June 17, 2025 • 36 mins
On the second full day of jury deliberations in the Karen Read trial, the jury came back and asked the judge presiding over the trial, Judge Beverly Cannone, four questions related to evidence and charges. The first question was about the time frame for the OUI charge. The second asked if Read's interviews are evidence and how they can be considered. The third question asked for clarity for convicting on a lesser charge. Then the fourth question was, "If we find not guilty on two charges but can't agree on one charge, is it a hung jury on all three charges or just one charge?" to which Judge Cannone said she could not answer.
Stay tuned in to WBZ NewsRadio 1030 with the IHeart Radio app, online, in your car, or on your favorite listening device for the latest update on this developing story!
Now you can leave feedback as you listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the FREE iHeart Radio app! Just click on the microphone icon in the app, and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!
Stay tuned in to WBZ NewsRadio 1030 with the IHeart Radio app, online, in your car, or on your favorite listening device for the latest update on this developing story!
Now you can leave feedback as you listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the FREE iHeart Radio app! Just click on the microphone icon in the app, and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Well, today was an interesting day in Dedham Superior Court
where the trial of Karen Reid begin to look as
if it was wrapping up a little bit. As a
matter of fact, there were four questions from the jury.
Now the trial lasted I think it was six weeks.
This is the second trial she is charged in related
(00:29):
to the death of her late boyfriend, Boston Police officer
John O'Keefe. Read is charged with a second degree murder,
which seems to me to be a bit of an overcharge.
Possible second charges manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the
(00:50):
influence of liquor, and there were lesser included charges there
individual charge of manslaughter without reference to the liquor, motor
vehicle homicide OUI, and then the third leaving the scene
of an accident resulting in death. So those are the
three charges that Karen Reid is facing today. Well, the
(01:13):
jury got the case last Friday, as I think all
of you know, they apparently spent an hour and a
half on Friday, which was probably no progress at all
on anything. That's a pretty brief amount of time for
a jury. And then I think it was nine hours
yesterday and maybe seven or eight hours today, so I
(01:36):
think they have deliberated approximately sixteen hours now. The first
trial a year ago, a year ago in the spring,
went for twenty four hours of deliberation, so this is
a significant amount of time. But they were four questions
that came in today just to set the stage. Let
me have Rob play a report that WBZTV's Christina Rex
(02:00):
who has been covering the trial for WBZ, filed late.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Today an indication from the jury in Karen Reid's retrial
that they might be deadlocked on one charge, just like
in her first trial.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
We're going ended up in the exact same position that we.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Were in last year.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
There are other steps that can be taken to perhaps
prevent that.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Tensions mounted Tuesday as the jury approached sixteen hours of
deliberations with no verdict, but a slew of questions for
the court.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
What is the timeframe for the OUI charge? OUI at
twelve forty five or OUI at five am? Our video
clips of Karen's interview's evidence? And the third does convicting
guilty on a sub charge example of fence to number
five convict the overall charge.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
Indicating that jurors might be considering convicting Karen Reid of
one of the lesser included charges like pure OUI or
operating under the influence.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
This this is that's pretty good analysis by Christina Rex.
I'm not sure if she's a lawyer or not, but
I think that her instinct on it is pretty good.
I don't think this jury is going to end up
in a hung jury. I just have that sense that
a second a jury, a second time round, is going
(03:20):
to figure that they have an obligation and they will
be told if they come back and announce that they
are are deadlocked, the judge will give them a charge,
which will basically say they are the most qualified individuals
that they've sat there and listened to all the evidence.
They're the most qualified group of people anywhere in Massachusetts
(03:42):
to determine her guilt or innocence in this case. The
questions that we're interesting today, and again, without repeating what
Christina reported, what is the timeframe for the OUI charge?
That's an interesting question and one that frankly should have
(04:06):
been anticipated, I think by the prosecution. So she was
not charged with this crime, and obviously if whatever happened.
Happened around a quarter of one, and she drove home.
We are soon blissfully unaware of what did happen. Now,
obviously her lawyers believe that John O'Keefe was able to
(04:29):
walk into the house and a problem ensued, and that
the inadequate investigation by the state police, you know, just
just missed it. And that's why so many people are
critical of the District attorney's office, Mike Morrissey's office in
(04:50):
Norfolk County. She didn't realize, I guess that he had
not come home until she woke up five o'clock and
then she with a friend of hers, went out in
the midst of the snowstone to try to find him.
And you've seen the video and all of that. So
the question was his videotape from the bar where she
(05:13):
is being served some drinks. She did make some some
admissions against interest in some of the television commercial the
television interviews that she did after the first trial, so
the jury could have been looking at that. The other
thing is that I don't think that she had a
(05:34):
blood alcohol test or a breathalyzer test until probably a
quarter of nine the next morning, So that was I
thought a pretty insightful question from the jury. And the
second one dealt with the video clips of her interviews.
Should they be considered and yes, the judge answered that
(05:56):
pretty clearly. Yeah, I think no question. They are considered
evidence and they can take that into consideration. Third one,
does guilty on a sub charge mean guilty in the
overall charge, So it would be the answer to that
is no, because the overall charges manslaughter while operating a
(06:17):
vehicle under the influence of liquor. They could come back
with involuntary manslaughter, which is a sub charge of manslaughter
or motor vehicle homicide or OUI. So all of this,
and then the fourth question, which was the one that
sort of rang the bell as to a year ago.
(06:37):
If we find not guilty on two charges but kind
of agree on one charge, is it a hung jury
on all three charges or just one charge, which is
the very questions that were asked after the jury was
dismissed as a hung jury last July, if you recall,
if you remember, and there were some jurors who came
forward and said, yes, we had agreed that she was
(07:00):
not guilty on second degree murder, and I believe it
was not guilty on leaving the scene of an accent
and resulting in death. But they apparently were still discussing
manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor.
As I understand, that's what the jurors were telling the
(07:21):
defense lawyers post trial, and the judge today. Beverly Conone,
when she was challenged by defense attorney Alan Jackson, CONNONI
had said that that question about guilty on two charges, said,
(07:42):
and kind agree on one charges is very similar to
what but the first jury might have come back with.
Cannone said, that's a theoretical question, not one that I
can answer. Defense attorney Alan Jackson said that response was
over our objection. He added, I don't think it's an
appropriate answer to a very very clear question that could
(08:03):
be answered in an innocuous way that does not impact
miss Reed's rights the way it does. She responded that
there are things she could do, so I suspect that
they do if they were to come back and say
we're deadlocked. I have to believe that this judge is
going to learn from her past, in my opinion, errors
(08:26):
and would say, okay, since you asked the question, are
you deadlocked on all three charges or on just one
or two of the charges, which then would allow the
jury to come back with a partial verdict. But we'll see.
So I'm looking for your thoughts after this day of
interesting activity at the courthouse. How many of you think
(08:50):
that a jury is a verdict is immited. How many
of you think that this jury is going down the
path that the first jury went down and it's gonna
be a hung jury, or your thoughts in the case. Uh,
this case has gone on and on and on. I
think some people probably are feeling fatigued on this one.
