← The Stefon Diggs Trial: Commonwealth Confidential
The Stefon Diggs Trial: Commonwealth Confidential
What stories do the new evidence in Karen Read's trial tell?
00:22:01
After a day, and a week, heavy on forensic and physical evidence in the Karen Read trial, our experts had plenty of thoughts on what things like DNA found on John O'Keefe's shoe and the taillight of Read's SUV might mean to the jury — especially given how complex the science is compared to how simple TV shows can make it look. Plus, they look at why Judge Beverly Cannone is allowing a prosecution expert to slightly change their findings over the defense's objection, who took better advantage of the evidence this week and more.
Loading summary
Transcript79 lines
- [00:00]
Advertiser
You just realized your business needed to hire someone yesterday. How can you find amazing candidates fast? Easy. Just use Indeed. When it comes to hiring, Indeed is all you need. Stop struggling to get your job posts seen on other job sites. Indeed Sponsored Jobs help you stand out and hire fast. With Sponsored Jobs, your post jumps to the top of the page for your relevant candidates so you can reach the people you want faster. According to Indeed data, Sponsored jobs posted directly on indeed have 45% more applications than non sponsored jobs. There's no need to wait any longer. Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed and listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility@ Indeed.com podcast just go to Indeed.com podcast right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com podcast terms and conditions apply. Hiring Indeed is all you need.
- [01:00]
News Anchor
NBC 10 Boston news worthy of you tonight. One shoe tested DNA from five people found, but who they belong to is a mystery.
- [01:11]
Andre Porto
With regard to the sneaker, at least, you couldn't even say whether John o' Keefe's DNA was on it, correct? Correct.
- [01:18]
News Anchor
What else? A forensic scientist is revealing about physical evidence found at the scene and the chain of custody to get those items to the lab.
- [01:27]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Plus, the government is not changing their timeline.
- [01:31]
Glenn Jones
The Commonwealth is not changing any information.
- [01:34]
News Anchor
Questions raised about an expert's timeline and a ruling about future witnesses. What the judge has decided as the trial completes its fourth week. Canton Confidential the Karen Reed murder trial starts right now.
- [01:54]
Glenn Jones
DNA evidence. It's a powerful tool for any criminal investigation, certainly when it comes time for trial. But what we know about the DNA collected from John O. Keith's clothing leaves a lot of room for conjecture. Good evening. J.C. is off tonight. I'm Glenn Jones. Our John Maroney catches us up on today's testimony in the retrial of Karen Reed.
- [02:14]
Andre Porto
My name is Andre Porto.
- [02:15]
David Yannetti
An analyst for State Police says John o' Keefe's DNA was found at the snowy crime scene. Karen Reed has pleaded not guilty to striking him with her SUV and leaving him to die in a blizzard.
- [02:26]
Andre Porto
I was assigned to do the DNA analysis process.
- [02:29]
David Yannetti
Andre Porto says the SUV's tail light tested positive for John O' Keefe's DNA as well as two other unidentified people. The same, he said, is true for pieces of a broken drinking glass. Using a number with 30 zeros, he explained the odds of the DNA on the tail light belonging to Reed's boyfriend.
- [02:48]
Andre Porto
The DNA profile from this item is at least 510 non alien times more likely if it originated from John o' Keefe.
- [02:55]
David Yannetti
The defense challenged the results, asking if the glass had been tested for the DNA of the people it says are responsible for Okeefe's death.
- [03:03]
Andre Porto
Were you ever asked with regard to that broken drinking glass to compare the DNA profile that you analyzed with the DNA of either Boston Police Sergeant Brian Albert or ATF agent Brian Higgins? I was not.
- [03:20]
David Yannetti
A second analyst described how she reconstructed the SUV's busted taillight and examined debris from O' Keeffe's clothing. Defense attorney David Yannetti questioned the chain of custody for evidence suggesting something sinister while invoking the name of the former lead investigator and state trooper Michael Proctor.
- [03:39]
Andre Porto
You have no information and do not know why Michael Proctor waited six weeks to bring this clothing to your route.
- [03:45]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Do you sustain he had a piece of glass?
- [03:49]
David Yannetti
Jurors saw another docu series clip with Reed talking about how she pulled a piece of glass from o' Keefe's face leaving court for the week. She declined all questions.
- [03:59]
Sue O'Connell
Thank you.
- [03:59]
Andre Porto
Have a good weekend.
