March 19, 2025 • 37 mins
Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the Karen Read case, has been fired, and dishonorably discharged by the Massachusetts State Police. The state police trial board found Proctor guilty of three charges of unsatisfactory performance and one charge of consumption of alcohol while on duty. Proctor’s family released a statement saying he is "human not corrupt, not incompetent in his role as a homicide detective, and certainly not unfit to continue to be a Massachusetts State Trooper.” Do you agree or disagree?
Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio app and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!
Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio 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 (00:00):
It's Night Side with Dan ray I w BZ Costs video.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Well, the big story, the big local story in Massachusetts
today has been the fact that Michael Proctor, a state
police detective who was the lead detective and the Karen
Reid case that I think most of us are familiar with,
that was a case in which she was accused of
striking and killing a Boston police officer who she was
(00:27):
dating at the time with her suv and left of
deny in the snow. That trial occurred last spring from
April to July, and it ended in a hung jury,
and that retrial is supposed to that second trial retrial
is supposed to occur or begin on April first. I'm
(00:48):
not sure they're going to be able to get that
all lined up by April first. But the big news
today is that the lead investigator on the case, the
state police detective been on the job fourteen years, has
been fired. There was an investigation. He was a witness
(01:11):
at trial last spring and there were four charges against him,
and there was a trial board that convened on three dates,
one in January, one of February, and one in March,
and to consider the allegations against him. The allegations, all
of which all of which were found to be true
(01:34):
by the trial board. He will be able to appeal
it to the Civil Service Commission, which will be interesting.
But as of now, he basically has been found guilty
of as while he was the lead investigator in a
homicide investigation, sent derogatory, defamatory, disparaging, in or otherwise inappropriate
(01:56):
text messages about a suspect in that investigation other individuals.
That's specificated charge one, what they call specification Specification two
was that wallas Sign is the lead investigator in a
homicide investigation, Drew per Proctor provided sensitive and or confidential
information about a homicide victim, potential witnesses, and or potential
(02:20):
investigative steps in the investigation to non law enforcement enforcement personnel.
He was found guilty of that step three, that drewper
pro wallasign is the lead investigator in a homicide investigation,
through his unprofessional inappropriate conduct, created an image that he
was unprofessional and created an image that he was biased
(02:44):
in his dealings with a homicide suspect, and or brought
otherwise himself and the Massachusetts Police into disrepute. That actually
is a direct violation of what they call a Class
A violation. And then the fourth charge was that he
consumed out Holly beverages while eating dinner while on duty
and then proceeded to operate the department issued cruiser. Well,
(03:07):
I think most of us have a thought about this case.
His the cross examination of Trooper Proctor obviously did not
help the prosecution in the case last year of Karen Reid,
the head of the Massachusetts State Police, who is newly appointed.
(03:28):
I mean, he is just I think he's I don't
think he's been on the force for for six months
at this point. Colonel Jeffrey Noble, he was hired out
of New Jersey and he basically made the decision to
relieve Proctor of duty. So fourteen years he suspended, he's terminated.
(03:51):
He will have a right to appeal to the Civil
Service Commission. And his family has done into with one
of his wife and his sister have done interviews with
one of the local television stations in Boston. They have
released statements saying that, well, let me read a statement
(04:13):
from the family. We are truly disappointed with the Trialboard's decision,
as it lacks precedent and unfairly exploits in scapegoats one
of their own. A trooper with a fourteen year unblemished record,
the family said, well it's a little blemish now. Despite
the Massachusetts State Police dubious and relentless effage to find
more in cumpatory evidence against Michael Procter on his phones, computers,
(04:37):
and cruiser data, the messages on his personal phone referring
to the person who killed a fellow beloved Boston police
officer are all that they found. The messages prove one thing,
and that Michael is human, not corrupt, not incompetent in
his role as a homicide detective, and certainly not unfit
to continue to be a Massachusetts State trooper. The Proctor
(05:04):
family continued, Proctor and his detectives led him meticulous and
thorough investigative investigation of integrity, and despite today's wrongful termination
and great harm and defamation this case inflicted on him
and his family, I don't think it inflicts defamation on
his family, but that's neither here or there. Practice still
(05:25):
believes justice will be served. The family said, he's grateful
for the unrelaying support of the union and the men
and women of the Massachusetts a Police. His heart is
always with the family of Officer John O'Keefe, who continued
to adore a prolonged and unimaginable nightmare. Now, meanwhile, the
State Police Colonel he issued this statement. Our mission to
(05:45):
deliver the highest level of police services depends on the
public's trust in our professionalism and integrity. It is incumbent
upon me, as well as every member of this department,
to hold one another accountable when any member compromises our
mission by failing to uphold our values. As Superintendent, my
role demands that I do what is in the best
(06:07):
interest of the department. My decision to terminate mister Proctor
follows a thorough, fear and impartial process. I have weighed
the nature of the offenses, their impact on our investigative integrity,
and the importance of safeguarding the reputations of our dedicated
women and men in the State Police. This decision reflects
our unwavering commitment to upholding our values and enhancing public trust,
(06:29):
ensuring the higher standards of service and accountability. Finally, recognizing
the ways in which this process has affected the family
of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, I would also like
to renew our condolences to them, Proctor can appeal to
the State Civil Service Commission. So to some, certainly to
(06:50):
read supporters, I think this will be proof that this case,
from their perspective, was a.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
It was a bad job.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
I guess that is what they would probably say to
me tonight. And if you want to say that, feel free.
This guy obviously acting in an unprofessional manner.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
You could.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Act unprofessionally and also conduct a thorough investigation, which I
think is what his family's saying. But this has blown
up to be a national story. I mean, it is
a horrible accident. Well, it's a horrible human tragedy. For
the O'Keefe family, they lost the life of a member
(07:36):
of their family. For the Reed family, it's cost them
enormous amounts of money. And all of this comes down
to I think, you know, it's almost Shakespeare, and it's
like the fates put these two people together who apparently
at some point got along very well, and then it
(07:57):
deteriorated and it ended that. It will be up to
a joy to decide which theory is true. But I'd
like to just open it up and ask focus on
Michael Procter tonight, and the question is do you think
the State Police did the right thing in terminating him
fourteen years of service. He will also never be able
(08:17):
to reapply assuming the civil the State's Civil Service Commission
upholds his dismissal his termination, he will never be able
to even reapply to renew his professional status as a
member of the Massachusetts State Police. This is a pretty serious,
heavy duty deal. Six one seven, two, five, four ten
(08:40):
thirty six one seven, two, five, four ten thirty. The
other lines a full let's keep it rolling here on
nights side, as we had. We're going to do this
for one hour period and the reason is I have
a guest coming up at ten o'clock and if you
don't believe me, try me. We're going to be talking
at ten o'clock tonight with the Israeli Consul General to
(09:01):
New England, Ben Sharoni, about the latest developments in the
Middle East, in the war between Israel and Hamas and
what is going on in Gazam. So we will be
talking with again representative direct representative of Israel's government here
in New England. He's spent a guest before in this program.
(09:22):
The Israeli Consul General to New England, Benny Sharoni, at
ten if you want to get in on this and
comment about Michael Proctor what was shown in the police
Personnel Trial Board finding the four specific charges that he
was accused of and found guilty of by ranking officers
(09:46):
in the Massachusettstate Police. Although his union stands behind him.
The only number that is available six one, seven, two, five, four,
ten thirty.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Be back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Now bent to Danway live from the Window World, Nice
Side Studios on WBZ News Radio.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
So we are going to talk about this. Is this
is a big development. I think it will have an
impact on the case. He's still uh, he being Michael
Proctor is still on the witness list for both the
prosecution and the defense in the Karen Read case. Let's
get to the call. It's gonna go first to Mark
in Cambridge. Mark, appreciate you taking the time to call in.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
You are first up this hour aside.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
Thank you for taking my carl again.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
You're welcome, You're welcome. Mark. How are you? What? What's
your reaction to this?
