The Karen Read Trials, The Death of Officer John O’Keefe

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Mother Knows Dad starring Nicole and Jemmy and Maria qk.

Speaker 2 (00:20):
Hi.

Speaker 3 (00:21):
Everyone, Welcome The Mother Knows Deth. We have a great
episode for you today. We are going to talk about
this shocking or not so shocking verdict in the Karen
Reed trial that was last week, and we're going to
go through this case with a fine tooth comb and
give you all of the details that you are dying
to know about. We know that some of you are
true crime experts and know all the details of this case,

(00:45):
and then we know that there's some of you that
might have heard her name on the news and don't
really know what the story is. And then there's other
ones that are like Karen who. So we're going to
go through the whole case. I'm going to ask Maria
a lot of questions and she's going to go through
all of the details, and then we're going to talk
about what was seen at autopsy, what my opinion is
of that, and then what happened at her not one,

(01:06):
but two trials. So let's get started. Read Why don't
you tell them like who is Karen Reid, where are
they from? Why is she in trouble? What happened all right.

Speaker 1 (01:15):
So this case is just kind of all over the
place because it's normal people just like us.

Speaker 3 (01:21):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:21):
It's a financial analyst who's Karen Reid, with her boyfriend
who's a Boston Police officer, John O'Keefe. They're in their
early forties at the time. This occurred in twenty twenty
two when John died. So we're going to get more
into that later, but just a little background on them
as a couple. When they were in their early twenties,
Karen and John had briefly dated but broke up. Fast
forward to twenty twenty. They reconnect on Facebook, which is

(01:44):
funny to me, this is sense of any message and
start dating after all those years, but they reconnect via
Facebook and start dating again. So they're in this relationship
for a couple of years, but according to friends and family,
it was pretty tumultuous and all over the place, all right.

Speaker 3 (02:00):
So there's one important thing to know about John because
he wasn't a typical just single guy that was in
his forties. So do you want to tell them a
little bit about that.

Speaker 1 (02:12):
Yeah, So John's sister tragically passed away from cancer, and
then shortly after her husband died from a heart attack,
leaving their children to be orphans. So John was kind
of seen as this angel because he took custody of
his niece and nephew and was raising them.

Speaker 3 (02:28):
So they're and they're pretty much little kids at this time.
So he was dating. I'm just trying to put this
all into perspective so we could all relate to it.
So he is dating her and has little kids that
are essentially he's acting as the father for these children.
They live at his house, and he was with her
for a couple of years, so she was around them.

Speaker 1 (02:51):
Yeah, she's around them. She's seemingly pretty integrated into their life.
I mean she definitely wasn't living there. They weren't getting married.
So but when you're dating some and you're in a
serious relationship and you have children, i mean you're going
to cross paths.

Speaker 3 (03:04):
Yeah, so okay, So what happened? So they're dating and
they're fighting all the time. Everybody agrees with this, and like, still,
that doesn't make anything suspicious because people or relationships fight
all the time. So what happened leading up to John's death.

Speaker 1 (03:23):
Well, before everybody gets all like the brother and sister
died too, it's nothing nefarious. In this case, it was
genuine natural causes. It's not like Lori Valo, where there's
multiple deaths in one family and we should look into
it like this is purely the sister had cancer, the
husband had a heart attack, and then her brother unfortunately
passed away, which we're going to touch on the details
leading up until John's death, they weren't having the best relationship.

(03:47):
It was tumultuous and all over the place. They had
recently gone on a trip to Aruba, and according to
friends who were on the trip, John had innocently hugged
a female friend on the trip, which sent Karen into
a total jealous rage and tizzy, and she did not
like that at all. And then the day before his death,
we see all these text messages coming out where they
were seemingly having a fight. She had told him, you

(04:08):
really hurt me this time, and he replied, things haven't
been great between us for a while. Ever, consider that,
so throughout the day she proceeds to continue texting him
and calling him, but he keeps saying it's not a
good time, and later on that doesn't look so great
for her. But I don't think in most cases, when
you're having a fight with your significant other that you're
gonna that you think that's gonna come up at your

(04:30):
trial and not look great for you.

Speaker 3 (04:32):
God, I know, right, the reading of the text messages
in all of these cases, you're just like, nobody ever
thinks that that's going to happen to them, of course,
so that's always embarrassing. I mean, think about if somebody
just took your phone and started reading your text messages,
especially with your your partner or your husband, wife, whatever,
it's it's a little weird. It is weird.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
And I said that with the Justin Baldonian Blake Lively
case when he was trying to subpoena Billake Li Ryan
Reynolds text.

Speaker 3 (05:01):
No, he just wanted that apparently he can get he
could get Taylor Swift and Blake Lively's text messages, which is,
oh my god, if they get released, that's gonna be
some juicy shit right there. But all right, so let's
get back to this. So these text messages she's sending,
she's just kind of like you're an asshole, basically, like

(05:23):
back and forth, and they're fighting back and forth. So
at some point, even though he's not taking her calls,
like like anybody else. They decide to like make up
and they're gonna hang out later.

Speaker 1 (05:35):
Yeah, that's something in the details of this case. I'm
kind of confused about what happened between the all day.

Speaker 3 (05:40):
Long, everybody that fights, like it's just like that's what happens.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
So around nine o'clock, John's out with some friends, so
some of the key players in this case. He meets
up at the bar with his friend Brian Albert, who's
a former Boston Police officer, Brian's wife Nicole, her sister
Jennifer McCabe, and of friend Brian Higgins, who's an ATF agent.
So they're all gonna come up later in this trial,
but those are the people that are there at the

(06:07):
bar with them this night. Karen meets up with John
and the friends at the bar on CCTV. You can
see them having a pretty good time. Everybody's drinking. It's
the middle of a snowstorm, so everybody's probably awful work
and just enjoying their night. So then we get to
midnight and the Alberts invite everyone back to their home.

Speaker 3 (06:26):
Okay, so let's summarize where we're at right now. So
we have Karen and her cop boyfriend are going back
to the house of a retired cop and his wife
and her sister and this other guy, Brian is anyone.
So they're going in separate cars, correct, Yeah, Okay.

Speaker 1 (06:47):
So John seen leaving the bar with a glass in
his hand, which is important because that's gonna come up later.
But he has a glass from the bar and he
gets into Karen's car.

Speaker 3 (06:57):
So round twelve, you're allowed to do I thought you
weren't allowed to do that. I mean, it's stealing, but
like no, but I mean, just in Vegas you're allowed
to walk around with a drink. But that's like the
only place in America that you could do that.

Speaker 1 (07:10):
Right, You're allowed to drink and drive. It doesn't say before.
I'm not saying I'm not saying now.

Speaker 3 (07:15):
I'm just saying it's like kind of unusual to leave
a bar with the with the drink. Still, yeah, but
that's what drunk people do. Okay.

Speaker 1 (07:22):
So we're only mentioning that part because it comes up later.
So at twelve fifteen, John texs Jennifer McCabe asking for
the address. Ten minutes later, john cell phone data then
pings him at the house, and at that point Karen
claims they did leave the bar and go to the
Albert's home, but at that point she had asked if
it asked John if he could go up to the
door and make sure it was okay they were there,

(07:43):
because I don't think she was on that friendly of
terms with the Alberts, so she wanted this is according
to Karen, that she wanted to make sure it was
okay they were.

Speaker 3 (07:50):
There all right. So in my opinion, and like my
opinion is whatever, But if I'm at the bar and
someone invites me to their house afterwards, we're gonna get
in the car and we're going to drive, and then
whoever's driving is going to park the car, and it
will always be gay because I don't. I don't drive, right,

(08:11):
So okay, Gay parks the car. We both get out.
I get out of my side, he gets out his side,
and then we go to the house. Like to me,
it's just very unusual for me to be like, can
you just like as because they're my age, right, But
they'll be like, can you just can make sure it's
okay at the party, But think about it, they're fighting
all the time, well, and they're friends, they're all drunk.

Speaker 1 (08:32):
They're all drunk. His friends probably don't like her. They
might know somebody might have mentioned that they were fighting
earlier that day and they were like, why are you
bringing your naggy girlfriend out to drink.

Speaker 3 (08:44):
It's just it. You have to agree that this is
just kind of bizarre behavior for people that are almost
fifty years old.

Speaker 1 (08:50):
I think you think it is because you don't drink,
but I think this is an average night after and
really it is pretty standard really for people that drink. Like,
obviously you should not be drinking and driving, but I
think a lot of people go out and then they
want to continue their night at somebody's house. Okay, So
so you're saying that part's not weird. I think that
part's a little weird. But whatever, So continue what happened.

(09:12):
So she says that he got out of the car.
So Karen claims they pulled up to the house, John
got out of the car and was supposed to go
knock on the door and make sure it was okay
they were there, and then signal back to her that
it was okay for them, and then she would come inside.
So she says, she's sitting in her car scrolling on

(09:33):
the phone and she waited about ten to fifteen minutes,
and she never heard anything back from him. So she
got really pissed because she had to pee really bad,
and she drove back to his house, which was only
like a couple of minutes down the road, and then
she starts leaving him these incredibly angry voicemails.

Speaker 3 (09:50):
Well because according to her, she thinks that he went
inside and was like f that broad like and just
kept partying and didn't come back to get her.