- [04:02]
David Yannetti
Judge Beverly Kanoni has ruled on the use of accident reconstruction experts. She says she will not exclude a report from the prosecution as the defense had asked. At the same time, she says the prosecution will be given a chance to rebut some new information that the defense is trying to get in. And denim. John Maroney, back to you.
- [04:25]
Andre Porto
The evidence will further establish that John o' Keefe's shoe, the one that he was wearing when he was found, was sampled and that DNA revealed five, count them, five unidentified males. Recall that. The evidence will establish independently that John was injured someplace warmer and had to be moved onto that lawn. Five unidentified males touching that shoe.
- [04:53]
Glenn Jones
That, of course, was defense attorney Alan Jackson during opening statements teasing new evidence. And that evidence was brought to light today. We've got a full panel here to discuss it all. With me, NBC News legal analyst Danny Savalo, retired Massachusetts judge Jack Lew, and our courtroom insider, Sue o' Connell. We're going to have a spirited conversation. I can already feel it. Let's start with forensic and physical evidence. Once again, a hot topic. We heard about the testing of John o' Keefe's shoe. Jackson just mentioned that John's clothing and the taillight of Karen Reed's vehicle all covered today. There was DNA president on all of it, but more than just John o' Keefe's.
- [05:31]
Andre Porto
Who contributed that DNA to his pants? I don't know. It could be anybody. Who are the other two contributors of DNA to that stain? I don't know. They could be Anybody. And who was the other contributor to that stain on the genes? It could be anybody. I don't know. Who were the other three contributors to that DNA profile? I don't know. It could be anybody. And with regard to all five, do you have any idea who contributed the DNA to the, to that sneaker? No, I don't.
- [05:57]
Glenn Jones
That was a testimony of Andre Porto. He follows that opening statement promise from Alan Jackson. So, sue, let's start from you. You're in the courtroom. What do you imagine is going through jurors minds as they hear this information about forensic evidence every episode of Law.
- [06:12]
Sue O'Connell
And Order and csi? And they are wondering, you know, why, why don't they have the information? Why wasn't it? Why is this DNA all over everyone's shoe? I once sat on a jury for a rape trial 20 years ago, and it wasthe rape was reported days and days after it happened. And the jury I sat with wanted to know why the police didn't come in and take the couch and shut the whole house down. So the jury's expectation of what they think they're going to get versus the reality of what they did get and could get is going to come into sharp conflict.
- [06:46]
Glenn Jones
So, Danny, the question for you is, are jurors expectations in the right place if really they're just watching Law and Order?
- [06:52]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Exactly. Blame csi. Blame Law and Order. Now, jurors expect this kind of information. And when they expect it, the problem is when it comes into evidence, it doesn't come in as easily as it does on TV when they've got to get it done within 28 minutes.
- [07:07]
Glenn Jones
Right.
- [07:07]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
It comes in with a lot of science. And your average juror, in fact your average lawyer can't follow a lot of this science. But here's the thing. This is one of those cases where if you're pro Karen Reid or pro prosecution, you look at the same piece of evidence and you say it helps you. For example, the five extra profiles on the DNA of DNA on the shoe that could be these five mystery men who may have attacked o' Keefe. On the other hand, our shoes are the things that are in contact with everything. If you live in a city, then you probably have pigeon DNA on your shoe. You probably have golden retriever DNA. You probably have DNA of hundreds of people on your shoes and your clothing. But again, it's just one of those pieces of evidence that could go either way and strong.
- [07:52]
Glenn Jones
All right, so judge for you then. Where do we go from here? Do you expect we could even see further testing? Now, even Though the trial is underway.
- [08:02]
Judge Jack Lew
It'S hard for me to predict. I kind of doubt it. But, you know, I do not agree to blame the CSI effect. Who do you blame? I don't blame anybody. The jury has a sacred duty here, and it transcends everybody, and it transcends all the crazy people on the Internet. The jury has a duty, and if they think the CSI expectation of the government is here, then that's where it is. And I support that. Whatever the jury decides.
- [08:29]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Yeah. The amazing thing about DNA, you know, a few years ago, I started thinking, now that there are ring cameras everywhere, now that we have DNA, can anyone ever get away with a crime now? And you know what I found, Judge, I wonder if you agree with me and you sue that with all of this data, in a way it creates more reasonable doubt. Think about, for example, the expert dispute today. One clock on one device is showing one time, the other one is a minute and a half behind. Video everywhere, but no video of this event. And all of this data now may make it even harder to get to reasonable doubt. And who would have ever imagined that back when people first had cameras on their cell phones, back when our phones started tracking us through GPS where we are. There's just as much reasonable doubt today as there was in the 1970s, when you could get in your AMC Gremlin and just disappear into the night and no one knew where you were.