Speaker 4 (10:35):
My reacting the State Police, Colonel State Police. They did
what they had to do, no doubt whatsoever. On the
other hand, in my opinion on the other hand, all
this is gonna get over to bye. It's union lawyers, arbitration. Listen,
and it's only again he got emotional, absolutely, but his
(11:01):
speech is protected in the First Amendment. His speech is protected.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Well, I'm gonna I'm going to disagree with you on
that because it's this is really not a First Amendment issue.
This is an issue that deals with his conduct as
a professional. Okay, if I get on the radio tonight, uh,
and I say, you know, Mark from Cambridge is a
(11:29):
bad guy, and I know which, of.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Course you're a great guy. I would never say anything
like that about you, Mark.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
But you know, if I in effect defamed you, I
might be able to defend myself or my lawyers might
be able to offend myself in a defamation case. But
I guarantee you my company would say, Hey, that's not
what we hired you to do. We hired you to
conduct a talk show and conduct a talk show in
which people felt welcome to have a conversation.
Speaker 5 (11:55):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
And you you went a little far when you when
you said those horrible things about Mark from Gaybridge, who's
now suing us, and so so I don't know that
my job would be protected and I don't think his
job should be protected here either, because by his very actions,
he's called into question the integrity of every state police
(12:18):
officer in my opinion, that people might have disagreed with.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
That's when I think, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
I know I'm gonna wrap it up. I know for facts.
I know a couple of Boston officers that actually years
ago got into mess and it took him years to
get their job back. But they pussed them out to
them listen, take an early retirement, and it was more serious,
and him speaking the words that he spoke, trust me.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Okay, Well, well let's see. We'll see what happens. Okay.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
I mean, it's going to be a long time for
the Civil Service Commission to deal with the case. In
the meantime, we'll have to see what impact this is
going to have on the second trial. I don't think
it's particularly helpful to the prosecution to have this now
(13:07):
out and about. I think a lot of people will
probably hear from some of them tonight who are gonna
say this just reinforces what they believe. Let me ask
you this, were you surprised at what the jury came
up with at last July that they couldn't arrive at
a decision or no.
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Was I surprised about that? Yeah? Yeah I was, because I.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
Mean okay, let me ask you a follow up question. Okay,
so you were surprised about the jury being hung. Did
you think this was a strong case against Karen Reid
or did you think it was a weak case against
Karen Reid?
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Honestly, I think it was a strong case against my
opinion because.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
Okay, so now the fact that you think it was,
just the fact that you think it was a strong case,
thank you. I'll give you plenty of time to respond here.
Do you think that what was done by the defense
lawyers to proctor or the hand on the witness stand
strengthened that strong case or weakened that strong case?
Speaker 4 (14:08):
It just shows the Trooper's character. That's what the show is, Dan,
it shows the troopers character.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
But did the case or strength Did that strengthen the
case or weakened it?
Speaker 4 (14:22):
No, I don't think it's strengthened the strengthened the case.
I think it made it a little you know, weak.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
But the atue I mean, yeah, okay, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (14:30):
The evidence is there. I mean, like I called you
last week on this and my opinion, like I told you,
I think the average is overwhelming for a guilty butt
we got in her. That's all.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Well, I understand that that's your position, and what I'm
saying is the chances of that verdict. That's your opinion. Uh,
others have different opinions, but you have a right to
your And all I'm saying is that what Proctor did
in the way he conducted the investigation, said next messages,
made comments that that that harmed him as a witness
(15:07):
on the witness stand, and he just acknowledged that that
weak in the case. Now because his conduct as a trooper.
If you're if your analysis correct, and I think it is,
that it weaked the case, why would the state police
not terminate him?
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Again, I did say the state police did what they
had to do. On the other hand, I truly believe
that once everything is set and done, because remember the
unions are powerful. Unions are very powerful dand you know
has the one right do and I, in my opinion,
I believe it's going to be overturned and he's gonna
(15:50):
give an option reinstated or or or take a retirement.
Along with the fact pay that we the Tracks band
provide we will, you know, Mark.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
The nice thing about this is that when this is
all resolved, you know, a year or so or whatever
it is from now, you can call me back and
you can say, Dan, I told you back in March,
as a matter of fact, on March nineteenth, twenty twenty five,
and I was exactly right. Or you can call me
back and say, Dan, I overestimated the strength of the
(16:26):
police union on this one. The police union has to
stand behind there. They're members, but I'm not sure. I'm
not sure that this is one that the police. This
is a hill the police union wants to die on. Think.
I think the police union has some work to do
on the members of the police union who were terminated
because they didn't take COVID shots by Charlie Baker. Those
(16:49):
cases are still hanging out there now, four or five
years later, including the case of one female state police
officer whose father died while on the and and she
was fired. I think I think those people are gonna
get their jobs back, in my opinion, but we'll see.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Mark. I love you man.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
Thank you for taking me in, Hey, thank you for
taking my car, Dn.
Speaker 3 (17:12):
You bet you? Thanks for calling in Mark, all right?
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Gonna take a quick break here, We're gonna take the
news and then coming back. I got one line at
six one, seven, nine thirty. I got a couple of
lines at six one, seven, two, five.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
Four to ten thirty.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
I will get you on the year before ten o'clock
because at ten o'clock, ending this discussion, we have a
guest coming in the Israeli console General to New England
who join us, Benny Charoni, talking about what's going on
in the Middle East, what's going on with Israel renewing
attacks on hamas in Gaza. This is not going into
the ten o'clock hour. So if you're sitting there thinking
(17:48):
to yourself, well, I'll wait and see what people say,
we will be moving on at ten o'clock, coming back
on night side.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
You're on night Side with Dan Ray on WZ Boston's News.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
So this was a big deal today. Okay, Massachusetts State
Police trooper who's also detective, a homicide detective fourteen years
Michael Proctor terminated simple as that terminated will how he
he may be a witness in the next trial. That's
what complicates things. It's fascinating. How do you think this?
(18:27):
If you think Karen Reid was being framed. I assume
this only increases your skepticism. If, on the other hand,
you think it was legitimate, this has to shake your
thought about the prosecution's case. Pelvis in Middleton, Pelvis, welcome, How.
Speaker 5 (18:47):
Are you hey, How do you doing tonight?
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Agree?
Speaker 5 (18:51):
So, yeah, no, and at the very least, not only
what he said, his conduct and what he said about her,
throw all that out the window. His total incompetent at
the at the investigation, dropping the ball from the very beginning.
He said from the beginning that this wasn't going to
stick to the homeowner, never went in the house, never
did a thorough investigation, the Sally Port video that's missing.
(19:16):
There's a lot of skepticism going into this number one.
So of course it's going to hurt him and the
prosecution to be called back on the stand after being
completely disgraced and dismantled as a detective because he dropped
the ball from the very beginning. It's a one hundred
percent cover up. I'll let you hit me in the
parking lot at twenty eight miles an hour backing up,
(19:38):
I guarantee you I have broken bones in my body,
and you know the dog bite.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
I missed that.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
Yeah, the tail light, the tail the tail light thing
is is another huge incompetence on their on their part,
the missing Sally Pot sally Port video of the tail
light being smashed out.