(09:13):
If there ever is a hung jury the second time,
I wonder if morrisey, I mean it's it's it's a
homicide case. The DA almost has to bring it a
third time, but it would be kind of unprecedented in
my opinion. I haven't researched all the case law in Massachusetts,
but if there's if does result in a hung jury,
(09:38):
it's gonna be some tough questions, very tough question six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three one, ten thirty.
We're going to talk about this for a while tonight
because it is the only story we're keeping our eye
on the Middle East at this point. Obviously President Trump
has now said we control the skies over Iran, which
(09:59):
is an interesting year use of the plural first person
plural we as opposed today meaning the Israeli pilots. We
don't have pilots to the rest of our knowledge. Oh
we may, but at this point we are unaware of it.
So all of that is in play. Six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine three one ten
(10:20):
thirty triple eight nine two, nine, ten thirty. Again, we
certainly would talk about it for at least an hour
or two. Uh, if you're out of state and you're
intrigued by this case, which is now every night it
plays on the national newscast quite prominently. It's certainly when
that vertic comes in, the nation's going to know about it.
There's a lot of homicide cases that go on in
(10:42):
this country on a day to day basis that no
one knows about. This is one that a good portion
of the country, not everyone, but a good portion of
the country is aware of the implications of this case.
Back on Nightside, right after a couple of quick messages.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
It's Nightside with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Now, I know there's a lot of people who are
out there, well every day, there was a big crowd
of people out there. I don't quite understand, and I'd
love to have this as part of the conversation. If
you've been out there, I would love to know what
is the connection that causes you to be out there again.
I'm sure that for every person who is out there
(11:25):
wearing the color pink, which shows solidarity with Karen Reid,
I'm sure that for different people there are different reasons.
But if you're actually spending part of your day out
there and again, you become part of a movement. I
can't think of any trial in my memory, and maybe
(11:47):
you can think of some where this many people on
a consistent basis stood outside the courthouse day after day
after day. Let's go to Mara down on Cape Cod
Mari going to start us off tonight. Your thoughts are
then her, how are you you're quick your thoughts of
Karen Reid trial number two?
Speaker 5 (12:09):
So you know, I'm not in no position to say
she's absolutely guilty or absolutely innocent. I just I feel
bad that at the end of all of this, we're
probably never going to know exactly what happened that night,
and I feel that the the those that are chiefly
(12:33):
responsible for us never knowing the real story are the police,
the canton and or the mass State Police Department.
Speaker 6 (12:40):
They you know, they didn't.
Speaker 5 (12:42):
Knock on the door atty thirty four of air of you.
I feel like that they, you know, neglected a lot
of pieces that maybe could have answered a lot of questions.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
You know, I happen to share that that concern. I
think the police, Uh, there's a body on the lawn,
the body is dead. You would think that you'd say, well,
why don't we check with the people inside? Maybe they
heard something or they saw something. Seems like elementary police work.
And I know that that has raised probably a lot
(13:19):
of doubt in the minds of a lot of people.
But I think that's a legitimate question.
Speaker 5 (13:25):
Yeah, I just and there's a lot Again, I'm not
on the jury. I you know, I haven't listened to
every minute of the trial, but I've heard I feel
like I've heard enough of it that there's certainly reasonable doubt.
There's you know, were the mocks on his arms caused
(13:45):
by a dog or were they caused by the you know,
the impact of the car or the you know, the
suv or the you know. You have medical examiners who
say they can't determine exactly what was the cause of death.
So I just feel really bad that I think at
the end of the day, there isn't going to be
(14:07):
a clear answer, and I think that's the sad part in.
Speaker 7 (14:11):
All of this.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Well, I think you're right. Look, everybody has an opinion,
and let's say the OJ Simpson case, but yeah, I
don't think that. Again, people can have opinions, but there's nothing.
I was hoping that there would be some more forensic
evidence and maybe it was presented and I just didn't
(14:33):
hear it in terms of where the car was, where
it moved, when did it move, at what speed did
it move? Was John Keith in the car out of
the car? I don't know if the vehicle that she
was driving would have captured that sort of evidence or.
Speaker 7 (14:49):
That sort of.
Speaker 5 (14:52):
Is the prostitution has now moved the time of impact
or death or whatever. It's twelve forty five and and
you have data that says that shows her having logged
into the Wi Fi at home at twelve I don't know,
thirty six or thirty eight or whatever it was before
(15:13):
twelve forty five. So I don't know there's reasonables out there,
and again it doesn't it doesn't give anybody a clear
answer as to exactly what happened that night. And that's
that's just the unfortunate part of all of this.
Speaker 7 (15:30):
No, did you ever.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
Did you ever ride up from the cape to to
survey the situation? Did you ever go up there? Do
you know anybody who sat outside the courthouse in solidarity
with Karen Reid?
Speaker 5 (15:44):
Oh no, no, no, no, not at all. No, no, no,
I've just honestly I remember, you know, when it happened
and hearing about it and thinking, oh my gosh, that's awful.
And then you know, the first trial started and it
was probably well underway by the time I kind of
(16:06):
got up to speed or started getting interested in it,
and you know, kind of piecing the bits of information
that I got, piecing it together and thinking, wow, you know,
it's just I just feel like there's certainly a lot
of reasonable doubt again just based on the information.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Oh, I get it. And you're not trying to pronounce
a verdict, you know, on the dry. But but I'll
tell you this there's.
Speaker 5 (16:34):
No answer, and I just feel bad about that.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
I originally was, Uh, you kind of caught my eye,
particularly when you had the reporter, the guy who claims
to be a reporter, who was, you know, sort of
a turtle boy or whatever his name is. Yeah, and
I read some of his stuff and I just didn't
find it to be at the journalistic level that I
(16:59):
would want. So I kept following it in the Globe,
in the Herald, where professional reporters were who had no involvement,
no interest in the case. They weren't invested in it.
But a lot of people. I hope we hear from
some people who were there on a regular or semi
regular basis to find out what drove them to this,
(17:20):
to this case. There have been other high profile cases
in Massachusetts, but there was something about this one that
caught the imagination of a lot of people. Mar love
your phone call. Thanks for getting this going.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
I appreciate it all right, Dan, thank you, take care
you too.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
Talk to you soon. Thanks very much. That's a great,
great call. Let's keep rolling here. I should have asked
more if she's first time caller, feel free if you
are first time called it to let us know because
that helps us decide what topics and with they should
be placed in the show six one seven one line
at six one seven, two, five, four, ten thirty and
one at six one seven, nine three one ten thirty.
(17:58):
If you have been out there holding vigil, as it
were for Karen Reid, I'd love to know your motivation, what,
what drew you in? What got you that committed? Uh,
it's again, everybody's got a different story, I'm sure, but
it seems to me a tremendous commitment to the people,
the men and women who have been their day after
(18:19):
day during the course of this end or the first trial.
Back on Nightside right after these quick messages, followed by
a newscast at the top of the at the bottom
of the hour, I should say.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Or Let's go. I thought that Moore's call was really interesting,
and I know Debor is going to do the same
for us here up in Salem. Hi, Deborah, how are
you tonight?