Speaker 1 (09:59):
Yes, so let's stop and reevaluate, like what's happening so far,
So the whole day before they're arguing via text, something
happens where they're fine enough to meet up, and then
you add alcohol into the situation, and then you add
these people in the mix that maybe aren't all getting along,
So then you're at twelve thirty six. At this point
is when the first voicemail comes through. Karen leaves John

(10:21):
a voicemail that says, I fucking hate you, and then
a couple minutes later, John, I'm here with your fucking
kids and nobody knows where the fuck you are, you
fucking pervert, And then she says, John, I'm going home.
I cannot babysit your niece. You're fucking using me right now,
you're fucking another girl. You're a fucking loser. Fuck yourself.

Speaker 3 (10:40):
So this is.

Speaker 1 (10:40):
Within an hour she's leaving him all of these voicemails.
Oh so, at one thirty am, Jennifer McCabe and other
friends leave the Albert home. They say they go home,
they don't notice anything unusual. Around five am, Karen then
calls Jennifer and says, John never came home. Did you
see him? So?

Speaker 3 (11:00):
Then John? So then Karen, and you're saying, like she
wasn't really like great friends with this gen person.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
No, like they were acquaintances. But okay, and maybe she
only it wasn't her best friend. And I think she
was probably only comfortable reaching out to her because they
had just seen each other hours before.

Speaker 3 (11:22):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (11:23):
So then at this point Karen calls John's friend Carrie,
and she says John's dead. This is according to Carrie,
And then Carry picks Karen and Jennifer up. So if
you want to pause right there, and you know, everybody's
still kind of drunk. At this point, Karen seems like
a pretty dramatic person. Of course, when you realize John

(11:44):
is dead. Later you think that's extremely suspicious that she
made that proclamation.

Speaker 3 (11:48):
But is it for the dramatic person? Did did did
they say? How like the context in which it was said,
because like think about this, Let's just put yourself in
this situation, like Ricky. Ricky is pretty normal, Like you're
married to somebody, you know how they act. Let's say

(12:09):
Ricky was supposed to be home at twelve o'clock and
it's like five in the morning, you can't talk to him.
You would call me and be like, oh my god, Mom,
he hasn't called me. I know he's dead. I know
he's dead.

Speaker 1 (12:19):
Like right, this is just like a meltdown picturing it
because where dramatic Italian women and this is.

Speaker 3 (12:25):
Exactly how like yeah, like that's what I'm saying. So like,
how was it said? It wasn't like, oh, he's he's dead,
I'm sure, Like how was it said? Was it frantic?
Was it like I just know something's wrong? Because because
it for to Karen's defense, like if she she knows
that he loves the kids and stuff, and he wouldn't

(12:46):
have left the kids with no one watching him and
he didn't get back to her, and even though they
fought and stuff, they always made up really quick whatever.
It was very unusual for her to not hear back
from him at all, and nobody knew where he was,
so of course everyone's mind goes to that, that's not
just like a Karen Reid thing. That's like in everybody thing, Right.

Speaker 1 (13:08):
I don't think it's unusual she would have said something
like that. I mean, I just read the voicemails she
had left him, and clearly she was an extremely dramatic person,
So I don't think it's that far fetch that she
of course immediately went to he's dead.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
Yeah, I just don't like listen, like, you know, Gabe's
a firefighter, right, Like, if I don't hear for three hours,
I'm just kind of like, it's very unusual for him
not to text me right back, and then I start
going down, Oh my god, he's her or something's wrong.
You know, that's like normal shit people do. Now.

Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah, I don't think that's bizarre, but they really tried
to use that against her later. So this is around
five AM, when she's calling Jennifer and John's friend Carrie
to help look for him because nobody knows where he
is at this point. So then an hour later they're
all the three of them are driving around looking for John.
They pull up to the Albert's house and then they
see John laying in the snow in their front yard, unresponsive.

Speaker 3 (14:03):
And what time was this?

Speaker 2 (14:04):
Again?

Speaker 3 (14:04):
Sorry, this is at six am? Okay, so it's it's
what what time of year was this? This was it?
Obviously it was so so it was probably just just
getting light out, so you know what I mean, Like,
it's it's not right? Is it dark at six?

Speaker 1 (14:20):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (14:20):
It's it's dark. So when they approached the scene and
they see him lying in the snow out front of
the house of the albert This is now the the
retired Boston Cops house, they all went, yeah, let's say that.
So what what did they do? They they ran out
of the car right away, Like what happened?

Speaker 1 (14:41):
So the friends Carrie and Jennifer are saying, Karen got
out of the car, she immediately saw him laying there
and she's so they were saying that it seemed like
she knew he was there by how quick it was
when they approached the house, which seemed suspicious to them. Well,
I mean, what was it obvious that he was laying there,

(15:02):
because I mean, I feel like it would be obvious
to see a grown man laying on a white blanket
of snow. I don't know, like, I don't think that's
that nuts, all.

Speaker 3 (15:12):
Right, So they thought that it was a little weird.
And now is it possible that in Karen's mind that
she was thinking like that it could have been possible
that she hit him and that maybe she really was
looking there or is that just kind of like because
you know, you said, you're saying according to the friends,

(15:33):
but like they we already know they didn't really like her,
so they're obviously going to be like saying whatever to
get her in trouble.

Speaker 1 (15:40):
Right, Well, this is what I'm getting at. There's clearly
two sides of this story because things just at this
point we have to go through both scenarios that both
people take us through because they have a completely different
series of events than she does. So, according to the friends,
they pull up to the albertom Karen immediately sees him

(16:01):
on the ground, almost as if she knows he's laying there,
and then says, I hit him.

Speaker 3 (16:06):
I hit him.

Speaker 1 (16:07):
But when Karen's retelling this series of events, she said,
I had a feeling and I saw him laying there
and I said I hit him question mark, like she
was questioning could I have hit him? Not saying she
did hit him. Okay, so that is something they also
try to use against which I.

Speaker 3 (16:25):
Think, you know what, maybe we could talk about that after,
but okay, I won't say that until after we go
through everything. So when they approach his body, is he dead.

Speaker 1 (16:37):
No, he's unresponsive, but he's seemingly still alive. So they
called nine one one.

Speaker 3 (16:41):
Okay, So they call nine one one and they bring
him to the hospital.

Speaker 1 (16:45):
But he is pronounced dead two hours later.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
Okay, so what immediately after that? So this is this
is only seven and a half eight hours after they
were last scene together. So she's she's his current girlfriend,
so she goes to the hospital with him.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
She goes to the hospital and she's acting so erratic
there that she's put on a really a psychiatric hold,
so she doesn't even know he's dead at first when
everybody else finds out because she's in a psychiatric hold.
And so for this she's texting her dead and saying,
again I think this is just being dramatic. John's dead.
I don't want to live because she didn't know what

(17:30):
was going on.

Speaker 3 (17:31):
So I'm actually curious for people who work in emergency
rooms how often things like this happen, because I think
especially I always think about all of these stories we
talk about when you approach one of your loved ones
who's either dead or you find someone unresponsive and they're
bleeding or anything. I imagine that it's so traumatic that

(17:55):
that people completely like lose their shit, you know, because
I know I would. I would, I don't. I don't
know that i'd have to go to the psych word,
but I know I would be. I would be shocked
and panicked and freaking out. So or is it because
she she she had this overwhelming physiological response because she

(18:16):
thought that she was partially or completely responsible for it.

Speaker 1 (18:21):
Or is it because her BAC at the time she
was at the hospital was point zero nine?

Speaker 3 (18:25):
Like she's drunk when it so happening. So they bring
her to a psychiatric for a psychiatric evaluation, and at
that time they take her blood and that's when they
find out that her alcohol level is that high. So
what was it?

Speaker 1 (18:39):
A point zero nine? Okay, which is at eight o'clock
in the morning roughly, that's what it is.

Speaker 3 (18:45):
Okay, and did they ask her when the last time
that she had a drink was or she I'm just
I'm just curious because that is actually the legal or
the limit where you could get pulled over and charge
with a d. So if she was that drunk at
that time in the morning and she stopped drinking, let's

(19:07):
say at midnight or whenever she went home, I mean
she was like piss ass drunk, unless she was drinking
up until like all night, which is a possibility because
she was stressed out because she didn't know where he
was and she she still hadn't gone to bed at night, right.

Speaker 1 (19:24):
Okay, Well, in my mind, there's a couple of scenarios.
So she is drunk at this time at point zero nine,
So there the toxicologist is saying, that would have placed
her at being at point two ninety two at the
time she dropped John off, which.

Speaker 3 (19:40):
Is is pissed ass drunk. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (19:43):
I also could see a scenario. I mean, she she
admittedly was drinking at the bars, and there's footage of
her drinking. But I was saying during the trial, like,
how did they know she was really having alcohol because
they didn't take her blood at the time she dropped
off John, and I don't think she was the person
driving in the morning. I believe the friend Carrie was

(20:03):
the one driving at five am when they were looking
for him. So like, how did they know she didn't
come home from the bar and drink in between dropping
him off and that search in the morning? To me,
that point nine two nine to two BAC is speculative

(20:24):
because they don't know if she was at that level
when she was driving earlier.