Speaker 3 (19:59):
There's no let me play devil Devil's advocate with you
just for a second.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
I agree with most of what you said. But my
understanding and has been confirmed by the defense lawyer Hank Brennan,
who I have a great who's now the prosecutor, by
the way, he said, defense lawyer by trade, who have
a great respect for He basically had set an open
court that any federal investigation, there are all sorts of
rumors about a federal investigation going on, which when you
(20:24):
have a federal investigation, the federal looking at the conduct
of the law enforcement people. So from that perspective, Michael
Proctor should be able to say, you know, no one
has charged him with any sort of a criminal activity.
He's been charged with an inappropriate behavior as a state
police homicide investigator, the head of the homicide unit. So
(20:49):
the fact that they're.
Speaker 5 (20:50):
Still going to they're still going to bring that up,
They're still going to bring up the sally Port video.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Well, they're going to bring all that issue up, right,
But but the fact that if they if apparently there
was a federal investigation of some sort and the federal
investigation has concluded with no charges being brought, well, that
is something that if I were Michael Proctor, because they're
not investigating the defense lawyers, they're not investigating the defense,
would not be investigating the defense team. They probably are
(21:16):
investigating the way that that this prosecution went forward. Now
it wasn't an effective prosecution by virtue of the fact
that we came back with a hung jury, but how.
Speaker 5 (21:28):
It was handled from the start, right by the by
the lead, by the lead investigator, and.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
The point, that's the point.
Speaker 5 (21:38):
If you've got a dead guy in your front yard
with a cocktail glass in his hand, do you think
they're coming in your house? So I'm saying he dropped
his integrity as a cop number one, not only what
he said, defamation, whatever he said, you know, throw all
that out. As a as a character person, you know,
as his person, that's different. But I understand that those
(21:59):
are the actions there that they're actually going off of.
But this definitely, no matter what, putting him back on
the stand is an absolute clown show moving forward.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
But but well, well, I don't know that the prosecutor
will put it back on the stand.
Speaker 5 (22:13):
He's on the witness, he's the lead investigator.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
They have to what, I'm not sure.
Speaker 5 (22:21):
Excuse herself as well because she's in the pocket.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
Well again, you're making allegations of a judge. So that
makes me very uncomfortable. You know, you can't you can
have an.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
Opinion, you don't have anything with that. That's fine, But
he has to be.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
That's gonna be a favorite's back off for a second.
That's your opinion. Okay, it's my show. That's your opinion.
You have nothing to prove with that. You have no
you know, you have your opinion, your observations.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
That's it. You know you can tell me the rich
Ox is going to win the World Series. That's your repeat.
Speaker 4 (22:50):
I went.
Speaker 5 (22:52):
Back to Proctor. Proctor has to come back on the stand.
He's the lead investigator. Of course, he's so sure about that.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
I'm not.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
I'm not so sure about that being I think he's
going to be ripped apart by the defense. Maybe he
will be caught. Okay, but if I were Hank Brennan,
I were the prosecutor, I wouldn't want to see him
in the courtroom at this point because at this point
the defense is going to be asking him all sorts
of questions. Do you still work for the state Police,
you know, Trooper Proctor?
Speaker 6 (23:19):
No?
Speaker 3 (23:19):
I don't. Oh why is that? Did you leave the
department voluntarily?
Speaker 2 (23:24):
No?
Speaker 3 (23:24):
I didn't. You were to let me show you a letter.
Speaker 2 (23:26):
This is a letter from the colonel to you, dated
March nineteenth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Would you read an open court paragraph too?
Speaker 5 (23:33):
I mean, well, I sort of think all of that,
plus the I don't know if you saw the documentary
or whatever they're doing right now is being streamed online too.
I don't think any of that should be being done.
This on the side point, it should not be being done
right now before a second trial, because you're gonna have
a hard pressed time finding and unbiased Jerry at this
point to begin with.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Yeah, but they they may have to what they may
have to do.
Speaker 2 (23:58):
Okay, Sometimes you can take a case and move it
to another jurisdiction. It's not impossible that you can have
cases that you cannot, you know, in panel a jury
of a twelve or sixteen people who have the ability,
you know, the jurors don't have to be blind to
the case, but they have to be able to express
(24:20):
a genuine belief that they can listen to the evidence
and come to a fear. I mean, that's the whole
And what happens is you get a change of venue,
and it's conceivable that the prosecution might at this point
have to move for a change of venue.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
I don't know.
Speaker 5 (24:34):
It's a fascination from the first child that some of
the jurors felt intimidated by the presence of other law
enforcement in the room, and that was part of their conclusion,
part of their nervousness. There was levels of apparent levels
of intimidation that was direct from the lawyers of the
jurors that were involved in the first case.
Speaker 4 (24:53):
I suppose.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I suppose it depends upon what apprehension what but apprehension
was why they were apprehensive. I mean, were they apprehensive
because they felt that the police officers in the courtroom.
You could certainly say to police officers, look, you got
to commit. If you go to command, you count wear
your uniform. They could be motions made on all of
that sort of stuff. Maybe the police were there to
(25:17):
support the O'Keefe family maybe the police were there in
this case to support practical I don't know. I didn't
cover the trial. I know enough about it that I'm
smart enough to know I don't know.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Everything about it.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
I had my own thoughts, and I've expressed them, and
I'll continue to express them. Pelvis is always great to
hear your voice that much. Have a good one, good night.
Let me get Danielle in Worcester. Danielle, you were next
on nightside. Don't want to make you wait. We'll get
you in here before the break. Go ahead, Danielle.
Speaker 6 (25:46):
Hey, Dan, So you know my passion for this and
my knowledge of this case that I've been following since
day one. I don't think you've followed it very closely
other than just general news.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
No I have.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
I have not read transcripts. I have not watched videotapes.
I have not listened to the points for the clarity
of the audience. Okay, hold on, just so that I
know what you have. But tell me from my audience
so they will understand where you're coming from. You your
belief is that she was framed?
Speaker 3 (26:20):
Correct?
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Absolutely?
Speaker 3 (26:23):
Okay, no, this one. Just want people now.
Speaker 6 (26:27):
When we talked about this, you know the last time
around it that you hadn't followed her real closely, and
judge is judge them by some of your answers just
now to the previous do callers, I can kind of
tell that you had, had you been following them more closely,
you would understand some of the comments that that these
guys are making.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
I believe me, Danielle. I do want to explain to
me the comments that you don't think I understood. Do
you think I don't know what the evidence is of
the Sally point?
Speaker 6 (26:51):
You want this last one that this last guy that
just went to talk about the judge, I'm not going
to love.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
It's the thing, daniel Danielle.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Danielle, bear with me for a second, Okay, all right.
I Am not going to allow anyone to They can
express an opinion if they want to say, in my opinion,
the judge has not been fair to Karen Reid. I'm
like a judge. I will allow that in this court
of conversation. But I'm not going to allow someone to
(27:27):
try to end it as a fact. There is the
difference between saying, in my opinion, I believe this judge
has been unfair. There's a difference between that and saying
this judges in the bag for the prosecution's lawyer.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
Ees, he doesn't know anybody. I mean, some of us
don't know you.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
No, no, no, I'm a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
In my opinion, you could you could tell me anything
in your opinion. But when you say to me, if
you want to say to me on this show, Dan,
the sun rises in the east, you don't have to
qualify that with me as your opinion, because we know that.
But I'm running a show here which wants to try
(28:09):
to be fear to everyone, and sometimes it's a little
bit of like a.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
Law school class that I run.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
Sometimes here I might have an opinion about the judge,
but I am going to express my opinion in a way.
I might think she's a terrific judge. You have no
idea what I think about her. But I don't want
someone to come in and disparage a judge in my
court in what I'm going to call this the court
(28:36):
of public opinion.
Speaker 3 (28:38):
So go ahead and say what you want. Go ahead.
Speaker 6 (28:40):
I think that Brennan probably was you said you have
a great deal of respect on him, and I'm sure
you join others with that same sentiment. But I think
that him taking this case, in my opinion, is going
to put a couple of dents in his halo because
he's not making himself.