Speaker 6 (18:44):
Good evening, mister Dean Ray. Thank you for taking my
phone call, Thank you.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
For calling in. What have you followed this case closely?
I'll bet you have.
Speaker 6 (18:53):
I'm a first time caller, sir, Well.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
How about that. Let's get a rude in a wall house. Look,
you don't have called me, sir. This isn't the army,
this is Knight's side. Go ahead.
Speaker 6 (19:08):
I had, Yes, I had to say, I listened to
you for the past year, and I'm trying to be.
Speaker 8 (19:17):
Loyal.
Speaker 7 (19:18):
We's not.
Speaker 6 (19:22):
Two major victims in this very sad situation in case,
first of all police officer John o'keith and also his
poor mother. Yeah, I've watched her on TV. Her head
now all the time. She said, some major losses within
(19:45):
the past four years, such as her daughter, followed by
her son in law, and lastly this mysterious case and
death of police officer John o' keith. We had to
get out of me.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Yeah, let me ask you this. There were the two
children that John O'Keefe adopted were a the children of
his sister and his brother in law.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
I think that was stated in court.
Speaker 7 (20:16):
I'm not sure, but I'm.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Saying, I'm just saying that would be logical. I was.
I was unaware. I knew that he had adopted two
children and you know who had lost both their parents obviously,
So go, go right ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt.
Go right ahead.
Speaker 6 (20:33):
No, that's fine. I'm not going to talk much longer.
I don't even be the jury. They have a very
tough case. This is one of the toughest cases I've
ever heard of my life. And where I stand, what's
the miss read, I'm I'm not sure whether she's innocent
(20:56):
and guilty only the goodwife though. And I've heard the
two doctors whose names I cannot mention talk about animal wounds,
and I believe that would tell him the truth, that
it's just a tough case. And I remember he thinks
(21:17):
that the jury, very annual, will give the correct verdict.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Let us hope so. By the way, in terms of
the animal wounds, as I'm sure the so called dogfights,
a lot of people are convinced that there was a
dog in the house and he went inside and a
brawl broke out and the dog attacked him at the
same time. I don't know if if if he was
actually and again I don't know the answers there. I'm
(21:46):
only asking the questions. If he was hit by the
car and fell on the lawn and died, could not
have an animal come along and and and bit at
at what was a dead body. I mean, I just
think that you know, again, I wasn't in court either,
But it seems to me that this story you can
(22:06):
come up with all sorts of scenarios, and I am
as mystified by it as you are. I have a
strong feeling as to what happened in the O. J.
Simpson case, but I don't have a very strong feeling
as to what happened here. But the people who stand
out there day after day in the hot sun obviously
(22:28):
are totally committed to a belief in her innocence.
Speaker 6 (22:35):
As I said, I have great trust because jury knows
best and they will.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
I share that with you, By the way I share
that with you. I've spent plenty of time in courtrooms
as a lawyer and as a reporter, and I have
always come away with the belief that unless you sit
in a courtroom for the entirety of a trial, or
you're trying the case, you don't know it as well
just by watching on television. But well, we'll see how
(23:06):
I hope. I hope that the jury can come to
a decision and there can be some closure here that's
satisfactory to everyone. What they're going to decide, I have
no idea to be really honest with you, I wouldn't
even attempt to figure that one out at this point.
Debry did great. Your sincerity is genuine. I really appreciate
(23:27):
you taking the time to call. Thanks for listening to
the show and call any night on this or any
other topic. I really do appreciate you taking the time.
Thank you so much.
Speaker 6 (23:35):
Thank you very much accepting my call. I think a
lot of you, we all do.
Speaker 7 (23:39):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
Thanks, Debora, call me Dan, Okay, I'm not that old.
Thanks very much. I have a great night. All right,
let's keep rolling. You're going to go to Mark in
New Hampshire, Mark next on night Saga, Right ahead? Mark.
Speaker 8 (23:50):
Yeah. First of all, Dan, you just made a comment
about if side O'Keefe was lying on retchipts on the
front lawn, could those marks have been caused by a
stray animal? What like a bob cat or coyote or something. Dan.
If that was the case, Dan, if it was the
(24:14):
slightest possibility, don't you think that Adam Lalley in the
first trial or Hank Brennan in the second trial would
have brought that up. Neither one of them ever brought
up the possibility of John O'Keefe being attacked while he
was unresponsive on the front lawn by some wild animal.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
All I'm trying to say to you is that you
always have to think of every possibility, whether you're a
prosecutor or a defense.
Speaker 8 (24:42):
Lawyer or What I'm saying to you, sir, is that
the prosecutors did not mention that in either trial before Dan. Therefore,
the jurors cannot discuss that. Dan.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
I know the jury cannot discuss that, but I'm not
a juror. You're not a juror. We're talking about it
on the radio, Okay, And what I'm saying, I have
my own thoughts as to what might have happened. I
have tried to keep those thoughts to myself. Okay, every
scenario that is there, including the scenario of the assault
(25:21):
in the home resulting in his death. I don't know
that if that happened that the people inside the home
would have automatically said, I got a great idea, let's
just put them on the front lawn. No one will
notice till the spring. That's all I assume you have.
I assume you hold on for a second. I assume
(25:41):
you've solved the problem. You know exactly what happened, right Mark? Oh?
Speaker 8 (25:45):
Dan, Dan, all right, if you want to get sarcastic first, well, no.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
You're coming across like a tough guy. And I love
dealing with tough guys. I love dealing with tough guys.
Speaker 8 (25:55):
What happened inside the house? What I do know? And medical?
And I spent forty five years in the medical profession.
What what did.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
You do in the medical profession.
Speaker 8 (26:09):
I was a clinical pharmacist.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Okay, okay, pharmacist.
Speaker 8 (26:15):
So I studied the I looked at the medical information
that was present in this trial. The corner the only
person that ever touched the body of John O'Keefe. In
her autopsy report, she stated, and when she was crossed
(26:39):
by uh was it Jackson or whoever had crossed her?
She stated that she could not have stated that he
was hit by a motor vehicle. There was no collision
point on his body that would have been consistent with
(26:59):
the like of an automobile. That was the coroner, Dan,
That's not me. The coroner stated that in the report.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Yeah, well maybe maybe what if we follow your logic, Okay,
assuming that it's logical, Uh, maybe the indictment never.
Speaker 8 (27:17):
Should be logical.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Never, Well, I assume it is, you know, and maybe
the indictment never should have been broad as what I
think you're saying.
Speaker 8 (27:25):
Ah, now you're talking sense.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Oh no, I'm just following your logic. I'm following your logic.
I didn't. I'm not characterizing in any sense Dan.
Speaker 8 (27:36):
Dan. First, first of all, I wanted to I really
wanted to talk about the trial. But while I was
on hold, you made a comment that I need to
take umbrage with. You made a sleight of hand slap
on the face comment at Aiden Cornie aka Turtle Boy. Yeah,
and he sort of made the reference that he's not
(27:58):
a real journals.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
He's not a professional journalist. To the best of my knowledge,
who does he work for?