Speaker 3 (20:28):
Well, regardless, she's still at this time of the morning,
she's she's drunk, so.

Speaker 1 (20:34):
She's drunk dru regardless of what she's drunk at this time,
So like that doesn't matter. So I'm saying, like, for
the psykehold, I think, like I'm gonna just keep reiterating
this clearly, I think she's an extremely dramatic person. So
you have that they're fighting, they're not in a good place,
and then you add alcohol on top of it, and

(20:57):
he's unconscious. She doesn't know what's going on at the
point of her cycold, she doesn't even know he's officially
died yet, so of course she's freaking out. Yeah, but
I am curious if this happens with a lot of people.
I mean, I would certainly not be okay if this
was my husband.

Speaker 3 (21:14):
Yeah, I'm not sure. So she had so she gets
so she's herself gets a medical evaluation at the hospital then,
which is interesting actually because if she if she kept
her shit together and wasn't freaking out like, there would
have really been no indication for them to take her
alcohol level at that time. And so she's there, when

(21:38):
when did it? At one point was it like, Okay,
he got there because somebody hit him or Karen hit
him or whatever that he ended up there, Like where
did it turn from she's at the hospital with her
boyfriend that's unconscious, to now she's a suspect in his death.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
So she was only arrested a couple days later. So
this was pretty much the leading theory. And because of
her saying I hit him, they were taking the friend's
account of what happened. They were only zoning in on
her because she was the last person to have seen
him alive. Allegedly, we don't ever have confirmation that he

(22:25):
went in the Albert's home. They're all claiming he never
went in the house and they never saw him after
they left the bar, even though he's dead on their
front lawn, everybody says it didn't see a.

Speaker 3 (22:35):
Police officer in an investigation is almost like all of
these things I talk about with celebrity deaths and the
VIP thing, because it's just not it's not handled the
same exact way you would do a stranger kind of
you know, and then things are skipped and things are
not done properly. And I mean, obviously in this case

(22:57):
there's a lot of suspicion that there's evidence tampering, right,
so we we'll get into that later. But so when
you say it's botched, like what happened, they show up.
And so if I'm a cop and I have no
idea what cops do, really, for the most part, I
don't really ever deal with that. But if I'm a

(23:18):
cop and I show up to a person's house that
there was a dead body found on their front lawn,
the first thing I'm going to do is go up
to the house, interview who lives at the house, find
out what happened, and go in the house and like
look around and see what the hell's going on.

Speaker 1 (23:37):
Okay, So the investigating departments in this case was the
Canton Police Department, which is the town they were in,
and the Massachusetts State Police. I'm kind of confused why
the state police was involved at all.

Speaker 3 (23:52):
But and he was a Boston City cop.

Speaker 1 (23:54):
Correct, yes, but they're friends with like other cops and
other apartments.

Speaker 3 (23:59):
That happens.

Speaker 1 (24:00):
Yeah, So the lead investigator on this case was Trooper
Michael Proctor, who was friends with the Alberts the home
in which this this guy's found dead. Right, So when
they start investigating this case, they don't close off the scene.
They never go into the Albert's home.

Speaker 3 (24:18):
That Alberts never even come outside. I'm sorry, if there is.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
A dead person on my lawn, I'm going out there,
let alone my friend.

Speaker 3 (24:26):
This is so ridiculous. So this guy comes to investigate
the death and he knows the homeowner and doesn't go
like you mean to tell me. He didn't even go
in the house to pee or anything home on that
he didn't get and.

Speaker 1 (24:39):
He didn't think it was a conflict of interest in
any way. No, not at all, So why would it
be like So the Alberts never come out even though
their friend is dead on their front lawn. They never
close off the scene, and then they collect blood samples
in red solo cups and then put those samples into
paper grocery bags. What was anybody thinking?

Speaker 3 (25:03):
I am confused because let's say, for example, and God,
I hope that I'm wrong with this, because this could
open up a whole can of worms for other investigations
these people have done. But let's say so Michael Procter.

Speaker 1 (25:18):
Is a.

Speaker 3 (25:20):
Massachusetts State Police officer. You're saying, yes, okay, So like
let's say any rando that he doesn't know they get
the same as ac phone call. Why don't they have
the proper tools with them to collect evidence? That's what
is blowing everybody. That's how they were collecting all evidence
for all homicide investigations with red solo cups and grocery

(25:43):
bags like it. Just it's so bizarre to me that
they don't have that kind of kit with them. Now.
I don't know how smaller departments work or whatever, because
I would think that that that would be a crime
scene investigation thing that willn't even it doesn't matter how

(26:05):
small the department is.

Speaker 1 (26:06):
That would never be acceptable in twenty twenty two when
this happens.

Speaker 3 (26:09):
Now, I understand that I'm just I just am trying
to figure out because I only really know the way
things are done in like a big city like Philadelphia
or something where so I'm just wondering, like what employee,
I guess I would say is because you have to
be trained in collecting evidence like that crime scene evidence,

(26:31):
getting it in such a way that you're not having
contamination and things like that. So I'm wondering, like what
person is in charge of doing this and if so
I would assume I guess we should never assume, but
you would think that they would have this whole entire
kit in their car at all times because they're getting
called to potential scenes all the time and you're going

(26:53):
to have to collect evidence and if not, you call
the proper person to show up to collect it properly.
That's why I'm just so confused, like why there would
ever be a situation. And furthermore so, they have like
a stack of red solar cups in their in their
police vehicle where they get the solo cups from the house, right,

(27:16):
Like I actually think they got them from a neighbor's house,
so they were just like, hey, we need to collect
some like we're out of sample cups.

Speaker 1 (27:26):
We just are gonna use these as backup, like it
was totally negligent.

Speaker 3 (27:30):
Yeah, and and like you're you're a cop, right, so
you know that when someone dies under suspicious circumstances that
this is eventually going to go to court. So maybe
if you're out of specimen cups, you just make a
call and say, like, hey, can so and so drive
me these things because I need them. There's a lot
of this is outrageous.

Speaker 1 (27:52):
Okay, Well, this is why this case starts getting insane
because you have two sides of the story, and then
you start off with the very first step. The investigation
is botched from start to finish. You have major conflict
of interest with the officers involved in the investigation. I'm sorry,
but it's not like even just this one guy showed

(28:12):
up to take all these samples. You have multiple officers
at this scene doing this and participating in this. Let's
just say, regardless, if this was a normal person that
was found dead and the police showed up already not
following protocol, correct, But when a police officers found dead,
are these not considered like extra high profile cases. I mean,

(28:34):
this guy was forty six years old, active duty police.

Speaker 3 (28:36):
Active duty police officer, exactly.

Speaker 1 (28:39):
And this isn't considered a high profile case with extra
steps that should be taken.

Speaker 3 (28:44):
So what one interesting thing I remember when I was
looking up the case of this, So when I was
at the Philly Medical Examiner's office, I had an autopsy
of a cop that got shot, and I was really
kind of impressed and also just really intrigued by the whole,
the whole thing of it, because it was it was

(29:05):
like his body was brought to the Medical Examiner's office
and there was a lot of cops that came in
and were watching the autopsy, and that was clear that
he was shot and he was the victim of a
police violence, you know what I mean, Like he he
was killed by somebody in front of everybody. But in
this particular case, when there's police officers that may potential

(29:30):
that at least were at the scene, I feel like
it's a conflict of interest for police officers to be
at that autopsy because they would potentially have say and
influence at the autopsy because they were at because they
were at the scene of the crime. Literally one of
them lives at the scene of the crime. So I'm

(29:55):
not I just I don't really I don't really understand,
like what in the hell. These people were thinking, it's
just it's it's out of control.

Speaker 1 (30:05):
Oh right there, all that evidence collected is inadmissible because
it was mishandled.

Speaker 3 (30:10):
So why so? And they their reasoning was they were
out of specimen cops like that. I don't think they
ever gave a reason.

Speaker 1 (30:19):
They were just kind of like, I don't know what happened.

Speaker 3 (30:21):
Like so, if you had a family member who died
in that jurisdiction, wouldn't you be questioning everything if this
is how they handle one of their own.

Speaker 1 (30:33):
So I think this is contributing to the sensationalism of
this case because it's opening this Pandora's box of all
this corruption between all these police departments.

Speaker 3 (30:54):
So so at the time of the autopsy, there were
the state police detectives watched John O'Keefe's autopsy, which I
think is a huge conflict of interest because the lead
proctor guy was friends with the person that owned the house.

(31:15):
I mean, just it's being considered a suspect. But like
how I listen, they don't have to be a suspect,
but that was the goddamn scene of the crime. It's
just outrageous. It's a conflict of interest because the person
died on their front lawn. Okay, end of story. It

(31:39):
doesn't matter if they weren't involved or not. It's just
kind of like, let's just keep this separated because that
would make the most sense here. Okay, So god, this
is this story is just so in detailed. So at
this time, obviously they are thinking Karen Reid is some

(32:00):
how involved, because they go to her house and arrest her.

Speaker 1 (32:03):
Oh, they're not thinking she's involved. They're like she's done it,
Like they already are, like she must have done a
three point turn and hit them, and she was so
drunk that she definitely killed them, Like this is the
only theory.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
Immediately, so within a couple of days of his death,
they're at her door to arrest her. Now this is
and who So this is Canton police.

