Michael Coyne (2:11)

He plowed Fairview that night and what.

Jeff Lewis (2:13)

He'S going to tell you is that there was no body on that lawn.

Michael Coyne (2:17)

At 2:30 in the morning.

Jeff Lewis (2:19)

And our panel of experts is answering your questions about this high profile case. Canton Confidential. The Karen Reed murder trial starts now.

J.C. Monahan (2:31)

And thank you for being with us on this Memorial Day. I'm J.C. monahan. We are more than a month into Karen Reid's second trial and possibly as early as tomorrow. The case could be in the hands of the defense. Tomorrow would mark 20 days of testimony and the prosecution is set to call its final witness. Our Glenn Jones looks back at everything laid out by the Prosecution.

Jeff Lewis (2:52)

So far, the Commonwealth's case is memorable, not necessarily for who it called to the stand, but who it did not. State trooper Michael Proctor, homeowner Brian Albert, and ATF agent Brian Higgins, all called to testify by the Commonwealth in the first trial. None of them in the second trial. No nudes so far?

Michael Coyne (3:12)

No nudes so far.

Jeff Lewis (3:15)

Correct? Correct. And you said that to your bosses? Yes, sir. Between trials, Michael Proctor, once the lead investigator for the case, was fired. His vulgar, unprofessional text messages about the defendant, read aloud in court, forced prosecutors to distance themselves for Karen Reed's retrial. He also called her correct? That is what's written over three days. That left Sergeant Yuri Buchanak, Proctor's supervisor, to answer for his dismissed colleague, sometimes defending him.

Michael Coyne (3:47)

The investigation was handled with integrity and honor. Do you stand by your testimony that.

Jeff Lewis (3:52)

Michael Proctor conducted himself during the course of this investigation with integrity? Yes, I do. Sergeant Buchanak also had to explain why Brian Higgins voluntarily handed over text messages to investigators. They show Higgins was in a secretive, days long, flirtatious exchange with the defendant just prior to John o' Keeffe's death. It tells of a rendezvous and a kiss. Even though Reed and O' Keefe were still an item, the defense had Sgt. Buchanak read every Higgins Reed message aloud. I told you, I just think you're.

Michael Coyne (4:25)

Like me and I am attracted to you a lot.

J.C. Monahan (4:28)

Feelings mutual.

Michael Coyne (4:30)

I just never saw this coming.

Jeff Lewis (4:31)

The last text was ominous. Saturday, 11:54am John died. In the last trial, Higgins read his own text messages. He also admitted to tossing his phone in a dumpster on a Cape Cod military base, being at 34 Fairview Road on the night in question, and going to Canton PD as the blizzard raged. Although he's been charged with no crime, Reed's defense team alleges Higgins is culp in o' Keefe's death. Seeing his flirtatious relationship with the defendant provides motive. His presence at 34 Fairview Road provided opportunity. The Commonwealth did not call Higgins to testify in the retrial. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, your honor. And good afternoon to the jury. Same for Brian Albert, a second third party culprit, according to the defense. Until recently, the retired Boston police officer owned 34 Fairview Road and was at home as people gathered for an after party. And then hours later, when first responders tended to John o' Keefe near his bedroom window. John o' Keefe was never in my house before or after that date. Albert is charged with no crime. The Commonwealth called him in the first trial, not the second. They didn't recall State Police Trooper Joseph Paul either. Instead, they put experts from Aperture on the witness list, a private firm that forensically studied the defendant's Lexus suv. After the trial began, Aperture changed its event timeline despite objections from the defense. The new timeline, first presented by Shannon Burgess, gave credence to the Commonwealth's assertion that Reed's car hit John o' Keefe that night. But on cross examination, he had to admit to errors in his work and misstatements on his resume.

Michael Coyne (6:07)

If I did the math correctly, sir.

Jeff Lewis (6:08)

You'Ve been pursuing a Bachelor of science degree for 17 years, correct? That is correct.

Michael Coyne (6:16)

And you have not obtained it as.