Speaker 8 (28:04):
Dan? I subscribe to his YouTube channel. Good for you,
I'll be good for you. Admit. I'll be the first
to admit, Dan, that Turtle Boy is rough around the edges.
He's vulgar. Okay, you think I'm also going to say this.
That guy has broken more stories in this case in
(28:27):
all the Boston local Boston media stations combined.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
So he's run he's run circles around all the stations
that's fine. You know what, Mark, I am not going
to try to disabuse you of your opinion because it's
clear to me from the intensity with which you say
your beliefs, that you are absolutely convinced beyond.
Speaker 8 (28:48):
A reasonable doubt.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
You know exactly what happened. I know that, and I
hear it in your voice. Mark, So what am I here?
I'm not going to argue with you over this. I'm
delighted that you called and presented your viewpoints.
Speaker 8 (29:03):
You're a fence sitter. You always have been when it's
times listen to you.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
You know what, I'm not a fence sitter in anything.
I'm not a fence sitter in anything. Mark. I'll tell
you what when I'm just smart enough to know that
unless I have been in the courtroom for the entirety
of the trial and have listened carefully to the entirety
of the trial, there may be things that I don't know.
Have you been in the front room every day? Have
(29:29):
you watched every day? Okay, well, good for you. And
with your pharmaceutical degree. With your pharmaceutical degree, I'm sure
that you have a perspective that gives you a unique
ability to figure out exactly what happened, and I think
you've sold I think you have.
Speaker 8 (29:45):
I told us, could I just make one more coliment
about journalism and I'll give you.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
I'll give you thirty I've given you six minutes. I'll
give you twenty five more seconds.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
Go ahead, Okay, all right, thank you. So on January
thirty twenty, WBZTV came out with a news story that
there was ring camera video footage that Karen Reid of
showing Karen Reid hitting John o'tiyeah.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
First of all, I don't know. I don't know what
you're saying to be true. And because I don't know
what you're saying to be true, since I do not
know what you're saying to be true, it might be true.
But since I do not know what you're saying to
be true, Mark, I allowed it in the air, but
(30:37):
I'm saying right now that's I'm not here to discuss
how WBZTV, for whom I do not work. By the way,
that's a competitor of WBZ Radio. So therefore, you felt
it was important to say you've exceeded you thirty five seconds.
But I appreciate you having called tonight. Thank you very much. Again,
(30:58):
you can see the passion that exists here. If you're
passionate about this story, let's talk about it. The only
line that's open right now is six one seven, nine three, one,
ten thirty. I have tangled with Mark on other issues. Okay,
he might be right. I don't know. I'm I'm big
enough to admit I don't know that. I don't know
(31:18):
what the result is. I don't know what actually happened.
I look at I can look at a set of
facts and surmise and think and discuss. That's what I do. Mark,
because of his pharmaceutical degree, is an expert uh in
in trial law. I never had when I was in
law school, never had one pharmacy issue. If there was
(31:42):
a pharmaceutical issue in a case, I would have found
that expert witness. Maybe Mark, maybe not. Back on Nightside
six one seven, nine three, one ten thirty, we will
continue with our conversation right after this.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
You're on Night Side with Dan Ray ONBZ Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
Let's pick the pace up a little bit. Let's go
first time out of state to Jony in Pennsylvania. Jony,
I guess you're watching this down in Pennsylvania too.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
Well, No, exactly.
Speaker 6 (32:10):
But I've been following it through through your radio station.
Speaker 2 (32:14):
Good, great, great, great? What's your thoughts?
Speaker 5 (32:17):
What thought is?
Speaker 2 (32:18):
My question is, no matter.
Speaker 1 (32:21):
What the verdict is, do you think she'll get a.
Speaker 6 (32:23):
Book or a movie deal or both of both?
Speaker 2 (32:26):
EUSt I think there's a pretty good possibility of that,
and it may be why she did some of the
interviews between the first two cases. It's possible, it's possible.
And again, if if she's acquitted or acquitted on most
or all of the charges, I think that the movie
(32:47):
deal becomes even more of a possibility. So we'll have
to say that there's a lot of HBO and Netflix
and all of that that are always looking for story
ideas these days. So yeah, so a little bit easier necessarily.
I don't think it'd be necessarily a major motion picture
at the at the movie theaters, but I could see
(33:09):
it being on HBO, Netflix, some of those discovery channels. Sure. Absolutely. Oh.
Speaker 6 (33:15):
Also prayer for the Middle East.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
Absolutely. We want to make sure that that conflagration stays
where it is and that it gets resolved quickly with
some finality.
Speaker 7 (33:25):
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Thank you. I have a great night, going to go
to Alex and Millis Alex next on nights.
Speaker 7 (33:32):
I go, ahead, hey, Dan, how are you? I was, Oh,
first of all, I want to congratulate you for being
kind to the unkind.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
You're kind to say that, correct?
Speaker 7 (33:43):
Ahead, No, I was trying to keep my composure while
you were sparring. So I was going to say, my
wife is she goes? I hope they I hope they don't,
you know, find her guilty. I feel so bad for
that woman, you know, but I I know that something happened,
(34:05):
but you know, there's doubt, but I know for sure
that she was, you know, under the influence. She was
driving under the influence. So they may find her guilty
on those chargers. And the other thing is I can't
understand is it like a cult following? You know, all
these people in front of the courthouse. I have a
(34:26):
doctor's appointment right near there tomorrow and I hate I
didn't want to cancel it. But you know, I just
say myself, do these people have you know, a lot
of time on their hands that I don't.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
Want to diminish their them. I mean, there are a
lot of people who live and die with how the
Red Sox do with the bruins or the Patriots, and
they follow things closely. I would suggest that if you
have a doctor's appointment there, you know, there's a bunch
of ways to get into Debtum Park, two or three
blocks further away. On the other side of your doctor's appointment,
you'll find a good parking space, get a couple of
(35:00):
off and get to the doctrine. Best of luck with
that in the morning, Alex, I mean you won't. I
don't think you'll be impacted by particularly if it's early,
because even if they start early, it's gonna take it
always takes half an hour an hour for them to
reassemble and take whatever. Even if they were taking a
vote tomorrow morning, I don't think you'd be I don't
think you'd be a firstly impacted.
Speaker 7 (35:20):
Yeah, what's what's the rule of thumb? You know, the
longer the trial takes, the longer the decision takes, the
less app she's going to be found guilty.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Well, the only rule of thumb that I've learned over
the years is there really is no rule of thumb.
There have been cases that have come back very quickly
with an acquittal. There have been cases that have come
back very quickly with a conviction, So there's really no
rule of thumb, and anyone who tries to read a
jury generally is going to be writ fifty percent of
(35:53):
the time. I feel lucky as simple as that. Hey,
thanks Alex, the best of luck with the doctor's point.
Hope everything is well the morning.