- [09:17]
Sue O'Connell
Well, my packages are still getting stolen off my front porch.
- [09:21]
Glenn Jones
Let me add one other thing to this conversation. It's about the chain of custody of the evidence, because Michael Proctor's name came up repeatedly. Ashley Valer did have to say that at some point, Michael Proctor dropped off the tail light pieces, and six weeks after the event brought in John o' Keefe's clothing. It's another way that Michael Proctor's name is being evoked here, and I think for a specific purpose.
- [09:42]
Sue O'Connell
Right, but they still don't know who Michael Proctor is. Right. If we assume that they're on the jury and they haven't made up their minds, they might have read or heard something, they might know. They don't know why he is in such conflict here, why everyone wants to know about Michael Proctor. So it is kind of interesting. Every time his name gets entered and gets mentioned, they write it down, and it's almost like they're waiting to see where this is all going to connect when they deliberate.
- [10:07]
Glenn Jones
So, Judge, is the questions about law enforcement raising the specter of reasonable doubt for the defense?
- [10:14]
Judge Jack Lew
I'll go with the conventional wisdom. Criminal cases are totally unpredictable. I could easily see a total acquittal or I could see something in between. It does seem to be a massive overcharge, though. So I wouldn't necessarily be predicting a conviction on all three charges.
- [10:31]
Glenn Jones
Okay, Danny, let's dig deeper into the contentious courtroom. Back and forth today between the prosecution and the defense. The defense argued against an amendment from the prosecution's accident reconstruction. Experts, take a listen.
- [10:43]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
At a minimum, we need a voir dire to ask Mr. Burgess why did he do what he did. Another reason for the voir dire. Mr. Brennan yesterday said we were surprised to get the report. That further makes great concern as to.
- [10:59]
David Yannetti
Why Mr. Burgess did what he did.
- [11:01]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
And now he has found a method.
- [11:04]
Glenn Jones
To show the exact variance.
- [11:05]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
It's not changing the.
- [11:07]
Glenn Jones
There's nothing in the reports that changes.
- [11:08]
David Yannetti
As far as the timeline.
- [11:10]
Glenn Jones
That's just an attempt to cause fear. There's nothing that has changed. We can look at the reports.
- [11:14]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
It's all the same, always has been.
- [11:17]
Glenn Jones
All of this happened away from the jury and focused on the Commonwealth's timeline for the alleged motor vehicle strike. The defense expressed concerns that a sequestration order was broken by one of those experts. Ultimately, Judge Cardone ruled against the defense. Here's part of her ruling.
- [11:33]
I
The defendant has not persuaded me of undue surprise or unfair prejudice by this information. And I don't find that there's delayed disclosure. Of course, all of this is ample game for cross examination. But if after the direct, you demonstrate that you need further time, I'll certainly hear you on that. And more importantly, perhaps if you feel that the testimony of Jen McCabe and the others that you've mentioned is critical and that you need to recall them, I'll hear you on that as well.
- [12:05]
Glenn Jones
So a prosecution expert is going to slightly change their findings ahead of testimony. This made the defense very upset. What do you think about the judge's ruling?
- [12:13]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Yeah, a lot of folks are probably watching thinking there was already a first trial. Here we are, a year later, there's another trial, and you're telling me that there's new information that the experts are determining mid trial. But the reality is, and Judge, you can probably speak to this, surprises come out during trial all the time, even in a retrial like this. And if I'm the defense and I am a defense attorney, so take what I say with a block of salt, that I would be none too pleased, you're supposed to have expert disclosures. You're supposed to understand what experts are going to say before they take the Stand. Because what they testify about is so complicated, you need your own expert to review it and rebut it. So if they are changing their position, that is something you have to object to. You have to make a record. And by the way, you might already have a large appealable issue there, even though it didn't go the defense's way. And the last thing I'd say is that if Judge Kanoni keeps her promise that she will allow cross examination, extensive cross examination, then great. But in my opinion, she has frequently curtailed the defense's cross examination. And by the way, reasonable minds can differ on this, but I think she's been very quick to sustain objections against the defense.