Speaker 5 (28:57):
Look very good. He's repeatedly.
Speaker 6 (29:01):
Said false things which appeared to be deliberate and then
backtrack and say, oh, no, no, no, that was a mistake.
I don't mean to say it that way. He openly
blamed the defense for not turning over discovery and that
he got some information from the sets, and then he
had to apologize and say, well, he actually didn't apologize,
he just made a correction said oh, actually it was
a defense that gave it to me. I mean, he's
(29:22):
done some really.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I think, let me say this, I know Hank Brennan
well enough to know that when this is over, whether
he successfully wins the case, meaning he convicts Karen Reid,
or he loses the case, I think people will see
a real trial lawyer, who normally is a defense lawyer,
(29:45):
by the way, acting in his role as a prosecutor.
And I think that he will do a better job
because a lot of the decisions that might have been
made by the prosecution he gets a second look. It's
always easier to play the eighteenth hole if you're the
(30:06):
if you're the second person playing the hole, because you
can watch other people in front of you played it.
Speaker 3 (30:10):
It's the same principle.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
You know.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
Uh, the guy in front of you thinks that he
can he can drive at three hundred yards and avoid
the stand traps. You realize when he hits the ball
and it only goes to sixty, he's in the trap
that maybe you're going to play it a little short
at the trap.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
That's all I'm saying. That's that's all I'm saying.
Speaker 6 (30:28):
You two other quick things. I know you said you
gotta go to break, but it's also important to mention
that it wasn't just the text messages that Practor sent
to number four. Do you know what was the fourth
thing that he was found guilty of? The operating a
crew there?
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Yes, yeah, Well if you if you listen, I read
just so you know, I read verbatim at the beginning
of this hour the four specifications, including the one and
I said trooper. According the the colonel found that Trooper
Proctor consumed alcoholic beverages while eating to her on duty
and then proceeded to operate his department issued cruiser.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
So yeah, and.
Speaker 6 (31:05):
Frankly, I don't think his family is doing anything good
for him going out and crying about his emotional well being.
Because he's a homicide detective. It's not the first death
he's scene. And if he's that emotional and busted up
over and that caused him to do these funny things,
and maybe this isn't the job for him.
Speaker 7 (31:21):
But that's daniel.
Speaker 6 (31:25):
Ing.
Speaker 3 (31:25):
You've got to be really quick because I'm up the.
Speaker 6 (31:28):
Police officers in the courtroom the previous caller, and it
wasn't about uniforms. They couldn't do that. He's talking about
the family of John O'Keeffe and the third party culprits
that that sat with the O'Keeffe family during closing arguments
and stared the jury down, uh and made them feel
very uncomfortable. Brian Albert And again that's.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Again again, that's a subjective allegation on your part.
Speaker 3 (31:57):
Uh. And you sure have.
Speaker 6 (31:59):
Come forward and said that, I mean, that's not well,
that's right.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
If two jurors have come forward and said that, Danielle,
that doesn't make it so. It doesn't make it so.
I'm just telling you that if you want to phrase
it and say to me, well, a couple of the
jurors have said they felt intimidated, and they're on the record.
That's fine, but you got to be I want to
make you a lawyer, Danielle. That's what I want to do.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
All right. I gotta let you go.
Speaker 6 (32:26):
Karen Reid will never be gotta go, Karen go.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
Thanks very much, Danielle, good night. We'll be back on
night Side right after this.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Now back to Dan ray Line from the Window World
night Side Studios on WBZ, the news radio.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
I gave everyone a warning about twenty minutes ago that
you had to get in early. Now we have an
abundance of callers. All of you are not going to
get in. Those of you who I am going to
call on. If you want to be brief and help
other people who called in late, you want to do that,
that's very fine, but I'm not rushing anybody.
Speaker 7 (33:01):
And Nick go right ahead and next to the night said, Hey, Dan,
how you doing.
Speaker 4 (33:06):
I got two quick questions for you. I know you're
a lawyer. Don't make this real quick.
Speaker 7 (33:11):
You said, the defense will not bring procteron. A prosecutor
would not bring procteron is a witness. But what's stopping
the defense from calling him is a witness.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Nothing could, nothing would stop the defense from calling him
as a witness. But I don't think that his appearance
of the witness stand would be of any help to
the prosecution.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
We'll see what happens.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
I mean, you could argue, but I think that you
could argue, what's that.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
What I said?
Speaker 7 (33:38):
The defense would want him on the stand, yes, right,
right right.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
The prosecution also might say, well, we got to put
him on the stand, and we got to clean him up,
and we got to clean him up by by by
getting it out in front of the jury that yeah,
he was terminated.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
That's a strategy that might be used.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
There'll be a tough decision for for Brendan to deal with.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
What's your second question?
Speaker 7 (33:58):
My second question is it men in Massachusetts have a
case we tried with the same judge, she become the
judge of the cases.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
It's very common.
Speaker 2 (34:07):
It's very common unless unless unless the judge either decides
to recuse him or herself, or if there's a motion made.
If one party of the prosecution defense feels the judge
was un fear in the first case and they want
to risk making a motion to recuse, they can that's
(34:27):
possible as well.
Speaker 3 (34:29):
But uh, she she very clearly wants to sit wants
to see this trial to the to the end.
Speaker 7 (34:33):
I think so, And I'll leave on his statement. The
Albutt and McCabe's if they're not guilty, they made they're
doing everything to make themselves look guilty. In my opinion, Well.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
Okay, in your opinion, I'm glad. I'm glad you added
that in your opinion. That's your that's a good that's
a good lesson.
Speaker 3 (34:49):
Thanks make thank you, good night, all.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Have a great night. Joe and revered Joe. Gonna get
you in. Maybe get one more in.
Speaker 4 (34:55):
We'll see, go ahead, Joe, thank you, you know, just
real quick.
Speaker 8 (35:02):
I think the way that was definitely set up, there's
too much stuff going on. Policemen losing their licenses, phones,
I mean stuff like that, like couldn't find them, they
lost them. A second trial. I think it's terrible. And
I believe there were a lot of marketings on that
officer that died that weren't related to a car accident.
(35:26):
So like people know in that house what happened. Why
aren't they bringing more people in from that house and
asking them what happened that night, Joe.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
I'm sure that's part of the investigation and we will
see how it plays out the second time.
Speaker 8 (35:45):
Yeah, I just think I haven't I've been following it,
and I haven't seen a lot of people that were
at that party that they've actually questioned.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
Some of them who were at that party were on
the witness stand during the first trial, and I'm sure
some of them be also on the on the wood
stand dur in the second drop.
Speaker 3 (36:02):
Thank you, Joe.
Speaker 8 (36:05):
Okay, jan good.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
Night, Karen. I'm going to give you thirty seconds. Okay,
there's a couple other callers who may not make it.
I'll give you thirty seconds. Go ahead, Karen.
Speaker 6 (36:15):
Hi.
Speaker 4 (36:15):
Dan, So, I'm just wondering quick question.
Speaker 5 (36:17):
I apologize if you already answer this. What happens to
Michael Proctor's other cases, They're.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Going to be impacted. It will depend upon what they
will find out in other cases. If he if he
all all of his his reputation as an investigator, I'm
sure will be invoked by defense lawyers and other cases,
and what if sort of an impact that will have
on the jury in those cases will obviously be It
(36:43):
will be determined. But that's a great question. Karen, wish
gave you more time. Wish you called earlier because.
Speaker 5 (36:48):
That was the best.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Give you the best question of the night. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (36:51):
We are changing topics and we are going to talk
about Israel, the war with hamas with the.