Speaker 1 (32:24):
Yeah, so you know you don't you don't go in
the house or interview like anybody else really that was there.
Then that you just assume the one person is the
only person that could have done it, not anybody else, right,
just her because they were fighting. This is where the
fighting starts not looking good because they were like she
was fighting and she was drunk driving, therefore she must

(32:45):
have done it now, like, I don't know, there was
like five to ten other people at this house at
this time.

Speaker 3 (32:51):
We're not we're not even gonna look into it at all.
Oh my god.

Speaker 1 (32:54):
All right, So they show up at her house and
arrest her and charge her with So she's arrested February first,
which is only a couple of days later, she charged
with manslaughter, and then she's accused of motor vehicle homicide
and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. Fast forward
to June of twenty twenty two. The charges then get
up to second degree murder after the circumstances of the

(33:15):
drunk driving and her angry texts and voicemails come through.
This is such a stretch, So it literally goes from
stretch she hit him drunk driving to she intentionally murdered
him while.

Speaker 3 (33:31):
He said like she's basically saying, you're an asshole, You're
you're looking at other girls. I didn't hear anything like, motherfucker,
I'm gonna come kill you right like this, Personally I did.
Was there anything that was like I'm going to hurt.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
You, not to my recollection, and personally, I think if
you if she did willingly or knowingly kill him. She
wouldn't then go home and then start leaving him angry voicemails,
because don't you think your anger would be resolved by
taking that person's life. You wouldn't then proceed to leave
their dead body like all these angry voicemails for them

(34:04):
to never hear.

Speaker 3 (34:05):
Listen, Like, there's been plenty of times where people like
to do stuff like that so they could throw off
cops and their investigation to be like I I called
him and left him a voicemail. I couldn't have thought
he was dead. But she like, she gives me crazy
bitch vibes, but not like Jodyarius crazy bitch vibes. Like
Jody Arius was like manipulative and like and like slimy

(34:27):
and and you would expect her to do something like
that because but I, Karen, Read's just kind of like
everybody give me that exact vibe.

Speaker 1 (34:36):
Everybody knows a couple in their life that loves screaming
at each other and having these horrible fights and then
going home and having like the most.

Speaker 3 (34:44):
Aggressive makeup sex.

Speaker 1 (34:46):
Like just everybody knows somebody that acts like this, and
this is the type of couple they seem.

Speaker 3 (34:51):
One hundred percent one hundred percent. So so she gets
arrested and charged with all these things, and so I
guess where should we start now with with her trial.

Speaker 1 (35:02):
Yeah, so she posted one hundred thousand dollars bond and
pleaded not guilty. So through the duration of these trials,
she is not sitting in jail like she's out. She's
living at her house while these trials are happening.

Speaker 3 (35:15):
So that's a little I mean, I guess we hear
this from time to time, but like if you're being
accused of killing a person, like you could just pay
and get out and be.

Speaker 1 (35:23):
Free, Well, it depends on this circumstances. And as we
know from other stories we cover on the show, apparently
you could do really egregious things and have bonds. So
I think for this they might have considered it an
isolated event and she was potentially not a threat to society.
So trial one starts on April twenty nine, twenty twenty four.

(35:44):
So we start off with, you know, the prosecution's going
really hard on the points we talked about earlier, with
you know, the cops saying that she must have hit him,
because she claims she did hit him. According to the
friends and that she was drunk driving. But the defense
argued that this was a mass cover up for the
police departments, which I think wasn't that good of a

(36:05):
strategy to go into that first.

Speaker 3 (36:09):
Well, but they're right, I mean, listen.

Speaker 1 (36:13):
There's definitely corruption, but going straight into this is a
mass cover up.

Speaker 3 (36:18):
You got to that. Yeah, And that's and I don't
I mean when I say they're right, I don't mean
that it's a cover up. I'm not one hundred percent
sure if I think that although you're either the dumbest
person ever or you or you're I almost I almost
rather it be a cover up because people just can't

(36:39):
be this stupid, you know what I mean.

Speaker 1 (36:41):
Like, but people are that stupid, Like this is the problem.
You want to think a police department would actually take
the proper sample cups and collect blood samples, but no,
they took red solo like the.

Speaker 3 (36:54):
Cups are the least of their problems. But that's concerning
that it started there the house. The house. Not going
into the house is the is really to me that
the it's a it's a flaring like red flag, like
it's just it's something is just not right. And I
don't blame the defense for being like, this is a

(37:15):
conspiracy theory, because on what planet, what justification would they
even have for that? That's that's not protocol, even a
little bit like, no, it's not. So.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
The defense's theory was that during trial one that they
thought John was beaten up inside the Albert home or
attacked by their dog and then left outside to die.
So a really alarming piece of evidence that was uncovered
during this trial was that Jennifer McCabe, who was Nicole
Albert's sister, who was there that night, at two o'clock

(37:46):
in the morning, googled how long to Die in the cold,
But she says she didn't see anything, and it was
it was not about that. She said Karen asked her
to google how long to die in the cold when
they found him at six o'clock in the morning, and
she happened to google that on a tab she had
opened at two am. And technology experts are saying, that's

(38:07):
not how that works.

Speaker 3 (38:09):
Oh okay, So so there were people that actually testified
that said that that's so what is she so she's
trying to say Karen asked her to google it, and
she opened like a safari window that she already had
opened in her phone and that's when she put it in. Yeah,
so and that window was open. They can't tell that.

Speaker 1 (38:30):
But they can, which is why they said, that's not
how that works.

Speaker 3 (38:33):
Yeah, because I was gonna say, like, because when you
originally open the tab, it should be on a web
page that's like clocked at that time, and then the
next time you touch it when you go.

Speaker 1 (38:43):
You know what I mean, I would imagine the way
it works is that you see when the search was submitted,
not when the tab was open.

Speaker 3 (38:51):
Yeah. So listen, that's that's actually complete bullshit. Like I
feel like, right now, as a non expert person, I
could go, oh on my Google searches right now and
see exactly what time I hit the button.

Speaker 1 (39:03):
But also if Karen, like, why would that be Karen's
first thought to ask her how long to die in
the cold? Like, I just don't really understand it.

Speaker 3 (39:14):
Yeah, Yo, that lady too, That McKay lady is freaking
creepy looking. Well they all are when they're testing. And yeah,
it's salty. It's like she's she's like, I don't know,
there's there's something a little extra sauce about that one.

Speaker 1 (39:30):
Okay, so other evidence coming out from this time. Let's
go back to the house for a second. This trial
happens two years and a couple months after John's death.
In between this time, the Alberts just got rid of
their dog they had had for years. Didn't explain why
they sold the house. That they never dared exit to
see their.

Speaker 3 (39:48):
Dead friend on their lawn. Is that not suspicious? That
is okay? So so that's before the trial started. But
they knew that she was on trial for this. They
know she was going to trial, so okay. So you
can look at it from both perspectives. Number one, which
is more likely in my opinion, that it's suspicious that

(40:09):
they're selling the house because they're trying to get rid
of get rid of it because they were in the frenzy,
the media frenzy, et cetera. But another thing is like, Okay,
their friend died there and they don't want the memory,
Like I don't want to look out at my front
lawn every day and picture my friend being dead and
frozen on my phone.

Speaker 1 (40:27):
How could you picture it when you never went outside
to see them laying out there?

Speaker 3 (40:31):
Like, und I understand your theory. I mean, like that's
that's the human response would be this, this house brings
too many memories. But unfortunately, and and like people get
rid of houses and sell houses all the time, people
don't usually get rid of dogs. Could we say that, like,
unless you have a dog that's been like violent, you know,

(40:53):
like attacks your friend in the front yard or whatever,
or that you have to get rid of them. Like
people that have dogs typically think that their dog is
like a child. And you couldn't even take that dog
away if you tried. So them getting rid of their dog,
what was their re They didn't even have like a
legit reasoning. But who they gave it to? Somebody? Like

(41:16):
the dog was still alive at some point. I don't know,
Like I don't know.

Speaker 1 (41:20):
I don't think they just like gave it to a friend.
I think they gave it to like a shelter.

Speaker 3 (41:25):
They brought it to like Germany and dropped it off
at somebody's house or something.

Speaker 1 (41:30):
No, seriously, all right, so let's get into Brian Higgins,
who was also there that night. Brian was an ATF
agent who was friends with John O'Keefe, and he said
one night, when he was leaving John's house that Karen
had kissed him and was sending him flirty text messages. So,
considering they were all hanging out that night, is there
a possibility there was an argument about that going on

(41:51):
in the car.

Speaker 3 (41:53):
Is there proof of this, of this flirtatious relationship? Yeah?
Via text?

Speaker 1 (41:58):
What like what I mean are basically just like her
calling him hot, which is inappropriate when you're in a
relationship with somebody else, asking him to come.

Speaker 3 (42:06):
Over her house. Okay, yeah, so that's that to me
is a little bit more than even flirtatious. I would
say that's like next level like cheating based on almost cheating.

Speaker 1 (42:18):
Yeah, yeah, so you have to consider he's like hanging
out with all of them still, even though she like
kissed him, which I don't think we know if he
really like kissed her back or was engaging back. I
think he was flirting back with her, which is also like,
why are you flirting with your friend's girl? What's wrong
with all these people?

Speaker 3 (42:36):
I don't know, They're all kind of like really gross people, honestly.

Speaker 1 (42:40):
Okay, continue, Okay, So the biggest thing in this was
Trooper Michael Proctor. So obviously we know there was a
conflict of interest because he was he was friends with
the Alberts, And then we know the investigation was just
like bots, beyond anybody's imagination. So then it gets even worse.
He was caught looking for nude photos of Karen on

(43:02):
her phone and then sent texts about her to friends
and family and coworkers that referred to her as a
whack job and said he hoped she'd kill herself.

Speaker 3 (43:12):
Wait, how did any have access to her phone?

Speaker 1 (43:14):
Because for the investigation, they were probably looking through her data.

Speaker 3 (43:18):
That's so like, So how do they know that he
was looking for naked pictures because he was telling he
was talking to people about it. That's so weird. So
he's really un professional.

Speaker 1 (43:31):
Well, he got fired from the Massachusetts State Police, which
I feel like you have to do something incredibly wrong
and nominated from the like.

Speaker 3 (43:40):
A total dipshit because that probably affects your pension and
everything else. And I mean, these guys are like older,
approaching fifty, Like they're probably getting close to retirement age anyway,
and you're just gonna like throw away your whole career
for why would you do that if you knew that
it was going to court?

Speaker 1 (43:58):
Well, this makes me think they had been doing stuff
like this for years and years and years, and he
just thought he was untouchable.

Speaker 3 (44:05):
Yeah, well there's a lot of that here because of me.
I mean not that regular people don't drink and drive,
but like all these people are law enforcement officers and
they're just driving around piss as drunk, Like why because
if they get pulled over, they won't get in trouble.
Did you watch that twenty twenty? He was just recently, Yeah,
I and I really thought that his body language was

(44:28):
suspicious to me, honestly, Well, why just because I was
watching you know, Kara was over, so we were watching
it on the couch and then we would like stop
watching it for a while and we would talk and
then I would just turn the volume down, and I
was like looking at his mannerisms and stuff, and I
just I'm not like a body language expert, obviously, but

(44:49):
I just felt like he seemed terribly insecure and like
he was hiding something.

Speaker 2 (44:54):
It just was.

Speaker 3 (44:56):
Like he didn't feel comfortable or confident. You know, when
you ask some a question and they're they like even
I don't even want to say the kids because they're kids,
but you asked them a question that that they're lying
and they just they break eye contact or they're a
little whimpery with the response. It was kind of like that.
I know that could happen if you're nervous too, but

(45:17):
it just didn't seem that he was very that he
was being very truthful.

Speaker 1 (45:22):
Well, I would say, I think it's kind of weird
that he even did the interview with twenty twenty. And
he probably did it because he needs money because he
got fired from his job and like, what's he going
to do after this work at Starbucks? Like, but he
had to have done the interview before the verdict came out.
And maybe do you think that he was confident that
she was going to get convicted. Yeah, but he was
fired months ago. It didn't even matter if she was

(45:44):
convicted or not. He was still getting fired for what
he did. No, I know, I'm just I'm just curious.

Speaker 3 (45:49):
I'm curious if he thought that because it got released
the day of right, Yeah it was. It was the
day of the verdict.

Speaker 1 (45:58):
Yeah, so he was obvious interviewed before the verdict. Yeah,
because that's what I'm saying. So I'm just curious because
there were a lot of people online that were I've
been watching this the whole time on X or whatever
and just being.

Speaker 3 (46:12):
Like, Oh, Karen Reid's toast. Any person that doesn't see this,
she's getting guilty? Is this, is this and this, like
people honestly thought that she was all the evidence was
so clear, And you're like, was he confident that he
was gonna come out and clear his name? Because I
feel like now it makes him look even worse.

Speaker 1 (46:30):
Well, somebody confidently left us a YouTube comment last week
that said Brian Koeberg is innocent and we clearly haven't
done our research on the Idaho murder case. I'm like, Okay,
oh god, if you want to think so, lady, but
I don't know, Like nothing this guy did is making
him innocent. I mean, you can't be like admittedly looking

(46:51):
for nude photos on a murder suspect's cell phone device.
What is wrong with you? And I'm sure that made
his family feel real great.

Speaker 3 (46:59):
That this is also weird too, like if you hate
someone so bad, which he like, he's investigating John o'keith's death,
so he doesn't even really know Karen read so why
is he saying I hope she kills herself? And also,

(47:20):
if you want someone to kill themselves why why would
you want to see them naked too? It's like a weird.

Speaker 1 (47:27):
Well to me, it's some weird dark fetish and it
has me questioning the rest of his profession and how
he's treated other suspects that he's interacted with. I mean, honestly,
it's really concerning.

Speaker 3 (47:39):
Okay, So, so he has these text messages which don't
look good for him. What about during during the night
or the next day? Did they get everyone's text messages
like Jen mccave's. I know they got her Google Search
off her phone, so they had to they had to
subpoena her phone, and I mean, they look.

Speaker 1 (47:59):
Through everybody's texts, but they weren't really looking at them.
And I don't even think the prosecution was looking at them.
I think the defense had subpoenaed those.

Speaker 3 (48:09):
Wasn't there something too that after? So they claimed that
they left the house at a certain time and night
and they didn't see anything. But wasn't there like a
weird thing that there were phone calls between them or
something like that? So they like who, like if they
were all together in the house, like, why would they
be making phone calls to each other? Yeah, So they's bizarre.

Speaker 1 (48:28):
They claimed they left around like one o'clock in the
morning and didn't see anything at all, But then her
Google search how long to Die in the colds at
around two thirty in the morning, and then yeah, throughout
the middle of the night, there was a bunch of
phone calls between people that were hanging out in the house,
like that's bizarre.

Speaker 3 (48:46):
It is having a party and stuff like why.

Speaker 1 (48:48):
Yeah, I feel like they didn't focus on that enough.

Speaker 3 (48:51):
Yeah, but but they're cops, right, so maybe they were thinking, oh,
they I mean, they can't really they can't really know
what you're talking about on the phone, all.

Speaker 1 (48:59):
Right, So the big question is how did John die? Right,
we really don't know at this point how he died.
So the prosecution is claiming that they have this tail
light from Karen's car, proving that she hit him. But
then the defense provides ring doorbell footage proving that she
hit it beforehand and that's why.

Speaker 3 (49:21):
It was broken. So where did they get the pieces
of the tail light? Then?

Speaker 1 (49:27):
So the pieces were at the Albert's home. But then
this is where the conspiracy start coming in because they
claimed they didn't get them until the snow melted, so
they were there for a while, and then there's theories
that the police department planted the piece is there, and
that her tail light wasn't that broken even the day
of when they were looking for him. So there's all

(49:49):
these theories that the police broke the tail light and
planted the pieces at the scene, which is shady. But
let's talk about the autopsy, because wouldn't it mean that
he would have these injuries on his body that showed
he got hit by a car.

Speaker 3 (50:03):
Yeah, so there's definitely specific things that happened during this autopsy,
which if you watch the trial at all, and any trial,
you're always going to have the prosecution is going to
have a medical examiner testify, and that's the one that
did the autopsy, and then you're going to have experts

(50:24):
testify on the other side to argue with why they're wrong.
So and that that's just kind of a matter of opinion,
I guess for the jury to listen and decide what
they believe, because science isn't always an exact science, and
you really could finagle results either way sometimes depending on

(50:45):
what you want them to be, I guess. So the
medical examiner in that case determined that his cause of
death was due to blunt force trauma that incapacitated him
and he was found out in the cold, and he
could not remove himself due to the head injury, and
therefore hypothermia was also listed as a contributing factor. Okay,

(51:07):
so that would be his cause of death. But the
Emmy's office said that the medical examiner didn't have enough
information to determine if those injuries happened by accident or
they didn't happen by accident. So right there, that makes
me think, well, how are they charging this woman with
homicide when they don't even know if like, let's say

(51:31):
she was pissed ass drunk. They got in a fight
and she was like go in the front to house
with your friends, and backed up into him somehow. I
don't even know why he would be behind the car,
Like the whole entire thing of it is is bizarre
of the position of it. But she backed up into
him and ran him over and then drove off. This

(51:51):
was an accident. How would you know if the medical
examiner is not able to say if it's if it
was definitely intention or not, Like, how are they able
to say it just because she sent some nasty grams
to him.

Speaker 1 (52:05):
The second degree murder charge never made any sense to me.
I never will understand it. I understand them wanting to
go after her for vehicular manslaughter, but still they didn't
have enough evidence for it.

Speaker 3 (52:18):
So if you hit somebody with a car to the
point where you knock them off of the ground, you're
expecting to see certain injuries on them, right, So he
did have sternal and rib fractures, with the medical examiner
determined that that was due to CPR injury. So when
you're doing chest compressions, oftentimes there's a lot of hematomas

(52:42):
or bruises and broken ribs because you're really pushing on
someone's chest and it's easy to break someone's rib. He
had other evidence of trauma. He had a lot of
bruises on his hand, which were first when you look
at them, you're like, oh my god, he's got bruises
on his hand. But then you look at them and
you're like, anytime you've ever had an ivy or gotten

(53:03):
blood taken out of your hand, sometimes you get big
bruises on your hand like that. They are not injuries
you would see in somebody that was trying to defend themselves.
They're not injuries that you would see if somebody got
hit by a car, because it's on the top or
the dorsal of your hand, and that's just it's just
a weird place to get a bruise. And we know

(53:24):
that he had the ivy and stuff. Now, one thing
that he had, which was that, which is why the
medical examiner said that he was knocked down and had
this head injury, is because when you looked at his face,
he has what's called Perry orbital echimosis, which is we
also call raccoon eyes, or it looks like he has

(53:45):
two black eyes. Now when you see that, you might think, oh,
he got punched in the face. But usually obviously when
you punch them in the face, you don't punch them
twice in each eye. So this is caused by a
skull fracture. So sometimes when there's a frack at the
base of the skull, blood could leak and get behind
the eyes, and it gives us appearance around the eyes

(54:07):
that you look like you have two black eyes. But
they're not really from trauma to the eyes themselves. It's
from a fracture of the base of the skull. So
there's another photograph from the autopsy of the back of
his head, and he has evidence of blunt trauma. So
he has this laceration that's about three I'm looking at

(54:28):
it right now, so it's about three point five centimeter
in length. A laceration is due to blunt trauma, so
it's when your skin is hitting against another blunt object.
And with the head, it's a little bit interesting because
or any any part of the body that's covered by
bone is because the bone is blunt object too. So

(54:50):
it hit something and it caused a laceration. Is I
would describe it as the skin being split like it's
it's its tear, so it's jagged, and the the edges
of the wound might have like little pieces of flesh
in between it. Because it's not the same as if
you got a knife, Like think about if you had
a steak and you ripped it in half, as opposed

(55:11):
to getting a sharp knife and cutting it like it
would just look different. So, so something he hid his
head on something which caused his skull to fracture, and
she I guess the medical the first medical examiner that
did the autopsy was saying that obviously it wasn't enough
of an injury to kill him because he was still

(55:33):
alive when they found him, but it could have made
him pass out and could have made him stuck there
in the snow. Now, I guess throughout this whole entire trial,
they're trying to figure out well, like what hid his
head and did he get knocked on the ground and
hit his head on the ground, Like how did he
get this wound on his head? Now, the most interesting

(55:57):
part really of his whole entire autopsy is this picture
that's been going viral on x and on Instagram and
everywhere throughout the trial. Are these these wounds that are
on his arm. He has these crazy wounds on his
right arm, only on his right arm.

Speaker 1 (56:11):
Which they're trying to say is caused by the tail
light hitting him.

Speaker 3 (56:15):
They're trying to say it's caused by the tail light
hitting him. And just like when I looked at it
the first time, I was like, absolutely not. So the
medical examiner describes them as abrasions or scrapes, and this
whole entire time, I've never thought that they were an
abrasion or a scrape. And abrasion is when you're a
kid and you're riding your skateboard and you fall and

(56:37):
scrape your knee. You know what it looks like, right,
you know what an abrasion looks like. These When you
look at these wounds, you could just tell that there's
that that they're depressed, like. You could see that it's
it's thick, and it's it's just not it's not caused
by a scrape along a piece of plastic. What furthermore,

(56:59):
one of the biggest things is you would think that
if you got hit with a car so hard that
it knocked you on the ground, that there would be
a bruise or there would be a broken bone. Nothing.
There's no bruising or broken bone underneath of this guy's arm, Okay.
And when you look at it, they have like a

(57:19):
very specific look to which the prosecution says were she
They're saying it's from the tail light and from the
broken plastic, and the defense is saying, no, our experts
said that it looks like a dog bite. So this
is this is really an interesting thing to bring up

(57:42):
because then you have to think about, well, this house
that he died outside of so happened to have.

Speaker 1 (57:49):
A dog that they so happened to get rid of that.

Speaker 3 (57:52):
They so happened to get rid of and it was
it was a German shepherd. I believe it was like
a big dog. Yeah, and these wounds would match with
an attack of a big dog. The medical examiner said
they didn't see any defense wounds from a person. But
I'm like, well, could these be defense wounds from a dog?

(58:14):
I mean, this is a commonplace if you're seeing a
person that's getting attacked by the dog. What's the if
a dog came up to you right now, Like, what
would be the first thing that you would do? You
would put your arm up to block.

Speaker 1 (58:26):
It, right, I'd run away because it will like the vice.

Speaker 3 (58:29):
So it could attack you from the back and start
like chewing on you. No, Like, if a dog run
up to you and look like it was gonna bite you,
your first reflex would be, especially if you were a
right handed person, would be like to block it right.
And that's where those injuries are. It's right on his
his right, his right forearm right. So that's a little

(58:51):
bit unusual. Also when you look at these injuries, because
dog bites have very specific wound patterns and they have
a particular V shaped hole like meaning that one end
of it is is almost looks like the letter V.
And when you look at John O'Keefe's autopsy pictures, that's
what it looks like. It's it's really crazy because it's

(59:15):
from the canine tooth and that it is like the
anchorage point of it that and then it pulls down
with the with the weight of like moving the arm
and things like that. And then those bites can also
be accompanied by these parallel lines that you would see
with the claws from a dog. And when you look
at these wounds, they're just they're parallel lines like they

(59:37):
it's it's bizarre to if you think about you getting
hit with a broken piece of plastic from a tail light,
they wouldn't be perfect parallel lines that you would see
from two perfectly spaced apart claws, you know what I mean.

Speaker 1 (59:55):
And then to bring back something we mentioned earlier, is
this glass he took from the bar. There is a
theory that perhaps the cuts were from the glass, but
that's just not the case.

Speaker 3 (01:00:06):
Listen, how what was it? What kind of glass?

Speaker 2 (01:00:10):
Was it?

Speaker 3 (01:00:10):
Like a pint mug or like a pint glass or
a or a martine whatever, like bar.

Speaker 1 (01:00:15):
Glass wouldn't give those type of.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
I'm looking at this right now, and there's what, there's
ten fifteen marks on this guy's arm, Like, how how.

Speaker 1 (01:00:28):
Exactly it's It's just.

Speaker 3 (01:00:30):
It's the theory doesn't even make it doesn't even make
any sense. Now. The reason that I say it's important
that the police that were involved with this investigation, who
also knew the police officers involved in the case it
was a conflict of interest is because if you're the
medical examiner's office and you get a body and you

(01:00:52):
start doing the autopsy, and then the people that are
there that are watching are the investigators, they're going to say, oh,
this is what happened that we think that this woman
hit this guy with the car and we saw the
broken tail light did it and all this stuff, Well,
you're planting information in the head of the medical examiner. Now,

(01:01:14):
the medical examiner should not be thinking what they're told
and just be thinking about what they're looking at. And
if you're looking at this, there's you just you can't
say that that was caused by a headlight. Like even
if somebody's telling you that your your little antenna should
go up and be like, eh, that doesn't look like
an antenna. That headlight would cause that injury, right but

(01:01:39):
that didn't happen in this case. But she also didn't
really seem to have any explanations as to what caused that,
but that came later with the testimony and things like that.

Speaker 1 (01:01:49):
Wait, based off what you just said about the investigators
being in the autopsy, I wanted to bring up a
point that Cheryl keeps making on Zone seven, which is
that I thought kind it odd that the investigators went
to the autopsy, but none of the police officers went
to his funeral, which she said is incredibly unusual for
law enforcement funerals that not all of them would be there.

(01:02:12):
So wait, so Albert, that guy didn't even know none
of the cop friends went to Okay, right there too, See,
I didn't even know that. That is absolutely right. Listen
when and and and like the firefighters and cops kind
of even though they're different, they kind of have a
lot of the same similar things, like if there's a

(01:02:33):
firefighter that dies in another city, Gabe will go to
the funeral. Like exactly, they are very they are like
a tight knit brotherhood of guys. That is very bizarre,
and especially bizarre because they're friends.

Speaker 3 (01:02:50):
Yeah, like that's yeah, that's really weird.

Speaker 1 (01:02:52):
And she didn't go because she was under arrests.

Speaker 3 (01:02:55):
Okay, well, that's what I'm saying that, Like I understand.
I guess I could understand if she was there and
they were so mad at like because they thought she
killed the friend. But that's so shady.

Speaker 1 (01:03:12):
Get into the hypothermia too, because you had a really
interesting take about that.