Speaker 7 (36:00):
Okay, Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, thanks. I'm not a phrase them,
Thanks Alex.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
Okay, he's a good night. Those are you in the line? Frank,
Steve and Ann Marie. You stay right there. We're gonna
get right to you guys right after the news, and
we're gonna stick with this for a while into certainly
into the ten maybe even longer. This is the story
of the day, as long as the piece well, as
long as things remain stable in the Middle East. We're
keeping an eye on that as well. Six one, seven, two,
five four ten thirty one line there. Six one seven,
(36:26):
nine three one ten thirty one line there. If you
die now, we'll get you in early during the ten
o'clock news. Frank, Steve and Ann Marie stay right there,
coming back right after the ten o'clock news. On Night
Side with Dan Ray
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Well, today was an interesting day in Dedham Superior Court
where the trial of Karen Reid begin to look as
if it was wrapping up a little bit. As a
matter of fact, there were four questions from the jury.
Now the trial lasted I think it was six weeks.
This is the second trial she is charged in related
(00:29):
to the death of her late boyfriend, Boston Police officer
John O'Keefe. Read is charged with a second degree murder,
which seems to me to be a bit of an overcharge.
Possible second charges manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the
(00:50):
influence of liquor, and there were lesser included charges there
individual charge of manslaughter without reference to the liquor, motor
vehicle homicide OUI, and then the third leaving the scene
of an accident resulting in death. So those are the
three charges that Karen Reid is facing today. Well, the
(01:13):
jury got the case last Friday, as I think all
of you know, they apparently spent an hour and a
half on Friday, which was probably no progress at all
on anything. That's a pretty brief amount of time for
a jury. And then I think it was nine hours
yesterday and maybe seven or eight hours today, so I
(01:36):
think they have deliberated approximately sixteen hours now. The first
trial a year ago, a year ago in the spring,
went for twenty four hours of deliberation, so this is
a significant amount of time. But they were four questions
that came in today just to set the stage. Let
me have Rob play a report that WBZTV's Christina Rex
(02:00):
who has been covering the trial for WBZ, filed late.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Today an indication from the jury in Karen Reid's retrial
that they might be deadlocked on one charge, just like
in her first trial.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
We're going ended up in the exact same position that we.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Were in last year.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
There are other steps that can be taken to perhaps
prevent that.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Tensions mounted Tuesday as the jury approached sixteen hours of
deliberations with no verdict, but a slew of questions for
the court.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
What is the timeframe for the OUI charge? OUI at
twelve forty five or OUI at five am? Our video
clips of Karen's interview's evidence? And the third does convicting
guilty on a sub charge example of fence to number
five convict the overall charge.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
Indicating that jurors might be considering convicting Karen Reid of
one of the lesser included charges like pure OUI or
operating under the influence.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
This this is that's pretty good analysis by Christina Rex.
I'm not sure if she's a lawyer or not, but
I think that her instinct on it is pretty good.
I don't think this jury is going to end up
in a hung jury. I just have that sense that
a second a jury, a second time round, is going
(03:20):
to figure that they have an obligation and they will
be told if they come back and announce that they
are are deadlocked, the judge will give them a charge,
which will basically say they are the most qualified individuals
that they've sat there and listened to all the evidence.
They're the most qualified group of people anywhere in Massachusetts
(03:42):
to determine her guilt or innocence in this case. The
questions that we're interesting today, and again, without repeating what
Christina reported, what is the timeframe for the OUI charge?
That's an interesting question and one that frankly should have
(04:06):
been anticipated, I think by the prosecution. So she was
not charged with this crime, and obviously if whatever happened.
Happened around a quarter of one, and she drove home.
We are soon blissfully unaware of what did happen. Now,
obviously her lawyers believe that John O'Keefe was able to
(04:29):
walk into the house and a problem ensued, and that
the inadequate investigation by the state police, you know, just
just missed it. And that's why so many people are
critical of the District attorney's office, Mike Morrissey's office in
(04:50):
Norfolk County. She didn't realize, I guess that he had
not come home until she woke up five o'clock and
then she with a friend of hers, went out in
the midst of the snowstone to try to find him.
And you've seen the video and all of that. So
the question was his videotape from the bar where she
(05:13):
is being served some drinks. She did make some some
admissions against interest in some of the television commercial the
television interviews that she did after the first trial, so
the jury could have been looking at that. The other
thing is that I don't think that she had a
(05:34):
blood alcohol test or a breathalyzer test until probably a
quarter of nine the next morning, So that was I
thought a pretty insightful question from the jury. And the
second one dealt with the video clips of her interviews.
Should they be considered and yes, the judge answered that
(05:56):
pretty clearly. Yeah, I think no question. They are considered
evidence and they can take that into consideration. Third one,
does guilty on a sub charge mean guilty in the
overall charge, So it would be the answer to that
is no, because the overall charges manslaughter while operating a
(06:17):
vehicle under the influence of liquor. They could come back
with involuntary manslaughter, which is a sub charge of manslaughter
or motor vehicle homicide or OUI. So all of this,
and then the fourth question, which was the one that
sort of rang the bell as to a year ago.
(06:37):
If we find not guilty on two charges but kind
of agree on one charge, is it a hung jury
on all three charges or just one charge, which is
the very questions that were asked after the jury was
dismissed as a hung jury last July, if you recall,
if you remember, and there were some jurors who came
forward and said, yes, we had agreed that she was
(07:00):
not guilty on second degree murder, and I believe it
was not guilty on leaving the scene of an accent
and resulting in death. But they apparently were still discussing
manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor.
As I understand, that's what the jurors were telling the
(07:21):
defense lawyers post trial, and the judge today. Beverly Conone,
when she was challenged by defense attorney Alan Jackson, CONNONI
had said that that question about guilty on two charges, said,
(07:42):
and kind agree on one charges is very similar to
what but the first jury might have come back with.
Cannone said, that's a theoretical question, not one that I
can answer. Defense attorney Alan Jackson said that response was
over our objection. He added, I don't think it's an
appropriate answer to a very very clear question that could
(08:03):
be answered in an innocuous way that does not impact
miss Reed's rights the way it does. She responded that
there are things she could do, so I suspect that
they do if they were to come back and say
we're deadlocked. I have to believe that this judge is
going to learn from her past, in my opinion, errors
(08:26):
and would say, okay, since you asked the question, are
you deadlocked on all three charges or on just one
or two of the charges, which then would allow the
jury to come back with a partial verdict. But we'll see.
So I'm looking for your thoughts after this day of
interesting activity at the courthouse. How many of you think
(08:50):
that a jury is a verdict is immited. How many
of you think that this jury is going down the
path that the first jury went down and it's gonna
be a hung jury, or your thoughts in the case. Uh,
this case has gone on and on and on. I
think some people probably are feeling fatigued on this one.
(09:13):
If there ever is a hung jury the second time,
I wonder if morrisey, I mean it's it's it's a
homicide case. The DA almost has to bring it a
third time, but it would be kind of unprecedented in
my opinion. I haven't researched all the case law in Massachusetts,
but if there's if does result in a hung jury,
(09:38):
it's gonna be some tough questions, very tough question six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three one, ten thirty.