Jeff Lewis (6:17)

You sit here today? That is correct. And yet there are the various documents that we've seen that state that you have obtained. Obtained a Bachelor of Science. Correct again, with errors or misinterpretation? Yes. I was so surprised to see an expert who put information that is just blatantly false out there to the public, to potential clients. It was brutal to watch. I had some secondhand embarrassment watching him talk about his credibility issues with his education. Another prosecution expert witness, Ian Wiffen, plotted the movement of Okie's cell phone, which shows his steps outside 34 Fairview Road on the night in question. But on cross, Wiffen had to concede the same makes it possible o' Keefe went inside the house. Was there anything remarkable about what you were searching at 2227 that time frame? No.

J.C. Monahan (7:07)

I did not tell Jen to make a Google search. I certainly didn't tell her to make the one at 227 either.

Jeff Lewis (7:12)

Cell phone data from Jen McCabe's phone revealed she did not make the infamous Google search. How's long to die in cold at 2:27am but at 6:24am after John O' Keefe was found in the snow, that was the finding of Jessica Hyde. For the prosecution. That search occurred at 6:24am and was the last search in the tab that had been opened at 2:27. In addition to an avalanche of cell phone data, the jury has a mountain of physical evidence to consider as well. Taillight pieces and the victim's clothing, graphic autopsy photos, even a strand of hair on the rare exterior of Reed's car, which DNA analysis revealed may have belonged to John o' Keefe. The but the state's medical examiner could not say Karen Reed and her vehicle is the reason the victim is dead. You had all that information, you still were unable to conclude the manner of death of Mr. Correct? Correct. Throughout the Prosecution's case. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan played clips of Karen Reed's media appearances in an effort to use her own statements to convict her of murder. I mean, I didn't think I hit.

J.C. Monahan (8:25)

Him, hit him, but could I have clipped him?

Jeff Lewis (8:27)

Could I have tagged him in the.

J.C. Monahan (8:29)

Knee and incapacitated him?

Jeff Lewis (8:31)

In every key area where the Commonwealth called an expert witness, the defense likely has an expert witness of its own to put on the stand with a completely different view.

J.C. Monahan (8:39)

I'm Glenn Jones, and we are back now with our chief legal analyst, Michael Coyne. Michael, thank you for being with us.

Michael Coyne (8:46)

Thanks.

J.C. Monahan (8:47)

On a holiday especially. You're always there for us. So we just sort of got that recap right of what's happened. Can you just give me your synopsis of how the prosecution has done so far? Just pointing out they haven't rested yet. There's still at least one more witness.

Michael Coyne (9:03)

It's the science that they're focused on. You know, last week, a little bit of bogged down. But if you really go back and start to remember the beginning here, we're focused on the cell phone, the cell phone battery, the location, devices and all. And I think they've done a great job tying that together with John o' Keeffe's move. All of those witnesses had problems at various times, and the defense will really try to explore that even further on their side of the case. But I think the government, compared to the last time, has really put forward a pretty tight presentation of its theory of the case and how they believe John o' Keefe met his death.

J.C. Monahan (9:41)

So we do think there's one more witness. You know, that's our understanding. And that would be tomorrow. Accident reconstruction expert, Dr. Judson Welcher. The defense actually tried to keep Welcher from testifying, but he is allowed to take the stand. He is an executive vice president at Aperture. That's the same company that employs Shannon Burgess, the digital forensics expert who testified about that data coming from Reed's suv. Burgess was on the stand for three days. He was the one that they were questioning his credentials. The whole thing about he does not actually have a Bachelor of science, even though his resume said he did. You had said prior to what that message, to lack a better word, that the defense sort of uncovered that Burgess was a good. A good witness for the prosecution. Now we have welcher. What are they going to get from Welcher they didn't get from Burgess? And is welcher actually supposed to undo any of the mess that maybe the jury may have seen in that testimony?

