed and yet another text message that we haven't gone over here today. Is that right? On February 4, 2022, you responded to a text message from your sister, correct? And your response was, hopefully she kills herself, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Who's she?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The defendant, Ms. Reed. Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

You literally said that you hope that Karen Reed, the subject of your investigation, the woman sitting to my left about seven feet from me, that she would just die, Correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The figure of speech.

[Legal Analyst]

The figure of speech is you wanted her to kill herself.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No.

[Legal Analyst]

Right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No, it's not.

[Legal Analyst]

Trooper Proctor, Karen Reid, in your investigation, had quickly become a very serious problem for you, hadn't she? Did you believe that Karen Reed was a problem or an issue for your investigation?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No. Absolutely not.

[Legal Analyst]

In your words, quote all the powers that be, one answers ASAP. That's what you texted on January 29, right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

That put a lot of pressure on you, didn't it, Trooper Proctor?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

There's a lot of pressure in every case, sir.

[Legal Analyst]

This case involves a Boston cop whose family you were actually connected to, correct?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Loosely.

[Legal Analyst]

Chris Albert. Loosely, yes. Julie Albert Loosely?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Colin Albert Loosely?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Kevin Albert Loosely?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Loose enough to leave his badge and his gun in your cruiser after a night of drinking?

[Paula Barros]

Right after Alan Jackson brings up this juicy and alarming detail that Canton police officer Kevin Albert allegedly left his gun and bag badge in Trooper Proctor's cruiser. Prosecutor Lally objected. It was sustained by Judge Kanoni, never to be elaborated on.

[Legal Analyst]

You agreed in your group chat you needed to, quote, make this cut and dry because another cop was Involved. Those are your words, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I did text that. I don't know if it's in the exact context, but, yes, those were my words.

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

That was in the group chat.

[Legal Analyst]

Your friends wrote this whole thing in their words, stinks, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I interpreted it as a joke.

[Legal Analyst]

You believed, Trooper Proctor, that your life would be much easier if Karen Reid was just dead, didn't you?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

No. No, I had said it was a figure of speech. My emotions got the best of me, based on, you know, the fact that Ms. Reed hit Mr. O' Keefe with her vehicle and left him to die on the side of the road. So my emotions got the best of me with that figure of speech.

[Legal Analyst]

Let's talk about your figures of speech during the course of your investigation. Your figures of speech include the following. She's a. Is that right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

A whack job, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

A right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Her balloon knot leaks, right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

No. Ass, correct?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

She's, according to you, right?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Legal Analyst]

Ass leaker. That was the word you used, a figure of speech, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

A girl who shits herself, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

And then her. Correct.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Would you agree, Trooper Proctor, that you have dehumanized Karen Reed during the course of your investigation with comments and words like this? Would you agree with that?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

I would say, based off that language, yes.

[Legal Analyst]

And you admitted in your own words that the cop homeowner wasn't going to, quote, catch any, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Correct.

[Legal Analyst]

Because you were out to, quote, make this cut and dry, isn't that right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

The homeowner was gonna catch any shit because Mr. Alba had nothing to do with Mr. O' Keefe's death.

[Legal Analyst]

Because you were gonna make sure that the case was cut and dry. Those were your words, Right. And Trooper Proctor, it would be far easier, far easier for you to pin it on the girl who's just a whack job cunt, in your words, who you hope just kills herself, right?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Objection.

[Legal Analyst]

Sustained. Shame on you, sir.

[Paula Barros]

Proctor's two days on the stand may have been over, but what came out of them reverberated within the courtroom walls and beyond. Here's attorney Jennifer Roman with her reflections on how Proctor performed.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

He lost a lot of ground with the jury, I think, during his cross examination. Now, whether or not it's enough that the jury believes that he would be capable of planting all of this physical evidence and sort of being engaged in this very elaborate cover up, that remains to be seen. But he was definitely in the hot seat during his cross examination and definitely took a lot of heat from the defense about the way he handled this investigation.

[Paula Barros]

But Rich Showenstein says that Proctor's behavior made it a cakewalk to strip him of his credibility.

[Legal Analyst]

The defense didn't destroy his reputation. He destroyed his reputation.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Let's start with why is he having.

[Legal Analyst]

Texts with his friends and his wife about a case he's investigating the first day of the investigation? He shouldn't be doing that at all. And then you get to what the text said.

[Paula Barros]

And attorney Wilkes Corman anticipated bigger consequences than just character assassination alone.

[Legal Analyst]

I think that for all intents and purposes, his credibility is shot. I think his career as a lead investigator in anything is probably by the wayside. I think there's a possibility he loses his job. That's certainly not something I know is going to happen by any stretch of the imagination. But his statements in this case have the potential to haunt him in any other case that he ever testifies about, especially if there's a female defendant or a female suspect.