Speaker 4 (37:00):
UH.
Speaker 2 (37:03):
My guest schedule is the Consul General to New England,
the Israeli Consul General to New England, Benny Sharoni. We
will join with him and calls are invited if you
want to get on dial now, come on back on Nightside.
It's Night Side with Dan ray I w BZ Costs video.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Well, the big story, the big local story in Massachusetts
today has been the fact that Michael Proctor, a state
police detective who was the lead detective and the Karen
Reid case that I think most of us are familiar with,
that was a case in which she was accused of
striking and killing a Boston police officer who she was
(00:27):
dating at the time with her suv and left of
deny in the snow. That trial occurred last spring from
April to July, and it ended in a hung jury,
and that retrial is supposed to that second trial retrial
is supposed to occur or begin on April first. I'm
(00:48):
not sure they're going to be able to get that
all lined up by April first. But the big news
today is that the lead investigator on the case, the
state police detective been on the job fourteen years, has
been fired. There was an investigation. He was a witness
(01:11):
at trial last spring and there were four charges against him,
and there was a trial board that convened on three dates,
one in January, one of February, and one in March,
and to consider the allegations against him. The allegations, all
of which all of which were found to be true
(01:34):
by the trial board. He will be able to appeal
it to the Civil Service Commission, which will be interesting.
But as of now, he basically has been found guilty
of as while he was the lead investigator in a
homicide investigation, sent derogatory, defamatory, disparaging, in or otherwise inappropriate
(01:56):
text messages about a suspect in that investigation other individuals.
That's specificated charge one, what they call specification Specification two
was that wallas Sign is the lead investigator in a
homicide investigation, Drew per Proctor provided sensitive and or confidential
information about a homicide victim, potential witnesses, and or potential
(02:20):
investigative steps in the investigation to non law enforcement enforcement personnel.
He was found guilty of that step three, that drewper
pro wallasign is the lead investigator in a homicide investigation,
through his unprofessional inappropriate conduct, created an image that he
was unprofessional and created an image that he was biased
(02:44):
in his dealings with a homicide suspect, and or brought
otherwise himself and the Massachusetts Police into disrepute. That actually
is a direct violation of what they call a Class
A violation. And then the fourth charge was that he
consumed out Holly beverages while eating dinner while on duty
and then proceeded to operate the department issued cruiser. Well,
(03:07):
I think most of us have a thought about this case.
His the cross examination of Trooper Proctor obviously did not
help the prosecution in the case last year of Karen Reid,
the head of the Massachusetts State Police, who is newly appointed.
(03:28):
I mean, he is just I think he's I don't
think he's been on the force for for six months
at this point. Colonel Jeffrey Noble, he was hired out
of New Jersey and he basically made the decision to
relieve Proctor of duty. So fourteen years he suspended, he's terminated.
(03:51):
He will have a right to appeal to the Civil
Service Commission. And his family has done into with one
of his wife and his sister have done interviews with
one of the local television stations in Boston. They have
released statements saying that, well, let me read a statement
(04:13):
from the family. We are truly disappointed with the Trialboard's decision,
as it lacks precedent and unfairly exploits in scapegoats one
of their own. A trooper with a fourteen year unblemished record,
the family said, well it's a little blemish now. Despite
the Massachusetts State Police dubious and relentless effage to find
more in cumpatory evidence against Michael Procter on his phones, computers,
(04:37):
and cruiser data, the messages on his personal phone referring
to the person who killed a fellow beloved Boston police
officer are all that they found. The messages prove one thing,
and that Michael is human, not corrupt, not incompetent in
his role as a homicide detective, and certainly not unfit
to continue to be a Massachusetts State trooper. The Proctor
(05:04):
family continued, Proctor and his detectives led him meticulous and
thorough investigative investigation of integrity, and despite today's wrongful termination
and great harm and defamation this case inflicted on him
and his family, I don't think it inflicts defamation on
his family, but that's neither here or there. Practice still
(05:25):
believes justice will be served. The family said, he's grateful
for the unrelaying support of the union and the men
and women of the Massachusetts a Police. His heart is
always with the family of Officer John O'Keefe, who continued
to adore a prolonged and unimaginable nightmare. Now, meanwhile, the
State Police Colonel he issued this statement. Our mission to
(05:45):
deliver the highest level of police services depends on the
public's trust in our professionalism and integrity. It is incumbent
upon me, as well as every member of this department,
to hold one another accountable when any member compromises our
mission by failing to uphold our values. As Superintendent, my
role demands that I do what is in the best
(06:07):
interest of the department. My decision to terminate mister Proctor
follows a thorough, fear and impartial process. I have weighed
the nature of the offenses, their impact on our investigative integrity,
and the importance of safeguarding the reputations of our dedicated
women and men in the State Police. This decision reflects
our unwavering commitment to upholding our values and enhancing public trust,
(06:29):
ensuring the higher standards of service and accountability. Finally, recognizing
the ways in which this process has affected the family
of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, I would also like
to renew our condolences to them, Proctor can appeal to
the State Civil Service Commission. So to some, certainly to
(06:50):
read supporters, I think this will be proof that this case,
from their perspective, was a.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
It was a bad job.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
I guess that is what they would probably say to
me tonight. And if you want to say that, feel free.
This guy obviously acting in an unprofessional manner.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
You could.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Act unprofessionally and also conduct a thorough investigation, which I
think is what his family's saying. But this has blown
up to be a national story. I mean, it is
a horrible accident. Well, it's a horrible human tragedy. For
the O'Keefe family, they lost the life of a member
(07:36):
of their family. For the Reed family, it's cost them
enormous amounts of money. And all of this comes down
to I think, you know, it's almost Shakespeare, and it's
like the fates put these two people together who apparently
at some point got along very well, and then it
(07:57):
deteriorated and it ended that. It will be up to
a joy to decide which theory is true. But I'd
like to just open it up and ask focus on
Michael Procter tonight, and the question is do you think
the State Police did the right thing in terminating him
fourteen years of service. He will also never be able
(08:17):
to reapply assuming the civil the State's Civil Service Commission
upholds his dismissal his termination, he will never be able
to even reapply to renew his professional status as a
member of the Massachusetts State Police. This is a pretty serious,
heavy duty deal. Six one seven, two, five, four ten
(08:40):
thirty six one seven, two, five, four ten thirty. The
other lines a full let's keep it rolling here on
nights side, as we had. We're going to do this
for one hour period and the reason is I have
a guest coming up at ten o'clock and if you
don't believe me, try me. We're going to be talking
at ten o'clock tonight with the Israeli Consul General to
(09:01):
New England, Ben Sharoni, about the latest developments in the
Middle East, in the war between Israel and Hamas and
what is going on in Gazam. So we will be
talking with again representative direct representative of Israel's government here
in New England. He's spent a guest before in this program.
(09:22):
The Israeli Consul General to New England, Benny Sharoni, at
ten if you want to get in on this and
comment about Michael Proctor what was shown in the police
Personnel Trial Board finding the four specific charges that he
was accused of and found guilty of by ranking officers
(09:46):
in the Massachusettstate Police. Although his union stands behind him.
The only number that is available six one, seven, two, five, four,
ten thirty.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Be back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Now bent to Danway live from the Window World, Nice
Side Studios on WBZ News Radio.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
So we are going to talk about this. Is this
is a big development. I think it will have an
impact on the case. He's still uh, he being Michael
Proctor is still on the witness list for both the
prosecution and the defense in the Karen Read case. Let's
get to the call. It's gonna go first to Mark
in Cambridge. Mark, appreciate you taking the time to call in.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
You are first up this hour aside.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
Thank you for taking my carl again.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
You're welcome, You're welcome. Mark. How are you? What? What's
your reaction to this?