Michael Coyne (10:40)

Well, hopefully, for the commonwealth standpoint that he has to do that, it's a critical witness. We definitely will hear from him simply because it's so necessary to tie the collision of Karen Reed's vehicle to John. John o' Keefe in his ultimate death. And so we will see that. And he should come across, at least on direct exam, as a very strong witness. Remember, these witnesses are paid to testify. They are professional witnesses. So you shouldn't see what you saw with Burgess. That's what was shocking about it. And so you will see a little more on cross about Burgess with this expert witness, but you'll also see a pretty extensive presentation with respect to the physics, the dynamics of the movement of that vehicle. Tying that together with all the cell phone data and the movement data and the GPS data that we have, it should be a very powerful presentation.

J.C. Monahan (11:36)

What was shocking is that, as you said, they are professionals who do this, who get on the stand. So to have a messy resume was a little outside the ballpark for what you would expect.

Michael Coyne (11:47)

Not a little. Not a little outside. A lot.

J.C. Monahan (11:50)

We have a clip from Brennan's open Hank Brennan's opening statements. Here he is laying out the charges to the jury and the case his team is trying to prove. Here, take a look.

Jeff Lewis (11:59)

The first one. Second degree murder. When most people hear murder, they shooting somebody, stabbing somebody delivered premeditation. But I can tell you clearly we are not going to try to prove that Karen Lee tried to kill John o' keefe. We're not going to try to prove to you that she intended or wanted him dead. That's not second degree murder. What will she engaged in an intentional act, driving back at him at that speed in the storm, in the darkness, knowing that he had just gotten out of her Lexus. She intended that act would proof cause the plain and strong likelihood of death.

J.C. Monahan (12:38)

Again, a key witness still hasn't taken the stand, but have they reached that bar?

Michael Coyne (12:42)

Not yet. That's what this witness will do and tie a lot of the evidence together with respect to exactly how Dakar struck him. And ultimately then he was left to die in the snow. So they're close. But this witness is a critical witness and he has to really come across, not only come across on direct well, but he can't suffer some of the slings that we saw with every other commonwealth witness who on cross examination was at least in part revealed to have some flaws and in some cases significant flaws.

J.C. Monahan (13:16)

Well, you're making your point about the prosecution really streamlined this time. As a matter of fact, we're doing a little bit of math here. There have been far fewer witnesses for the prosecution, maybe as many as a dozen fewer. The defense is intent is implying they're going to ask many more people to testify. They only had six the first time around. You've always said defense does not have a burden to do anything. They don't have to put anyone on the stand. Why this time then would we all think and have they alluded to the fact they're going to call many more people than the first trial?

Michael Coyne (13:46)

Well, I'm not really sure because again, you know, what we have to remember about this case is that, and we've said before, it's a reasonable doubt case, the defendant does not have to prove who killed John o' Keefe. And it's a mistake to try and say it's going to have to be these two or Karen Reed because they do.

J.C. Monahan (14:05)

They have a third party culprit that they're throwing around this time.

Michael Coyne (14:08)

They've talked about it. The question now in their case will be will they try to explore that and develop that as much as at least earlier they indicated? I'm not so sure they will because simply it's a bigger burden than they have to assume. Why give the jury this, at least an artificial choice in their mind, did Karen Reid do it or did those two do it? And the fact is, if those are the choices, the evidence tips so much more in favor that Karen Reed somehow contributed to John o' Keefe's death.

J.C. Monahan (14:41)

I didn't even think about that, that they could drop that whole idea of a third party culprit if they feel they don't need it.

Michael Coyne (14:46)

Well, and not just don't need it, but can't sufficient efficiently develop it. The problem with that will be, if you remember, during Jackson's opening, he promised the jury that unequivocally he would prove that John o' Keefe entered that house. That hasn't happened yet and I'm not sure it's going to happen in their case. And if that evidence doesn't come in, Attorney Brennan is clearly going to remind the jury that there were promises made in the defendant's opening that they never complied with. And if you can't trust them to tell you the truth, then you shouldn't trust their evidence at all.

J.C. Monahan (15:21)

Michael Coyne, as always, thank you so much. All right. You have sent us some great questions about this case. We want to get you those answers. So when we come back, our team of experts respond to your emails. Stay with us. You're watching Kitten Confidential.