We're going to talk about this for a while tonight
because it is the only story we're keeping our eye
on the Middle East at this point. Obviously President Trump
has now said we control the skies over Iran, which
(09:59):
is an interesting year use of the plural first person
plural we as opposed today meaning the Israeli pilots. We
don't have pilots to the rest of our knowledge. Oh
we may, but at this point we are unaware of it.
So all of that is in play. Six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine three one ten
(10:20):
thirty triple eight nine two, nine, ten thirty. Again, we
certainly would talk about it for at least an hour
or two. Uh, if you're out of state and you're
intrigued by this case, which is now every night it
plays on the national newscast quite prominently. It's certainly when
that vertic comes in, the nation's going to know about it.
There's a lot of homicide cases that go on in
(10:42):
this country on a day to day basis that no
one knows about. This is one that a good portion
of the country, not everyone, but a good portion of
the country is aware of the implications of this case.
Back on Nightside, right after a couple of quick messages.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
It's Nightside with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Now, I know there's a lot of people who are
out there, well every day, there was a big crowd
of people out there. I don't quite understand, and I'd
love to have this as part of the conversation. If
you've been out there, I would love to know what
is the connection that causes you to be out there again.
I'm sure that for every person who is out there
(11:25):
wearing the color pink, which shows solidarity with Karen Reid,
I'm sure that for different people there are different reasons.
But if you're actually spending part of your day out
there and again, you become part of a movement. I
can't think of any trial in my memory, and maybe
(11:47):
you can think of some where this many people on
a consistent basis stood outside the courthouse day after day
after day. Let's go to Mara down on Cape Cod
Mari going to start us off tonight. Your thoughts are
then her, how are you you're quick your thoughts of
Karen Reid trial number two?
Speaker 5 (12:09):
So you know, I'm not in no position to say
she's absolutely guilty or absolutely innocent. I just I feel
bad that at the end of all of this, we're
probably never going to know exactly what happened that night,
and I feel that the the those that are chiefly
(12:33):
responsible for us never knowing the real story are the police,
the canton and or the mass State Police Department.
Speaker 6 (12:40):
They you know, they didn't.
Speaker 5 (12:42):
Knock on the door atty thirty four of air of you.
I feel like that they, you know, neglected a lot
of pieces that maybe could have answered a lot of questions.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
You know, I happen to share that that concern. I
think the police, Uh, there's a body on the lawn,
the body is dead. You would think that you'd say, well,
why don't we check with the people inside? Maybe they
heard something or they saw something. Seems like elementary police work.
And I know that that has raised probably a lot
(13:19):
of doubt in the minds of a lot of people.
But I think that's a legitimate question.
Speaker 5 (13:25):
Yeah, I just and there's a lot Again, I'm not
on the jury. I you know, I haven't listened to
every minute of the trial, but I've heard I feel
like I've heard enough of it that there's certainly reasonable doubt.
There's you know, were the mocks on his arms caused
(13:45):
by a dog or were they caused by the you know,
the impact of the car or the you know, the
suv or the you know. You have medical examiners who
say they can't determine exactly what was the cause of death.
So I just feel really bad that I think at
the end of the day, there isn't going to be
(14:07):
a clear answer, and I think that's the sad part in.
Speaker 7 (14:11):
All of this.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Well, I think you're right. Look, everybody has an opinion,
and let's say the OJ Simpson case, but yeah, I
don't think that. Again, people can have opinions, but there's nothing.
I was hoping that there would be some more forensic
evidence and maybe it was presented and I just didn't
(14:33):
hear it in terms of where the car was, where
it moved, when did it move, at what speed did
it move? Was John Keith in the car out of
the car? I don't know if the vehicle that she
was driving would have captured that sort of evidence or.
Speaker 7 (14:49):
That sort of.
Speaker 5 (14:52):
Is the prostitution has now moved the time of impact
or death or whatever. It's twelve forty five and and
you have data that says that shows her having logged
into the Wi Fi at home at twelve I don't know,
thirty six or thirty eight or whatever it was before
(15:13):
twelve forty five. So I don't know there's reasonables out there,
and again it doesn't it doesn't give anybody a clear
answer as to exactly what happened that night. And that's
that's just the unfortunate part of all of this.
Speaker 7 (15:30):
No, did you ever.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
Did you ever ride up from the cape to to
survey the situation? Did you ever go up there? Do
you know anybody who sat outside the courthouse in solidarity
with Karen Reid?
Speaker 5 (15:44):
Oh no, no, no, no, not at all. No, no, no,
I've just honestly I remember, you know, when it happened
and hearing about it and thinking, oh my gosh, that's awful.
And then you know, the first trial started and it
was probably well underway by the time I kind of
(16:06):
got up to speed or started getting interested in it,
and you know, kind of piecing the bits of information
that I got, piecing it together and thinking, wow, you know,
it's just I just feel like there's certainly a lot
of reasonable doubt again just based on the information.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Oh, I get it. And you're not trying to pronounce
a verdict, you know, on the dry. But but I'll
tell you this there's.
Speaker 5 (16:34):
No answer, and I just feel bad about that.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
I originally was, Uh, you kind of caught my eye,
particularly when you had the reporter, the guy who claims
to be a reporter, who was, you know, sort of
a turtle boy or whatever his name is. Yeah, and
I read some of his stuff and I just didn't
find it to be at the journalistic level that I
(16:59):
would want. So I kept following it in the Globe,
in the Herald, where professional reporters were who had no involvement,
no interest in the case. They weren't invested in it.
But a lot of people. I hope we hear from
some people who were there on a regular or semi
regular basis to find out what drove them to this,
(17:20):
to this case. There have been other high profile cases
in Massachusetts, but there was something about this one that
caught the imagination of a lot of people. Mar love
your phone call. Thanks for getting this going.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
I appreciate it all right, Dan, thank you, take care
you too.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
Talk to you soon. Thanks very much. That's a great,
great call. Let's keep rolling here. I should have asked
more if she's first time caller, feel free if you
are first time called it to let us know because
that helps us decide what topics and with they should
be placed in the show six one seven one line
at six one seven, two, five, four, ten thirty and
one at six one seven, nine three one ten thirty.
(17:58):
If you have been out there holding vigil, as it
were for Karen Reid, I'd love to know your motivation, what,
what drew you in? What got you that committed? Uh,
it's again, everybody's got a different story, I'm sure, but
it seems to me a tremendous commitment to the people,
the men and women who have been their day after
(18:19):
day during the course of this end or the first trial.
Back on Nightside right after these quick messages, followed by
a newscast at the top of the at the bottom
of the hour, I should say.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Or Let's go. I thought that Moore's call was really interesting,
and I know Debor is going to do the same
for us here up in Salem. Hi, Deborah, how are
you tonight?
Speaker 6 (18:44):
Good evening, mister Dean Ray. Thank you for taking my
phone call, Thank you.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
For calling in. What have you followed this case closely?
I'll bet you have.
Speaker 6 (18:53):
I'm a first time caller, sir, Well.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
How about that. Let's get a rude in a wall house. Look,
you don't have called me, sir. This isn't the army,
this is Knight's side. Go ahead.
Speaker 6 (19:08):
I had, Yes, I had to say, I listened to
you for the past year, and I'm trying to be.
