Investigators On Karen Read Case Connected To Death of Pregnant Girl That Had Been Abused By 3 Cops

[Music]. Bada bing, bada boom. >> There are probably a few things that you. should not do while a jury deliberates. on whether or not you are a murderer. One would be to commit more crimes. Jury. tampering is a big one. Don't follow a. juror home just so if you can see maybe. you could understand their perspective a. little better. Don't do that. To see if. they have all the facts needed to. deliberate. Definitely don't do that. But those are very obvious. You know, some are up for debate. Some people. think it's okay. Some people don't think. it's okay. And one of that includes.

cuddling your defense attorney. One New. York Post article reads, "Karen Reed. spotted canoodling with lawyer as jury. deliberated over whether she murdered. her cop boyfriend." There is an iPhone. live photo posted of Karen Reed outside. of a fancy Boston steakhouse with Alan. Jackson from the back. He's standing. behind her, one arm around her waist. So, she's facing forward, he's facing. forward, he's behind her, and the other. arm is like firmly around her chest. It.

seems like everyone's giggling, goofing. around, but it definitely seems. intimate, and online, everybody just. starts freaking out. First of all, Alan. Jackson is married. He's worn a wedding. ring throughout the entirety of the. trial. But now, the timing of it all. also feels way too intimate. One netizen. says, "It just looks so wrong and. inappropriate. it's her attorney and I. don't know, it just doesn't feel like a. normal attorney client type of. situation. The picture is a lot. Some. try to argue, well, it's because they've.

been working very closely every single. day with each other for years, fighting. for freedom. Gez, can't a girl have. hobbies? Like, can a girl live a little? Others say they've become a close. friends and a support system. I'm sure. that his wife is totally fine with stuff. like this. I mean, what's the big deal. about this picture? It's not like they. got caught making out or anything. Why. are people so crazy? Others say, "I just. feel a little uncomfortable because he's. married." But the people who don't like. Karen Reed have used this photo as. another example of why she's guilty of. murder. How can she be so heartless and.

cruel? Karen, how exactly are you paying. your attorneys? You will have your day. I'm totally disgusted. Another one. reads, "This is blowing it for me for. Karen Reed. This man is full of himself. and he's all over her and she's loving. it. He's married, but not for too long. They're definitely sleeping together.". One source apparently close to Karen. Reed tells TMZ that the picture has been. taken way out of context. The two are. just sharing an innocent moment of. celebration. There's nothing on this. picture really. They're just quote. goofing around. But Karen Reed.

supporters have stated, "Isn't it a. little weird that the source only spoke. with TMZ, a longtime non-suporter of. Karen Reed? The connection to Karen. Reed, the source has never been named, disclosed, further expanded upon. It's. also weird that out of the major news. media networks, the only ones that are. really running with this video, this. picture, are the ones that have not been. favorable to Karen Reed since the very. beginning. So, what if the picture is. not even real? What if it's AI? What if.

it's edited? Lars Daniel, a digital. forensic expert, author of Digital. Forensics for Legal Professionals, states, "I certainly do not believe this. to be real. He says it's weird that. there's elements in the photo. So near. the back of the photo, you see this. parking sign. High resolution. You can. read it. The Audi, the car in the back, high resolution, clear as day. So why. does Alan Jackson look like a blob? >> His hair has clear indications that. edits have been made. Additionally, his. arm is kind of warped. It gets bigger.

and smaller and bigger and smaller in. just ways that just don't align with. human anatomy. Netzens have also noticed. that there appears to be two Alan. Jacksons in the photo. One of them is. facing Karen Reed taking a photo with. David Yianetti. Some argue it's not him. and it's a different friend, but it does. look like Alan Jackson. And then another. one who's hugging Karen Reed from the. back. So, which one is Alan Jackson? >> That is crazy. So, you're saying AI? >> It seems to be edited by most people's. professional and non-professional.

accounts. In any event, I do think that. the video is questionable in its. credibility. I mean, I could always be. proven wrong, but just at first glance, it looks like at least a little bit. tampered with. But overall, the whole. thing feels oddly suspicious because the. implications of if this photo is real. versus if it's fake are drastically. different. So, for one, if the photo is. real, you might have a questionable. picture of an attorney and their client. and perhaps a dilemma of professional.

boundaries and moral, ethical questions. being bounced around. Two, if the photo. is not real, if it's edited and main. certain mainstream media outlets are. pushing this photo out there, who would. edit something like this? Why would they. even take this picture and run these. stories? How far are these people. willing to go to make sure Karen Reed. ends up in jail? Are they the same. people that wanted to make sure nobody. found out about Sandra Birmore? Another. high-profile murder case in. Massachusetts. We've actually talked.

about the Sandra Birmore case before on. this podcast. The death of Sandra. Birmore. She was 23 years old. She well. officially originally she self-exited in. her Canton, Massachusetts apartment. almost exactly a year before John. O'Keefe died. Or at least that's what. the Canton PD the Massachusetts State PD. kept saying. She self-exited. But once. the FBI got involved, it was uncovered. that not only did she not selfexit, but. she was likely killed by a police. officer who had been grooming,

exploiting, and abusing her since she. was 15 years old. A police officer that. has connections with some of the Canton. police officers. >> Wait, it was the same police department. >> It's a neighboring police department. So, her alleged killer works for. Stoutton PD, which is a neighboring. police department, but because her. apartment is in Canton, they were the. responding police officers. In fact, one. of these officers that we're familiar. with was at the scene when her body was. found and then the Massachusetts State. Police take over, the true patrols take.

over. >> You're going to see a lot of people that. you're familiar with that pronounce her. dead. They investigate her connections. with another police officer and they all. say, "You know what? She self-exited.". And all of this is taking place in the. same DA's office, Norfolk County DA. But. what's even more intriguing about all of. this is why did Karen Reed's defense. team request unredacted files from. Sandra Burmore's case? What are the. connections here?

[Music]. We would like to thank today's sponsors. who have made it possible for Rotten. Mango to support the Dana Farber Cancer. Institute in Boston, Massachusetts. They're a globally known cancer research. center that also provides support for. patients and families similar to John.

O'Keefe's sister who has since passed. away from brain cancer. This episode's. partnerships have also made it possible. to support Rotten Mango's growing team. and would also like to thank you guys. for your continued support. As always, full show notes are available by. rottenopodcast.com. There are references to driving under. the influence, alleged physical assault. Please watch at your own discretion as. well as mentions of self-exit, um, crimes against people who are currently. pregnant. This episode is pretty dark. It is the final part of the Karen Reed.

series, and there's just honestly I feel. like I could make a 20part series for. Karen Reed. It's just so extensive. every everything we've talked about, we. can go five layers deeper into all of. the nitty-gritty details, but because I. think the main focus that people have. been trying to center the conversation. on is the connections to all of the. corruption in Massachusetts and probably. everywhere in the United States. This. episode is also going to include the. story of Sandra Burmore, which we have. already covered on this podcast, but. there have been lots of new developments.

since then. So, if you want to watch. that episode, I'll link it below, but. there's a lot of updates, and I'm going. to go through them today, and you don't. really need that, but you do need the. first three parts of the Karen Reed. series. There's no way that I can recap. almost 10 hours of video footage for. you. Just know that January 29th, 2022, John O'Keefe, Boston police officer, was. found deceased in the snow on the front. lawn of another Boston police officer's. home, Brian Albert. Brian Albert has a.

lot of connections. This doesn't take. place in the jurisdiction of Boston. Police Department. It takes place in the. jurisdiction of the Canton Police. Department. They are the first ones to. investigate. Everybody is connected to. everybody. And somehow it seems like the. least likely murderer in this situation. The evidence doesn't really point to. her. There's a few things that are weird. like her angry voicemails, but those are. all kind of explained by just sheer. logic. The one that every single person. in a position of authority and power in.

law enforcement in that town has pointed. this case as the culprit is Karen Reed, John O'Keefe's girlfriend of two years. And Karen Reed has gone through two. different trials to try and prove her. innocence. And so this is kind of the. summary and culmination of both trials. We have condensed and combined. statements, trial testimonies for. brevity's sake because there's just no. way. I mean, you're talking about. hundreds of hours of trial footage that. we went through. So, with that being. said, that is the recap. Go watch part.

1, 2, and three. And this is the final. part of Karen Reed. Michael Morrisy is. the DA for the Norfolk County. And he. sits in front of a wall of books and it. makes him look scholarly. It makes him. look well read, but he just starts. yapping away in a YouTube video. Suddenly, everyone in the comments is. rolling their eyes at Mr. Michael. Moresy. He says, "This will be my first. statement of its kind. False narratives. are not evidence. What the evidence does.

not show is that John O'Keefe never. entered the home at 34 Fair View Road in. Canton the night that he died. 11 people. have given statements that they did not. see John O'Keefe enter the home at 34. Fair View that night. Zero people have. said that they saw him enter the home. Zero. No one. Some have, without. evidence, pointed to 18-year-old Colin. Albert, a nephew of the homeowner, and. accused him of attacking John O'Keefe as. he entered the home. But phone evidence.

shows John O'Keeffe never entered the. home at all. There was no fight outside. There's no fight inside the house. John. O'Keefe did not enter the home. Colin. Elbert, the young man being vilified, >> knocked out KO baby, >> was not present when Reed's vehicle and. John O'Keefe arrived on the street. >> This is a false narrative. >> When was he saying this? >> This is like before trial, too. >> Okay. >> And people are confused because why does. this man sound like an attorney for. Colin Albert and not a DA? Because.

aren't DA supposed to be trying the case. before the jury and not telling the jury. what to think about this case? But he. continues, Colin Albert did not commit. murder. How would you know that? There. was no investigation into that. >> Were you there? >> Yeah. Were you there that night? Check. his phone records. I'm just kidding. He. seems crazy. Jennifer McCabe, Matthew. McCabe, and Brian Albert. These people. were not part of a conspiracy and. certainly did not commit murder or any. crime that night. Well, I feel like a. lot of them were drunk driving, so.

that's at least a crime. So, you're. already lying. They have been. forthcoming with authority providing. statements and have not engaged in any. cover-ups. They are not suspects in any. crime. They are merely witnesses in this. case. To have them accused of murder is. outrageous. To have them harassed and. intimidated based on false narratives. and accusations is wrong. The autopsy of. John O'Keefe was conducted by a forensic. pathologist. The doctor found the. injuries that left John helpless in the. cold were not a result of a fight. That. is an entirely false narrative. She. stated specifically that she could not.

rule out a fight. It could have been. from a fight. It could have been from. being hit by a car. It could have been. lots of things, which is why the manner. of John's death is listed as. undetermined. But he continues, "We try. people on the court and not the internet. for a reason. The internet has no rules. of evidence. The internet has no. punishment for perjury, which is also. another lie. You can get hit with. defamation lawsuits." But he continues, "The internet does not know all the. facts. Conspiracy theories are not.

evidence.". >> Michael Proctor, >> no nude so far. The state police trooper. being accused of planting evidence. outside 34 Fairview Road was never at. Fairview Road on the day of the. incident. >> In addition to having no opportunity to. plant the evidence as has been. suggested, Proctor would have no motive. to do so. He had no personal. relationship with any of the parties. involved in the investigation. Had no. conflict. He had no reason to step out. of his investigation. Every suggestion.

to the contrary is a lie. But the one. part that sticks out most is when. Michael Morsy says this. The idea that. multiple police departments, EMTs, fire. personnel, and medical examiner and the. prosecuting agencies a join in or taken. in by a vast conspiracy should be seen. for what it is, completely contrary to. the evidence and a desperate attempt to. reassign guilt. His whole explanation is. that it just takes too many people to be.

involved in a conspiracy or a conspiracy. cover up to this extent, to this level. If that's the case, that means nothing. similar should have never happened ever. before in maybe history, but definitely. not in his department, right? Because. it's just logically impossible, logistically impossible, theoretically. impossible. It is impossible. Correct. >> Mhm. February 4th of 2021, almost exactly a. year before John O'Keefe is found dead.

This is the date of another blizzard in. Canton, Massachusetts. >> Oh yeah. >> Canton police get a phone call from a. local elementary school and one of the. teachers failed to show up to work and. nobody's been able to get in contact. with her. Some people might think this. is no big deal, but this is very unlike. her to do this. Her name is Sandra. Birmore and the Canton police are. dispatched to do a wellness check. They. get to her apartment. Nobody's answering. the door. They're about to leave when. they realize that her vehicle, which is. registered to her. It's in the parking.

lot covered in snow. Snow started. falling 3 days ago, which means she has. been in her apartment for the past 3. days. That would make the most sense, right? I mean, she's not going anywhere. without her snow. Canton is not really a. walkable town. So, if that's the case, why is she not opening the door? Is she. having some sort of medical emergency? Canton police. They ask the property. manager for a set of keys to open up the. apartment. They walk in and they see. Sandra Birchmart in her bedroom on the. floor with a lanyard around her neck, deceased. She's like sitting on her.

bedroom floor. This is very important. later. Her phone is near her body, likely within reach. And they, the. Canton police that show up, they come to. the least likely, least investigative, least common sense conclusion that. Sandra Burmore has self-exited by way of. a duffel bag string around her neck and. she had used her closet door handle. whilst sitting down to self-exit by way. of asphixxiation. Even though most.

evidence does not point her having any. sort of inclination to self-exit. And I. know a lot of people are going to say. that a lot of the times it is random. It. is abrupt. There are not that many signs. to be able to predict, but she's. pregnant. She's planning a newborn photo. session. She literally just emailed a. photographer. She's making arrangements. with a friend to take care of her two. cats while she goes into labor. She's. doing laundry. She was about to put her. laundry from the washer to the dryer. And she was waiting for the father of. her child to show up to her place. The.

father of her child is Ston Police. Detective Matthew Farwell. So this is a. nearby police department. This is not. Canton. And Massachusetts State Police. is the whole state. So it's like a. within. So Canton is within. Massachusetts. Stoutton is within. Massachusetts. It's nearby. Matthew. Farwell is clearly not happy that Sandra. Birchar is pregnant with his child. I. mean, for one, he's married and his wife. is currently also pregnant with their. third child. He didn't like that Sandra.

was going around telling everyone that. she was pregnant with his child. He. didn't want to pay for child support. And he definitely didn't want to get. investigated because Sandra Burmore. isn't just a woman that he's having an. affair with. Sandra Burmore is someone. that he has known since she was a little. girl. She was part of a police mentoring. program called Police Explorers where. it's alleged that multiple police. officers, including Matthew Farwell, his. twin brother, and their superior. officer, Robert Deine, had groomed her. and assaulted her since she was at least.

15 years old. She went into the program. cuz it's supposed to help local youth, and she came from a. just a rough background is how everybody. describes it. But instead of being taken. care of, Sandra Birch was 16 years old. when Matthew Farwell essayed her for the. first time. He was 26. No, she was 15. He was 26 and she was 15. He's also. getting paid by the police force while.

assaulting a minor on the clock getting. paid for it. Near Christmas of 2020, Sandra is of age now. She's 23 at this. point. She tells him that she's pregnant. with his child. He's clearly not happy. about any of this. He texts her and he. just says that he wishes that she would. die. February 1st of 2021, Matthew. decides he's having a change of heart. He does indeed want to stop by Sandra. Burmore's place in the midst of a. blizzard while his wife is in the. hospital about to go into labor with. their first child. He drives to Sandra.

Burmore's home. He's seen on the. apartment CCTV cameras wearing a mask, a. COVID mask. His hood is covering his. entire head. 20 minutes later, he's seen. leaving the apartment, going straight to. the hospital where his wife is giving. birth. There's actually a very. terrifying photo of him where he's. cradling his newborn baby in the. hospital, wearing the same exact outfit. that he had gone to Sandra Burmore's. apartment and allegedly killing her. All. very suspicious elements to I don't. know, a very straightforward crime. I.

don't think anyone would need a police. badge to put two and two together and. come to the very easy destination that. Matthew Farwell should at the very least. be investigated. But that is not what. happens. Instead, Sandra Burmore's death. is quickly deemed a self-exit. Even. though Matthew Farwell has strong. motives, he was the last one to see her. alive. Multiple tips after Sandra's. death, multiple tips are called into the. Norfolk DA's office. The same one. handling Karen Reed's case. Friends of. Sandra are calling in saying they knew.

Sandra was pregnant with a police. officer child, Matthew Farwell. And when. he found out, he was not happy. In fact, he seemed kind of violent. He was. pushing her, shoving her, grabbing. objects from her. This is what Sandra. had told them before she died, putting. Sandra in a chokeold. This is weeks. leading up to her murder. Also, just 12. days before her death, Sandra told her. friends that Matthew Farwell came over. and was suspiciously looking at her. apartment, going through her bathroom, her closets, almost like he was scoping. it out. Those are the words she used. Wow.

>> And 12 days later, she mysteriously dies. in a strange manner that authorities. deem a self-exit. Even though Sandra was. really excited to become a mom, nothing. happens for four full years until the. FBI steps in and finally arrests Matthew. Farwell for Sandra Burmore's death, accusing him of essentially framing. framing Sandra Burmore in her own. murder. Another thing to note is yes, after Sandra's death, many of her. friends called in tips to the Norfolk. County DA's office. And even when the.

red alarms did not go off, I mean, it. should have. But even prior to her. passing, people were calling into Ston. PD to report Matthew Farwell. Sandra. Birmore had told a few of her friends. that she was pregnant with Matthew. Farwell's child, and he had actually. started essaying her since she was 16. She did not believe it to be essay. because she had been so groomed. But. they had noticed it was essay. So they. call Stoutton and they're like, "One of. your officers was abusing the police. program, the Explorers program to essay.

a minor at the time." This is even. before she passes away. And just like. Karen Reed's case, a lot of different. agencies were involved with this whole. investigation before it goes to the FBI. Matthew Farwell is part of Stoutton PD, but Stoutton PD has no jurisdiction. because Sandra Burmore is found deceased. in Canton. So, Canton PD are the first. ones to arrive at the scene. It's later. handed off to the Massachusetts State. Police. >> Why is that? >> They handle most of the unattended. deaths.