- [13:23]
Glenn Jones
Judge, I know you have something to say about this, but let me put this viewer question up because I think you can address Michelle's question directly after what happened in court. How can this be a fair trial allowing the timeline to be changed halfway through the trial? Brennan is saying it is not changing, but it is, says Michelle. What's your view on how Judge Kanoni has handled this whole issue around the timeline?
- [13:45]
Judge Jack Lew
This whole issue? She's handled absolutely perfectly. And people don't really understand. It's a careful legal analysis. It is notice to the defendant versus the search for the truth. The nature of the change is minor, so the search for the truth wins out, which is that they can add or modify their opinion, which is actually what's going on, not the report. The report is just a way of encapsulating what is going on. She is the right decision. And if she had done the opposite for technical legal reasons, she would not have been reversed, but she might have been criticized by the Supreme Judicial Court. And that judge and every judge works for the Supreme Judicial Court perfectly handled on this complicated issue. I'm glad to explain it more, but I don't think you want that.
- [14:33]
Glenn Jones
Well, sue, let me just ask you if we go to Danny's point that she keeps her promise about allowing extra leeway on cross examination. These defense attorneys are very effective at cross examination.
- [14:44]
Sue O'Connell
Yeah. I mean, the problem is for them, and I underscore what they both. What you both said is that they just have to. They made a plan and now it's a little bit different. And the seconds make difference. I also want to point out, though, and you'll affirm or deny this, lawyers get along all the time. If they're not getting along, it's not because of the case. It's because of their personal issues between each other. These lawyers were all talking to each other this morning and laughing and backpacking and now they're out there fighting for their case. So what?
- [15:11]
Glenn Jones
They both want to win. Before we go to break, we want to take a moment to remember John o' Keefe, the victim in this case. The Braintree native was a Boston police officer who became the legal guardian of his niece and nephew after the children lost both of their parents to illness. You're watching Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed murder trial.
- [15:31]
Advertiser
You just realized your business needed to hire someone yesterday. How can you find amazing candidates fast? Easy. Just use Indeed. When it comes to hiring, Indeed is all you need. Stop struggling to get your job post seen on other job sites. Indeed sponsored jobs help you stand out and hire fast. With sponsored Jobs, your post jumps to the top of the page for your relevant candidates so you can reach the people you want faster. According to Indeed data, Sponsored Jobs posted directly on indeed have 45% more applications than non sponsored jobs. There's no need to wait any longer. Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed and listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit. To get your jobs more visibility@ Indeed.com podcast just go to Indeed.com podcast right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com podcast terms and conditions apply. Hiring Indeed is all you need.
- [16:31]
News Anchor
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.
- [16:49]
Glenn Jones
This was a big week for physical and forensic evidence. We learned more about shards of glass, bits of tail light and hair found on Karen Reed's vehicle. But also that bombshell today about John's clothing and the batch of unknown DNA found on several items. Danny Ceballos, Judge Jack Lew and Sue o' Connell back with us now. Danny, I guess I'll start with you in this segment because we talked earlier and you said both sides have been leveraging the physical evidence to their benefit. So I guess the question is, who did it more effectively this week?
- [17:21]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Oh, that's hard to say. But I mean, you take for example, the hair evidence, right? And where the defense is winning is that they get the jury asking questions that are almost collateral to the prosecution's case, which is if you're at home wondering how does a car drive 30 miles in the snow and a piece of hair stays on it, then that means the defense is winning because they have you focusing on an issue that really doesn't go to the core of the prosecution's case. But if you believe that there's no way a hair could go 30 miles an hour or 30 miles down the road in a blizzard and remain on a car, then you're going to be, when you're deliberating, you're going to say, well, I have doubt. I may have reasonable doubt as a result of something that really doesn't have to do with whether or not Karen Reed drank too much and or backed into John o' Keefe.
- [18:09]
Glenn Jones
Sue, when you're looking at the jurors, what is their level of attention to detail when it comes to the physical evidence?
- [18:15]
Sue O'Connell
So I was dying today. I was bored out of my mind. And they were all sitting, all 18 of them, paying attention, most of them taking notes. Only one guy is not taking notes consistently. Maybe he's got a photographic memory. But they are paying attention and writing down things that they are finding important. And it was, it has been a long week of testimony between the autopsy photos and that medical testimony and now this. And I got to say, compared to the last jurors, no offense to you, if you're home watching, these jurors are really engaged in watching.
- [18:50]
Glenn Jones
Judge Lu, I wanted to ask this of you yesterday and I didn't get the chance to because you weren't here, but there was a moment in the trial where the judge took a break to allow the jurors some breathing room after taking in those graphic images from, from the medical examiner's office. Is that something you've encountered before? How do you read what the jury needs in order to do their job?