Jeff Lewis (15:36)

Don't miss any of the Karen Reed murder trial. Get the full recap of what happened in court, expert analysis and what we could see next. This is coverage you won't see anywhere else. Canton confidential weeknights at 7 on NBC 10 Boston. Hey, this is Jeff Lewis from Radio Andy live and uncensored. Catch me talking with my friends about my latest obsessions, relationship issues and bodily ailments. With that kind of drama that seems to follow me, you never know what's going to happen. You can listen to Jeff Lewis live at home or anywhere you are. Download the SiriusXM app for over 425.

J.C. Monahan (16:12)

Channels of ad, free music, sports, entertainment and more. Subscribe now and get 3 months free offer details apply.

Jeff Lewis (16:23)

Nearly Home Isn't home where we all want to be? Reba here for realtor.com, the Pro's number one most trusted app, finding a home is like dating. You're not just looking for a place to live, you're searching for the one. That's where realtor.com comes in. Like any good matchmaker, they know exactly where to look. With over 500,000 new real listings straight.

J.C. Monahan (16:46)

From the pros every month, you could.

Jeff Lewis (16:48)

Find your perfect match today. Ranch style with a pool, barndominium with an in Law Suite. Realtor.com's got em modern craftsmen with a big yard and a treehouse out back.

J.C. Monahan (17:00)

Realtor.com will have you saying yep that's the one.

Jeff Lewis (17:03)

No more swapping. It's time to start finding. Download the realtor.com app today cause you're nearly home. Make it real with realtor.com pro's number one most trusted app based on August 2024 proprietary survey. Over 500,000 new listings every month based on average new for sale and rental listings February 2024 through January 2025.

J.C. Monahan (17:28)

Since the trial began, we have received hundreds of questions from you, not just those of you who live around here. We are receiving emails from folks watching Canton Confidential, the Karen Reid murder trial around the world. Take a look. These are just some of the places where people are watching. And tonight our team of experts is answering the questions that you have been asking. This question is from Bruce in Belmont, New Hampshire. He asks if it's possible that the retrial could also end in a hung jury or a mistrial and if, if this would happen, what would be next? Morgieta so of course there's always a possibility that there could be another mistrial and or a hung jury. And just for everyone's edification, that's when the jurors can't come to an agreement unanimously, they have to do that in this case. Again, the prosecutor's office, it's their choice to try the case for a third time. But at that point, I think we really have to look at what evidence that they would be presenting because now you're talking about a whole other set of group of jurors. And is that going to be effective? Is that going to be effective for taxpayer dollars? Are you thinking about the o' Keeffe family, how that's going to affect them emotionally, physically? And how are you going to go about designing this new third retrial if it happens? Right. So I think the reality is, yes, they can. Will they? Probably not.

Jeff Lewis (18:54)

All right, let's see what Marty from Hanover, Massachusetts has to say. Does the judge have to abide by the same rules as the jurors pertaining to the consumption of outside media regarding this case? Let's have a listen to what Judge Canoni tells the jurors every day, those same cautions. Please do not discuss this case with anyone. Don't do any independent research or investigation.

Michael Coyne (19:18)

If you happen to see here or read anything about this case, please disregard.

Jeff Lewis (19:23)

It and let us know.

J.C. Monahan (19:23)

And be careful with your social media use.

Jeff Lewis (19:26)

So what Marty is really asking is, does the judge have to follow those same rules?

Michael Coyne (19:31)

Not nearly as strictly because the judge is a trained professional with a ballpark, I would say 35, 40 years, maybe more of experience and training at this.

Jeff Lewis (19:43)

And can ignore extraneous stuff.

Michael Coyne (19:47)

And more importantly, the judge does not decide the facts, the jury does.