>> Canton PD is just too small of a police. department to handle a lot of the. homicides. So, I think they hand off a. lot of their bigger cases. The. Massachusetts State Troopers are the. ones that deemed Sandra Burmore's death. as self-exit, but also the Canton PD. They both deem it a self-exit. Canton. PD, the Massachusetts State Department, and even the DA's office is like, "Yeah, it's definitely a self-exit." In fact, you're going to see a lot of the same. people that are involved. So, the first. connection between these two cases comes.

from. Michael Link. Michael Lank of the Canton. Police Department. good old friends with. Chris Albert. Michael Link has known the. Alberts for probably longer than we've. been alive. This guy has known Chris. Albert since he was 12 years old. And. they have been friends I mean Link says. if he's got to list it. He's probably. known Tim Albert since he was what 16. He's known Chris since he was 12. I mean. >> Tim Albert is the brother another. brother of Albert's. >> Yes. So Brian, Tim, Chris, Kevin Albert,

they're all brothers. They have a few. more siblings. There's like seven. siblings in the bunch, but these are the. four important ones. >> And three of them are cops. Oh, no. Two. of them are cops. One of them is. >> a Canton select man. >> in charge of the I have no idea what. this man does. >> Tim Albert. >> Yeah, he'd just be posting weird stuff. He's like the type to post the alpha man. lion. Michael Link has worked with Kevin. Albert, another Canton detective, for at. least 18 years. He's known Kevin since. he was 14 years old. He does admit that.

he considers Kevin Albert more of a. friend and less of a co-orker. The most. alarming connection in this friendship. with Chris Albert is that Chris is. shady. He sells mediocre pizza. That's. also shady. But in 2002, Officer Link is. sitting outside of a bar. He's off duty. drinking when Chris Albert runs up to. him and says, "Hey, you got to save my. life. My life is in danger." This is. from the perspective of Michael Lane. >> But actually, it looks like an evidence.

bag. It just doesn't say can't police on. it. It says stop and shop, but it's it. does look like an evidence pack. It's. the same thing. >> Do we trust anything? Michael Link says. probably not. So, take it with a grain. of salt. He's saying that they're. threatening the entire Albert lineage. He says, I got out of my car. I. approached these group of men and I. pleaded with them to not fight tonight. I said, you know, there's not going to. be a fight tonight. There's six of you. guys. Chris Albert is here with his. girlfriend, probably Julie Albert at the. time. There's not going to be a fight. tonight. Michael Link says, "I observed.

multiple men walking down the sidewalk. in that direction. And at that point, I. got out of my truck, approached the. group, and pleaded with them. I said, "Guys, not tonight. You know, he's with. his girlfriend. That's not going to be. the fight tonight. Let's" He says, "I. tried my best to diffuse the situation, but they get into a fist fight in the. middle of the night. These two brothers, Michael Link says they end up throwing a. few punches first." Michael Lang starts. wrestling them down to the ground. He. taps himself in as an offduty police. officer. He says, "Okay, now I'm on duty.

and he starts fighting them. He's. punching them. He's on top of them.". Other Canton police officers have to. drag him off of the two brothers and he. says, "I defended myself and engaged in. a physical altercation with the. brothers.". >> Wait, wait, wait, hold on. Six people. He ran into six people. >> Yes, but I it seems like it's only the. two brothers. >> Who's at the scene? Chris Albert, a. girlfriend, and four other people. Yes, but those I mean it's like a group of. people, but he really only starts. fighting two guys.

>> of the six people. >> Yeah. >> Are they trying to fight Chris or trying. to fight Michael? >> They're trying to allegedly they're. trying to fight Chris. I don't really. believe it cuz Chris is known to start, >> right? And Michael saying that's my. friend. Please don't start trouble now. And they start trying to start trouble. So Michael start fighting two brothers. >> Yes. And here. >> is Chris fighting too. >> No. And here's why I don't believe that. Chris is uh innocent in any of this. And. that's just a personal belief. He seems. like the type to start. At one point,

Alan Jackson was in I mean, he's in. Canton. He's in Boston because of this. trial. He walks into a bar. Chris Albert. happens to be there. Chris Albert calls. for a buff friend to show up. And that. friend starts yelling at Alan Jackson to. get the out of Canton and go back to LA. Go back to Los Angeles. big shot. attorney in a very threatening manner. And so this guy is still doing that to. this day. I feel like in 2002, this is. the one that started everything. He gets.

Michael Link involved. Michael Link. starts pummeling these guys. He's asked. later by Karen's attorney. >> Did you come to Chris Albert's aid as. best you could as a longtime friend of. his? >> I came to the aid of a citizen who was. in fear and of need. >> That citizen happened to be Chris Albert. whom you had known since you were 12. years old. >> Correct. Ultimately, a fight breaks up. Link is called for backup. They separate. them. Nothing happens that night. Nobody. is arrested. And that's interesting. because if he is saying that these two. brothers started the fight, they would.

have arrested the brothers. >> Yeah. >> You don't just attack a cop and get away. with it. That never happens ever. Well, interestingly enough, nobody is. arrested. Everyone is told to go home. Nobody files a police report about this. incident until the next day. The two. brothers come into Canton Police. Department and they complain and they. say, "I was just randomly attacked by. one of your officers who was off duty. last night." And then the two brothers. get arrested. Lank is confronted by this. by Karen's attorney who asks him,

"Officer Lank, is this an example of you. using your position as a police officer. to come to the aid of one of the members. of the Albert family?". >> It was me coming to the aid of a citizen. who was terrified and scared for him and. his family on that night. >> Who happened to. What? >> Who happened to be Chris Albert? >> You indicated that either they made a. threatening comment to you or a. disparaging comment to you about I don't. give a correct. Correct. Isn't it true. that what was actually said was you said. to them, I don't know who you are, but.

I'm going to make your life miserable. No. Michael Lank connected with the. Alberts, connected with Karen Reed. He. is one of the first to show up at Sandra. Birchar's apartment when there is a. wellness check called. He is one of the. few officers that finds her deceased. body and starts the investigation into. Sandra Birchmore's death. Now, speaking. of the Albert family, Kevin Albert was. additionally one of the few at the scene. of Sandra Burmore's investigation, but. he was at the scene much later, so he.

did not discover Sandra Burmore's body. He was actually not a big key role in. the investigation, but he did go to the. apartment complex to gather CCTV data, >> which they see clearly that another. officer was at the scene. >> Yes. Daniel Whitley is a paramedic. He is. also another connection. He's one of the. first paramedics on the scene for Sandra. Birmore. He's also the paramedic that. drove Karen Reed to the hospital after. she was section 12. He's also Carrie.

Roberts's neighborh. >> When Carrie Robert hosts a neighborhood. block party, he brings the fire truck. because he's a firefighter paramedic. He. brings the fire truck to the block. party. Now, what's interesting is in. part of his testimony for the Karen Reed. case. A lot of netisonens think this guy. just just does not like Karen Reed. People don't understand why all of these. law enforcement officers have so much. hatred and vitriol for Karen Reed. without even really understand. First of. all, if you're a law enforcement officer.

and you look at this case, because a lot. of people have pointed out, why is it. that all police officers from across the. nation have not come in support of John. O'Keefe and this trial? Because if you. are talking about a police officer that. has been murdered by their girlfriend, every single cop in the entire nation is. going to be posting about it on. Facebook. >> Every when a cop goes down, every the. blue wall, stand strong, every other cop. is posting about it. It doesn't matter. if you've never met that cop. >> You're posting about it on Facebook.

>> and you're saying people the cops are. not across the. >> not a lot. I mean, you have the Boston. police force. They showed support. briefly initially when John O'Keefe was. first deceased. And then you had a few. local officers. You have the Canton. police that have rallied around, but. definitely nothing like what you would. imagine, especially a case this. high-profile. I would understand if. maybe it's not a high-profile case and. these cops just haven't heard of it. But. I would think everyone from the NYPD all. the way to the LAPD would be posting. about it. Why is it that they're not? Is. it because they're looking at it and.

going, "Oh, this is a weird. investigation.". >> Mhm. >> But it seems like every single person. that goes on the stand doesn't feel that. way. In fact, it seems just like they. hate Karen Reed. It's like they have a. predisposed condition to hate her. When. Daniel Whitley is talking about what he. witnessed in the ambulance, he does. admit that Karen Reed was a wreck, which. is pretty on par with what you would. imagine someone going through a. traumatic incident. However, he says, quote, "She was crying about having to. take care of kids, saying she couldn't. do it.". >> I was saying, "You can do this. It's.

it's not it's not as hard as it seems.". >> Which again doesn't really seem that. motivating, but he continues. >> Um, she kept saying, um, I can't take. care of these kids. I can't take care of. these kids. they're not my kids and. they're not they're not his kids. So I. said, "Listen, it's okay. It looks like. you have a very strong support system.". And she she had been crying, crying, crying. And she picked her head up and. said, "Do you know Carrie Roberts?" And. I said, "A matter of fact, I do." And um.

she said, "Anybody who knows Carrie. Roberts wouldn't say that about her.". And I said, "Well, she did come to uh. out at early in the morning to look for. your husband in in in a blizzard." And. she just rolled her eyes and put her. head head back down. >> And I thought it was just bizarre. >> Wait, can we break that down for a. second? >> Yes. >> Feel like that was packed. What does. that mean? >> He's saying, "You've got a strong. support system. You've got this." And. okay, Karen Reed, she unprompted does.

say, "Do you know Carrie Roberts?" He's. like, "Yeah, I do." She says, "Well, if. you know Carrie Roberts, you wouldn't. say that." However, I feel like I'm on. Karen Reed's side with this one. >> So, is Karen Reed saying that Carrie. Robert is not a great support system? >> No. And I agree because she's telling. her to shut the up the whole time. >> Yeah. I mean, what what what is so wrong. about that? >> I I don't understand. And I He's saying. in the moment when you're crying about. your deceased husband, it doesn't make. sense. However, I feel like there have. been times where I mean I don't know the. level of distraught or grief that any.

type of situation like this has never. occurred in my life thankfully, but I. feel like I do make dark comments like. that. >> Yeah. Are you kidding me? Like this is. life. What are you talking about? You're. not here trying to get motivational. right now. This is life. >> Especially in the moment when you are in. this dark of a place and someone says, "Well, chin up, buttercup. You're not. going to go okay thanks." Like that's. very small talk. But I feel like you're. in a state where you're very realistic. You're like, "Absolutely not. I have no. support system. I can't do this. I can't.

do anything in life. What are you. talking about? Do you even know who. you're talking about?" That's the vibe. Karen Reed gives me. But he's on the. stand like, "It's just weird. It's just. weird." He testifies. The only tone I. can use to describe it is snarky. It just seems that he does not like. Karen Reed and he is one of the very. first paramedics at the scene for Sandra. Burmore. Trooper Nicholas Garino was a. Commonwealth witness for both the first. and second trial. He is a digital.

forensic specialist. That's what he. calls himself. He says he went through. all of John O'Keefe's data extracted. from his phone. The main takeaways from. his testimonies include the fact that I. think he doesn't know what he's talking. about. I think he's shady. >> Why? >> For one, he states that the house long. to die in the cold search for Jennifer. McCabe. He didn't find that on Jennifer. McCabe's phone on Cellbrite, which. doesn't make sense. It doesn't make. sense because all the other CellBrite. experts, they're like, "You pull the. data from Celebrite just because she. deleted her Google search." You're.

talking about Cellbrite. Most law. enforcement agencies use Cellbrite. If. you can Google something, delete it, and. then it doesn't show up. Why would law. enforcement agencies use Celbrite? His. excuse to that is, well, I was using an. unupdated version of CellBrite when I. extracted her data. and everyone's like, "That doesn't make sense." He also. claims that he didn't find the numerous. phone calls that Jen McCabe made to John. O'Keefe that night and then later. deleted. Remember how Jen McCabe is. like, "Yeah, I was waiting for him.

outside or looking out the window. waiting for him to come in. I was. texting him a few times." Well, after. that, she makes numerous phone calls to. John O'Keefe and all of them go. unanswered and then she deletes them. Why would she delete them? because it. doesn't make sense if they did drive. away and she was like, "Oh, I thought. they got into a fight, so I just I let. it go." Why would she call? The netizen. theory is that they had allegedly. something to do with his demise and they. couldn't find his phone. So, she was. calling it to hear it ring so that they.

could find his phone. >> Wow. >> He didn't find any of those either. I. don't know what he's looking for because. he's not finding anything. He also. claims that you can sometimes trick your. phone that you walked up and down stairs. because remember John O'Keefe's phone. indicated that he took multiple steps. like about 80 steps which would have led. them straight to the front door side. door of 34 Fair View and then went up. and down three flights of stairs. He. says, "Well, you can kind of trick your. phone to do that." which a lot of. people, including anonymous Apple. employees, take it with a grain of salt, online, have later disputed, but likely.

due to strict company policies, they. can't really tell you outright, but they. expressed disbelief in the comments that. he's making. He's like, "Yeah, I mean, a. lot of these Apple employees are saying. maybe in 2012, but you're talking 2022. No, you're not going to trick your phone. of going up and down the stairs by. driving up a hill." So best case. scenario is he is a complete useless. incompetent quote unquote expert. >> Yes. Okay. So that's the complicated. thing about Karen Reed's case. Everyone.

uses the straw man theory where they. just compile every single thing and. bubble it to you know when people argue. online and you're like can you have a. little more nuance? That's kind of the. thing with this. The argument is not. every single person can be that corrupt. It doesn't make sense. It's not corrupt. Some people are just incompetent and. it's just together. >> It's a mixture of corruption and. incompetence and then it's combined and. it creates this. >> It's not that every single person is in.

on a so-called cover up. It just seems. like some people have no idea what. they're doing. >> and you can't really tell which one. >> This is one of the guys. You can't. really tell which one it is. I mean, there's a few. This guy, Trooper Paul, you're going to be like, I don't think. he's part of a conspiracy. I think. there's no thoughts behind this man's. eyes. But this one, it's hard to say. With Gino, it's hard to say. And the. timing of the fact that he didn't find. the house long to die in the cold search. is interesting considering if they had.

that information for the first grand. jury, if they were privy to these. details, they probably would have been. less likely to indict Karen Reed. >> All those deleted calls from Jen McCabe, the house long to die in the cold, I. don't know if a grand jury would have. indicted Karen Reed, >> right? It just makes Trooper Gino look. like a very shaky witness in the Karen. Reed case. Side note, I will say that. Trooper Gino has gone viral because. whether intentional or not, there is a. break. He was the one that had to read. all of John O'Keeffe and Karen Reed's. messages out loud in court.

>> Okay. >> And at one point there's a break during. the reading of the text messages between. John and Karen. He sigh, he leans back, but the mic is clearly still on and he. whispers, "Kill me to himself. kill me. >> Which has since gone viral with most. people feeling a twinge of sympathy. towards him except for the fact that can. you even trust a single thing that this. guy says when he has also worked on the. Sandra Birchar case. After Sandra.

Burchmore's death, Canton PD had the. state police come in to investigate. Trooper Gino is a trooper. He's a. trooper troll. Trooper Gorino being on. the team, he states that he did not find. a single message between Matthew. Farwell's phone to Sandra Birchmart. Matthew Farwell turned in his phone. >> That is so shady. >> I didn't find a single message. Which. would make you think, okay, Farwell is. not as involved as the internet likes to. think that he is then. Correct. Incorrect. The second the feds take a. look at this case, they uncover 32,79.

messages between the two between. December 2019 to February 2021. That's. just what, like 2 years. >> What's like the status of Sandra Burmore. now? Is it. >> He's in jail and it's pending trial. >> because of the feds, right? >> Yes. He has pled not guilty. So, you're. just telling me, Trooper Garino, that. you just miss, you don't even just miss. one or two, you miss 32,79. text messages. Some of those text.

messages include the two of them talking. about the first time Farwell rworded. Sandra Burmore. That is when Sandra. would have been 15 years old, he rworded. her. That is her very first experience, and she happened to be a victim of a. crime. She text him, "I had butterflies. so bad the day you took my car." Like, you know, "Me, too. It was such a big. day. I still know the date to this day.". So, she's saying, "I still remember the. date to this day." And this is how deep. the grooming has gone. He says,

"Really?" Yes. That's not a date I'll. ever forget. April 10th, 2013. Again, very clear evidence that he essayed her. when she was 15. You don't need a. calculator to do the math. Sandra. writes, "Best day of my life. heart. emoji. Me, too. Then later, Matthew. Farwell texts her, "If I pushed, I. absolutely could have effed you without. condoms from day one." Sandra Birmore. responds, "Probably if you really pushed. it, I was kind of scared to say no in. the beginning, not knowing how you would.

take it. So, yeah, you probably could. have gotten using no protection, lol.". More alarmingly, this police officer who. has already committed these crimes when. Sandra is of age now that she's an. adult, he asks her to engage in acting. during intimate relations. He says that. he wants her to have intimate relations. with him while pinning her down and fake. rwording her. He wants Sandra to say, quote, "Will you say, Matt, stop? I'm. 13. I'm not ready for this. Oh my god,

please stop. >> This is insane." He also texts her. numerous times to pretend that he is an. older brother coming into her room at. night to have intimate relations with. her that she does not want to consent. to. Even that's not enough for this sick. walking disease that likes to call. himself a police officer, likes to call. himself a man or a human. He text her a. whole lengthy conversation about how he. wishes she would have told him sooner. that she was interested in him because. he would have totally essayed her a year. prior when she was 13, 14 years old. Even after all of that, when Sandra is.

of age, he will ask her to meet up in. Costco parking lots, Five Guys parking. lots to have intimate relations while. he's on the clock for Stoutton PD. He. also text her, quote, I'm going to sneak. away from work real quick. Quote, "Yes, I will be on the clock." If this is not. already a steaming pile of motivations. for Matthew Farwell to kill Sandra. Burmore, that just goes over the. trooper's heads. There's also these. messages. Sandra Birchmore texts Matthew. Farwell a poster board that she made. that reads, "Congrats, we're going to be. parents." To which Matthew Farwell. responds, "I literally have nothing to.

say right now. How could you express. that in text when I said I don't. appreciate it?" He responds, "How far. are you? Regardless of how far we're. keeping it." Okay, we will need to talk. then. No, that's obvious. I'm mad at how. you're acting over a choice we both. made. I'm mad you act like you gave. anyone a choice. Oh, so you didn't have. a choice. Per usual, you make and do. whatever you want. This is coming from. the rworder that rwordwarded her when. she was 15. He says, "You are truly the.

worst person on the face of the earth.". According to the feds, Sandra's diaries. also indicate, as well as text messages. indicate that Matthew Farwell would. punish Sandra Birchmore ever since she. was a kid for things like getting bad. grades, for failing to share her cell. phone location data. He would punish her. with really rough essay when she was. young. He also details his ideal. situation, which would be her pretending. to be 13 or 14 years old, and he says, quote, "You can say no and make me take. it full rword." After an in-person.

meeting, Sandra texts Matthew Farwell, "It made me really uncomfortable and. stressed out and scared when you were. next to me because I thought you were. going to hit me after you said what you. said and took things out of my hand. That's why I was crying. I know you. wouldn't, but it still scared me." Which. makes sense because this guy is very. scary. A federal search warrant of his. devices also found that he liked lots of. memes involving necrilia. Again, a. detective. He liked one that reads, "What does a pulse and a.

destination of intimate relations have. in common? I don't care if she has. either. He doesn't care if a woman. reaches a destination. >> or dead. >> or if she has a pulse." Another one he. likes says, "When she says, "Choke me, daddy." And you get carried away and now. she's dead. Another one that reads, "If. you a corpse on a water bed, it feels. like they're participating." A report. from the feds reads that he also liked a. meme that reads, quote, "Glorifying a. person who kills and essays someone no. one will miss." Another one shows a.

woman with a piece of duct tape over her. mouth. And again, this is a police. detective, a woman with a piece of duct. tape, duct tape over her mouth, and it. reads, "Duct tape turning no no intom. since 1942." a police detective. A month. before Sandra Burmar is found dead, she's texting Matthew Farwell while. trying to compromise knowing that he has. a family, which side note, hewarded her. for the first time a month before he got. married to his wife, the mother of his. three children. She was 15. Sandra texts. him, "You don't have to sign the birth.