- [19:10]
Judge Jack Lew
Well, I think this judge is probably better at it than most people. I think this is a nurturing judge. You listen to the tone of her voice. She actually cares. And she's only about 15, 20ft from the jurors. So she's right there with them. And she can sense from their body language how they're experiencing this. To us, it may be not really that big. Well, you're falling asleep, right? But to the jurors, some of this is pretty difficult. I would say there's a significant amount that is difficult in terms of goriness by Mr. Brennan's efforts.
- [19:48]
Sue O'Connell
And the court officers as well are also doing a great job caring for the jurors. I mean, you really get in the courtroom that the jurors are very, very important, their well being and how they're doing.
- [19:59]
Glenn Jones
So let's circle back to a moment from this morning. There was a comment we noticed at the Very start of proceedings. In addition to her normal guidance, Judge Beverly Kanoni gave the jury an important instruction. Take a listen.
- [20:10]
I
It's so important that each and every juror can hear the evidence or the testimony that's presented, can follow the testimony, and can understand and evaluate the testimony of each witness and the attorney. Exhibits don't talk, don't make any facial expressions, no muttering under your breath, no audible noises, because people need to hear what's going on.
- [20:38]
Glenn Jones
Sue, can you give us an idea of why this moment happened when it did?
- [20:42]
Sue O'Connell
So I want to point out that there's no direct warning here. It's just kind of a reminder of what they're told when they get there. We've had a couple of jurors who have been giggling uncontrollably twice during sidebars. Doesn't seem necessarily related to anything they're watching or hearing or the evidence. And as we all know, because it's happened to all of us, you'll be somewhere you're not supposed to be giggling, and then you giggle, and then you try and stop. And at one point, one of the court officers walked over to them, stood in front of them. And then we saw this happen. That court officer went up, took an oath, talked to the judge. And then the jurors were reminded of this. This is a young, young jury compared to juries I've seen in the past. It was just a reminder. I mean, a lot of people I could see on the conspiracy theories all online, we just had a moment, and they were reminded.
- [21:27]
Glenn Jones
Danny, you haven't been in a Judge Kanoni courtroom. You don't know her like Judge Liu does. What do you think about her performance so far in this case?
- [21:37]
Judge Beverly Kanoni
Okay, so I think, again, take what I say as a defense attorney, and I think on the whole, I think she is civil to the attorneys, which really means a lot. There are a lot of judges who are not. And she is somebody that she does hear the lawyers. But look, I mean, if I were to make a criticism, it would be that often she sustains objections without allowing a sidebar, allowing any argument on them. But that's all style. That's really not anything that I could criticize too harshly. It's just a style thing. Every attorney wants to be heard on their objection. And if you don't get your opportunity, you get frustrated. But that's hardly a criticism of her. It's more criticism.
- [22:15]
Glenn Jones
Judge, you've been very complimentary. I wonder if there's anything you think she needs to improve on with this case. I know you talked about maybe she's giving too much latitude.
- [22:27]
Judge Jack Lew
The maybe maybe she should reconsider her FBI agent ruling about the nature of the investigation based on Sergeant Buchanak's outrageous cross examination to say it simply. But you can tell from what she says she's not watching this.
- [22:48]
Glenn Jones
And when you say that, you mean allowing more transparency in the courtroom during the case about what the FBI did?
- [22:55]
Judge Jack Lew
No, I mean let them call a witness to criticize the the quality of the investigation. But the reality is you can the defense lawyer and Yannetti is unbelievably good. He'll get up there and he'll hammer everything a so called opinion or expert on the investigation would say. So it's still kind of a bit of duplication. He can say anything that that person would say in criticizing the investigation. He can say it is horrible. And he probably would be right. But.
- [23:26]
Glenn Jones
All right, Sue o' Connell, Judge Jackalou, Danny Savalas, thank you very much. It's so great to have all of you in with us tonight. Remember, you can 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 will be streaming on Peacock starting the day after tomorrow. You're watching Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed murder trial.
- [23:55]
News Anchor
Watch Priscilla Casper and Colton Bradford weeknights at the Six on NBC 10 Boston. To watch full episodes of Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed murder trial. Tune in to NBC 10 Boston weeknights at 7 through the duration of the trial. You can also catch past episodes on the NBC 10 Boston YouTube page. Full episodes are posted one day after airing. NBC 10 Boston news worthy of you.