Speaker 4 (10:35):
My reacting the State Police, Colonel State Police. They did
what they had to do, no doubt whatsoever. On the
other hand, in my opinion on the other hand, all
this is gonna get over to bye. It's union lawyers, arbitration. Listen,
and it's only again he got emotional, absolutely, but his
(11:01):
speech is protected in the First Amendment. His speech is protected.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Well, I'm gonna I'm going to disagree with you on
that because it's this is really not a First Amendment issue.
This is an issue that deals with his conduct as
a professional. Okay, if I get on the radio tonight, uh,
and I say, you know, Mark from Cambridge is a
(11:29):
bad guy, and I know which, of.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Course you're a great guy. I would never say anything
like that about you, Mark.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
But you know, if I in effect defamed you, I
might be able to defend myself or my lawyers might
be able to offend myself in a defamation case. But
I guarantee you my company would say, Hey, that's not
what we hired you to do. We hired you to
conduct a talk show and conduct a talk show in
which people felt welcome to have a conversation.
Speaker 5 (11:55):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
And you you went a little far when you when
you said those horrible things about Mark from Gaybridge, who's
now suing us, and so so I don't know that
my job would be protected and I don't think his
job should be protected here either, because by his very actions,
he's called into question the integrity of every state police
(12:18):
officer in my opinion, that people might have disagreed with.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
That's when I think, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
I know I'm gonna wrap it up. I know for facts.
I know a couple of Boston officers that actually years
ago got into mess and it took him years to
get their job back. But they pussed them out to
them listen, take an early retirement, and it was more serious,
and him speaking the words that he spoke, trust me.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Okay, Well, well let's see. We'll see what happens. Okay.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
I mean, it's going to be a long time for
the Civil Service Commission to deal with the case. In
the meantime, we'll have to see what impact this is
going to have on the second trial. I don't think
it's particularly helpful to the prosecution to have this now
(13:07):
out and about. I think a lot of people will
probably hear from some of them tonight who are gonna
say this just reinforces what they believe. Let me ask
you this, were you surprised at what the jury came
up with at last July that they couldn't arrive at
a decision or no.
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Was I surprised about that? Yeah? Yeah I was, because I.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
Mean okay, let me ask you a follow up question. Okay,
so you were surprised about the jury being hung. Did
you think this was a strong case against Karen Reid
or did you think it was a weak case against
Karen Reid?
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Honestly, I think it was a strong case against my
opinion because.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
Okay, so now the fact that you think it was,
just the fact that you think it was a strong case,
thank you. I'll give you plenty of time to respond here.
Do you think that what was done by the defense
lawyers to proctor or the hand on the witness stand
strengthened that strong case or weakened that strong case?
Speaker 4 (14:08):
It just shows the Trooper's character. That's what the show is, Dan,
it shows the troopers character.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
But did the case or strength Did that strengthen the
case or weakened it?
Speaker 4 (14:22):
No, I don't think it's strengthened the strengthened the case.
I think it made it a little you know, weak.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
But the atue I mean, yeah, okay, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (14:30):
The evidence is there. I mean, like I called you
last week on this and my opinion, like I told you,
I think the average is overwhelming for a guilty butt
we got in her. That's all.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Well, I understand that that's your position, and what I'm
saying is the chances of that verdict. That's your opinion. Uh,
others have different opinions, but you have a right to
your And all I'm saying is that what Proctor did
in the way he conducted the investigation, said next messages,
made comments that that that harmed him as a witness
(15:07):
on the witness stand, and he just acknowledged that that
weak in the case. Now because his conduct as a trooper.
If you're if your analysis correct, and I think it is,
that it weaked the case, why would the state police
not terminate him?
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Again, I did say the state police did what they
had to do. On the other hand, I truly believe
that once everything is set and done, because remember the
unions are powerful. Unions are very powerful dand you know
has the one right do and I, in my opinion,
I believe it's going to be overturned and he's gonna
(15:50):
give an option reinstated or or or take a retirement.
Along with the fact pay that we the Tracks band
provide we will, you know, Mark.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
The nice thing about this is that when this is
all resolved, you know, a year or so or whatever
it is from now, you can call me back and
you can say, Dan, I told you back in March,
as a matter of fact, on March nineteenth, twenty twenty five,
and I was exactly right. Or you can call me
back and say, Dan, I overestimated the strength of the
(16:26):
police union on this one. The police union has to
stand behind there. They're members, but I'm not sure. I'm
not sure that this is one that the police. This
is a hill the police union wants to die on. Think.
I think the police union has some work to do
on the members of the police union who were terminated
because they didn't take COVID shots by Charlie Baker. Those
(16:49):
cases are still hanging out there now, four or five
years later, including the case of one female state police
officer whose father died while on the and and she
was fired. I think I think those people are gonna
get their jobs back, in my opinion, but we'll see.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Mark. I love you man.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
Thank you for taking me in, Hey, thank you for
taking my car, Dn.
Speaker 3 (17:12):
You bet you? Thanks for calling in Mark, all right?
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Gonna take a quick break here, We're gonna take the
news and then coming back. I got one line at
six one, seven, nine thirty. I got a couple of
lines at six one, seven, two, five.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
Four to ten thirty.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
I will get you on the year before ten o'clock
because at ten o'clock, ending this discussion, we have a
guest coming in the Israeli console General to New England
who join us, Benny Charoni, talking about what's going on
in the Middle East, what's going on with Israel renewing
attacks on hamas in Gaza. This is not going into
the ten o'clock hour. So if you're sitting there thinking
(17:48):
to yourself, well, I'll wait and see what people say,
we will be moving on at ten o'clock, coming back
on night side.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
You're on night Side with Dan Ray on WZ Boston's News.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
So this was a big deal today. Okay, Massachusetts State
Police trooper who's also detective, a homicide detective fourteen years
Michael Proctor terminated simple as that terminated will how he
he may be a witness in the next trial. That's
what complicates things. It's fascinating. How do you think this?
(18:27):
If you think Karen Reid was being framed. I assume
this only increases your skepticism. If, on the other hand,
you think it was legitimate, this has to shake your
thought about the prosecution's case. Pelvis in Middleton, Pelvis, welcome, How.
Speaker 5 (18:47):
Are you hey, How do you doing tonight?
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Agree?
Speaker 5 (18:51):
So, yeah, no, and at the very least, not only
what he said, his conduct and what he said about her,
throw all that out the window. His total incompetent at
the at the investigation, dropping the ball from the very beginning.
He said from the beginning that this wasn't going to
stick to the homeowner, never went in the house, never
did a thorough investigation, the Sally Port video that's missing.
(19:16):
There's a lot of skepticism going into this number one.
So of course it's going to hurt him and the
prosecution to be called back on the stand after being
completely disgraced and dismantled as a detective because he dropped
the ball from the very beginning. It's a one hundred
percent cover up. I'll let you hit me in the
parking lot at twenty eight miles an hour backing up,
(19:38):
I guarantee you I have broken bones in my body,
and you know the dog bite.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
I missed that.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
Yeah, the tail light, the tail the tail light thing
is is another huge incompetence on their on their part,
the missing Sally Pot sally Port video of the tail
light being smashed out.
Speaker 3 (19:59):
There's no let me play devil Devil's advocate with you
just for a second.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
I agree with most of what you said. But my
understanding and has been confirmed by the defense lawyer Hank Brennan,
who I have a great who's now the prosecutor, by
the way, he said, defense lawyer by trade, who have
a great respect for He basically had set an open
court that any federal investigation, there are all sorts of
rumors about a federal investigation going on, which when you
(20:24):
have a federal investigation, the federal looking at the conduct
of the law enforcement people. So from that perspective, Michael
Proctor should be able to say, you know, no one
has charged him with any sort of a criminal activity.