Jeff Lewis (19:52)

So that's, you know, the judge is about procedure. The jury decides the facts. The next viewer question is from Valerie Bruce in Louisiana. She wants to know, in your experience, do witnesses frequently use the phrase I don't recall or I'm not sure, to avoid potential perjury, particularly when their current statements may contradict prior testimony. What do you think, Neil? That can go both ways? I don't think that in this case, witnesses are really worried about committing perjury based upon the fact that they testified one way in the prior trial or at a prior grand jury proceeding. But they have to be careful and they review their testimony prior to getting on the witness stand. And I think it's a catch. All that's a good way to, you know, couch everything. I don't quite recall or I'm not quite sure. They just don't want to put themselves in any difficulty. Carrie Roberts sort of got into trouble with this earlier in the trial.

Michael Coyne (20:42)

Yeah. But you can't be charged with perjury for not truly. If you do not remember, that's very difficult to prove because you have to get into the mind of the person. So a lot of witnesses do see that there is a safe harbor there by saying, I don't remember, as opposed to making a misstatement, which if it's clearly a misstatement and material, they could potentially be charged with perjury. And there were problems with Kerry Roberts where she said, well, I don't remember. You know, I said this, I said that. And then finally, finally she had to acknowledge that, okay, it was a lie, but I didn't mean it.

Jeff Lewis (21:17)

This next question is from Kathy. She wants to know why is it allowed for Karen Reed to use a lawyer on her team that was a juror on the previous trial? Daddy. This question comes up a lot. It is very unusual. This person was an alternate juror and now she's part of the Karen Reid defense team. Yeah, it's allowed because it's brilliant. It's a great strategy, and there's nothing to prevent it. It is unusual. But here's the thing. A lawyer on the jury doesn't have a conflict of interest the way lawyers traditionally would if I was a lawyer for an opposing party, they're a member of the jury. And so there's no real conflict there. And no one seems to have made any motion to try and preclude that Attorney and clients have a right to counsel of their choice with some limitations, but with no apparent conflict with any client or the. The state, the commonwealth. This is allowed.

J.C. Monahan (22:08)

Todd, let's get another viewer question. This one is from Margot Tobin in Arizona. Hello, Arizona. She asks, is it typical for the coroner to be given all of that information by law enforcement as to what they think happened to the victim before her examinations of the deceased? This came up during the testimony with the state medical examiner. Is that typical? They say, well, we think he got hit by a car, so if you could just check that out.

Jeff Lewis (22:34)

So Dr. Squidi Bello did a great job in her examination, in her testimony of her examination of John o' Keefe. Yes, giving the information by the investigators is standard. However, she stuck to her guns and made that the statement, made the statement on the stand. There was no evidence of any impact to John o' Keefe in connection with the collision. She said, said she, as standard, would have looked at his lower extremities. From what? Based on the information from the investigators, if they believe that there was a motor vehicle collision, then that's going to better inform her examination above and beyond what she would be looking for in.

J.C. Monahan (23:14)

Normal examinations is the whole idea that they are actually planting a seed that it was steering her toward a certain conclusion. Because if they were, it didn't happen.

Jeff Lewis (23:24)

Beers. There's an argument, strong argument to be made. However, as a professional that she is, Dr. Scotty Bello, stuck to her guns in business as usual. This is how I made the examination and here is my analysis.

J.C. Monahan (23:38)

And we thank our experts and we thank you for all of your great questions. Keep sending them in. We're only halfway through this trial, so if you have them, the email on your screen Canton confidentialbc We're gonna answer as many questions as we can and remember to join us every weeknight at 7 on NBC 10 Boston. We'll have a full recap of the latest developments from court as well as legal analysis. Plus, this week's episodes begin streaming on Peacock on Sunday. Be sure to check out our true crime podcast about the case. It's the audio version of our nightly show that will catch you up on all the twists and turns on up until this point. You're watching Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed murder trial.

Jeff Lewis (24:32)

Hey there everyone in podcast land. I just wanted to thank you all for listening and telling your friends about our little podcast. Let's talk off camera with me, Kelly Ripa. I know there are millions of podcasts out there, so I really appreciate you giving us a listen. There are so many gems from season one from Matthew McConaughey disclosing that he and Woody Harrelson might be brothers to Salma Hayek, telling us about the argument that started her friendship with Prince. Hope you enjoy season one and stay tuned for a bigger and better season two.