Speaker 3 (01:03:16):
Okay. So so she said that the medical when I
say she, the medical examiner had said that he had
died of hypothermia basically, which means that his body temperature
went too low. So you're our body temperatures, we have
something called homeostasis because we're warm blooded animals. So our body,

(01:03:38):
our body temperature is at ninety eight point six degrees
give or take a few degrees at the same time,
and that's the ideal temperature for our organs to function
at their at their absolute best. And if you get
too hot, if your temperature goes too hot, so that's
when you get a fever, basically, then you it could
it doesn't function. Your body doesn't function best obviously, you know,

(01:04:01):
because you feel like you're literally going to die when
you have a fever of that high and that's called
hype or ethermia. So there's a point that it could
get too high that you will die, your organs won't
function anymore. Well, the same thing can happen if you
get too cold too, So this is this is really interesting,

(01:04:21):
and this is my theory that proves that he wasn't
laying there as long as they said that he was
laying there. According to the prosecutors, John was knocked over
by Karen Reid's car and left for dead around twelve
thirty am ish and he wasn't discovered until six am ish,
meaning that he was there for around five and a
half hours. The temperature in Canton, Massachusetts, on the night

(01:04:45):
that he was supposedly knocked down by Karen Reid's car,
between the hours of twelve am and six am, ranged
from eighteen to twenty eight degrees fahrenheit. He was outside
wearing a hoodie partially covered in snow. He wasn't dressed
appropriately for the weather, but Karen said it was very
common for him not to wear a coat. When his

(01:05:07):
body was discovered, like I said, his body temperature was
in the low eighties. Now, I had found this in
one of my forensic books, a chart on Newton's law
of cooling in relation to hypothermia. This chart that I
have showing here, you're gonna have to go in the
grosser room to look at it, But it's showing a

(01:05:28):
chart of how many hours you're in the cold according
to how much you weigh and how your body temperature
drops the longer that you're in a certain temperature. Okay,
so this particular chart that I'm referencing is based on
a person that's one hundred and seventy six pounds who's

(01:05:49):
in twenty five degree fahrenheit air temperature and a ten
mile an hour wind. Now we're gonna say that John
O'Keefe weighed a little bit more than that, So instead
of one hundred and seventy six pounds, he was two
hundred and seventeen pounds ish, and the temperatures were between
eighteen and twenty eight degrees, so in the range of

(01:06:11):
the same exact temperature that his body was found in.
According to this chart, one hundred and seventy six pound
person would not survive in these conditions for more than
two and a half hours.

Speaker 1 (01:06:22):
Okay, that's what they're trying to say. He was there
for six.

Speaker 3 (01:06:26):
For almost six hours, That's what my question is. According
to this chart that we used in forensics textbooks. This
is from a forensic textbook. One hundred and seventy six
pound person would not survive in these conditions for more
than two and a half hours. So obviously he weighed
a little bit more, so he could have lasted a
little bit longer. But there's no way more than double

(01:06:49):
that time five and a half to six hours with
lower temperatures and more extreme weather because there was snow
that he was out there, and on top of that,
he wasn't even dead when he was found. He was
still alive when he was found, the medical examiner, So
this is even this is even more interesting, the medical

(01:07:09):
examiner said. Alcohol intoxication has been shown to inhibit some
of the mechanisms that the body uses to maintain heat.
So it's definitely a factor that is a negative when
it comes to hypothermia. So when our body's cold, the
natural response is to shiver to generate heat, right, So

(01:07:29):
alcohol delays that mechanism, and a head injury with unconsciousness
also delays that mechanism. So it's in my opinion that
he was no way out there for five and a
half hours and still alive when found. Down, not wearing
a coat directly on and covered by snow. There's just
there's absolutely no way that he was out there that long.

(01:07:50):
And I finally, I mean just last week one of
the defense medical examiners testified that she didn't think that
he died from hypotherma. And I'm like, why is this
the first time I'm hearing this in this entire trial,
because right ago, I brought it up months ago. But
I'm saying that I brought it up in the Grosser
Room post and I brought it up on the Zone

(01:08:11):
seven podcasts. But what I don't understand why, Because this
right here proves a timeline. They they they're able to
prove his weight, they're able to prove the temperature, they're
able to prove the conditions. They should have been able
to say, there's no way that he was outside during
that time. Now, what's what's really interesting is, all of

(01:08:34):
a sudden, when you look at her text messages, Jim
McCabe's text messages at two o'clock in the morning, which
is now an hour and a half past when Karen
Reid said she was there. Now you're like, hm, that's interesting,
like that that timeline could could start matching up a
little bit closer, and and and just think about the dog,

(01:08:55):
the potential dog it wounds or whatever happened. Is it
possible that there was some kind of a fight in
the house and the dog attacked, you know, like, think
about this sometimes. If if he this is just a
theory obviously, but if he went into the house and
they were like, where's your bitch girlfriend? Right, and then

(01:09:17):
he was just like, don't talk about my woman that
way they got up in each other's face. What does
a dog do with their owner? They they get like
if I if I walk into momm and pop Up's
house and go to kiss pop like, the dog starts
eyeing me up, like yo, get away from him. He's like,
I'm protecting him. Yeah, right. So if if John O'Keefe

(01:09:41):
was in an argument with the homeowner and they were
screaming at each other, the dog could have jumped up
on him like that and knocked him over to the
ground and they could have brought him outside, and that
would explain the wound on his head, That would explain
the wound on his arms, and that would explain the
text messages that are like how long what does it say?

(01:10:04):
How's shell because she was just long to die in
the cold. I mean, I'm just I'm just putting out
like a potential theory.

Speaker 1 (01:10:15):
There's also this grand conspiracy that they were all in
this giant swinger situation, and it's I could cover up
for them all being swingers or something.

Speaker 3 (01:10:26):
Well, I don't know. I just think that they're I
just I don't know because if they were swingers like that,
that could be a conspiracy theory. But if they were swingers,
like I feel like there would have been evidence that
they were doing There's there's no text message there. They're
they're acting like they're acting like teenagers, honestly, like that

(01:10:49):
that's how they're acting, Like Oh I like you, and
I like you, and you're hut and the weird go
in and make sure it's okay that I can't then
I go in the party. Like it's all just like
it's all bizarre behavior. In my opinion, it's bizarre behavior
that he was the guardian of two children and they
were at home alone and he was out drunk with

(01:11:10):
his friends. Like all of it's weird to me, But
like people do what they're gonna do whatever. I just
I personally just think that I don't one hundred percent
like I'm not one of these like free Karen Read people,
because I think all of the people involved are just
kind of like scumbaggy kind of people. But I definitely
just one hundred percent in agreeance with the jury on this.

(01:11:35):
There's absolutely no way that you could prove anything, and
even if you could, the worst you could say is
she pulled away because she was pissed off and hit
him by accident and didn't realize it. There's no evidence
to suggest anything else.

Speaker 1 (01:11:50):
Yeah, So during this first trial, there was nine weeks
of testimony and then several days of deliberation, and then
they ended up being a hung jury. They could not
they could not come to an agreement that she was
guilty or innocent. They just couldn't. So this means a retrial. God,
this must have been such a horrible moment for her.

Speaker 3 (01:12:12):
The thing is is that she's she's like, she's not likable, right,
you would say that she's not.

Speaker 1 (01:12:19):
I was just texting my cousin Devin last night about
why because she her and her sister lived just started
watching all the I'm like, I can't believe you've never
watched anything about this. So we're texting this is a
good episode, a good starter episode if you want to
get into it now. Yeah, So I said that via text.
I was like, she comes across unlikable because I don't

(01:12:40):
think she is, but like, it doesn't mean she did
it exactly. I agree with and I'm gonna stand outside
the courthouse with a sign of this is free Karen Reid.
But I could say they can't prove this beyond reasonable
doubt that she did it.

Speaker 3 (01:12:54):
And like, another thing I want to say, which we
probably should have said in the beginning of the episode,
is that there's just so much more to this trial
that we're we're not even covering like a lot of
it because for time sake, we've already been talking for
over an hour and it and everybody so much suffering
and my kind of but my, my whole thing is

(01:13:16):
obviously because I'm a PA and I do autopsy and
surgical pathology, that I I have to bring up that
just the timeline alone from a scientific standpoint isn't possible,
and the wounds as well. And another thing that we
always bring up when Maria and I are talking about
this case is the similarities with cases like the Ellen

(01:13:37):
Greenberg case, which if you don't know about that, that's
a whole other wele other time that's not getting I'm
not getting into it. If you're interested in it, you
could read about that in the gross room. But it's
just it's just another case that leaves a lot of
answers because the initial investigation was botched. And and that's
when you and and when you become a police officer

(01:13:59):
and a friend investigator and when you do autopsies, it's
just so important that you are meticulous and you go
slow and you get the correct answers, you collect the
evidence correctly, because if you get trust lost in you
early in the process, the rest of the case is shit.

Speaker 1 (01:14:18):
No, absolutely all right. So let's wrap up with what
happened in trial too, and then the verdict. So we've
gone over some differences in trial to that began on
April first, twenty twenty five, and it just ended June
eighteenth with the verdict. So again weeks and weeks and
weeks of going over all of the same evidence and testimony.
I think what was successful in this case was that

(01:14:40):
the defense changed their strategy so instead of really focusing
on the conspiracy, which I think they were right to
bring up I just don't think it was right to
go that deep into it.

Speaker 3 (01:14:51):
At first.

Speaker 1 (01:14:52):
They chose to go like, why weren't you looking into
anybody else besides Karen? Why was the investigation so botched?
And that was really important for the jurors to see.
I always get tripped up with saying us so basically,
like you didn't look at anybody else besides Karen, which
we've seen.

Speaker 3 (01:15:11):
They didn't go in.

Speaker 1 (01:15:12):
The house, they didn't collect the evidence properly, they didn't
do anything correct. There was conflicts of interest with the investigators,
so how could you reasonably charge her not ruling anybody
else out?