He's been charged with an inappropriate behavior as a state
police homicide investigator, the head of the homicide unit. So
(20:49):
the fact that they're.
Speaker 5 (20:50):
Still going to they're still going to bring that up,
They're still going to bring up the sally Port video.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Well, they're going to bring all that issue up, right,
But but the fact that if they if apparently there
was a federal investigation of some sort and the federal
investigation has concluded with no charges being brought, well, that
is something that if I were Michael Proctor, because they're
not investigating the defense lawyers, they're not investigating the defense,
would not be investigating the defense team. They probably are
(21:16):
investigating the way that that this prosecution went forward. Now
it wasn't an effective prosecution by virtue of the fact
that we came back with a hung jury, but how.
Speaker 5 (21:28):
It was handled from the start, right by the by
the lead, by the lead investigator, and.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
The point, that's the point.
Speaker 5 (21:38):
If you've got a dead guy in your front yard
with a cocktail glass in his hand, do you think
they're coming in your house? So I'm saying he dropped
his integrity as a cop number one, not only what
he said, defamation, whatever he said, you know, throw all
that out. As a as a character person, you know,
as his person, that's different. But I understand that those
(21:59):
are the actions there that they're actually going off of.
But this definitely, no matter what, putting him back on
the stand is an absolute clown show moving forward.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
But but well, well, I don't know that the prosecutor
will put it back on the stand.
Speaker 5 (22:13):
He's on the witness, he's the lead investigator.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
They have to what, I'm not sure.
Speaker 5 (22:21):
Excuse herself as well because she's in the pocket.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
Well again, you're making allegations of a judge. So that
makes me very uncomfortable. You know, you can't you can
have an.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
Opinion, you don't have anything with that. That's fine, But
he has to be.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
That's gonna be a favorite's back off for a second.
That's your opinion. Okay, it's my show. That's your opinion.
You have nothing to prove with that. You have no
you know, you have your opinion, your observations.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
That's it. You know you can tell me the rich
Ox is going to win the World Series. That's your repeat.
Speaker 4 (22:50):
I went.
Speaker 5 (22:52):
Back to Proctor. Proctor has to come back on the stand.
He's the lead investigator. Of course, he's so sure about that.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
I'm not.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
I'm not so sure about that being I think he's
going to be ripped apart by the defense. Maybe he
will be caught. Okay, but if I were Hank Brennan,
I were the prosecutor, I wouldn't want to see him
in the courtroom at this point because at this point
the defense is going to be asking him all sorts
of questions. Do you still work for the state Police,
you know, Trooper Proctor?
Speaker 6 (23:19):
No?
Speaker 3 (23:19):
I don't. Oh why is that? Did you leave the
department voluntarily?
Speaker 2 (23:24):
No?
Speaker 3 (23:24):
I didn't. You were to let me show you a letter.
Speaker 2 (23:26):
This is a letter from the colonel to you, dated
March nineteenth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Would you read an open court paragraph too?
Speaker 5 (23:33):
I mean, well, I sort of think all of that,
plus the I don't know if you saw the documentary
or whatever they're doing right now is being streamed online too.
I don't think any of that should be being done.
This on the side point, it should not be being done
right now before a second trial, because you're gonna have
a hard pressed time finding and unbiased Jerry at this
point to begin with.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Yeah, but they they may have to what they may
have to do.
Speaker 2 (23:58):
Okay, Sometimes you can take a case and move it
to another jurisdiction. It's not impossible that you can have
cases that you cannot, you know, in panel a jury
of a twelve or sixteen people who have the ability,
you know, the jurors don't have to be blind to
the case, but they have to be able to express
(24:20):
a genuine belief that they can listen to the evidence
and come to a fear. I mean, that's the whole
And what happens is you get a change of venue,
and it's conceivable that the prosecution might at this point
have to move for a change of venue.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
I don't know.
Speaker 5 (24:34):
It's a fascination from the first child that some of
the jurors felt intimidated by the presence of other law
enforcement in the room, and that was part of their conclusion,
part of their nervousness. There was levels of apparent levels
of intimidation that was direct from the lawyers of the
jurors that were involved in the first case.
Speaker 4 (24:53):
I suppose.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I suppose it depends upon what apprehension what but apprehension
was why they were apprehensive. I mean, were they apprehensive
because they felt that the police officers in the courtroom.
You could certainly say to police officers, look, you got
to commit. If you go to command, you count wear
your uniform. They could be motions made on all of
that sort of stuff. Maybe the police were there to
(25:17):
support the O'Keefe family maybe the police were there in
this case to support practical I don't know. I didn't
cover the trial. I know enough about it that I'm
smart enough to know I don't know.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
Everything about it.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
I had my own thoughts, and I've expressed them, and
I'll continue to express them. Pelvis is always great to
hear your voice that much. Have a good one, good night.
Let me get Danielle in Worcester. Danielle, you were next
on nightside. Don't want to make you wait. We'll get
you in here before the break. Go ahead, Danielle.
Speaker 6 (25:46):
Hey, Dan, So you know my passion for this and
my knowledge of this case that I've been following since
day one. I don't think you've followed it very closely
other than just general news.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
No I have.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
I have not read transcripts. I have not watched videotapes.
I have not listened to the points for the clarity
of the audience. Okay, hold on, just so that I
know what you have. But tell me from my audience
so they will understand where you're coming from. You your
belief is that she was framed?
Speaker 3 (26:20):
Correct?
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Absolutely?
Speaker 3 (26:23):
Okay, no, this one. Just want people now.
Speaker 6 (26:27):
When we talked about this, you know the last time
around it that you hadn't followed her real closely, and
judge is judge them by some of your answers just
now to the previous do callers, I can kind of
tell that you had, had you been following them more closely,
you would understand some of the comments that that these
guys are making.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
I believe me, Danielle. I do want to explain to
me the comments that you don't think I understood. Do
you think I don't know what the evidence is of
the Sally point?
Speaker 6 (26:51):
You want this last one that this last guy that
just went to talk about the judge, I'm not going
to love.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
It's the thing, daniel Danielle.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Danielle, bear with me for a second, Okay, all right.
I Am not going to allow anyone to They can
express an opinion if they want to say, in my opinion,
the judge has not been fair to Karen Reid. I'm
like a judge. I will allow that in this court
of conversation. But I'm not going to allow someone to
(27:27):
try to end it as a fact. There is the
difference between saying, in my opinion, I believe this judge
has been unfair. There's a difference between that and saying
this judges in the bag for the prosecution's lawyer.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
Ees, he doesn't know anybody. I mean, some of us
don't know you.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
No, no, no, I'm a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
In my opinion, you could you could tell me anything
in your opinion. But when you say to me, if
you want to say to me on this show, Dan,
the sun rises in the east, you don't have to
qualify that with me as your opinion, because we know that.
But I'm running a show here which wants to try
(28:09):
to be fear to everyone, and sometimes it's a little
bit of like a.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
Law school class that I run.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
Sometimes here I might have an opinion about the judge,
but I am going to express my opinion in a way.
I might think she's a terrific judge. You have no
idea what I think about her. But I don't want
someone to come in and disparage a judge in my
court in what I'm going to call this the court
(28:36):
of public opinion.
Speaker 3 (28:38):
So go ahead and say what you want. Go ahead.
Speaker 6 (28:40):
I think that Brennan probably was you said you have
a great deal of respect on him, and I'm sure
you join others with that same sentiment. But I think
that him taking this case, in my opinion, is going
to put a couple of dents in his halo because
he's not making himself.
Speaker 5 (28:57):
Look very good. He's repeatedly.