certificate if they can have your name, and I won't move to Stoutton. I won't. [ __ ] about holidays, but I would like. you to come a few days before Christmas. and Easter so you can see what they get. from me, and I don't want you to leave. them out." And three, if you want to try. and support them, we can talk about. that. But I do want you to see them. I. feel like I'm trying to be as fair as I. can and I want you to be there for the. labor. I'm standing my ground on that. one for sure. Okay, we can discuss this. more in person. It's a lot to think. about. It's so much more than you have. ever asked for. Sandra Birchar sadly.

responds and still less than what any. other girl would ask for. Just two weeks. before Sandra's death, adding more. motivation into the mix if you can even. fathom that. One of Sandra's friends. calls him into the Stoutton Police. Department to report Matthew Farwell for. essaying her as a teenager. He text her, "Dude, your [ __ ] friend called my. job, Sandra. What the [ __ ]. >> Wait, another friend said that uh. Matthew essayed. >> the friend.". >> No, so Sandra had told and I think the. friend is like, "Okay, Sandra, you don't. see how alarming this is. This is not.

normal. He can't be a police officer. calls Stoutton PD and he's texting her. upset. And Sandra just texts question. mark. He says, "You told me that no one. knew about us, yet she claimed we. wereing. Like, you have no idea how bad. what she did is. I literally can't. believe this is even real life. Like, what else do I have to worry about now? Which other friend will do something. tomorrow?" And just a few days before. her murder, there are text messages. proving that Sandra went to Walmart to. get a copy of her apartment keys, as is. requested by Mat Matthew Farwell. text. messages to Sandra's friends from Sandra.

indicating that Matthew Farwell came. over to scope the bathroom. All of these. are messages that are seemingly missed. by Trooper Garino initially. >> How does Gino still have a job after. that? >> Yeah. Well, I I don't know. >> I mean, to say the least, the guy should. be locked up too for. >> in our opinion. As they say though, you. cannot be fired from the police force. for incompetence. you have to be fired. for like brute over-the-top corruption,

which is hard to prove because you can. always argue corruption is just. incompetence. All of these messages are. seemingly missed. Trooper Gino's. explanation for that is that Matthew. Farwell already told him that the. messages between him and Sandra Burmore. were deleted from his phone. So, he. didn't really take it as a big red flag. He just kind of goes with it. Which even. then, a digital forensic specialist. should know that that doesn't mean. deleted, right? Deleted does not mean. deleted when you're a law enforcement. officer. Additionally, he pulled. extractions from Sandra Burmore's.

computer which shows thousands of. communications between them. It also. includes Matthew Farwell googling and. deleting quote, "Can deleted iMessage be. recovered by Celbrite, which sounds very. similar to how long to die in the cold.". And then another one, quote, "Can you. revoke consent in Massachusetts?". H. >> both of which he has deleted. But the. jurors for Karen Reed's case don't know. any of this when Trooper Gino is. testifying. Just like they don't know. about the FBI investigation into the.

investigation of John O'Keefe's death. because. Auntie Bev has ruled against it. There. will be no mention of it. She states. testimony about unrelated death. investigation Birchmark would result in. a trial within a trial with much. information being inadmissible, confidential, or offered without a. proper foundation. Elizabeth Little. argues that the parallels in these cases. couldn't be clearer. Both cases involve. a failure to investigate a law. enforcement officer who should have been. a suspect. The reports by investigating. officers that led to the improper. clearing of Farwell go directly towards.

the credibility of these officers. But. alas, regarding any information. regarding Sandra Burmore is not allowed. into Karen Reed's trial. One criminal. justice journalist states, "Understatement of the century, but. Massachusetts has a serious problem with. murder investigations involving police. suspects, witnesses, and leads." So, they can't bring it up. So, the second. trial, the defense, they just completely. forego a cross-examination for Trooper. Garino. They don't even touch it. But. the the internet goes crazy. >> They don't even touch it. >> They go, "We have no questions.".

Sergeant John Fanning. Before this case, Sandra Birchar's case gets taken over by. the feds. It goes from Stton PD to. Canton PD. Well, Stton really didn't do. anything. Canton PD to MSP. And they. decide that maybe we are going to. investigate Matthew Farwell, the state. police. They're like, "Okay, let's look. into him.". >> Who is John Fannon? >> John Fanning is lieutenant of the. Massachusetts State Police. He's going. to be connected. Just you wait. >> He's going to be leading the. investigation into Sandra Burmore's.

death. He's like, "Gorino, pull the text. messages." He's like, "I couldn't find. any." And so he's like, "Okay, let me. investigate what's going on." Now, what. do they do? Do they investigate Farwell. for potential murder? No, they. investigate him for lararseny. In other. words, they're going to investigate him. for stealing taxpayer money, as there is. proof that he was essaying Sandra while. he was quote on patrol. They're not. investigating him for essaying Sandra. They're investigating him for having. intimate relations with her when she is. of age while getting paid at work. Why. is that easier on the charges?

>> I guess it's better than not. investigating Matthew Farwell at all. And this is a pretty slap on the wrist. charge. Hopefully, >> doesn't look as bad. >> Yeah. Even when people are lining up, calling in to say, "Hi, I'm Sandra's. friend and she told me that Matthew. Farwell put her in a headlock and. snatched her phone from her and stated, quote, "I wish you would die. I want. nothing to do with this baby." But he. says lararseny. And that when she showed. him a sonogram, he pushed her to the. ground and said, "That's not my child. I.

want nothing to do with you." He says, "Larseny.". He believes that Sandra Burmore has. self-exited. He said based on the. physical evidence, personal notes. discovered, as well as the medical. examiner's findings and medical. determination, she selfexited. He writes. in his report about Sandra Birchmore. that yes, trooper Gino did eventually. eventually discover text messages. between Farwell and Sandra Burmore, but. really all it did was indicate that. there was a relationship between them. However, Sandra communicated often with. friends and family, and it appeared that. Sandra had sexual relations with other.

men in the months leading up to her. death. There were no threats of harm by. any of these individuals, including. Matthew Farwell. Side note, all of this is happening after Matthew. Farwell was caught lying to state. troopers about his relationship with. Sandra. First, he told them that they. only started having relations after she. was of age. They've only had relations a. few times and the last time that they've. been intimate was long time ago, which. is all entirely false and the troopers. should have discovered that very quickly. on. And I do want to say just like the. Karen Reed case, why does every trooper.

have a problem with the victims? Why. does every trooper have a problem with. really anyone that's not law. enforcement? Because the way that. everyone is saying that, uh, well, Karen. Reed was snarky. Karen Reed was this, Karen. It's just like these snide side. comments that are just weird to come. from law enforcement officers who are. supposed to be objectively investigating. a case. When the Canton police write. their report on Sandra Burmore, they dog. on her apartment for being messy. >> Oh, yeah. >> They're like, "Looks like nobody's. cleaned it in months.". >> I remember. Yeah. >> But you know what's interesting about.

Fanning? In his free time, this guy. belongs to a group chat. >> Michael Proctor. >> Yes. >> The No Nudes Yet group chat. >> Yes. A year after Sandra Burmore's. murder, Michael Proctor texts. No nudes. yet. And he was part of that group chat. He's actually a supervisor for Michael. Proctor as well as Yuri Buchanan is. And. so is Tuli. Fanning was investigated. briefly by the MSP Office of. Professional Integrity and. Accountability, which sounds like a. makebelieve department, but he's briefly. investigated over.

>> What's his department one more time? >> It's the MSP Office of Professional. Integrity and Accountability. >> That'sing crazy. >> Yeah, it's like if we had a Department. of Silence and peace and quiet. It just. Okay. Doesn't mix. That's what they. have. He's investigated. He says that he. didn't see the text message. And the. investigation shockingly ends with quote. insufficient evidence to either prove or. disprove if John Fanning failed to. reprimand Proctor as a supervisor. >> Do all of these people still have their.

job? Has anybody received any punishment. or. >> Yes. So, Michael Proctor is fired, but. he will get he he's appealing that. >> Yuri Buchanan is put on desk work as. well as ATF Brian. They're both put on. desk work. >> What does that mean? >> Desk work means you're not on the field. administrative. usually this is what this means in the. law enforcement world. shuts the [ __ ] up and then you can go.

back and do your job or not do your job. which is what you were doing in the. first place. >> so nothing. >> nothing he did lose five vacation days. as well Brian Tully has been transferred. to a different department again could. easily be transferred back they made it. sound like it was a big deal it doesn't. sound like it's a big deal at all it. seems like the only one that has a big. deal is Michael Proctor which he might. even get his job back. And this guy, Shannon Burgess, which we're going to. get into in a little bit. He's not even. a law enforcement officer. >> What does purple mean again? >> Purple just means important, >> but not like uh Okay, got it.

>> Yes. Fanning claims that he never saw. those group chat messages of the no. nudes yet. And to be fair, there is no. proof that he ever responded. There's no. proof that we know of. However, there is. another strange incident during Karen. Reed's trial. The defense, they know of. Fanning. They know of his connection to. Sandra Burmore's case. They know of his. connection to trooper proctor's text. messages. They know they don't like. Fanning clearly. And Fanning, just like. Trooper Proctor, should have no. connection with how this trial proceeds. forward. Just as how Buchenik, who is. also part of the group chats, he was in.

the group chats. He is a witness, but he. should not be touching this trial. He. should not be facilitating anything in. this trial, right? Cuz that would be. crazy. There is a strange incident. during Karen Reed's trial where a juror. a juror is dismissed. And according to a. netzen comment who worded it as simply. as possible because it gets a little. convoluted, an anonymous person is. outside and they hear a juror talking. about the case. How do they know it's a. juror? I don't know. Maybe the juror. said, "I'm a juror on the Karen Reed. case." I have no clue. But an anonymous.

person is like, "I heard a juror talking. about the case. I'm going to go report. it to this random person, John Fanning, a trooper. Am I going to report it to. Adam Lai? Am I gonna report it to Auntie. Bev? No. I'm gonna report it to this. random trooper, John Fanning. Well, Lieutenant John Fanning, who then is. going to tell a court officer. Then that. court officer is going to go tell Auntie. Bev, who's going to question the juror.

The juror is going to deny the. accusation and say, "I never. What are. you talking about?" But the juror is. ultimately dismissed. >> Shady, huh? Why would an anonymous. person, we don't know who they are, report it to Lieutenant Fanning of the. Massachusetts State Police? They don't. report it to Michael Morsey's office. They don't report it to Auntie Bev. They. don't report it to a court officer. They. don't report it to Adam Lai. Why. wouldn't they just go straight to a. court officer themselves? The defense. has asked the court to get more. information from John Fanning about this. whole incident, but that is denied by.

Auntie Bev. Attorney Jackson actually. pops off on Auntie Bev, saying, "We were. told that he was the commander of the. extensive security operations in this. case. It's reasonable to conclude from. that statement that Fanning was either. directly in charge of or in charge of. the jurors, which the court is now. telling me he wasn't. We reasonably. concluded that this doesn't make any. sense. Like he's saying it doesn't make. sense. Okay, we were never allowed the. opportunity to find out exactly what his. role was because the court refused our. request at the time. Here's what we know. about Lieutenant Fanning. He's among the.

troopers that one of Michael Proctor's. supervisors that was included in the. text train when Trooper Proctor said he. was going through my client's phone. looking for nudes. He's the source to. whom something was reported about juror. misconduct. And when you couple those. two things together, it's unreasonable. to conclude that he was at least, you. know, within the orbit of security. operations governing the jurors. Like. what does he have to do with the jurors? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's weird. It's. like even when when the diddy case you. guys were doing, if there's something. suspicious or something like that, you. report it to the court. You report.

directly to the authority, not to a. state police. >> It's very weird. >> Yeah. >> If you ask John Fanning, if Auntie Bev. was like, "Okay, attorneys ask John. Fanning and he's like, "Yeah, it was my. neighbor and they didn't know who else. to tell and they were just telling me. because they thought it was weird, but. they didn't know the rules." Even that. would be weird because of his position. in all of this and the juror denied it. I feel like it would still require. further investigation, especially on the. defense part. But the fact that Auntie. Bev won't even allow the questioning, is.

bizarre. And the defense says there was. no evidence presented at the time, as. the court knows. There's no declaration. There was no report. There was no. supporting documentation whatsoever over. the defense's objection. That is, you. know, very also this juror is. potentially defense friendly. >> Right. Right. seems to show a lot of. likeness for the defense team during the. trial. To which Auntie Bev is like, "Well, he doesn't have any charge over. the juror, so move on." That's all she. says. Jackson asks for approval and she. says, "We're going to move on." And it's.

so bizarre that a lot of the comments. read, she has already decided beforehand. that she was going to interrupt him and. say, "Moving on." Every time she has no. answer, she shuts attorney Jackson down. and says, "Let's move on. Let's move on. What about the issue at hand? What do. you mean, let's move on?" which at the. very least this guy just does not. deserve to have a job in my opinion, John Fanning, let alone in police work. But it's just suspicious that in both. cases that Fanning is involved with that. the state troopers report there's. nothing weird about this case at all. Side note, that's another thing that the.

feds pointed out was crazy is that a lot. of Sandra Burmore's family have come. forward to say, "Hey, we did find. something suspicious at her house." So, after the police cleared out of her. apartment, we had to go clean her. apartment and we found her favorite. necklace, her prized necklace, which is. this necklace with a chain and a pink. flamingo. It was on the ground with. clumps of hair. Why would it be on the. ground with clumps of hair? They're. telling the authorities. I'm telling. you, this is weird, right? >> Mhm. >> The feds look at the crime scene photos,

which obviously have not been released. for obvious reasons, but they say what's. even more alarming is that that necklace. was not on the ground. That necklace was. on Sandra Birmore's body in the crime. scene photos. It was broken and it was. hanging dangling off of her neck with. clumps of hair. Do any of these people. put that in their reports? No. You know. what they put in their reports? Quote, "Trash and clumps of cat fur on the. carpet, indicating that it had not been. cleaned or vacuumed in some time.". >> Wow. >> When the troopers later are asked about. the security footage where you can.

clearly see Matthew Farwell, I he's a. tall guy as well. He's got a very. specific build. It's him. his car rolled. up to the it's him. They are very. cautious with their wording, stating the. man is a male believed to be Matthew. Farwell. One of the state officers. working this case used to be a former. Stoutton police officer, which Matthew. Farwell is a Stton officer. Yuri Buchan. had um spent a lot of time in Ston. I. believe he lived there at one point. So, there's a lot of connections with these.

small towns. Do they mean anything? Do. they not mean anything? I don't think. any single person online would be. putting these weird dots together being. like, "Oh, they all lived in the same. town as something nefarious." Except for. the fact that they are all conducting. themselves like weird villains. >> Yeah. >> But following Sandra Burmore's death, it. seems maybe the only police department. that maybe a little bit did something. Well, I don't even want to give them. that much praise, but the Stton police,

they did place Farwell firmly on. administrative leave very quickly. I. think Stoutton PD does have a female. police chief, like one of the first. female police chiefs. Some netizens were. saying, "Well, maybe it's that." Some. are saying, "Well, no, she still. sucked." It really depends. But at the. time, apparently Farwell went to a bar. with a local coworker. He goes to this. local bar with a co-orker, I mean. And. during that meeting, he tells the. coworker that he he did have intimate. relations with Sandra Birchmar. However, at no point during that conversation did. he express any grief, sadness, or.

remorse about her passing. In fact, he. told that person that he was very angry. with the MSP for looking into him. He. also participated in a joke at one. point. I don't know why there's a joke. to begin with about the fact that she. was found on a closet door. I guess a. bunch of officers were laughing at it. >> He was telling a buddy. >> Yeah. >> another police. >> He was like, "Yeah, I mean, I did have. intimate relations with her." And he. expressed no grief that she passed. And. then he's like, "But I'm just kind of. pissed off that these troopers are. looking into me.". >> And the buddy reported this.

>> Yes. And yet Fanning and the troopers. find zero evidence that could point to. Sandra Burmore's death as being anything. but a selfexit. Meanwhile, the feds say, I mean, this is literally crazy. It's. right there. Not only is it Matthew. Farwell, it's his twin brother, also a. police officer, and their supervisor, Robert Deine. and all three of them have. been involved in her life since she was. a young teenager and exploited her for. nearly a decade. The investigator for. the feds who combed through a portion of. the messages says he says he wanted to.

wash his eyes out with holy water after. seeing some of those messages. >> What What happened to his twin brother. and his supervisor? >> I think they're all put on leave, but I. don't know if they've been arrested yet. >> The state troopers, they never caught. that. Why would they? Usually there is a. synergy in the courtroom that opposing. council have. And typically you would. hope that the judge at least appears to. be a neutral force in the courtroom. which is why we called judge Aaroon. father Aroon because it was like a dad.

and his kids all fighting each other and. arguing and then he's like okay kids. calm down. And I use that term. specifically because he never showed. favoritism which is a very important. deal. Even if you are biased against or. for the defendant, you need a judge that. does not show favoritism to one side or. the other because that could cause. appellet issues, that could cause. justice issues. It's a big problem. We. have no clue what's going on with the. three groups of people if they actually. like each other. But usually there is. this synergy that's supposed to be.

preserved. People think that's not. happening in this case. That is not. happening in this case. There is one. viral moment where Karen Reed, she is. sitting at the defendant table and um. it's gone viral. She's sitting there, Alan Jackson is passionately disagreeing. with the judge about the verdict. slipped. Arguably the most important. piece of paper during the entire trial. The piece of paper that the jurors take. back to the jury room to determine the. fate of Karen Reed's I don't know entire. life. He says, "The fact that there's no.

box to check not guilty for lesser. charges or really most of the charges is. absurd. Auntie Bev is saying, well, it's. always been done that way. If they find. her not guilty, they just don't check. the guilty box.". >> This verdict slip as submitted to the. jury is exactly how it always is in. Massachusetts. >> I I don't really care how it always is. in Massachusetts. I care about whether. or not it's appropriate. >> It's appropriate. >> Stupid things. >> It's appropriate. >> for a superior charge. They have to.

decide that she is not guilty of the. superior charge. And that is the. starting point of whether or not she is. guilty or not guilty of any subordinate. charge. How do they decide that she's. not guilty of the first subordinate. charge, involuntary manslaughter? >> Okay. Anything else you want to say, Mr. Jackson? >> I'd like an answer from the court. How. do they decide that she's not guilty of. involuntary manslaughter on that. verdict? >> That's their decision to make. And how. do they make it if they don't have an. option to check a box that says not. guilty? How.

>> they don't check the box that says. guilty, do they? And then when they go. to the next ch the next block, they. don't check the block that says guilty. And on the top you're left with not. guilty. Okay. >> And he's like, "That's crazy.". >> Yeah. >> You don't think that's crazy? >> That is weird. >> And she's just not hearing it anymore. And perhaps Karen Reed smirks at the. fact that her life is on the line on. this singular sheet of probably an A5. piece of paper and she can't even decide. what goes on there. Or maybe it's the.

fact that Auntie Bev clearly made up her. mind prior to all of this because she's. fighting with Alan Jackson. And then. eventually she's like, "We've always. done it like this." David Yanetti, who's. a local attorney, is like, "Well, I've. never seen it like that." And then she's. like, "Well, I don't care." She's just. does not care. She's like, >> you say, "I don't care." Basically, she's like, "Well, I disagree.". >> It's the absence of the check mark that. the court determines is the not guilty. finding by the jury. >> Yes, that's what the verdict slip reads. It reads not guilty. If they don't check.

block 2, three, or four, the verdict. slip reads not guilty. Okay, Miss. Yianetti, you've seen verdict slips. exactly like this. Okay. >> I actually haven't I have not seen a. verdict slip there where not guilty is. not an option. >> Okay. I disagree with you. >> Or maybe it's the fact that Auntie Bev. have already made up her mind. Or I. don't know what it is. But also, she's. on trial for murder that she I mean, in. my opinion, and also legally did not. commit. Karen Reed smirks, smiles, and.

Auntie Bev's head snaps in her. direction. This is funny, Miss Reed. The. courtroom goes silent. So, we're done. here. And with that, Auntie Bev storms. out. >> Excuse me. This is funny, Miss Reed. All right, we're done. >> All right, to the court, please. >> What? >> In an interview, Karen says that at one. point she just wanted to ask Auntie Bev, the judge, "Is this a game? Is this a. game to you?" Cuz she's like, "My life.

is on the line. Like, is this a game?". Auntie Bev also has a very unique way of. running her courtroom. She likes to sit. right next to the witness in a black. office chair and she will just swing. side to side from her office chair like. she's testing them out at Staples. She. looks like she's in a meeting about what. people want to do with the communal. restroom towelettes if they want to. switch them to a different brand or if. they want to stay with Georgia Pacific. That's the vibe she gives me in the. middle of a witness testimony. Her mic. is on. It does not relay directly into.

the courtroom, but all the live streams. can hear it. And it's just, okay, Misty and Eddie, okay, Mr. Jackson, I don't know what it. is. Also, another thing is Father Arun. was very quick with any objections. during examinations. If he overrules the. objection, just a quick overruled, it's. overruled, it's overruled, or a soft. sustained, which is rephrase the. question, rephrase the question, or.

affirm sustained. That was it. Those are. like the three, maybe four if he didn't. know the grounds. So, he would ask. grounds and then they would tell them. the grounds. Auntie Bev, this is the new. catchphrase out there, which is I'll. allow it. I'll allow it. I'll allow it. I'll allow it. I'll allow it. I'llow it. I'll allow it. I'll allow it. I'll allow. it. I'll allow it. Instead of overruled, it's I'll allow it. That's her version. of overruled. And now everyone online. has made a meme out of her. They said. I'll allow it. House long till I'll. allow it. Okay, which kind of sounds.

mean cuz she's technically just doing. her job as a judge, but that's not what. it feels like to netzens. It feels like. this judge just does not like the. defense at all. Not nearly as much as. she likes the prosecution. It feels like. she doesn't like them even a tiny. crumble. Some netizens have noticed that. the timing of her size are consistent. with when the witnesses are cut in their. own lies and the defense team goes down. a list of questions that's going to rip. them up more. She's just sighing when. the defense has really good points. One. netizen comments, there she goes sighing. again. Bev sighing yet again. The judge.

is so biased. She's always sighing when. the defense is doing a cross. Oh, Bev, your bias is showing again. Sometimes. she'll sustain objections and not let. the defense question witnesses on what. netizens believe to be their right to a. rigorous cross-examination. To which a. lot of legal experts online have even. said, "I don't understand why she's. sustaining those freaking objections. It. doesn't even make sense." It's probably. causing a lot of appellet issues later. on. For example, when Carrie Roberts is. caught in what can really only be. defined as a lie about stating.

previously that she heard with her ears. heard Karen Reed ask Jen to Google how. long to die in the cold or well. hypothermia. And now she's saying I. misunderstood the question that was. asked to me. I actually never heard her. ask Jen McCabe that. Jackson is like so. you lied. Auntie Bev steps in and asks. Carrie was that a lie? Did you lie? Not. intentionally. And Jackson is like but. you did. Not intentionally. Okay. And. that's the end of that question. All. right. Is there any other question, Jackson, or is that it? >> And that was a lie. Correct.

>> Objection. >> Was that a lie? >> Did you lie? >> I did. Not intentionally, but you did. >> And not intentionally. >> Okay, that that's the end of this. >> I understood the question, Mr. Jackson. >> To which a comment reads, "Why does the. judge keep saving these goddamn. witnesses? That lady lied. If you're a. judge, you should want the truth from. the witnesses." During Brian Higgins. testimony when comments, the fact that. the judge prevented questions regarding. him destroying his phone is corrupt. She.

was very careful about which questions. she sustained and a lot of them about. him, I don't know, destroying his phone. and throwing it away at a military base. A lot of them were sustained. >> Last question, Mr. Jackson. >> Did you remove the SIM card for that. phone, drive onto a military base, throw. the SIM card in one dumpster and the. phone in a different dumpster? >> That is not correct. Did you testify. that. >> was your one question, Mr. Jackson? >> Questions would be asked and he wouldn't. have to answer to them or there are. other netizens that pick up small things.

such as one netizen comment reads, "Judge didn't interrupt the prosecutors. once during the direct. Let's see how. often they interrupt the defense." Some. netzens think it's less of that and more. of, "She just looks so over it." I mean, sure, someone's life is lost and another. one's life is on the line, but quote, "She's like the kid waiting for 4 p.m. to hit to throw everyone out of the. courtroom." the way that when the. workday is over, this lady is done. This. lady is gone. She's over it. Not a. second more. >> Is it kind of crazy going straight from. Father Arum's courthouse to this case?

>> Yeah. And I I mean, I don't know because. federal trials are not publicized as. much, but from what we could hear from a. lot of the court officers, >> Judge Arun is actually a little bit more. of the patient ones. Federal courthouse. judges are incredibly firm. They're. sharp. They're crazy in a better word. Um, and it seems like there is a. difference. The way that Judge Aroon, Father Aroon, would run circles on this.

woman either for breakfast, lunch, and. dinner without even lifting a single. hair on his head or having a single bead. of sweat on his glasses is kind of. crazy. And to know that they all oversee. cases is a little intense and. terrifying. Especially this one. I'm. sure there's a lot of incredible state. judges, but Auntie Bev just in my. opinion is not one of them. There's. another particular moment that the. internet has lost their minds over. It's. when the defense is questioning a. witness. Auntie Bev awkwardly reaches up.

towards her face and itches the side of. her cheek. And after a little while, the. prosecution objects to the line of. questioning. Auntie Bev quickly gives a. big smile and says, "Okay, I'll see the. attorneys at the sidebar.". >> It refreshes your recollection on any. comments, Mr. with me about objection. >> I'm going to see you inside for 2. minutes. >> People think that's a sign that she had. for the prosecution. That's how biased. people believe her to be and that's how. crazy they think this trial is. And it.

is weird. It is suspicious. It appears. the only time the majority of netzens. have agreed with Auntie Bev is uh Crash. Daddy right here. >> Crash Daddy. >> That's what netzens call him. He's a. crash expert witness for the defense. He. actually worked for the FBI, but the. jurors were not allowed to know that. They were hired. ARCA is the company. that he works for, and we're going to. talk about it in a second. They were. hired by the FBI. They concluded that. John's injuries were not a result of a. car accident. He's the defense expert,

and people call him Crash Daddy because. out of well, just look at all these. people. >> He is conventionally very attractive. He's very sharp. He's very smart, intelligent, and he does not seem to. hold a bias one way or the other, even. though he is testifying as a defense. witness. He's also very intelligent in. the sense that he does not get triggered. on the stand when the prosecutors come. at him for all sorts of gnarly things. And he's got dimples. So, a lot of. people have called him Crash Daddy and. they have a crush on him. Now, there is. this moment where he walks in to be.

sworn in and Auntie Bev, she's sitting. in her swivel chair. She's swiveling and. she is eating this man alive with her. eyes. >> No way. >> Yeah. >> No way. >> And the comments read, "The only time. Auntie Bev and I have been on the same. page this entire journey." Another. comment reads, "I'll allow it." Another. comment reads, "She got no eye contact, but she was chasing it. It seems like. she was into him." In fact, the. prosecutors fought really hard to make.

sure this man does not hit the stand. because his juror appeal is pretty high. Like I said, he does not seem to hold a. strong bias. He's very competent. He. knows what he's talking about. And a lot. of people say he's easy on the eyes. I. wouldn't know. I'm married. But the. prosecutors really did not want him on. the stand. Auntie Bev allowed it. She'll. allow it. And people think there's only. one reason. She allowed it. Yeah. >> I mean, that is pretty crazy though. someone that credible to say that it. wasn't a car crash. >> Yes. >> Then what what else are we arguing here?

>> It's not even just him. It's also um. honorable crash daddy Dr. Rent. He's. also part of ARCA. People love him as. well. >> So they brought multiple experts. >> Two of the experts. Yes. >> Uh-huh. And they all say it's not a car. crash. >> But the the prosecutors bring their own. experts. >> Oh yeah. >> You're going to have a field day. One. not comment reads, "I understand why. people suspect Auntie Bev is corrupt, but I find it difficult to accept it. only because she's known that the feds.

are investigating this case. I feel like. she simply has too much to lose by doing. anything illegal to support the DA and. the Mcalberts. But at the same time, the. netzen feels like if she truly has no. undisclosed hidden secret conflict of. interest, it just would be weird. Her. conduct is unexplainable. It's just. weird when you factor in that she used. to be a criminal defense attorney along. with her brother and her dad. So why the. favoritism for the DA who's brought. murder charges based on what is at best. the shabiest car crash investigation.

since the invention of the internal. combustion engine? It just doesn't make. sense. Does she just want to see Karen. Reed railroaded out of sheer spite? Could she hate Alan Jackson that much. for no apparent reason? Is she somehow. unaware that Reed is likely innocent of. the homicide charges? I just don't get. it. To which another netisonen comments, I think her and the DA's office, Michael. Moresy, which by the way, her mom, Auntie Bev's mom, and Michael Moresy's. family have history. We don't know how. deep that history, but they work. together briefly. They come and I think.

her and the DA's office have an. understanding for a long time that they. can force the outcome that they wanted. in previous cases, which is prosecution. cuz it's the DA's office. Kind of like. we run the hen house, if you will. never. get questioned, never had to answer for. anything, and basically just did things. their way, which I believe was the slam. dunk plan in this case as well, until it. wasn't. Now, I think it's just an. attempt to save face and try to act like. everything is still the status quo and. avoid backing down so as to not look. like you're admitting to some prior. shenanigans.

For a limited time, we were able to sell. Grandpa Mango's artwork. And it was a. lifelong dream for Grandpa Mango. It. started actually as a surprise for him. with just me, my husband, and my. sister-in-law sitting down trying to. figure out how to start an online store. so that he could share his artwork that. he has spent his lifetime drawing. And. long story short, we wouldn't have been. able to make Grandpa Mango's dreams come. true without Shopify. Shopify is the.

all-in-one commerce platform to start, run, and grow your business. And it is. true. No one gets small businesses like. Shopify. They they've been there. themselves. Did you know Shopify. actually started as a small snowboard. business? Just five people in a coffee. shop trying to sell snowboards online. who realized that these available. e-commerce solutions were not small. businessfriendly. So Shopify decided to. build their own. Now businesses of all. sizes use Shopify. Whether they're. selling online, in retail stores, or on. the- go, they've truly created the.

formula to commerce. From that super. cute sticker shop that you found on Tik. Tok with the cute packaging to stores. that you shop every day, Shopify's point. of sales system is a unified command. center for your retail business. It. brings together instore and online. operations across up to 1,000 locations. Get all the big stuff for your small. business right with Shopify. Sign up for. your $1 per month trial and start. selling today at shopify.com/rotten. Go to shopify.com/rotten. shopify.com/rotten.

[Music]. There have been other connections made. in this case of I mean not the strongest. ones but kind of which is there are. messages between Shawn McCabe. This is. Matt McCabe's brother. Matt McCabe is. Jen McCabe's husband. Matt McCabe's. brother had reached out to Turtle Boy, who is an investigative reporter and. influencer that has been honestly.

breaking this case from the get-go. I do. think that a lot of people have strong. feelings either for or against Turtle. Boy. I think he's a very divisive. >> His name is Turtle Boy. >> That's his online content creator name. Aiden Kernney is his I don't know if. it's his government name, but that's his. name. But um I think he's a polarizing. character. >> and sometimes that works being an. internet personality. He is very. passionate in what he believes in. And. some people think that that passion can.

go two degrees too far. And I think it. really depends on where you draw the. line of what do you call witness. intimidation. If you go to Jen McCabe's. kids lacrosse games to go confront Jen. McCabe while live streaming and shoving. a camera in her face and saying why'd. you Google how long to die in the cold. Some people say sleigh. Some people say. that feels like witness intimidation. So. it really depends. >> So Jen, I have a question. Did you think. that you could outsmart Karen Reed? Why. did you Google how long to die in cold?

Jen cop killers. That's what they are. They're cop killers. I cannot wait until. they go to jail. I'm going to be there. There are other things that people have. called into question about how he's went. about reporting on this case. All I know. really is that he was one of the first. people to break the case. I think. without I think that's the hard part is. he was one of the first people to even. get attention on this case. Nobody. really cared about this case much. Everyone was like, "Oh, she killed her. cop boyfriend. Okay, moving on.

>> I see.". >> And then he was like, "No, I think. something's weird." Did he get too. passionate? I guess that's subjective. I. guess that's up for you to decide. But. Shawn McCabe reaches out to Turtle Boy, Jen McCabe's brother-in-law, and there. are messages between Shawn McCabe and. Turtle Boy, which side note, I will say. some of the discourse surrounding Turtle. Boy. I do think some of it is warranted. The other parts I don't think are. warranted is a lot of people give him a. lot of flack for reaching out to people. that might be involved in this case,

including Shawn McCabe, and they they. kind of yell at him for doing it, which. I think is weird because a lot of the. mainstream reporters are not doing it, and he's doing it. And just because he. doesn't work for this big legacy media. outlet doesn't mean that he is not as. committed to finding out the truth as. any of these big major networks are. I. think this case is especially. frustrating cuz who do you even trust? There's nobody you can trust. >> Yes. >> Nobody to call. Everyone's like working. on the same team. >> But I think where people thought he took.

it too far was he would do these um roll. calls where he would drive through. everyone that was involved in front of. their houses and use a bullhorn and. people would consider that doxing. Some. people thought that there were children. involved that I mean not children aka. call it Albert but other children. involved that may not have really been. involved that are now being put in the. crosshairs for this but other people say. that well it's their parents' fault. It's really where you draw the line. Shawn McCabe and Turtle Boy have a. conversation where Turtle Boy asks Shawn.

do you really have a line to Judge Canon. which is Auntie Bev. Shawn McCabe. responds auntie Bev. This is where her. nickname comes from because everyone was. like Judge Canon, Beverly Canon. And. then he's like, "Auntie Bev, >> Auntie Bev.". >> It's like a nickname, I guess. >> Like they know her personally. >> He's like, "Auntie Bev, whose seaside. cottage do you think we're going to bury. your corpse under?" He's asking Turtle. Boy. Side note, Auntie Bev does indeed. have a seaside cottage that nobody knew. about because you're not supposed to.

know where judges live. The defense team. blows up the messages on a giant poster. board, which Auntie Be hates when they. do like this, but I kind of think it's. great for visual impact and is slightly. a comedic effect if this case were. anything other than what this case is. about. But Auntie Bev has to stare. straight into those messages, and. there's no missing it. Jackson asks, "You know, I'm getting old. I may have. appeared before thousands of judges in. my nearly 30-year career. I've never. known where a single one of them has. ever lived or property that they may or.

may not have owned. But Shawn McCabe. appears to know or appears to intimate. that he knows the details of this. court's personal life and so does his. family which these messages are. presented in court and Adam Lai Adam is. like wait hold on first of all these. messages are between two individuals. that quote literally have nothing to do. with this case. They are divorced from. the context in which this communication. arises. He's saying whatever they're. saying about Auntie Bev has nothing to. do with Auntie Bev or really anything. because we exist in a vacuum or as. Gallagher would say a leaf blower.

Accompanying that though is a 2022 Venmo. payment from Julie Nagel who was at the. house. Remember. >> accompany what? I'm sorry. >> The message from Sean McCabe, another. blown up poster board is a Venmo payment. from Julie Nagel. >> which was. >> Brian Albert birthday Brian's friend who. was there that night and she testified. Oh yes, I did see a black blob outside. of 34 Fair View when I was leaving. >> Um I did notice a something out of the. ordinary um like a black blob um in the.

grounds by the flag pole. >> But she's like all up in the Mc Albert's. family like she loves them would. probably do a lot for them. She sends a. Venmo payment. >> like what at what time? What year was. that? >> 2022. So later in the year. So it seems like. they're still familiar with Auntie Bev. But Auntie Bev is like, "First of all, that's not how I spell my name, and I've. never rented out my Cape Cod cottage.". But people are like, "Well, it didn't. have to be that you were renting it out. They could have stayed there without. paying, could have been invited there,

and maybe they bought something and she. was paying them back for that trip.". Clearly, these conversations just don't. help put faith in the justice system, which is precisely why Alan Jackson, the. defense attorney for Karen Reed, is. asking for the judge, Auntie Bev, to. recuse herself. He makes it very clear. He's not accusing her or even. insinuating that she cannot be fair and. impartial. He just says only the court. knows the answer to this question. But. the facts we presented unquestionably. are such that the public might, and.

that's the key word, the public might. doubt in the court's fairness in some. regard. And that's all that's required. for this court to do the right thing and. step aside from this case. Jackson also. points out that Auntie Bev has this. strange tendency which he calls a. routine practice of failing to act on. defense motions in a timely manner. Auntie Bev says, "Let me take a second. to think about it." And she takes 15. minutes, comes back to the bench, and. she says, "I've never socialized with. McCabe or any family members or. witnesses who have been here in court. I.

reject the notion that untrue and. unsubstantiated rumors spread on the. internet can force a judge to recuse. herself from a case. And that doesn't. underscore the fact that anybody can say. or write anything and try to make it on. the basis of a motion to recuse. And I. think it points out that this motion to. recuse is not credible. Immediately. afterwards, the prosecution requests. that the defense attorneys be placed. under a gag order. Lai states he wants. the defense attorneys to be prohibited. by addressing the merits of the case. within the media or using the media as a. propagandist to advance its theory of.

its case. to which David Yianetti. passionately stands up and he starts. explaining, "The prosecutors were quite. happy with the press this case was. getting when it was in their favor and. their minions were outdoing their work. with the media. We did not create this. media circus. The prosecution did." Does. the prosecution think that if they stuff. a gag in the mouths of Karen Reed's. attorneys that these good reporters. behind me are simply going to go away? Do they think the general public's just. going to go away? If you gag us, your. honor, the extrajudicial conversation.

will not end. And if anything, it will. only intensify. The gag order is not. issued. But the whole thing is just. leaving a bad taste in people's mouths. Primarily because Auntie Bev isn't even. supposed to be on this case anymore. She. was supposed to rotate. So after the. first trial, she's supposed to rotate to. civil cases. That's kind of how it works. in the state courts in Massachusetts. And she was supposed to go on that. rotation, but instead of rotating like. it's normally done, she has decided to. extend her rotation to stay on this case. that she's not getting favorable. coverage on. She's not getting fame or.

attention or even money on the contrary. here. So why won't she recuse herself or. just pass it on to the next person? Why. does she want to take on this case so. badly? The only connection nizens could. find that were affirmative were well 30. years ago Chris Albert killed a man. >> 30 years ago. >> Yes. Chris Albert was driving when he. rammed into the back of a man in a car. named Peter Burger. Oh, two seconds. >> Justice for Peter Burger. >> Up and down the sidewalk.

>> You'll beat my fate. You'll. >> I wouldn't. I could. >> He rammed into Peter's car so hard that. Peter's car, spun off the roadway, hit a. stone ledge, killing Peter, who was a. Hungarian foreign exchange student. Chris Albert does not stop to help. He. does not stop to call 911. He keeps. driving. Which, side note, people think. it's actually rich that they have such. strong opinions about Karen Reed, even. if she did hit John O'Keefe with her. car. I don't know if you're the one to. be. >> right. >> throwing looks her way. He does not stop.

driving. He does not stop to call 911. He keeps driving which triggers a 30hour. police manhunt before he is finally. arrested and sentenced to 6 months in. prison. Meanwhile, Peter's mother wrote. a letter to the court saying, "I feel. numb. This is a loss that will reflect. the rest of my life. My husband has lost. his will to live.". >> Wait, how is that only 6 months? >> Well, some say that he just had a. spectacular attorney to get him off that. lightly. Who's his attorney? His. attorney is John Prescott Jr. who is.

Auntie Bev's brother. Prior to Auntie. Bev getting married, she was Beverly. Prescott. And some people argue, well, that was 30 years ago and it's her. brother and they take on all sorts of. cases. Are you friends with all of your. clients? I don't know, but it seems like. everybody's friends with the Alberts. But maybe it's just all a coincidence. I. will say the orbit of Mc Alberts has one. too many bad drivers. So, you have Chris. Albert who killed a man in a hit and. run. You have Tim Albert who hit a. parked car and fled the scene leaving a. trail of transmission fluid straight to.

34 Fair View. He was not charged or even. interviewed at Canton PD. He just got a. misdemeanor for it. So, there's that. There are rumors that Tristan Morris, Caitlyn Albert's boyfriend, was also. involved in a hidden run, though that. has not been confirmed. Helena Rafferty. is the new police chief after Chief. Burkowitz. She resigned recently. Well, sorry, retired. She retired recently. because a lot of scandal has been. occurring over the fact that she hit an. elderly man with her car. An elderly man.

who was wearing a reflective vest. >> Is that confirmed or. >> Yes, she hit him with her car. >> Well, she is the chief. >> Yeah. Well, I don't think it was when. she was the chief, but she hit him with. her car. And then you have Paul O'Keefe, the brother of John O'Keefe. And. normally I don't really like to bring. details like this into the orbit of the. case. I will say that a lot of netizens. have deeper feelings for the O'Keefe. family than I would suspect most would.

in typical cases where a victim's family. is involved. Um, I think it maybe it has. to do with the fact that they have since. shared a lot of strong words against. Karen Reed. I don't think that's really. reason to hate them or dislike them to. any extent, but there is the mention. that Paul O'Keefe got into an accident. whilst driving under the influence. And. it is believed that Karen Reed helped. pay for Paul's attorney fees and bail, helped him out of jail when that. happened to him. So, there's just a lot.

an overwhelming amount of bad driving. incidents in this town, many of which. most of which could have been entirely. avoidable. Now, one of the biggest. questions throughout this case has been, if it's so obvious to netzens, why isn't. it obvious to the O'Keefe's that. something is a miss here? That they're. going after the wrong person to get. justice for their John O'Keefe. Side. note, Karen will later say that she. believes that it just hurt Peggy. O'Keefe, which is John's mom. It seems. like if anybody's the most involved, it's Peggy O'Keefe, which is John's mom,

and Paulo Keefe, which is John's. brother. John's dad seems to have taken. a little bit of the backseat to this. And Karen says, "John's dad and I got. along really well. It was actually the. biggest betrayal that John's dad didn't. believe her." Some netizens speculate, and this is just speculation, that maybe. Jon's dad is like, "Well, maybe I do. kind of believe her, but I'm not going. to go against the family when all of. this is happening. I'm just going to. support my wife and my kids." Nobody. really knows. But as to why Peggy. O'Keefe might not have liked Karen Reed.

even from the get-go before John even. passed, she says she just was hurt by. seeing another woman raise her. daughter's kids. Is Karen Reed's. speculation to it? Some speculate that. Karen Reed is definitely not the. daughter-in-law that maybe some. mother-in-laws would like. She's very. outspoken. She's very intense. She. doesn't hold back when she thinks. something's weird. So, some people think. it's that. Others say, "Well, no, I. don't think she disliked her. There's no.

proof that she disliked her before. John's death." But she does say, Karen. Reed does say, "So, Paul and Peg, if you. think I killed John, that means you. misjudged me for 2 years and entrusted. two young family members in my care. Then, in the blink of an eye, you now. think I'm a cold-blooded killer who took. your son away?" She thinks it's weird. that they automatically thought she had. something to do with it. I mean, just. questioning everything about her, but. never questioned why Brian Albert didn't. go outside as paramedics try to save. John. She thinks it's weird that they. don't question that. As for why they.

don't, Karen says the only explanation. she can think of is it's easier to fool. someone than convince them that they've. been fooled. Maybe they're in too deep. now. Karen says about Paulo Keefe, he's. seen during the trial just glaring her. down most of the days. And she says. about that, "You can't have no respect. for someone and care about what they. think. I didn't do anything, so you can. stare at me and get an ulcer over your. hatred toward me. The O'Keefe never. carried a pitchfork for me until I. started getting support. You didn't.

speak to any media. Now you're giving. interviews. You really just can't stand. my rising from the ashes. The only thing. that changed is I started to come from a. position of power.". >> Fascinating. >> Paulo Keith has done an interview after. the first trial in which he says, "We. know what happened. We know that Jon and. Karen were arguing. It was towards the. end of their relationship. They were. drinking and arguing and fighting and in. an intoxicated state of rage and. jealousy. >> She just decided that she was going to. do something about it. You know, put the. car in reverse and ran them down and. left him there to die. >> She's pointing the finger at everybody.

Everybody's lying except for her. according to her. And I think we had 68. witnesses testify and according to the. defense, they're all lying and they're. all not credible. I've gotten to know. the Alberts through this all very well. and they're all good people. So just. because we don't believe in a crazy. conspiracy theory and we believe that. Karen Reed is guilty of killing my. brother, people are taking it out on us. Unfortunately, if you pay highowered. attorneys enough and put enough lies out. there, you start influencing people to. the point where they there's just no. turning back. As for Michael Proctor, Paul says, "As for Michael Proctor's.

comments, I mean, he even said too, they. were unprofessional, which we agree. with, but this guy's life has been. ruined." And this is where a lot of. netizens started turning on Paulo Keefe, which was something that should have. never happened. >> He's saying that Michael Proctor's. personal phone should have never been. searched and now his life is ruined, even though those were unprofessional. comments. And I think that's where a lot. of people started turning on Paulo. Keefe. As for the mistrial, Paulo Keefe. says, "I guess we were obviously hoping. and confident that we were going to get.

the conviction that we were looking. for." So, as far as a mistrial, yes, it's something we didn't want, obviously, but it's just a bump on the. road. And like I said, we'll do it. again. We'll do it as many times as. we'll have to. I just want people to. remember John and want him to get the. justice he deserves and that we deserve. >> And that's Karen Reed going to prison. There are so many uncomfortable things. about the first trial, like the fact. that during the trial, according to two. jurors that have come out afterwards, one of the jurors who happened to be a.

retired police officer, told the other. jurors, "I too had been hit by a car. once. They chose him as the four person, the juror in charge, a retired police. officer who had been hit by a car, which. is already kind of I don't even know how. he ended up on the jury. And if he told. everybody that he had been hit by a car, too. I don't know how he wasn't. dismissed, which is all very weird. Also, at the very last moment, so the. way that this worked in this trial is. that the alternates are chosen at the. very last minute. It's like a luck of.

the draw numbers game. It's random and. all the defense defense friendly jurors. get chosen as alternates. What are the. odds? What are the odds of that? Then. according to multiple jurors, there was. confusion in the deliberation room. whether or not the jurors could declare. a partial verdict. Meaning, hey, can we. say not guilty or guilty to some charges. and then be hung on other charges? That. was a huge thing for the Shawn Combmes. case. For example, it's like if you are. hung on the RICO verdict, then. everything else has a verdict and he.

will only have a mistrial on the RICO. charge, which is clearly not what. happened, but that was the conversation. when there was deliberations happening. >> So, that was the conversation between. the jurors on this case. They didn't. really know what was going on, but they. said, "We all voted unanimously that. Karen was not guilty of seconddegree. murder. We were hung on the other. charges like the manslaughter charge. We. just couldn't agree." So the most. serious one that they're saying she's. not guilty on that one for sure. >> They expressed that to the judge or so.

they thought and the judge pretty. quickly Auntie Bev is like okay so you. guys are deadlocked on the charges so. I'm declaring a mistrial which means. she's going to get retrieded for all the. charges including secondderee murder. The defense didn't know this until after. the mistrial is declared a few of the. jurors called the defense themselves and. said something weird happened. That's. crazy. Okay, to clarify, she got charged. a bunch different charges. The most. serious one is seconddegree murder. >> And the juror say, "No, she's not guilty.

on that one.". >> unanimously. >> Right. The rest. >> we're fighting. The right thing to do is. remove that for the next trial. So, just. retry her for all the other charges, >> manslaughter, things of that nature. >> But instead, they did the whole thing. again. >> Yes. which the defense have tried to. take to the superior courts as double. jeopardy, which means you cannot be. charged for the same crime twice. >> Yes. >> And they said to prove that we need to. bring the jurors in and make sure that. they unanimously voted because that's.

what the jurors like five jurors have. come out to us and said that's what they. said. >> So, we need to bring in all 12 jurors. and make sure. And the judge was like, I'm not doing that. >> That's crazy. I'm not doing that. Which. has caused a mistrial. >> All right, Mr. Foreman, I am in receipt. of your note. Judge Canoni, despite our. rigorous efforts, we continue to find. ourselves at an impass. To continue to. deliberate would be feudal and only. serve to force us to compromise these. deeply held beliefs. I'm not going to do.

that to you folks. Your service is. complete. I'm declaring a mistrial in. this case. I'll be in to see you. privately in a few minutes. So, thank. you so much for your service. Okay. >> All right. So, the court, please. That is why we have a second trial in. this case. And the court presence I mean. even during the first trial was intense. It people I guess in a dark humor sense.

called it like a gender reveal party. Outside the courthouse, you have a sea. of people wearing pink in support of. Karen Reed and blue obviously for blue. for cops in support of justice for John. O'Keefe, which Karen Reed has expressed. her confusion because justice for John. O'Keefe is not exclusive with supporting. Karen Reed. She believes that she is. also fighting for justice for John. O'Keefe because he's not going to get. justice unless whoever killed him is. discovered. And she's like, "That's not. me. So you're not getting justice by. putting me in jail. I don't understand.".

Others are saying, "No, you did it, so. you need to go to jail." And there has. just been lots of people. People are um. outside the courthouse eight hours a day. wearing t-shirts, holding signs, and. they will live stream it outside the. courthouse, put it on speakers, and they. sit there with lawn chairs. They'll. bring snacks, coolers. It's almost. become a thing in Boston, Massachusetts, where you don't bring up Karen Reed's. name at the dinner table because it's. that divisive. Parents and children have. stopped talking to each other. Friend. groups have dissipated. They said it's. worse than talking about politics. And.

Paulo Keefe hates that. He says unlike. most people accused for murder and sued. for wrongful death, Karen Reed has. embraced her celebrity in outsized ways. This intensive media campaign to. influence potential jurors compounds the. O'Keefe's family's terrible loss while. delaying and denying her accountability. To which Karen Reed fights back, anyone. in my position who has been falsely. accused would be shouting from the. rooftops. First of all, I don't want to. be here. It can be the John O'Keefe. show. It can be the O'Keefe family. reunion. But if you think for a second. that anyone has fought harder to find.

the truth about what happened to John. and to enlighten everyone about what. happened to John harder than me, then. you're wrong. Witnesses have expressed. being terrified, the Mc Alberts. included. They say they're being. harassed. They're being followed by. influencers. That's what they call. everyone to lacrosse games to be. questioned on whether or not they. Googled how long to die. They're talking. about Turtle Boy. Also, Turtle Boy has. been charged for witness intimidation. Hm. >> Now, I do think regardless of what. people think about Turtle Boy, a lot of. netizens agree. I don't know if it goes.

into witness intimidation category. I. don't know. Okay. I don't know. There. has been so much developing in that. sphere, but Brian Tully was the one to. lead the investigation into Turtle Boy. I think that's another reason that a lot. of netizens are questioning whether or. not he should have been charged. Again, even if you think what he did is witness. intimidation and witness harassment, the. fact that Brian Tullley is leading that. investigation. >> with such passion and fury that you did. not see for the John O'Keefe. investigation.

>> makes netizens feel weary about the. situation. >> Yeah, it's crazy. >> That's why there's so much nuance to. this case. It's like you can dislike. Turtle Boy, you can love Turtle Boy, but. still disagree or agree with the. investigation. There's so many things. Karen Reed says, "It's impossible for me. to have any sympathy for these. witnesses. Definitionally, is it. harassing witnesses?" Yes, they're. witnesses against me in my prosecution, and he is yelling things at them, and he. is going up to their front doors and. ringing their bell. Yes, but they. shouldn't have been witnesses. They. should have been suspects. So, it's not.

that cut and dry. So, there is that. argument as well of like, is it witness. intimidation and witness harassment if. they're not really witnesses? I mean, they're definitely not good witnesses. I. don't know where you draw the line of. witnesses, but they're not good. witnesses. The Canton police officers. have also reported feeling petrified, shaking in their boots. One Canton. officer says, "No one in this town will. care about us until one of us gets. murdered. Even then, half the town will. probably celebrate that." Canton. officers report that the department. suffers significant pressure due to the.

proliferation of misinformation, witness. coercion, and a lack of support from. elected officials. As per an audit into. Canton PD, officers report that quote, "Certain individuals referred to as. influencers are spreading false. narratives about officers involved in. the O'Keeffe and Birchar cases without. substantiating any evidence. They. operate without adhering to journalistic. standards or rules of evidence. Don't talk to us about rules of. evidence. Leaf blower Gallagher solo cup. Gallagher, >> we utilized um cups, plastic cups. >> Those were red solo cups, right?

>> That's correct. The same kind of red. solo cup you'd drink a beer out of at a. barbecue. >> Yeah, sure you could. >> Okay. Rules of evidence gaining. notoriety by circulating unfounded. narratives in pursuit of fame and. viewership. Two things can be true at. once, I guess, right? But I don't think. Gallagher has any leg to stand on if. he's the one saying that. If netizens. were already not side eyeing Auntie Bev, the day before the second trial is to. begin, Auntie Bev decides Karen's team. can no longer point to Colin Albert or. anyone for that matter as their defense. So, when you bring your case and chief.

to the judge, they have to approve it. You can't just say, "I'm going to go in. there and I'm going to say whatever I. want to say to say that my client is not. guilty." You have to say, "This is our. presentation of how we're going to go. about things. This is how we're going to. prove it. These are the witnesses that. we're going to bring or a list of. witnesses that we think we're going to. call to the stand and they're important. for these reasons and they help with. these different arguments." The day. before, Auntie Bev is like, "You're not. doing that anymore." The third party. culprit defense, you're not doing it. anymore. the day before the second. trial. >> No reasons.

>> She's just like, "There's no proof.". >> So, you can't point your finger at Colin. Arbor. >> or really any other third party. So, the. defense has to switch gears and all they. can focus on is corruption of the. investigation, which to be fair is not. that hard to do. But, it is strange that. it happened so quickly before the second. trial. The prosecutors bring in Hank. Brennan. He is a special prosecutor, meaning he's not part of the DA's. office. He's not a prosecutor. He's a. criminal defense attorney. He's brought. in by the DA's office to act as a. special prosecutor for this specific. case. You do this a lot when you are.

going into very niche fields. You'll often see it with like um I mean. most really well equipped DA's offices. have people that are very well-versed in. financial crimes. A lot of like federal. US attorneys offices have people that. are wellversed in financial crimes, crypto, but sometimes like those are the. times you would bring in like a special. prosecutor when you're like, "Wo, we're. dealing with something that would take. us a long time to even learn about the. thing that we're dealing with.".

>> They bring him or you bring them in when. you're going up against a very strong. team. That's why a lot of people thought. that the Diddy case, they should have. brought in a special prosecutor to go up. against some of these very highpowered. criminal defense attorneys that have a. lot of flare, that have a lot of. charisma on their side. They bring in. Hank Brennan. I don't know if he was the. one to bring in. >> Really, >> I'm just going to be so real with you. He is a very well-known well well was a. wellrespected criminal defense attorney.

prior to this case but. >> you got destroyed. >> Lai sucked. And I say this like I think. anyone on the internet that's like I. could have done a better job than these. people. I find that to be really bad. arguments most of the time cuz you don't. really know what a prosecutor goes. through. I It's frustrating. Yeah. But. sometimes I read comments online and I'm. like, I do think you could have done a. better job than Lai. I do think so. Really? >> It's 1/16th of an inch by 116.

>> You have one minute, Mr. Lai. Wrap it. up. >> Yes, sir. All consistent with pieces of. tail light that are found within his. clothing. [Music]. [Music]. I'm just coming back. >> I'm like, I don't know what Lai was. doing, but you your comments make sense.

in my head. Yeah, Lai sucked. Hank. Brennan sucks less, but he is so. aggressive to the point of just coming. off angry and hostile for no reason. Just aggressive. just so mean for what? I don't know. For what? Why are you. being like that? That's the feeling Hank. Brennan gives. It seems like there are a. lot of nizens have psychoanalyzed that. he has sour feelings that the defense. team cuz he's a criminal defense. attorney at the end of the day. Defense. team, they're getting a lot of star. power, lots of praise and people are.

making memes and thirst traps of them. and he's just Hanky Spanky and he's. upset that he's Hanky Spanky. The. question ultimately is, is Hank Brennan. going to be worth it? Because between. November of last year and June of this. year, the special prosecutor is getting. paid more than $500,000 in legal fees. alone from taxpayers. Close to $600,000. $566,000. >> in half a year. >> Yes. And that's not even I mean, first. of all, the taxpayers don't get a. choice. And that's not including all of.

the different experts that are paid, the. other prosecutors, the parallegals, all. of the administrative fees. That's just. Hank Brennan is getting paid nearly. $600,000 in half a year. It's crazy. So, locals are mad because what about the. other families that want justice? DA's. offices have budgets at the end of the. day that they can spend on cases. Why. are they blowing like a third of their. budget on this case for a retrial that. nobody asked for? The defense team also. adds new additions to their legal.

defense team. And if you're wondering. how can Karen afford it, she lost her. job. She lost her she sold her house, is. paying for it with her house, got rid of. her 401k, is paying for that. I mean, she's like $5 million in legal debt. technically. I mean, Jackson and Little. alone said for the two trials, typically. for any other client, they would have. charged like $10 million upwards. >> Dang. >> But they are deferring their legal fees. They haven't really gotten paid by Karen. Reed. All of the new attorneys have also. come in pro bono.

>> Wow. >> That also feels like an indication of. how they feel about her innocence. Victoria George is one of the more. interesting additions to Karen's legal. team. She's an employment lawyer. So, people thought that was weird. Why is an. employment lawyer getting on this case? Victoria George has very interesting. insight to provide for Karen's legal. defense team. It's the fact that she was. on the jury for the first trial. She. became an alternate juror at the end,

but she was allowed on the jury because. she's an employment lawyer. She has She. didn't know anything about the Karen. Reed case. She was on the first jury. >> How does that work? >> Yeah, she was on the first jury. >> And then afterwards, she's like, "Can I. be on your team?". >> She called the defense team and had. conversations about, "Hey, I'm telling. you something was weird." Um, and as an. attorney, as someone that upholds. >> the legal justice system to a very high. degree, I just thought you should know. And there were first jokes about like,

you know, you should be on the you're. you're still licensed to practice, right? Cuz at that point, she wasn't. practicing as much. She has children and. she was at home taking care of them. And. she was like, I mean, I technically I am. still licensed to practice and they're. like, "Huh?" So then eventually she went. on this case proono. >> That is insane. >> Yes. >> And she probably knows the case inside. out, too, after the whole tri. Wow. But. more than that, with the Combmes case, as I've told you about, a lot of people. spend a lot of money hiring jury.

consultants, which are attorneys who. will just tell you what rings well with. jurors. She's been a juror. She can tell. you what hit well and what didn't. >> That's so crazy. Wow. >> She says, "If I, as a lawyer, am too. afraid to stand up for what I believe. in, who will? What happened to John. O'Keefe was a tragedy? But just because. something is sad doesn't mean that the. person in the defendant's seat is. responsible. I can feel bad for his. family and believe that she's not guilty. at the same time. Then you have Robert. Allessie. Everybody loves Robert.

Allessie. This defense team is. fascinating. It's people love this. defense team. I think with the Diddy. case dream team, yes, maybe a more. highpowered dream team than Karen Reed's. legal defense team, but they were not as. lovable. Like they were charismatic, but. it was always with an undertone of like, ooh gosh, oh no. But this team, people. love this team. I mean, there are thirst. traps for this team. Every single they. love them. Robert Allessie is a New York.

based attorney. So, he's in Boston for. the whole second trial for this. And. interestingly enough, he is a very. random addition as well, considering his. legal background is primarily in the. environmental financial law field in New. York City. So, why is he suddenly in. Boston fighting a murder trial? It has. been reported that his daughter asked. him to look into the case and that he. was looking into it and he's like, "Oh, wait a minute. I know David Yianetti. He. and I are besties." So then David. Yanetti ends up calling him and he's. like, "I need some advice. I need.

advice. You were a great trial attorney. Tell me something." And then he says, "You know what? I want to join proono.". >> Wow. >> So he goes in getting paid nothing as. well. Now, I know some people that are. cynical are going to say, "Well, most. law firms do required attorneys take on. a certain percentage of proono cases.". However, however, let's live in this. land for a second. Okay, I like this. land. There are also nine law clerks. that join the team for the second trial. They are also working pro bono for free.

Second trial is a bit more fast-paced. than the first one. Most of the Mc. Alberts do not testify the second time. around. The prosecution does not call. them. Trooper Proctor does not testify. the second time around. And even then, it doesn't stop the rather dumb. testimonies provided by parties. involved, such as when Jen McCabe can't. answer any question at all about really. anything and has a hard time showing. that she does not have pure venomous. hatred for the defense team. I mean, that I was woken up out of a dead sleep.

I was Karen showed up at my house. screaming. I went out to help her look. for John and then we found one of my. closest friends on the front lawn and. she was saying crazy things and acting. crazy and acting erratic. Jen Jen Jen. Jen I was more focused on her and her. hysteria than which officer was asking. the question. Don't recall. I don't.

recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I I don't I don't. recall. I don't recall if I don't. recall. I don't recall. There are certain things. I will never forget. Mr. Jackson, the. minute I remembered, she said, "I hit. him. I hit him. I hit him." I called. officer Len. I don't know why these. people have such a hard time just not. hating every single breathing person in. the courtroom. Every single prosecutor's. witness just seems like they're filled. with hatred. It's so unlikable. It's.

hard to even resonate with anything they. say. They're so defensive. They want to. be smart, Alex, but it comes off like, "Are you okay?". >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Gosh. It's like. >> I guess when you're shady, you just. can't be transparent and open about. things. >> No. Or like the time Bukenic starts. arguing that he doesn't know what. certain words mean in the English. language because he speaks three. languages. So, he asks attorney Jackson. if he can kindly hand him a Webster's.

dictionary. I'm sorry. English is uh. like a third third language for me. So, if you can bring up the Webster's. dictionary, I can read it out. >> And attorney Jackson is like, "Are you. kidding me right now? You want a. dictionary? >> You want me to pull up the Webster's. dictionary? You want to take a break. real quick and pull up the Webster's. dictionary to define a word that you. used in an answer about 40 seconds ago. We're working off of a theory, quote. unquote. You said it, not me. You want. me to go get a dictionary so we can. figure out for the jurors what that word.

means? >> Objection. >> And then they have a very tense. standoff. I mean, there are a lot of. ridiculous moments in both the trials. combined, and we would probably be here. for the next 10 weeks if I covered all. of them. Attorney Jackson is also very. upset and confused that Michael Proctor. was not even called as a witness for the. second trial by the Commonwealth. He. says, "You guys were so embarrassed of. Michael Proctor, you couldn't even put. him on the stand." I thought it was a. glaring error on the Commonwealth's part. to not call certain witnesses, including. Brian Albert, Brian Higgins, Nicole. Albert, Matt McCabe, and Chris Albert. They didn't want them to be subjected to.

a very vigorous cross-examination. because the Commonwealth knew that they. would not withstand it. And also because. Michael Proctor has been fired. President Patrick McNamera, which is the. president of the state police. association of Massachusetts, the union. for the troopers, he threw his support. behind Proctor, saying, "Our homicide. detectives here in Massachusetts are. arguably the best in the country. Our. solve rate is indicative of that." At. this point, it's just a matter of. understanding your audience. That's the. exact problem. Everyone is wondering if.

your solver rate comes from the fact. that you just throw everyone in jail. regardless of the evidence and then. you'd look for nudes for them. Boasting. about how great your solve rate is not. what we want to hear right now. He does. not read the room. He continues, "Trooper Proctor has been the subject of. personal attacks from the criminal. defense attorneys and the media for. doing their jobs.". >> I respond again, "Nut bag, as Chief. would say. She's got a leaky balloon. knot.". >> They did this work without favor. They. follow the evidence. This is true in the. case of the investigation of the death. of Boston police officer John O'Keefe.

Trooper Proctor has personally been. defamed in the media and in court. We. stand with you, Mike, as we do all state. police detectives. Which if he has been. defamed, hit everyone with the. defamation lawsuit. Let's go. Just do. it. That's crazy. He really should have. just stayed quiet. Okay, because this is. I mean I mean I guess that's a little. rich coming from someone who makes like. 10-hour long videos. Is there like any. police officials that's coming out and. exposing what's going on or or even take.

a different stance because it seems like. everyone's like backing each other. Has. anybody say something. >> briefly and then they went back? Yeah, we're going to get there. But soon after. that, Patrick loses his reelection for. the police trooper union. And um I guess. that's the nicest thing that could have. happened to him. ABC News asks Trooper. Proctor about getting fired. He says, "I. just remember dropping to my knees and. laying on my lawn crying. I couldn't. even talk. I was in complete hysterics. And I remember my mother being like, "What?" And I kind of gathered myself.

and I'm like, "They relieved me of. duty." He starts tearing up emotional. about the hardest moments of his life. What really got me was my union rep came. over to my house and picked up all my. uniforms and the one time I broke down. was putting my class A uniform. You go. through a six-month police academy and. you're very proud to put on that. uniform. That's tough. Feel very proud. to put that uniform on. Does it? Tough. >> He says that. >> And he wants us to feel bad. >> Yes. I don't know any trooper that has.

been punished for personal text messages. on their personal phone, let alone. fired. Are these people okay? He. continues. >> He thinks he got fired because of a text. message. Not what he did. No, >> it's because of Oh, I sent a little. text. I got fired. >> Yeah. They were just found on my phone. >> Yeah. You know, have you ever text. something? It means nothing. >> It means nothing. These text messages. are juvenile as they are. It's not me as. a person. I vented after being involved. in an investigation of a police officer. and used words that I regret. People see. those text messages and they instantly.

jump to a conclusion about you and that. you must be biased, you must be a bad. person, and I'm sure many other names. I. could see how people make that leap. because that's all they know about me. They don't know who I am. They don't. know the kind of person that I am. They. just see those text messages and they. immediately just assume I'm a bad. person. He has since appealed the. firing. He says, "I still love the job. I still want to be a trooper and I'm. fighting for it." Kelly De Kelly De is a. Boston cop, which is the same force as. Brian Albert and John O'Keefe, but she. used to work for the Canton Police.

Department, specifically the night that. there was a call made where John O'Keefe. was found in the snow. So, a former. Canton cop, she walks up to the stand. and she looks a lot younger than all the. other officers. >> Is she the one that Shan Good called to. replace his position? >> Yes. in the dispatch. >> Yes. >> He's like, "I got to go.". >> Yeah. >> She comes in maybe mid 20s, late 20s. She gets up on this stand and she. explains she was a patrol officer. She. was working the night shift. She took. over dispatch for Shawn Good. And.

attorney Jackson is asking her, "When. Shawn Good instructed you to take over. dispatch, explain what that meant.". >> When Sergeant Good instructed you to. take over dispatch, explain what that. meant. >> It meant I walked inside and I sat down. in a dispatch room. You're aware that. Sallyport had a camera, a security. camera. It would make sense because. that's where we bring prisoners to drop. them off. Well, more than just making. sense, I'm asking you. Do you recall. that it had a camera that serviced the. garage? >> It's where we brought prisoners, so. there would be cameras. Yes.

>> Oh, context on Sally Port. It's the. >> garage where Karen Reed's car was. brought in and held in evidence. And. people think that's where the evidence. tail light. The tail light was taken. apart and then brought to 34 Fair View. and then scattered in the snow. >> They revert the. >> Yes. inverted footage. >> Yeah. >> Oh my gosh. You're listening. Okay. >> So, she's saying. >> it's where we brought prisoners, so. there would be cameras. Yes. >> Okay. You're saying there would be. cameras. I'm asking you, were there. cameras? >> According to the media, yes, I've seen. the footage, so yes, there were cameras.

>> The judge stops her and tells her, "So, I'm going to strike that officer. You. have to answer the question based on. your own independent. And Kelly looks at. Auntie Bev. >> If you don't have your own independent. memories, that's fine, but you can't. reference what you know from the media. >> Hold on. You have to answer a question. based on your own independent. And if you don't have them tell us, we. can't reference what we know from the. movie. >> All right. There were cameras in the.

Sally board. She's making faces straight up. >> Yeah, she's 2 seconds away from fully. rolling her eyes to look inside of her. skull. Miss De, do you want to be here. today? I have no relation to this case. I didn't ask you that. I asked you if. you want to be here. Kelly De pauses. before dramatically stating, >> "I am put on the stand in a murder. trial. I don't know why I'm here. I have. no connection to this case.". >> This is honestly a bit more hostile than. some of the more important key. witnesses. her interactions with the.

defense team feel so scathing than even. some of the more McAlberts. Okay, some. of the Mc Alberts, they try to hide it. or some of the cops that are more. heavily involved. But the confusing part. in all of this is in trial 2, she is not. a prosecution witness. She is a defense. witness. The defense called her to the. stand to testify. Why? Because officer. De told FBI agents that she saw ATF. Brian. >> Uh-huh. and Chief Burkowitz in Sallyport. for a wildly long time near Karen Reed's.

car. What were they doing for a wildly. long time in Sally Port near Karen. Reed's car? >> That is crazy. So, what are you saying? During the first trial, she's kind of. like forced to speak. >> During the first trial, she was never. called to the stand. >> So, this attitude is from the second. trial. >> Yeah, she was never called to the stand. the first trial. Mhm. >> The second trial, she comes and she's. huffing and puffing. >> and the defense is just trying to get.

her to relay her statements that she. made to the FBI, which is, "You told the. FBI that they were near Karen Reed's car. and Sally Port for a wildly long time.". The defense is like, "You have no idea. why you're here. You've never talked to. me. Nobody on the defense seems to talk. to me since prior to the first trial, which she did not testify in. >> So, I don't have any idea why I'm here. No clue whatsoever. as you sit here. while you might have been called to the. stand. No. Are you uncomfortable. testifying? No. It's part of my job. There is an indication that things are.

not going to go well because Jackson. starts asking Kelly Deber and you. understand the oath. Yes, I do. What is. the oath? The oath is to tell the truth. The whole truth and nothing but the. truth. Correct. Objection sustained. Did. one of the monitors that you had looked. at when you had access at the dispatch. area? Because remember she took over. dispatch and they have a monitor. overlooking Sallyport shows the video. feed from the Sallyport garage. So as I. already said I don't remember where in. dispatch the screen with the cameras. was. There was a camera in Sallyport. If.

I'm going to make the assumption then. yes of course but now that's an. assumption. I'm not asking you for an. assumption. I'm asking you, did one of. those feeds, do you recall or not, there. was footage that you could see a monitor. on the dispatch area. I'm. going to go with yes. I don't know what that means. So, what. do you mean you're going to go with yes?

Is your answer yes? Yes. Did you observe. anything unusual that stood out in your. mind that occurred? pardon me. You know, in the Sallyport area where you were on. that shift. So, we've discussed this. previously. I can't make that statement. on the stand because I've been provided. information released by the defense that. it was not a memory, that it was a. distorted memory. Therefore, I can't. state it because at that point, it would. be a lie. I cannot make that statement. that you're wanting me to make on the. stand because I've been advised it would. be a lie. So, she's saying what I said.

to the FBI was a false memory. She's. saying I never saw Chief Burkowitz or. Brian Higgins in Sallyport. It was a. false memory. >> What? Like how how did you even come up. with that? >> Because she said that she had clocked. out before the time that she would have. seen them. But clocking out doesn't mean. anything. And also those records can. probably be fudged. I don't know. Don't. ask me. But she's saying it was a false. memory. Which the defense is like, "Okay, first of all, a police officer. with false memories should not be a. police officer because what are you.

doing throwing people in jail over false. memories?". >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Miss Dever, I've never asked you to make. a statement one way or the other on the. stand. I'm asking you an open-ended. question. Given factual information that. makes it so that I know. I did not know. So, the answer is no. Correct. But that. doesn't make sense because why did you. tell the FBI then? Were you advised. lying to those officers? The FBI. officers would have been a crime. So, it. was a willing conversation. I've spoken. with their legal team because of the. fact that I was providing factual. information that showed a statement of. mine was a false memory. It was not a.

lie. Therefore, I made it in good faith. and I've retracted given information. that it cannot be accurate. Miss Ever, did you understand my question? >> Yes, I did. You threatened to charge me. with perjury during our phone call prior. to the first trial if I didn't lie on. the stand right now. I'm telling you, I. did not see anything factually. I've. been provided evidence by a timeline. that it is not correct. >> Did they advise you of anything? any. consequences for lying to them to lying. to FBI agents because the defense is. saying it's so interesting that all. these people they're a little more. accurate when they're talking to the.

feds. Huh? >> Because they know that they've got. nobody in the feds and the feds don't. care. The feds are going to arrest them. Not the feds don't care. The feds have. also been the subject of a lot of. corruption allegations. But in terms of. when they're investigating this case, >> they don't really care. Did they advise. you of any consequences? So, we had a. willing conversation. That's a yes or a no. >> I don't recall. >> Okay, there's your answer. >> And again, it's like, are you shielding. these witnesses? As a trained law. enforcement officer, are you aware that. it is a crime to lie to certain other.

law enforcement agencies when you have. intent to lie? Yes. Did you tell those. law enforcement agents on August 9th of. 2023, you saw Brian Higgins and Chief. Burkowitz go into Sallyport together and. alone with Karen Reed's SUV for a wildly. long time? >> For a wildly long time. >> That was my recollection at the time. So, you did say that. >> at the time. That is what I recollected. >> Okay. >> What's even more interesting, and you'll. see by the line of questioning, is that. after she moves to Boston Police. Department, the commissioner, the man.

who runs Boston PD, >> Michael Cox, >> Michael Cox, calls this random patrol. officer, Kelly Deto, and then she recantss her statement. >> Oh my god. >> She calls the FBI and is like, "So, >> you say Boston has like thousands of. police, right? 3,000 officers and it's. very rare that the commissioner talks to. anyone, especially not on a detective. level. >> She's just a patrol officer. >> Wow. >> Did you have any conversation with.

anybody in the commissioner's office at. the Boston Police Department? >> Not about anything. malicious. >> I didn't use the word malicious. Why do. you say malicious? I had a conversation, but. it was my department saying regardless. of what I need to say on the stand, they. support me. So, everyone thinks this. whole thing is weird. Especially weirder. when you given the fact that Michael. Cox, he is interviewed by a reporter.

later and he's I mean, he's kind of. thrown off guard. He's like, "Did you. talk to Kelly Dever about her. statement?" And he says, "I don't even. know Karen Reed. I've got nothing to do. with Karen Reed's case. I don't know. anything about the Karen Reed case. >> I have nothing to do with Karen Reed. Matter of fact, I didn't even know this. person was associated with a Karen Reed. case. It's much to do about nothing. I. have no idea what they're talking about. with Karen Reed. They had nothing to do. with Karen Reed. I have nothing to do. with Karen Reed. >> And everyone's like, "That's crazy. because what do you mean? The officer. that is deceased involving Karen Reed's.

case is a Boston police officer.". >> Yes. >> What do you mean you know nothing of the. Karen Reed case? And the defense is saying, "You told us, Kelly de a year ago when you talked to. us, the defense, did you tell us that. you were called up to the commissioner's. office and he told you two things? Number one, the department supports you, officer Dver, and do the right thing.". >> Boston Police Department supports you, and Officer Dver, do the right thing. >> So, he said my name correctly. He said, "De." And um.

>> that's my mistake. >> He said nothing with the intent of. guiding me one way or the other. >> Just full of attitude, huh? >> Yeah. At one point when she's trying to. say, "I don't remember a question," she. says, "Just like how you don't remember. my name. I don't recall.". >> Like, "You can't remember my name. I. don't remember.". >> That is wild. >> Yeah. >> So, is she the one that you're talking. about that she kind of told what. happened and then she took it back? >> Yeah. Nizens have dug up that there. seems to be some distant familial. connection between the Dever family and.

the McCabes. There seems to be some sort. of marriage between Kelly De and Matt. McCabe's side of the family. It's. definitely not good. She also accuses. one of the male defense attorneys of. threatening to charge her with perjury. And she said that they became very. aggressive. And so Jackson is like, "A. male voice on the phone threatened to. charge you with perjury?" Yes. You're a. police officer, correct? Yes. Who. charges people with crimes? In the end, it's going to go through the court.

system. So the DA, you know, is, have. you ever seen a defense attorney charge. anybody with a crime? Personally, no. Fact of the matter is, nobody ever. threatened you with perjury, did they? They did. I contacted the FBI regarding. it. Oh, did you? I did. >> Do you have a report from the FBI saying. that you reported that someone on the on. the defense team threatened to charge. you charge yours with perjury? Any. report to that effect? >> No. >> No. that we're looking for the truth, >> which I gave you. Yes.

>> Did you also say on that phone call. something to the effect of, "I know. you're going to tear me a new one. It's. >> what you're trying to do." So, yes. >> Actually, what you said was, "You're. going to tear me a new asshole." Didn't. >> I don't recall that. So, that's putting. words in my mouth. >> But you do remember saying something to. the effect of, "I know you're going to. tear me a new one, right?". >> Yes. >> Okay. >> What is going on? >> Yeah. >> These people are. >> Yes. So now it's become a thing where um.

David Yianetti the only way he can. describe it is Johnke is a Boston cop. I. mean that tells you all you need to. know. The blue wall went up and Karen. Reed is on the outside of the blue wall. She is an outsider. It just seems like a. lot of it is not even corruption. I mean. it is but a lot of it is not even like I. want to protect Brian Albert. I want to. protect the Mc Alberts. It just seems. more so that's just the way it works. This is how we run things. But one of. the biggest problems in this case is. even the accident reconstructionists for.

both sides are well. The fact is nobody. knows exactly where Jon's body was. found. Right. During the first trial, the prosecution calls up their expert. crash reconstructionist, Trooper Paul. He states that Karen hit Jon with her. car. And it all makes sense due to. physics. Trooper Paul states that Jon. was hit by the SUV and flew 30 ft. Then. when the SUV hit him, he projected. forward and then to the left and then to. the front yard to his final resting. place. If you're confused, it's because. it's confusing. Nobody can understand.

what he's saying happened when the car. hit John O'Keefe. >> And more, like I said, in this case, more the fact that he didn't get 100%. like his center mass didn't strike the. vehicle. So, he would not have been. thrown 100% of the vehicle speed post. impact. He would have his right side. would have sustained the vehicle speed. and that would cause him to spin out as. opposed to traditional forward. projection. If he was right there in the. middle of the vehicle, he would have got. projected forward and he would have. sustained his full body would have. sustained the the vehicle speed. >> Basically, trooper Paul's version of. events show John O'Keefe doing almost a.

ballerina spin. He gets sideswiped by. the tail light. >> Mhm. >> His arm stays there. The tail light. shatters on impact, but no bruises or. broken bones on his arm that took the. brunt of the impact of this massive SUV. And then his arm kind of stays there for. the tail light to then kind of sideswipe. him again, causing those crazy. abrasions. And then that causes him to. propel in like a spin ballerina. projected. somewhere around the idea of 30 ft until.

he lands in the grass. And I know that. I'm being very animated with this and. it's because in the whole trial that's. how it is. He's being animated and. attorney Jackson to bring it home. He's. like doing a spin in court. So you're. like, "So this is what you're telling me. happened.". >> He does a pirouette and flies 30 ft to. his final play. >> because I think the only way to see how. ridiculous it is is to show the. animation of what he's saying happened.

Even Trooper Paul seems very unsure of. his own testimony. And this is where I. think a lot of people say maybe it's not. allaround corruption. Maybe it's also a. mix of incompetence. I will say the. defense the minute that the. cross-examination begins, they really. don't even need to argue the. nitty-gritty of everything he claims. because they just argue his credentials. Jackson questions him. Sir, do you hold. any degrees in the scientific discipline. of mathematics? I do not. Do you hold. any degrees in the scientific discipline. of physics? I do not. Hold any degrees. in the scientific discipline of. biomechanics? No.

>> How about in kinematics? >> No. >> What's the highest degree that you do. hold, sir? >> I have an associates degree. >> In what? >> Uh, administration of justice. >> What's another word for rate of. velocity? >> The rate of velocity. >> Correct. >> I mean, it's a it deals with um motion. It deals with forward and also deals. with speed. Deals with um travel and. speed. If something's moving, it's also. has a speed to it. >> Right. The word you're looking for is. acceleration. Correct.

>> Sure. >> What role does acceleration play in the. field of kinematics? >> What role does. So what role does acceleration play with. in kinematics? >> Correct. >> Talks about like you just said, it talks. about the speed and talks about motion. >> What's the difference between. constrained and unconstrained motion? >> Constrained and unconstrained motion. >> That's what I asked. Constrained motion.

>> I can't recollect at the moment. >> Constrained motion is motion on a. predetermined path, isn't it? >> Yes. >> Unconstrained motion is what? >> When it doesn't have predetermined path, >> free movement. Correct. >> Correct. >> Couldn't remember that from your class. >> For the most part, we don't go that that. constrained and unconstrained. >> Constrained and unconstrained. Not. restrained. >> That's what I said. Sorry. unconstrained. Yes. >> The defense also brings up the fact that. Trooper Paul testified that when someone.

is hit by something, whatever they have. in their hand, they lose it. But John. O'Keefe held onto his cocktail glass. while being projected 30 ft. Trooper. Paul responds, "I don't know. I mean, it. just could have been with him the whole. way. I I don't know. I wasn't there, so. I don't know how the glass stayed with. his body and went with him to the final. rest." "Sir, we know that you weren't. there, but if you don't know, who who. knows?" At certain points, Trooper Paul. makes no sense and he clearly sounds. very nervous. He will say things like. this to the defense attorney. >> I know. I'm just saying you asked. You. said what I just I'm just responding to.

what you said. I'm trying to make sure. you understand what I'm saying. >> No, I don't. But I'll ask another. question. >> Another questionable part is the defense. points out that John's phone was found. underneath his body. To which Trooper. Paul is asked, >> "A cell phone was found under his torso, under his body. What's your theory on. how that cell phone ended up flying 30. ft with him?". >> It just it just it just did. It just did. And somehow as he landed, he tucked that cell phone underneath his.

body so that he landed on top of it. >> It just It just did. That's That's the. evidence at the scene. I can't I didn't. put the evidence there. >> Well, you didn't. Objection sustained. Cell phone in one hand, cup in the other. hand, flew through the air. Right. Objection sustained. Defense attorney. Jackson accuses Trooper Paul of having. confirmation bias to which Trooper Paul. says he can't definitively say what. confirmation bias even really means. >> Have you ever heard of the phrase. confirmation bias? >> I know the phrase. Yes. >> You know what it means?

>> I can't definitely say what it means. >> Jupal states that he came to the final. resting spot of John O'Keefe by way of. Gallagher telling him where John O'Keefe. was found. But remember, Gallagher never. saw where Jon's body was found. All in. all, I think the only takeaway from. Trooper Paul's testimony is that he has. no clue what he's talking about. We have. no clue what he's talking about. Nobody. has any clue what Trooper Paul is. talking about. At one point, he says. like there are certain calculations that. you can do, you know, based on distance. and it's based on miles per hour and the. speed of the vehicle and the striking of.

the vehicle and stuff. The defense is. like, "What did you mean by and stuff?". >> What did you mean by stuff? >> I don't know. >> Ultimately, trooper Paul admits. >> that one more time. We could not. calculate anything from this collision. >> Side note, he doesn't even know John. O'Keefe's weight, which you would think. is one of the most important things. >> Are you kidding me? >> He also doesn't know the mass weight of. the vehicle. >> Are you kidding me? >> It's just so clear that he wrote I. >> How is he an expert? >> We don't know. It's like when you write, I speak Mandarin on your resume. Well,

you do. I speak Mandarin on your resume. And then you go and suddenly you have to. speak Mandarin. And then I'm just like, okay. How would you calculate how far a. body at rest would travel after being. struck by an object in motion? How would. you calculate that? I would use a type. of formula for calculations of post. impact speeds of pedestrians. >> The defense asks how the tail light was. shattered. So, the tail light in this. case was shattered when it struck John. O'Keefe's arm. Exactly what part of his. arm based on what I saw for his injuries. was the upper part of his arm down. Trooper Paul states that it would have.

been out, elbows out, then the full. mass, you know, and then it got hit. He. really doesn't know what he's talking. about. >> If he flew like 30 ft, it's very easy to. calculate the force needed to to reach. that kind of distance. >> But even just the arm. >> Yeah. That and that doesn't make sense. >> None of it makes sense. >> to shatter that type of plastic, you. know, what type of force. >> And then also it's a lot of the plastic. tail light pieces were found around. where John O'Keefe's body was found. So. it shattered like an explosion. >> Right. Exactly.

>> None of it makes sense. So then there. was breathing. There's only one thing. that doesn't lie, which is physics. >> Yeah, >> that's one thing cannot lie. So just. follow that proves everyone is lying. >> Yeah. But he's like, "No, this is. exactly what happened." And when he's. asked, "How are there no injuries to. John O'Keefe's arm other than those. abrasions and lacerations?" He says, "I. don't know. Literally, I don't know.". Any other questions about that? Auntie. Bev just sustains all of them, Jackson. asks. And at the same time he does a. pureway and flies 30 ft to his final.

resting point of rest. >> I don't know if he did a pirouette. He. started rotating counterclockwise. I. don't know how far he ran. counterclockwise but he started to. rotate according that would push him to. rotate counterclockwise. Well now he. went counterclockwise all the way to his. back toward the ground. It's a it seems. like a most likely possibility. >> At one point the defense straight up. asks Trooper Paul. The truth is trooper. Paul you have no idea what all these. physics calculations mean do you? Objection sustained. Netzen comments. read, "I was feeling sympathy for how. insufficient trooper Paul's intelligence. is, but then I see him on cross trying.

to explain away a murder charge with his. woefully lacking investigation and. opinions. Not doing calculations because. it was a reverse is a lot." The laws of. physics exist. Gravity exists despite. his wish that it didn't. >> I don't know. Just like based on this. person alone, just this little. conversation alone, it's enough to prove. that Karen Reed didn't hit John O'Keefe. That's it. period. The end. I don't even. know how the mistrial happened from the. first trial. It doesn't even make any. sense. >> I think the biggest thing for me is the.

feds got involved. The federal. investigation that has no connection. with Karen Reed, that has no connection. with the Mc Alberts and their experts. said these injuries from John O'Keefe. were not from a collision. >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. >> And they had no skin in the game. They. gave this to the Commonwealth and the. defense and they said, "Here you go.". And I feel like that was where I was. like, "Okay, then what can I say? I. don't know physics like that, but. they're telling me.". >> So, it wasn't from a collision, then.

let's look elsewhere, guys. >> Yes. But they're like, "No, it was from. a collision." In fact, Trooper Paul. testified in trial one, and clearly it. did not go well. So, for trial two, the. Commonwealth brings in expert witnesses, very expensive expert witnesses from a. company called Aperture. The first one. is Shannon Burgess. You can already tell. things are going to go ary by the fact. that his direct by Hank Brennan is 1 and. 1/2 hours long and the cross by Robert. Allessie is 4 and 1/2 hours long which. by the way Robert Allessie is a.

pharmacist as well. He's got a lot of it. seems like he knows a lot of STEM. related stuff. I don't know how else to. describe it but it seems like he's very. well-versed in anything STEM related. Shannon Burgess says that he found a new. computer chip in Karen Reed's SUV that. hasn't been previously analyzed. And he. used that data to calculate the time. difference between Karen Reed's SUV and. John O'Keefe's cell phone. And he found. the variance. And then he's just saying, you know, the time adds up to when Karen. Reed made a three-point turn and when.

John O'Keefe's phone was used for the. last time and that is why he believes. that she was the one that killed him on. impact. When the cross- examination. starts, when it starts with these types. of questions, you just know it's not the. type of cross that you want to be on the. receiving end of. Allessie has this look. of, "Good afternoon, Mr. Burgess.". People know Allessie, and people say, "This man is about to do something that. Burgess is not going to like." He brings. up his CV. >> CV cover. >> Yeah. And it says that he is currently.

pursuing a bachelor's degree. But. interestingly enough, on the Aperture. official website, his bio states that he. has a BS in mathematics and business. administration, not currently pending or. pursuing, just has it. You do not have a. bachelor of science in mathematics and. business administration. Do you? No, I. do not. He also puts it in his LinkedIn, but also he hasn't gotten his degree for. that or nor is he actively pursuing it. So, is he just like lying on the. Aperture website and his LinkedIn? The.

defense brings up another resume and. this time again it says Bachelor of. General Science and Mathematics and. Business Administration, University of. Alabama 2022. All Burgess can say about. that is that is what it states but this. resume there are a number of errors in. that. Correct. So let's go on. This is. the third example. Am I correct sir? It. has errors or outdated information. Well, when you say outdated, how is it. that you can call a date outdated next. to something you don't possess? either. you have a bachelor of science degree or. you don't. I have represented that I do.

not have a bachelor's degree. But to. make matters worse, the degree that he. claimed to have doesn't even exist at. the University of Alabama. He's asked. >> So you would agree that there's not even. a degree called Bachelor of General. Science and Mathematics and Business. Administration offered at the University. of Alabama. Correct. >> Correct. If I did the math correctly, sir, you've been pursuing a Bachelor of. Science degree for 17 years. Correct. >> That is correct.

>> And you have not obtained it as you sit. here today. >> That is correct. >> Is he embarrassed? What is happening. right now? >> Yeah. So, he's lying on his resume. He. has no degree in this. But what if. Shannon Burgess is a genius that excels. in math and this is an episode of Suits? He didn't graduate from school, but he. is a prodigy level ability to comprehend. car accidents and physics. That could be. the case. The defense reels that Shannon. Burg just doesn't know the difference. between a gigabit and a gigabyte. To. simplify it, 1 gigabyte is 8 GB, which.

is kind of confusing, but like that's. like confusing 5 minutes and 40 minutes. It's a huge discrepancy, a huge. miscalculation, misunderstanding, error, whatever Shannon Burgess wants to call. it. Do I know the difference between the. two? No, but I also don't work for. Aperture, where these things can change. the course of a defendant's life based. on their calculations. Burgess didn't. even realize he misunderstood a gigabyte. and a gigabit until the defense arc.

witnesses were like, "Hey, prosecutors, >> you're experts are dumb. They confused. it." So, >> unbelievable. It was you that simply misunderstood the. difference between gigabits and. gigabytes. Correct. >> Misinterpreted. I would not say. misunderstood. >> He also misinterprets dates. Just. straight up gets dates wrong on his. scientific findings. The defense also. accuses him of just switching up his. data and findings whenever other experts. that are also testifying for the.

prosecution find different findings just. to make it all cohesive, which is not at. all what you're supposed to do. And side. note, the redirect for the prosecution. does not save this testimony because. this this cross-examination is 4 and 1/2. hours long and it's brutal. Very brutal. It just makes it goofier. All Hank. Brennan can do is ask Burgess. >> Is a bachelor's degree a prerequisite of. success in a particular field? >> No, it is not. >> You ever hear of Bill Gates? >> Yes. >> Steven Jobs? >> Yes. >> Oprah Winfrey? >> Sustained.

>> Oh my gosh. >> Oprah Winfrey. Objection. Sustained. Then you have the other aperture expert. who I guess I decided last night at like. 3 in the morning. He doesn't deserve a. spot on this wall. Okay. But he's just. another He's the blue man. >> The blue man. >> Print the blue man. But he's the blue. man. Robert Allessie is also the one. doing this. I will say Robert Allessie I. don't think anyone expected him to do. these types of crosses. He I feel like. he knows more about physics than the.

Aperture witnesses. >> He looks like he would know. Yeah, he. he's people call him like the nerdy hot. guy type. >> He looks like a scientist more than a. lawyer. >> Yeah. Which makes him an incredible. lawyer. And Dr. Welchure is a lot. He. says, >> "Good morning, Dr. Walter. >> Good morning. We haven't been formally. introduced. Your whole name?". >> Robert Allessie, sir. >> Robert Leie. Nice to meet you. >> Nice to meet you. >> Which I just felt like Welchure is. trying to assert his dominance, which.

doesn't bode well for him later on. He. introduces himself as an action. reconstruction and biomechanics expert. He's got a little feistiness in him. Allessie asks him. >> and would you agree that the first. question or one of the first questions. that are to be asked by a biomechanical. engineer when conducting an analysis of. say an injury is how did this happen? Is. that one of the first few questions that. you ask? >> No, that's usually the last question. >> Oh, so for you.

>> so hold on a second. Generally what you. want to do is gather data. You want to. know what injuries there are, what. evidence there is, like for example on. the vehicles, and then the very last. thing you want to know or define is. given all that information, how did it. happen? So that's the end. >> It's very preachy. It's like he's like, "So hold on a second. Let me tell you. how it's done.". >> Yeah. Unfortunately, Welchure has no. explanation for how the how the car hit. John on the hand and broke nothing in. his hand or his arm. >> Is 300 to 400 lb of force sound right.

from the literature that it would take. to break a bone in the hand. >> for a distributed load such as the tail. light? No. >> Moving on. Because Welchure is mainly. known for his blue paint, unless he asks. him. >> Dr. Welchure, um I would like to talk. now about your paint exercise. I'll just. call it the blue paint exercise. Is that. descriptive enough for you to know what. I'm talking about? >> No, it's not an exercise. It's a test. >> Okay. You want to call it a blue paint. test? >> Sure.

>> Okay. Let's call it blue paint test. So, your blue paint test involved painting. the right rear tail light blue. Correct. >> Correct. >> So, he bought a Lexus. >> Who bought a Lexus? >> Welchure bought a Lexus for Aperture. I. mean, the Commonwealth's paying for it. Bought a Lexus. painted the rear tail. light blue. >> and then uh he's standing there and has. it back up into him at two miles per. hour. He runs three tests where the blue. paint backs up to him in 2 mph to see. where the blue paint lands on his hand.

because he is also the same height as. John O'Keefe or around the similar same. height. But that's confusing for the. defense because it's like you don't even. know where John O'Keefe was standing. You don't know if he was standing on the. lawn which would be a few inches. discrepancy from if he was standing on. the street. So, if you don't know where. he's standing, and these few inches make. vastly different results for a test like. this, what kind of test are you running? Also, you're running the test at 2 mph. The Commonwealth is claiming that she. hit him at over 20 mph. How can you even.

run a test like that? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, they're asking you. >> you didn't do a blue paint test with a. vehicle going at 20 mph. Correct. >> That is correct. I was not going to hit. myself with a Lexus at 20 mph. You could. have done other tests where the vehicle. was going at 20 mph if you used a crash. test dummy. Correct. >> Welchure gives a lengthy explanation of. why he didn't do that, but it just. sounds like why you didn't do your. homework. It doesn't really make that. much sense. Allessie is so overwhel.

you don't have the point of impact. You. don't know where in the road there was. impact. You you don't have anything. The. purpose of your blue paint test was. quote I mean the focal point is what? >> So that was the focal point of that. test. The focal point of the purpose of. that test was to show the contact width. and location of how someone of Mr. O'Keefe's height which happens to be me. contacts and where it would contact.

where the broken tail light was. So no, that was the focal point of the testing. That's why I did the testing. That's why. we're calling it paint transfer testing. >> Okay. So, his test is trying to show. that John O'Keefe's arm broke the tail. light. >> But that's not the test. The test is it. just touched the tail light because you. can't prove it broke the tail light if. you don't test at the speed. Yeah. >> And and it. >> Exactly. Yeah. Put a dummy there and.

>> Yeah. But something Yeah. At one point. he gets very aggressive and he just. argues. >> it's certainly possible. It's possible. it could have shot off into space as an. engineer, but not probable. >> Oh, you think it's possible that it. could have been shot off into space, sir? >> As an engineer, it's a possibility. >> You It's a possibility that this Lexus. could have been shot off into space. >> Highly, highly unlikely, but again, you're asking an engineer about. possibilities and probabilities. >> Let's get back to reality. >> Netzens are commenting, "Apparently, this guy thinks that John's arm blew up.

the tail light into 47 pieces without. breaking a single bone. He couldn't. answer a yes or no question if asked if. it's sunny outside right now. This clown. did his own 2 mph crash, did ridiculous. paint test, and admits that engineering. has thousands of possibilities, including launching the Lexus into. space. Another one says basically. they're doing costume changes lying on. the stand and fingerpainting to get paid. by taxpayers, which they're getting paid. a lot. The Commonwealth paid nearly. $400,000 to Aperture for the testing.

>> W and it was dumb. like the test was. useless. >> Useless. Which brings us to the defense. witnesses, Dr. Daniel Wolf and Dr. Andrew Rent. And they are called Crash. Daddy. Mainly Dr. Wolf is called Crash. Daddy. He's honorable Crash Daddy. Crash. Daddy number two. And there was a whole. ordeal that Hank Brennan was fighting. tooth and nail to make sure that they. don't come in for the second trial. It. was a whole thing. They bring in Arca, the two crash daddies. Now, ARCA was. originally hired by the FBI and they are.

a formal accident reconstruction company. that are hired by law firms that work. primarily with car insurance companies, insurance carriers, and they also have. multiple contracts with the Department. of Defense, the DoD for accident. reconstructions. Their CVs filled to the brim. Like, if. anybody knows anything about car. accidents, they know. And we know they. know because the prosecutors could not. question their CVs. >> Yeah. And it sounded like they are the. people to hire for something like this.

Ask the expert. Here's the expert. >> Yes. >> But the um prosecutor never reached out. to like a formal official. >> Aperture is supposed to be. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I think uh netizen speculation is. that they had to reach out to Aperture. or a company that maybe some people. subjectively in their opinion think is. not as reputable as ARCA because Arca. would probably not lie and Arca is. perhaps too smart and ARCA would tell. you straight up which is what they do on. the stand. They both state John's.

injuries are inconsistent with a crash. Dr. Wolf states it's his job to quote, and this is going to be a breath of. fresh air compared to the Aperture. witnesses. He's very likable on the. stand. Both of them are. >> I think a simple definition in my mind. would be the application of physics, engineering, science, and and. mathematics to collision events. I. always like to think of it as if you you. open up a puzzle box and you dump the. pieces out and you've got a bunch of. pieces and you're trying to piece. together together the evidence to see.

how everything fits to get a clear. picture. >> Unlike any of the prosecution witnesses, he says, >> "Back in 2012, I received a bachelor of. science and engineering from James. Madison University along with a minor in. mathematics. Some of my courses while at. JMU included included courses in. physics, statics, dynamics, kinematics, material science along with your other. engineering sciences. Uh subsequent to. my my undergraduate degree, I then went. on to the University of Delaware to. pursue my PhD in electrical and computer. engineering with a concentration in.

electromagnetics and photonics. In. addition to to my my undergraduate. degree and my PhD, I I've continued to. take courses through Northwestern. University and crash reconstruction. Um. some of those courses have included. human factors, lighting. I've taken. courses on uh electronic vehicle data, photoggramometry, threedimensional laser. scanning. So, I've continued to take. courses subsequent to to graduating. Yeah. >> Right off the bat, they sound a lot more. credible. They also Yes. >> Are you saying both of these were also. in trial one? >> Yes. And they try to get them banned. from trial 2.

>> That is crazy. Even with that, they. there's still questions. >> Yeah. And uh he they ran a lot of tests. So instead of just like rubbing blue. paint on a tail light, they ran multiple. experiments to see what would happen. when a tail light collides at various. speeds with a dummy arm. To which the. crash daddy state based on the test. results, the damage is inconsistent with. striking an arm. They also tried to do a. test an experiment where cuz he had a. cocktail glass in his hand that. shattered. They got a cocktail glass.

projectile. So, you literally built a. cannon? >> Yeah, it's pretty awesome. >> Basically, like a gun that shoots a. cocktail glass at a tail light. Yes. To. see if the tail light shatters and where. the cocktail glass pieces land, where. the tail light pieces land. That also. does not show that John was hit by this. car. >> Okay. Okay. I see. They're trying to. prove that the maybe the cocktail of. glass shattered the tail light, but. again, that was inconsistent with the.

scene. So, they're not even just trying. to prove one thing. They're just trying. to go down the line and they're like. literally nothing. >> Like nothing. At one point, the only. thing that the prosecution can do with. the ARCA experts, because honestly, they're experting. The only thing that. they can do is try to say that they're. too friendly with the defense team. They're too friendly with the defense. team because the defense team is like, "Hey, these weren't really even our. hired experts in trial one. They did. eventually get hired and they were only. paid like $23,000 which is a lot of.

money but they were probably way under. what they were paid by the FBI. So when. they testified for trial one, they. didn't have to testify. The FBI already. paid them. They did their job. >> Yeah. >> But they came in and they testified for. trial 2. I think their hotel fees, their. traveling, their time was compensated. for $23,000. And he's making a whole big ordeal about. it when he just paid aperture $400,000. But he's just trying to say you guys are. too close. >> He's Are you qu Like that's like the. last thing he should be questioning.

right now when you look at this whole. map that everyone knows each other. >> And he's just also saying things like, "Sue, you call him Allan. Allan Jackson. Sounds like you guys are friendly." And. Crash Daddy is like, "What are you. talking about?" It's literally. >> Yeah, I've become familiar with him over. the years, so I call him Allan. And then. I think um he he becomes a meme at this. point because he says, >> "What would you call me?". >> And everyone's like, "Are you jealous of. Crash Daddy? Like what do you want him.

to call you? It seemed like people have. been putting romantic music and like. what would you call me then?" And he. just says, >> "Probably Mr. Brennan.". >> And everyone's just like, "Okay." And. then at one point, Dr. Brent, honorable. crash daddy number two, he throws shade. at Aperture and he says, well, the blue. paint test is the only test that he. performed. And he referenced that test. for his opinion that the position and. lacerations are consistent with the tail. light cover. So, if that test was not.

intended to signify or demonstrate the. orientation of the arm, that's the only. test you did. So, if it doesn't. represent that, it's really meaningless. in his analysis and conclusions. He's. saying, "What was the test for? I don't. know what. >> you you did a test and it failed. >> So you have no answer. So what did you. do that for? >> So why are you showing us this test? Because this test means nothing. >> Yes. >> This a stupid test. >> Yes. >> Which is how a lot of nizens feel and. they feel that Crash Daddy's dimples.

alone would have them believe them. And. then the next problem is if it's not. caused by the arm, if we believe Arca, then what could it be caused by? Now we. bring up Chloe once more. The. prosecution brings Terry [ __ ] She works. for UC Davis at the veterinary genetics. lab in the forensic unit. She's the DNA. technical lead and she's been doing this. for 25 years. She had tested swabs sent. in by the MSP and tested it for dog K9. DNA, which it showed negative, but it.

did show positive for pig DNA, which she. says could happen when you have pork or. any sort of pig cold cuts or anything of. that sort. So, it doesn't necessarily. say that he was at a pig farm or. anything of that, but people thought it. was very interesting that there's no dog. DNA. But when the defense really gets. into the nitty-gritty of it all, they're. asking her, "Do you know where the swabs. came from? It was pulled from John's. t-shirt. >> that was laying on the hospital floor.". So, there's a lot of questions of that. And the defense is just saying just. because there was no dog DNA does not.

mean anything. In fact, dog DNA should. have been taken from the arm. Like, any. swab should have been taken from John. O'Keefe's arm. And even then, if those. are claw marks, it would have been very. difficult to find dog DNA because. usually you need saliva to indicate. these animal DNA. >> Yeah. >> factors. The defense bring in their own. witness, an older doctor by the name of. Dr. Marie Russell. And I don't know why, but Auntie Bev has beef with her for no. reason. Because during a voadier which.

is so vadier is not just jury selection. it's could be like vetting of witnesses. when the jury is not around. >> there's a vadier of Dr. Marie Russell. and Auntie Bev is like because it's a va. I can ask questions and everyone is like. I have never seen a judge ask questions. I mean judges will sometimes ask. questions for the when it's jury. selection to make sure that everything. is impartial the jurors are all good but. this is weird. All right. So, since this. is a voier, I get to ask questions, doctor. So, I just have a a couple of.

questions for you. I don't think I. really heard you. So, could you tell me. again what your opinion is and to what. degree you hold that opinion? >> Yes, >> Dr. Russell is very sharp. She is a. professional dog bite expert. Her resume. is as good as the ARCA experts residency. at USC, Level One Trauma Center, then. forensic pathology residency at the LA. County Coroner's Office. She has been. studying dog bites for a very long time. She has probably seen maybe a thousand. dog bites and she says.

>> I believe that these injuries were. sustained by an animal, possibly a large. dog because of the pattern of the. injuries. >> Fascinating. >> Yes. And a lot of people online say, "Hey guys, I'm not an expert, but I've. been bitten by a dog. I've been clawed. at by a dog." And look, also people say. that um there are rumors that Chloe was. supposed to be a canine dog in training. but failed out of the academy. And K9. dogs are trained to bite the arm. You. know when they have those marshmallow. arms. So it's very interesting that it's.

only one arm and she's allegedly been on. very strongly. The only rebuttal that. the Commonwealth has to Dr. Russell's. testimony is that bite analysis science. is pseudocience. I agree. But hold on. They're conflating two different things. Bite analysis science is pseudocience. When you look at bite indentations on. like a person's arm, let's say someone. bit my arm. >> and they take a picture of this and they. bring up scans of people's teeth and.

they say, "Does person one fit? Does. person two fit? Does person three fit? It's person three. Convict them.". >> Mhm. >> That is pseudocience. It's very hard to. identify the individual. But that's not. what Dr. Marie Russell's doing. She's. saying, I mean, you can kind of tell. when it's a dog bite. I'm not saying. which dog it is. I'm not saying which. breed of dog it is. I'm just telling you. these are very consistent with what I. have seen are dog bites because I study. dog bites. >> Wow.

>> Yeah. But they're saying, "No, bite. science is pseudocience." And she's. like, I'm not saying I'm going to tell. you which dog, which breed of dog, but. it's this is very weird. >> People think it's so crazy that this is. happening. So then just bring in Chloe, right, to examine her. Well, >> defense attorney Jackson says, "I want. access to that dog. I might want to. measure its claws. I might want to. measure its teeth. I might want to have. a forensic veterinarian look at the dog, examine the dog." And then we find out. that the Alberts got rid of the dog, their family pet. They get rid of Khloe.

and rehome her in Vermont. >> Insane. >> The defense is saying that the. Commonwealth never gave them any sort of. information. They gave them some random. vet form of a dog that's not even named. Chloe on the vet forms of like random. people from Vermont. And they're like, "Who are these people? We don't even. know if that's Chloe." Who's to say. that's Chloe? That could be a different. German Shepherd. Who's to say the Brian. Alberts don't find a different German. Shepherd? And it's like, "That's Chloe.

See, the teeth don't match. See, everything doesn't match.". >> Oh my gosh. >> So, they ask the McAlberts why they got. rid of Khloe. And they say that. recently, right before they rehomed. Khloe. It's not because of John O'Keefe. It's because Khloe bit another dog. And. then the two owners of the dog, two. women that were walking that dog tried. to stop Khloe and Khloe attacked the two. women. They ended up in the hospital. One of those two women later reached out. to Vanity Fair and said, "I was scared. because after I got out of the hospital, I was reached out to by Kevin Albert,

a Canton police officer who was asking. me, "How can we make this go away?". >> Whoa. >> Allegedly. >> Whoa. >> But they rehomed the dog. It's I think this is one of those cases. where I'm getting very confused because. a lot of the information seems like it's. not subjective. A lot of the digital. forensic information of how long to die. in the cold should not be subjective. The crash experts should not be.

subjective. But somehow everything has. become subjective. Everything has become. will you believe this party or this. party? But I thought digital forensics, >> yeah, >> physics were typically objective things. in the court of law. So this case is. interesting in that sense, but I think. it's weird enough to cause reasonable. doubt, which is the burden of the. prosecution because in the end for the. second trial, I mean, you guys already. know the jurors go off to deliberate and. they come back.

The deliberating jurors remain standing, defendant remains standing. All other. parties may be seated. [Music]. Mr. Foreman, on docket number um 001, murder in the second degree, what say. you is the defendant at the bar guilty. or not guilty? >> Not guilty. >> Do all of you agree?

>> Thank you. >> 002. What say is the defendant at the. bar not guilty or guilty? >> Not guilty. >> 003. What say is the defendant at the. bar leaving the scene after accident. resulting in death? Defendant not guilty. or guilty. >> So say you, Mr. Pullman. >> So say you all. Yes. >> And they find Karen Reed not guilty. And. you hear people cheering outside the. courthouse, inside the courtroom. [Music].

Heat. [Applause]. Heat. [Applause].

and she's just like bursting into tears. Even her defense attorneys are so. emotional in that moment. And it's just. a very She is found guilty of operating. under the influence, but she does not. get jail time. Instead, she receives a. year of probation. And Karen says, "I. just want to say two things. Number one is I could not be standing. here without these amazing supporters.

who have supported me and my team. financially and more importantly. emotionally for almost 4 years. And the. second thing I want to say is no one has. fought harder for justice for John. O'Keefe than I have than I have and my. team. Thank you. >> about the verdict. She says at first. there's grief, then it's anger. It's. anger that outside sources, outside. people can influence what happens in a. courtroom and can impact the results of.

a pretty cut and dry case. Krie Roberts. has also released her own statement. stating that she's confused why everyone. hates her and her new best friend, Jen. McCabe, she says, "I don't know why. they're making Jen McCabe a villain. All. she did was answer the same phone call I. did. Karen called her. She didn't call. Karen. It's so stupid and bizarre. We. put our asses on the line for three and. a half years, two trials to help the. state of Massachusetts, and you're not. going to help us when we're being. harassed. It's not worth it to put my. family through that ever again and not. be protected at all. It's absolutely. sick. The jury pool was completely.

tainted is all I can say. Yeah. Brian. Albert and his family have released a. statement of their own. Our hearts are. with John and his entire O'Keefe family. They have suffered through so much and. deserve better from the justice system. While we may have more to say in the. future today, we mourn with John's. family and lament the cruel reality that. this prosecution was infected by lies. and conspiracy theories spread by Karen. Reed, her defense team, and some in the. media. The result is a devastating. miscarriage of justice. ATF Brian. Higgins has remained quiet, except there.

are rumors and sources floating around. the internet that he was seen drunk at a. bar where he was telling a buddy of his, "All I did was pull the dog off.". We don't know if this is true. This. could be completely a madeup lie. Brennan has made a statement after this. case. He says, um, DA Michael Moresy. appointed me, giving me full discretion. to independently assess this case and. follow the evidence no matter where it. led. After an independent and thorough. review of all the evidence, I concluded. that the evidence led to one person and.

one person only. Neither the closed. federal investigation nor my independent. review led me to identify any other. possible suspect or person responsible. for the death of John O'Keefe. The. campaign of intimidation and abuse that. has been waged, funded, and promoted in. public and on social media is the. antithesis of justice. If this type of. conduct becomes commonplace, it will. threaten the integrity of our judicial. system, affecting both victims and. criminally accused. Jackson states, "The. Commonwealth would rather simply condemn. the jury in its fair and lawful. verdict." The O'Keefe family have since.

filed a wrongful death suit against. Karen Reed, CF McCarthy's, the first bar. that John and Karen went to, and then. Waterfall Bar, saying that they. overserved and um they are seeking about. $50,000 in damages for quote conscious. pain and suffering and profound. emotional distress. Karen states the. timing is very weird. She says that they. could have sued me right when John. O'Keefe passed, but they sued me after. they found out that she wasn't going to. prison. As for the kids, she really. cares for those kids and she says,

"They've been exploited and brought into. a trial they have no business being in. The hope for me is that one day one of. them will grow up and dig into this case. and be ambitious enough to say, I need. to see everything.". Jackson states about Karen and her. criminal trials. Make no mistake, it's. not that the Commonwealth didn't prove. that she's guilty. We proved that she's. innocent. And the unfortunate thing is. it's caused a flood of people who. probably are guilty.

that have Proctor and Lai have touched. their case in some way that are trying. very hard. >> to get their cases thrown out now. >> really. And it's just become a thing. where a lot of people say, I mean, looking at the evidence in their cases, it doesn't seem like a Karen Reed. situation where they've been framed or. potentially there's not enough evidence. >> But there could be cases that they. wrongfully. >> Oh, yes, of course. Yes, of course. But. the two in question that are coming up.

often, it doesn't seem like that's the. case. And I think that's where a lot of. netizens are even more infuriated. because it's it's not even just Karen. Reed, but you're talking about so much. impact that's going to be left because. what? >> You can't do your job. >> Also, the fact that the Fed's case is. closed has been up for debate. Um, some. people think that's the feds. They. haven't responded personally. It's just. Hank Brennan and the prosecution saying. that the Fed's case is closed, but we. don't really know. And one person that.

has worked with the feds before, the. DOJ, they say, you know, it could be. that the feds are sitting back and not. saying anything because the case is. closed and they're silently walking. away. Or they could be working on this. case as we speak. You never really know. >> Yeah. >> Karen Reed says, "Even if it's closed, that hardly means anyone involved in. murdering John or framing me was cleared. of wrongdoing. But everyone should knowe. which side of the case is celebrating. the federal investigation supposedly. being closed and which side isn't. I.

will tell you which side of this case is. culpable and therefore worried about a. possible federal indictment. >> That is true. >> Yeah. One juror that was on the second. trial has come out to say that they hope. the FBI is investigating because they. want justice for John O'Keefe and they. don't think Karen did it. They say that. means we have at least one killer in. town, a wolf in sheep's clothing. As a. matter of fact, I think we might have a. whole pack. >> Yes. >> And that is where I leave you with Karen.

Reed's final part 4. What are your thoughts on this case? I. know there's a lot more that we could. have dug into, but it just would have. taken me 20 episodes. What are your. thoughts? Leave it in the comments, and. I will see you in the next one. Be safe. [Music].