Speaker 8 (19:17):
Loyal.
Speaker 7 (19:18):
We's not.
Speaker 6 (19:22):
Two major victims in this very sad situation in case,
first of all police officer John o'keith and also his
poor mother. Yeah, I've watched her on TV. Her head
now all the time. She said, some major losses within
(19:45):
the past four years, such as her daughter, followed by
her son in law, and lastly this mysterious case and
death of police officer John o' keith. We had to
get out of me.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Yeah, let me ask you this. There were the two
children that John O'Keefe adopted were a the children of
his sister and his brother in law.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
I think that was stated in court.
Speaker 7 (20:16):
I'm not sure, but I'm.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Saying, I'm just saying that would be logical. I was.
I was unaware. I knew that he had adopted two
children and you know who had lost both their parents obviously,
So go, go right ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt.
Go right ahead.
Speaker 6 (20:33):
No, that's fine. I'm not going to talk much longer.
I don't even be the jury. They have a very
tough case. This is one of the toughest cases I've
ever heard of my life. And where I stand, what's
the miss read, I'm I'm not sure whether she's innocent
(20:56):
and guilty only the goodwife though. And I've heard the
two doctors whose names I cannot mention talk about animal wounds,
and I believe that would tell him the truth, that
it's just a tough case. And I remember he thinks
(21:17):
that the jury, very annual, will give the correct verdict.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Let us hope so. By the way, in terms of
the animal wounds, as I'm sure the so called dogfights,
a lot of people are convinced that there was a
dog in the house and he went inside and a
brawl broke out and the dog attacked him at the
same time. I don't know if if if he was
actually and again I don't know the answers there. I'm
(21:46):
only asking the questions. If he was hit by the
car and fell on the lawn and died, could not
have an animal come along and and and bit at
at what was a dead body. I mean, I just
think that you know, again, I wasn't in court either,
But it seems to me that this story you can
(22:06):
come up with all sorts of scenarios, and I am
as mystified by it as you are. I have a
strong feeling as to what happened in the O. J.
Simpson case, but I don't have a very strong feeling
as to what happened here. But the people who stand
out there day after day in the hot sun obviously
(22:28):
are totally committed to a belief in her innocence.
Speaker 6 (22:35):
As I said, I have great trust because jury knows
best and they will.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
I share that with you, By the way I share
that with you. I've spent plenty of time in courtrooms
as a lawyer and as a reporter, and I have
always come away with the belief that unless you sit
in a courtroom for the entirety of a trial, or
you're trying the case, you don't know it as well
just by watching on television. But well, we'll see how
(23:06):
I hope. I hope that the jury can come to
a decision and there can be some closure here that's
satisfactory to everyone. What they're going to decide, I have
no idea to be really honest with you, I wouldn't
even attempt to figure that one out at this point.
Debry did great. Your sincerity is genuine. I really appreciate
(23:27):
you taking the time to call. Thanks for listening to
the show and call any night on this or any
other topic. I really do appreciate you taking the time.
Thank you so much.
Speaker 6 (23:35):
Thank you very much accepting my call. I think a
lot of you, we all do.
Speaker 7 (23:39):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
Thanks, Debora, call me Dan, Okay, I'm not that old.
Thanks very much. I have a great night. All right,
let's keep rolling. You're going to go to Mark in
New Hampshire, Mark next on night Saga, Right ahead? Mark.
Speaker 8 (23:50):
Yeah. First of all, Dan, you just made a comment
about if side O'Keefe was lying on retchipts on the
front lawn, could those marks have been caused by a
stray animal? What like a bob cat or coyote or something. Dan.
If that was the case, Dan, if it was the
(24:14):
slightest possibility, don't you think that Adam Lalley in the
first trial or Hank Brennan in the second trial would
have brought that up. Neither one of them ever brought
up the possibility of John O'Keefe being attacked while he
was unresponsive on the front lawn by some wild animal.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
All I'm trying to say to you is that you
always have to think of every possibility, whether you're a
prosecutor or a defense.
Speaker 8 (24:42):
Lawyer or What I'm saying to you, sir, is that
the prosecutors did not mention that in either trial before Dan. Therefore,
the jurors cannot discuss that. Dan.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
I know the jury cannot discuss that, but I'm not
a juror. You're not a juror. We're talking about it
on the radio, Okay, And what I'm saying, I have
my own thoughts as to what might have happened. I
have tried to keep those thoughts to myself. Okay, every
scenario that is there, including the scenario of the assault
(25:21):
in the home resulting in his death. I don't know
that if that happened that the people inside the home
would have automatically said, I got a great idea, let's
just put them on the front lawn. No one will
notice till the spring. That's all I assume you have.
I assume you hold on for a second. I assume
(25:41):
you've solved the problem. You know exactly what happened, right Mark? Oh?
Speaker 8 (25:45):
Dan, Dan, all right, if you want to get sarcastic first, well, no.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
You're coming across like a tough guy. And I love
dealing with tough guys. I love dealing with tough guys.
Speaker 8 (25:55):
What happened inside the house? What I do know? And medical?
And I spent forty five years in the medical profession.
What what did.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
You do in the medical profession.
Speaker 8 (26:09):
I was a clinical pharmacist.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Okay, okay, pharmacist.
Speaker 8 (26:15):
So I studied the I looked at the medical information
that was present in this trial. The corner the only
person that ever touched the body of John O'Keefe. In
her autopsy report, she stated, and when she was crossed
(26:39):
by uh was it Jackson or whoever had crossed her?
She stated that she could not have stated that he
was hit by a motor vehicle. There was no collision
point on his body that would have been consistent with
(26:59):
the like of an automobile. That was the coroner, Dan,
That's not me. The coroner stated that in the report.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Yeah, well maybe maybe what if we follow your logic, Okay,
assuming that it's logical, Uh, maybe the indictment never.
Speaker 8 (27:17):
Should be logical.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Never, Well, I assume it is, you know, and maybe
the indictment never should have been broad as what I
think you're saying.
Speaker 8 (27:25):
Ah, now you're talking sense.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Oh no, I'm just following your logic. I'm following your logic.
I didn't. I'm not characterizing in any sense Dan.
Speaker 8 (27:36):
Dan. First, first of all, I wanted to I really
wanted to talk about the trial. But while I was
on hold, you made a comment that I need to
take umbrage with. You made a sleight of hand slap
on the face comment at Aiden Cornie aka Turtle Boy. Yeah,
and he sort of made the reference that he's not
(27:58):
a real journals.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
He's not a professional journalist. To the best of my knowledge,
who does he work for?
Speaker 8 (28:04):
Dan? I subscribe to his YouTube channel. Good for you,
I'll be good for you. Admit. I'll be the first
to admit, Dan, that Turtle Boy is rough around the edges.
He's vulgar. Okay, you think I'm also going to say this.
That guy has broken more stories in this case in
(28:27):
all the Boston local Boston media stations combined.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
So he's run he's run circles around all the stations
that's fine. You know what, Mark, I am not going
to try to disabuse you of your opinion because it's
clear to me from the intensity with which you say
your beliefs, that you are absolutely convinced beyond.