Speaker 6 (29:01):
Said false things which appeared to be deliberate and then
backtrack and say, oh, no, no, no, that was a mistake.
I don't mean to say it that way. He openly
blamed the defense for not turning over discovery and that
he got some information from the sets, and then he
had to apologize and say, well, he actually didn't apologize,
he just made a correction said oh, actually it was
a defense that gave it to me. I mean, he's
(29:22):
done some really.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I think, let me say this, I know Hank Brennan
well enough to know that when this is over, whether
he successfully wins the case, meaning he convicts Karen Reid,
or he loses the case, I think people will see
a real trial lawyer, who normally is a defense lawyer,
(29:45):
by the way, acting in his role as a prosecutor.
And I think that he will do a better job
because a lot of the decisions that might have been
made by the prosecution he gets a second look. It's
always easier to play the eighteenth hole if you're the
(30:06):
if you're the second person playing the hole, because you
can watch other people in front of you played it.
Speaker 3 (30:10):
It's the same principle.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
You know.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
Uh, the guy in front of you thinks that he
can he can drive at three hundred yards and avoid
the stand traps. You realize when he hits the ball
and it only goes to sixty, he's in the trap
that maybe you're going to play it a little short
at the trap.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
That's all I'm saying. That's that's all I'm saying.
Speaker 6 (30:28):
You two other quick things. I know you said you
gotta go to break, but it's also important to mention
that it wasn't just the text messages that Practor sent
to number four. Do you know what was the fourth
thing that he was found guilty of? The operating a
crew there?
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Yes, yeah, Well if you if you listen, I read
just so you know, I read verbatim at the beginning
of this hour the four specifications, including the one and
I said trooper. According the the colonel found that Trooper
Proctor consumed alcoholic beverages while eating to her on duty
and then proceeded to operate his department issued cruiser.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
So yeah, and.
Speaker 6 (31:05):
Frankly, I don't think his family is doing anything good
for him going out and crying about his emotional well being.
Because he's a homicide detective. It's not the first death
he's scene. And if he's that emotional and busted up
over and that caused him to do these funny things,
and maybe this isn't the job for him.
Speaker 7 (31:21):
But that's daniel.
Speaker 6 (31:25):
Ing.
Speaker 3 (31:25):
You've got to be really quick because I'm up the.
Speaker 6 (31:28):
Police officers in the courtroom the previous caller, and it
wasn't about uniforms. They couldn't do that. He's talking about
the family of John O'Keeffe and the third party culprits
that that sat with the O'Keeffe family during closing arguments
and stared the jury down, uh and made them feel
very uncomfortable. Brian Albert And again that's.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Again again, that's a subjective allegation on your part.
Speaker 3 (31:57):
Uh. And you sure have.
Speaker 6 (31:59):
Come forward and said that, I mean, that's not well,
that's right.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
If two jurors have come forward and said that, Danielle,
that doesn't make it so. It doesn't make it so.
I'm just telling you that if you want to phrase
it and say to me, well, a couple of the
jurors have said they felt intimidated, and they're on the record.
That's fine, but you got to be I want to
make you a lawyer, Danielle. That's what I want to do.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
All right. I gotta let you go.
Speaker 6 (32:26):
Karen Reid will never be gotta go, Karen go.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
Thanks very much, Danielle, good night. We'll be back on
night Side right after this.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Now back to Dan ray Line from the Window World
night Side Studios on WBZ, the news radio.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
I gave everyone a warning about twenty minutes ago that
you had to get in early. Now we have an
abundance of callers. All of you are not going to
get in. Those of you who I am going to
call on. If you want to be brief and help
other people who called in late, you want to do that,
that's very fine, but I'm not rushing anybody.
Speaker 7 (33:01):
And Nick go right ahead and next to the night said, Hey, Dan,
how you doing.
Speaker 4 (33:06):
I got two quick questions for you. I know you're
a lawyer. Don't make this real quick.
Speaker 7 (33:11):
You said, the defense will not bring procteron. A prosecutor
would not bring procteron is a witness. But what's stopping
the defense from calling him is a witness.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Nothing could, nothing would stop the defense from calling him
as a witness. But I don't think that his appearance
of the witness stand would be of any help to
the prosecution.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
We'll see what happens.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
I mean, you could argue, but I think that you
could argue, what's that.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
What I said?
Speaker 7 (33:38):
The defense would want him on the stand, yes, right,
right right.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
The prosecution also might say, well, we got to put
him on the stand, and we got to clean him up,
and we got to clean him up by by by
getting it out in front of the jury that yeah,
he was terminated.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
That's a strategy that might be used.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
There'll be a tough decision for for Brendan to deal with.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
What's your second question?
Speaker 7 (33:58):
My second question is it men in Massachusetts have a
case we tried with the same judge, she become the
judge of the cases.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
It's very common.
Speaker 2 (34:07):
It's very common unless unless unless the judge either decides
to recuse him or herself, or if there's a motion made.
If one party of the prosecution defense feels the judge
was un fear in the first case and they want
to risk making a motion to recuse, they can that's
(34:27):
possible as well.
Speaker 3 (34:29):
But uh, she she very clearly wants to sit wants
to see this trial to the to the end.
Speaker 7 (34:33):
I think so, And I'll leave on his statement. The
Albutt and McCabe's if they're not guilty, they made they're
doing everything to make themselves look guilty. In my opinion, Well.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
Okay, in your opinion, I'm glad. I'm glad you added
that in your opinion. That's your that's a good that's
a good lesson.
Speaker 3 (34:49):
Thanks make thank you, good night, all.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Have a great night. Joe and revered Joe. Gonna get
you in. Maybe get one more in.
Speaker 4 (34:55):
We'll see, go ahead, Joe, thank you, you know, just
real quick.
Speaker 8 (35:02):
I think the way that was definitely set up, there's
too much stuff going on. Policemen losing their licenses, phones,
I mean stuff like that, like couldn't find them, they
lost them. A second trial. I think it's terrible. And
I believe there were a lot of marketings on that
officer that died that weren't related to a car accident.
(35:26):
So like people know in that house what happened. Why
aren't they bringing more people in from that house and
asking them what happened that night, Joe.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
I'm sure that's part of the investigation and we will
see how it plays out the second time.
Speaker 8 (35:45):
Yeah, I just think I haven't I've been following it,
and I haven't seen a lot of people that were
at that party that they've actually questioned.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
Some of them who were at that party were on
the witness stand during the first trial, and I'm sure
some of them be also on the on the wood
stand dur in the second drop.
Speaker 3 (36:02):
Thank you, Joe.
Speaker 8 (36:05):
Okay, jan good.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
Night, Karen. I'm going to give you thirty seconds. Okay,
there's a couple other callers who may not make it.
I'll give you thirty seconds. Go ahead, Karen.
Speaker 6 (36:15):
Hi.
Speaker 4 (36:15):
Dan, So, I'm just wondering quick question.
Speaker 5 (36:17):
I apologize if you already answer this. What happens to
Michael Proctor's other cases, They're.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Going to be impacted. It will depend upon what they
will find out in other cases. If he if he
all all of his his reputation as an investigator, I'm
sure will be invoked by defense lawyers and other cases,
and what if sort of an impact that will have
on the jury in those cases will obviously be It
(36:43):
will be determined. But that's a great question. Karen, wish
gave you more time. Wish you called earlier because.
Speaker 5 (36:48):
That was the best.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Give you the best question of the night. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (36:51):
We are changing topics and we are going to talk
about Israel, the war with hamas with the.
Speaker 4 (37:00):
UH.
Speaker 2 (37:03):
My guest schedule is the Consul General to New England,
the Israeli Consul General to New England, Benny Sharoni. We
will join with him and calls are invited if you
want to get on dial now, come on back on Nightside.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!