Speaker 3 (01:15:23):
Basically.

Speaker 1 (01:15:24):
Also, historically, mistrials are really good for the defense because
you've proved enough doubt the first time around that you
could pretty much zero in on that for the second time.
And that's exactly what happened.

Speaker 3 (01:15:35):
Yeah, And I mean I am just and like, at
the end of it, it sucks because this guy, he's
a police officer, he was an active police officer. Most
people have really good things to say about him. Was
he was. I mean, that's a really big thing that
he did, being in his forties and taking his sister's

(01:15:56):
children and raising them, right, yeah, of course so, and
and now like think about his mom for example, I
don't know parents, mother, father, whatever, his parents like this guy,
they lost a child already to cancer and now they're

(01:16:19):
losing and now they lost his son. And if you
have I mean, that could have been their only children,
if whatever, if you have a couple children, like losing
two of your children when they're when you're still alive,
it is terrible. And not only that they're old people
now and they have to raise kids, because there's they're
gonna have to raise kids because of this. So you

(01:16:42):
feel terrible and like all of this circus is is
and we're guilty of it too, just being like the
Karen Reid trial. It's just like, no, it's just John
O'Keeffe was the one that died. We don't know howe died.
We're never gonna know Holle died unless someone confesses or
some video pops up at some point, and their family
is left with this circus, literal circus, and now they

(01:17:06):
left and they have no justice.

Speaker 1 (01:17:08):
They have no justice regardless because regardless if the police
officers that were his friends were involved in his death
or not, the police is responsible for fucking up the
investigation so bad that the family can't seek justice.

Speaker 3 (01:17:23):
Exactly, it's he's his fault.

Speaker 1 (01:17:25):
Whether she got convicted or not, they're still not answers
as to what happened to him, and they will never
know unless you're saying somebody straight up confesses to exactly
what happened.

Speaker 3 (01:17:35):
As of this recording, only one drawer has come out
and said that he believes not only did they not
have enough evidence, but he actually believes that she's innocent. Now,
he didn't really say what the other people said, and
he did what he said.

Speaker 1 (01:17:52):
They were pretty split on it, so some of them
thought she was innocent and some of them thought she
was guilty. But the people who thought she was guilty
agreed that there was not enough evidence beyond reasonable doubt
that she killed him.

Speaker 3 (01:18:05):
Okay, So like I'm really curious to see what they say,
because really that's the most important part is to see
how other people are perceiving it, not just us people
that are looking from around like people. That's that. And
but this is the thing, Like we could talk to
multiple people that know all of because we all watched
the trial the past two ones, Like we all know

(01:18:27):
the details, and everybody has such varying opinions on it.
So but I want to know when they were sitting
in the room, like, what are the details? And I
bet you when we hear from all of them, it's
going to have to do with them not going into
the house.

Speaker 1 (01:18:41):
Well, of course, because how could how could you live
with yourself if you convicted a woman not having concrete
evidence like that.

Speaker 3 (01:18:51):
So so that's so when we hear from them, that's
when the o'key family needs to listen to that, and
that's who they should put their anger towards, because that's
if think about how different this would have turned out
if they collected everything properly, if they went in the house,
if they had accountability it every it could have turned

(01:19:14):
all of their decision around really.

Speaker 1 (01:19:17):
Well of course, of course, but you can't convict her
without this evidence, and that's the problem. I I'm not
surprised she was found she So she was found not
guilty on the second degree murder and the manslaughter or
the leaving the scene of a deadly accident. She was
found guilty of operating under the influence, which I think
was appropriate, and she got one year of probation for that,

(01:19:39):
so like that was appropriate because she's being held responsible
for the thing she was doing wrong, which was drunk driving.

Speaker 3 (01:19:46):
But they did have gone to.

Speaker 1 (01:19:47):
Us that judge was so salty that all right, So
like everything, so the entire investigations bought this story is weird.
You don't really know what happened. And then you have
the mistrial first time around, and then what was weird
with this second trial was I mean, the judge sucked.
She was so salty, she was so rude to everybody.
She was probably so pissed she didn't get charged.

Speaker 3 (01:20:09):
She was she was very blatantly biased in my opinion. No,
I agree with you, and listen, like I said that,
I don't think Karen Reid doesn't have you just like them.
She's not likable. But also, you know, I don't know,
it's like we you know, we obsestantly, like watched the
Jodiarius trial and you just look at her and you're like, yo,

(01:20:31):
this chick is like bad shit crazy like Karen Reid.
I feel like I feel like she's she's like a passionate,
like she's nuts, but she's even rough around that she
seems like she's like rough around the edges and like
gets pissed off and like, I don't know, I just
I never really got the vibe that she was like

(01:20:53):
like do you know what I mean, like like conniving
and and some of that. It's just not a murderer,
Like yeah, I just don't Yeah, And if if anything,
like if anything you could that, if anything, I would say,
the most thing that you could do is is if
if she was ever going to get convicted, was that

(01:21:13):
she bumped them by accident because she was drunk and
you know, you you see people get in a fight,
they like drive off really fast, right, like it would
be something like that, like it was an accident. She
I just one believe she had no idea that she
hit him and and like went home and like played
out and called him and pretended like.

Speaker 1 (01:21:35):
And they don't have any evidence to prepeated it. So
the last weird thing that, of course had to happen
with this is the jury knocked on the door and
said they had a verdict, and then a couple of
minutes later said never mind, we don't. So then everybody
got some into the courtroom and then the salty judge
sealed the original verdict and I'm like, I hope they
read the correct one just to make it fair. But

(01:21:58):
it was so bizarre, and on court TV was saying
that was incredibly unusual that that happened. And the last
time something even kind of similar happened was with Johnny
Depp and Amber heard when the jury said they had
a verdict and they didn't fill the slip out correctly,
and then all they had to do was fill the
slip So every single.

Speaker 3 (01:22:17):
Element of this trial was so bizarre. I think her
comment so so I guess when they decided that they
were going to sentence her, write or whatever, they were
going to give her her sentence, and she said so,
she was just kind of like, oh so basically she's
getting a charge that any first time drunk driver would get. Okay,

(01:22:38):
like it was wasn't it said like that, just like,
oh so, so this psycho that killed the cop is
just gonna like That's how the said in that exact attitude.

Speaker 1 (01:22:46):
I think you're reading a little too No, I'm not
due to it. There was definitely twode behind there was.

Speaker 3 (01:22:52):
A too, like like okay, so you could just kill
the cop and this is all you're getting out of.

Speaker 1 (01:22:57):
It, Because do you think this judge could seriously fathom
the inappropriate actions of multiple police departments. Well, no, but
like here it happened. It is unbelievable. It did happen,
but it's unbelievable.

Speaker 3 (01:23:10):
One other thing that we should mention too, for those
of you who didn't watch, when they read the verdict.
Inside of the courtroom, there was a like an audible
like you could hear like people breaming outside outside, Like
it was so loud from the microphones inside of the
courtroom from outside it was nuts. All right, Well, you

(01:23:32):
guys have suffered through this very long explanation.

Speaker 1 (01:23:36):
We tried to get as much as possible in here,
but of course there's so much to this case, and
we couldn't watch it every single day on Court TV.

Speaker 2 (01:23:46):
We have a life, so I don't know, and we
couldn't like, uh, you know, get give up hanging out
with our kids and go stand outside of the trial
every day for two weeks or three weeks or three
months or whatever.

Speaker 3 (01:23:59):
It's a but we hope.

Speaker 1 (01:24:01):
That after all of this you have some better understanding
of why this case was so sensationalized and ridiculous. Little
programming note tomorrow's episode is going to be out on
Friday instead of Thursday, so look out for that. Don't
panic when you don't see the Mother.

Speaker 3 (01:24:17):
Nos Death episode pop up on Thursday.

Speaker 1 (01:24:20):
And if you want to buy tickets for the Atlanta
Meet and Greet or the Crime and Wine at the
Georgia's Writer Museum, head over to the description of this episode.
Please head over to Apple or Spotify and leave us review,
subscribe to our YouTube channel, and if you have a
story for us, please submit it to stories at Mothernosdeath
dot com.

Speaker 3 (01:24:36):
Say on Friday, thank you for listening to Mother Nos Death.
As a reminder, my training is as a pathologist assistant.
I have a master's level education and specialize in anatomy
and pathology education. I am not a doctor and I
have not diagnosed or treated anyone dead or alive without

(01:24:59):
the assistance of a licensed medical doctor. This show, my website,
and social media accounts are designed to educate and inform
people based on my experience working in pathology, so they
can make healthier decisions regarding their life and well being.
Always remember that science is changing every day and the

(01:25:20):
opinions expressed in this episode are based on my knowledge
of those subjects at the time of publication. If you
are having a medical problem, have a medical question, or
having a medical emergency, please contact your physician or visit
an urgent care center, emergency room, or hospital. Please rate, review,

(01:25:40):
and subscribe to Mother Knows Death on Apple, Spotify, YouTube,
or anywhere you get podcasts. Thanks

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Hosts And Creators

Nicole Angemi

Maria Q. Kane

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Karen Read Trials, The Death of Officer John O’Keefe