Speaker 8 (28:48):
A reasonable doubt.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
You know exactly what happened. I know that, and I
hear it in your voice. Mark, So what am I here?
I'm not going to argue with you over this. I'm
delighted that you called and presented your viewpoints.
Speaker 8 (29:03):
You're a fence sitter. You always have been when it's
times listen to you.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
You know what, I'm not a fence sitter in anything.
I'm not a fence sitter in anything. Mark. I'll tell
you what when I'm just smart enough to know that
unless I have been in the courtroom for the entirety
of the trial and have listened carefully to the entirety
of the trial, there may be things that I don't know.
Have you been in the front room every day? Have
(29:29):
you watched every day? Okay, well, good for you. And
with your pharmaceutical degree. With your pharmaceutical degree, I'm sure
that you have a perspective that gives you a unique
ability to figure out exactly what happened, and I think
you've sold I think you have.
Speaker 8 (29:45):
I told us, could I just make one more coliment
about journalism and I'll give you.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
I'll give you thirty I've given you six minutes. I'll
give you twenty five more seconds.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
Go ahead, Okay, all right, thank you. So on January
thirty twenty, WBZTV came out with a news story that
there was ring camera video footage that Karen Reid of
showing Karen Reid hitting John o'tiyeah.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
First of all, I don't know. I don't know what
you're saying to be true. And because I don't know
what you're saying to be true, since I do not
know what you're saying to be true, it might be true.
But since I do not know what you're saying to
be true, Mark, I allowed it in the air, but
(30:37):
I'm saying right now that's I'm not here to discuss
how WBZTV, for whom I do not work. By the way,
that's a competitor of WBZ Radio. So therefore, you felt
it was important to say you've exceeded you thirty five seconds.
But I appreciate you having called tonight. Thank you very much. Again,
(30:58):
you can see the passion that exists here. If you're
passionate about this story, let's talk about it. The only
line that's open right now is six one seven, nine three, one,
ten thirty. I have tangled with Mark on other issues. Okay,
he might be right. I don't know. I'm I'm big
enough to admit I don't know that. I don't know
(31:18):
what the result is. I don't know what actually happened.
I look at I can look at a set of
facts and surmise and think and discuss. That's what I do. Mark,
because of his pharmaceutical degree, is an expert uh in
in trial law. I never had when I was in
law school, never had one pharmacy issue. If there was
(31:42):
a pharmaceutical issue in a case, I would have found
that expert witness. Maybe Mark, maybe not. Back on Nightside
six one seven, nine three, one ten thirty, we will
continue with our conversation right after this.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
You're on Night Side with Dan Ray ONBZ Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
Let's pick the pace up a little bit. Let's go
first time out of state to Jony in Pennsylvania. Jony,
I guess you're watching this down in Pennsylvania too.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
Well, No, exactly.
Speaker 6 (32:10):
But I've been following it through through your radio station.
Speaker 2 (32:14):
Good, great, great, great? What's your thoughts?
Speaker 5 (32:17):
What thought is?
Speaker 2 (32:18):
My question is, no matter.
Speaker 1 (32:21):
What the verdict is, do you think she'll get a.
Speaker 6 (32:23):
Book or a movie deal or both of both?
Speaker 2 (32:26):
EUSt I think there's a pretty good possibility of that,
and it may be why she did some of the
interviews between the first two cases. It's possible, it's possible.
And again, if if she's acquitted or acquitted on most
or all of the charges, I think that the movie
(32:47):
deal becomes even more of a possibility. So we'll have
to say that there's a lot of HBO and Netflix
and all of that that are always looking for story
ideas these days. So yeah, so a little bit easier necessarily.
I don't think it'd be necessarily a major motion picture
at the at the movie theaters, but I could see
(33:09):
it being on HBO, Netflix, some of those discovery channels. Sure. Absolutely. Oh.
Speaker 6 (33:15):
Also prayer for the Middle East.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
Absolutely. We want to make sure that that conflagration stays
where it is and that it gets resolved quickly with
some finality.
Speaker 7 (33:25):
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Thank you. I have a great night, going to go
to Alex and Millis Alex next on nights.
Speaker 7 (33:32):
I go, ahead, hey, Dan, how are you? I was, Oh,
first of all, I want to congratulate you for being
kind to the unkind.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
You're kind to say that, correct?
Speaker 7 (33:43):
Ahead, No, I was trying to keep my composure while
you were sparring. So I was going to say, my
wife is she goes? I hope they I hope they don't,
you know, find her guilty. I feel so bad for
that woman, you know, but I I know that something happened,
(34:05):
but you know, there's doubt, but I know for sure
that she was, you know, under the influence. She was
driving under the influence. So they may find her guilty
on those chargers. And the other thing is I can't
understand is it like a cult following? You know, all
these people in front of the courthouse. I have a
(34:26):
doctor's appointment right near there tomorrow and I hate I
didn't want to cancel it. But you know, I just
say myself, do these people have you know, a lot
of time on their hands that I don't.
Speaker 2 (34:39):
Want to diminish their them. I mean, there are a
lot of people who live and die with how the
Red Sox do with the bruins or the Patriots, and
they follow things closely. I would suggest that if you
have a doctor's appointment there, you know, there's a bunch
of ways to get into Debtum Park, two or three
blocks further away. On the other side of your doctor's appointment,
you'll find a good parking space, get a couple of
(35:00):
off and get to the doctrine. Best of luck with
that in the morning, Alex, I mean you won't. I
don't think you'll be impacted by particularly if it's early,
because even if they start early, it's gonna take it
always takes half an hour an hour for them to
reassemble and take whatever. Even if they were taking a
vote tomorrow morning, I don't think you'd be I don't
think you'd be a firstly impacted.
Speaker 7 (35:20):
Yeah, what's what's the rule of thumb? You know, the
longer the trial takes, the longer the decision takes, the
less app she's going to be found guilty.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Well, the only rule of thumb that I've learned over
the years is there really is no rule of thumb.
There have been cases that have come back very quickly
with an acquittal. There have been cases that have come
back very quickly with a conviction, So there's really no
rule of thumb, and anyone who tries to read a
jury generally is going to be writ fifty percent of
(35:53):
the time. I feel lucky as simple as that. Hey,
thanks Alex, the best of luck with the doctor's point.
Hope everything is well the morning.
Speaker 7 (36:00):
Okay, Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, thanks. I'm not a phrase them,
Thanks Alex.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
Okay, he's a good night. Those are you in the line? Frank,
Steve and Ann Marie. You stay right there. We're gonna
get right to you guys right after the news, and
we're gonna stick with this for a while into certainly
into the ten maybe even longer. This is the story
of the day, as long as the piece well, as
long as things remain stable in the Middle East. We're
keeping an eye on that as well. Six one, seven, two,
five four ten thirty one line there. Six one seven,
(36:26):
nine three one ten thirty one line there. If you
die now, we'll get you in early during the ten
o'clock news. Frank, Steve and Ann Marie stay right there,
coming back right after the ten o'clock news. On Night
Side with Dan Ray
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.