[Paula Barros]

Will isn't far off. After Proctor's time on the stand made the national news cycle, droves of spectators called for his immediate termination. Here's Christina Rex with what came in the aftermath.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

So the response online has been frustration that he wasn't just immediately terminated, so he was relieved of his duties, meaning that he's still a trooper, as in he has the title of being a trooper. And he was administratively moved to a different office out of the Norfolk County Detectives Unit. But he cannot perform any of the actions of a trooper. He basically can't work right now. Instead, he has to wait for a disciplinary hearing, at which point he could be suspended, and then there are further proceedings before he potentially gets fired. And that's because the Massachusetts State Police is a union. They work in a union, and there are procedures required by their union agreement. And for all we know, he could be terminated at the end of this.

[Paula Barros]

But much to the disappointment to those left appalled, in the days after his testimony, it isn't quite that easy.

[Legal Analyst or Expert Witness]

We had asked state police for comments before. We had asked the state police union for comments before, and they all said they were withholding comment until after trial. So it certainly seemed like if heads were going to roll, that was going to happen once the trial ended. So I think the timing upset some people and also maybe the lack of real speed and accountability, a process the.

[Paula Barros]

Massachusetts State Police will have no choice but to face.

[Legal Analyst]

I'm not at all surprised that he's going to be dismissed, may be removed from the force. We'll have to see what happens because.

[Paula Barros]

Ultimately, as Ian Runkle notes, it doesn't reflect well on the Massachusetts State Police and demands significant internal changes. Not to mention it calls into question every case he's ever laid a hand on.

[Legal Analyst Ian Runkle]

Even in sort of the best light of saying that these police officers were not corrupt. They're trying to do their best. They didn't tamper with the investigation any, anything like that. If that's sort of your viewpoint. Even with that, there should be a major shake up with this police force and to reassess and probably to let some people go, like to just say, hey, you've had a good run, but maybe you shouldn't be a police officer anymore if this is going to be how you're going to behave. Like if that's how Trooper Proctor thinks about women. I don't think any woman in the Canton area should ever have to think that this, this might be the officer who puts her in cuffs and puts her in the back of a car at the end of a night of partying.

[Paula Barros]

Regardless of your views on the guilt or innocence of Karen Reed, you have to at least acknowledge that no matter what the behavior of Trooper Michael Proctor and his handling of evidence compromised this case from the jump.

[Legal Analyst Ian Runkle]

If you're sitting here thinking Karen Reed is guilty, then you should be also, also thinking that John o' Keefe was owed a proper investigation using proper investigative techniques by officers who are above reproach. Whereas instead we get Trooper Proctor and his sending text, the discussion about gifts. All of these things are just, just wild. And there's just no reason for it. It's obviously the wrong choice. So this has been such a wild case for the number of holes in it? It's difficult to say. If they'd done a proper investigation from the outset, where would we be sitting today?

[Legal Analyst]

Are you saying that the principles of physics are incapable of determining with the proper calculations how far John o' Keeffe's body would have moved given the collision at issue?

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Objection.

[Paula Barros]

Is that what you're saying, Trooper?

[Legal Analyst]

No. Is it your opinion, based on a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that those injuries are consistent with an animal attack as opposed to a motor vehicular pedestrian incident?

[Defense Attorney Alan Jackson]

Yes.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

Did you see anything on the front.

[Trooper Michael Proctor]

Lawn at that time? No. Lights were still on. Correct. Did anything attract your attention at all?

[Legal Analyst]

No.

[Prosecutor Adam Lally]

What do you not see in those text messages? You don't see any discussion or any delusion of any conspiracy? There is no conspiracy. There is no cover up. There is no evidence of any of that. And the defendant killed John o'.

[Legal Analyst]

Clock. What evidence do they actually have to prove that? That SUV ever hit John? The answer is none. They don't have any. There's no evidence whatsoever that Karen Reed's vehicle ever struck John o'. Keefe. In fact, every single piece of material evidence in this case unequivocally proves the opposite.

[Paula Barros]

If the Commonwealth has proven both elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should return a verdict of guilty. If the Commonwealth has failed to prove one or more of those elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must return a verdict of not guilty. That's all coming up on the final episode of Karen. This has been a law and crime production. I'm your host, Paula Barros. Our executive producer is Jessica Lowther. Our producer and writer is Cooper Maul. Our editor is Corey Hiltman. Our researcher is Stephanie Doucet. Our bookers are Alyssa Fisher and Diane Kay. Legal and fact checking by Elizabeth Vouli. And special thanks to Shawn Panzera for designing our key art. Follow Karen in the Wondery app. You can binge the entire series early and ad free right now by joining Wondery plus in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify.