June 17, 2025 • 40 mins
On the second full day of jury deliberations in the Karen Read trial, the jury came back and asked the judge presiding over the trial, Judge Beverly Cannone, four questions related to evidence and charges. The first question was about the time frame for the OUI charge. The second asked if Read's interviews are evidence and how they can be considered. The third question asked for clarity for convicting on a lesser charge. Then the fourth question was, "If we find not guilty on two charges but can't agree on one charge, is it a hung jury on all three charges or just one charge?" to which Judge Cannone said she could not answer.
Stay tuned in to WBZ NewsRadio 1030 with the IHeart Radio app, online, in your car, or on your favorite listening device for the latest update on this developing story!
Now you can leave feedback as you listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the FREE iHeart Radio app! Just click on the microphone icon in the app, and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!
Stay tuned in to WBZ NewsRadio 1030 with the IHeart Radio app, online, in your car, or on your favorite listening device for the latest update on this developing story!
Now you can leave feedback as you listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the FREE iHeart Radio app! Just click on the microphone icon in the app, and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
It's nice side with Dan Ray. I'm going Boston's niche radio.
Dan Watkins, Is Dan Watkins still in the newsroom? Still here?
What's going on?
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Dan?
Speaker 1 (00:12):
How come we cot get guys like Brad Marshan.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
I know, Brad marsh and Aj Greyer, Jesper bo Quiz.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
There was like four former Bruins that all handed the
cup to each other right in a row in succession.
Speaker 5 (00:23):
It was a little painful to watch.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Let me tell you. I was rooting for marsh and
I really was same are them you know? I mean
that little ball of hate in a row? Wow? Wow?
Thanks Thanks Dan. Thanks for the update of devas I
mentioned that as well. So Raffie's City five hundred for
the Giants and the Socks are down eight nothing So
(00:46):
oh it's another night. It's another New England night. Thanks
Dan Watkins. As always, we are talking about the Karen
Reid trial and it's getting a little spirited, which is okay,
and I think some of you would taken a little personally.
Don't take it personally, okay. I want to hear your viewpoints,
but when you start telling me stuff that I haven't
(01:06):
heard about in the trial, I get a little worried
because the implication of what John from Boston was saying
that this Boston police officer who apparently did have someone
what would seem to be inconsistent testimony, but she claimed
that she had incorrectly recalled something and then walked up
(01:28):
the stairs to meet the commissioner's office. I've criticized Michael Cox,
but I don't think Michael Cox would be involved in
and he's the police commissioner. So I do not want
anybody's name on this program disparaged unfairly. That's one of
the things. I'm pretty cognizant of slander laws and defamation laws.
(01:49):
So you know, police, I know all of you are
you know, probably better lawyers than I am, and probably
have much more experience in courtrooms than I do, which
is fine not but again, if we're having a conversation, uh,
and I challenge you on the conversation. That's what I do.
That's what my job is. I'm not supposed to sit
here like a potted plant and say, well, John, you're
(02:12):
on the ear. You go right ahead for five minutes
and let me let me listen to your wisdoms. That's
not what I'm doing. That's not the way I conduct
the show, and I'm surprised that John doesn't know that
because John is a regular call it. Anyway, let's continue
right now. We're going to pick the pace up here
and to go to Sheila in Boston. Sheila, you are
next on Nightside. Welcome.
Speaker 6 (02:34):
Oh well, hello, thank you for taking my car.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Oh hello, Shela.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
My question.
Speaker 7 (02:40):
You know, I'm not an expert at all.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
Well, we've had enough experts. We've had a lot of
experts tonight ahead, right, But.
Speaker 7 (02:50):
My thing is being able to like, why haven't they
had another judge on the second time around here?
Speaker 5 (03:01):
Why wasn't another judge pick?
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Well, first of all, it's not required if the judge
wants to recuse him herself, himself or herself and say, gee,
I sat in the first trial and I would prefer
to to allow a second judge to sit here. I
don't think that there was a recusal motion made by
(03:27):
the defense. If the defense thought that the judge was
inherently unfair, they could make a recusal motion at any point. So,
to the best of my knowledge, no such motion was made,
and that the judge basically, no judge knows the case
better than the current judge. I think that I criticized
(03:48):
the judge a year ago. I felt that, in my opinion,
just my opinion, that she should have inquired of the
jury when they came back and said that they were
that they were hung, that she should have said you
are you deadlocked on all three counts or on you
know lesser, And she never asked that question. And then
(04:10):
the jurors came forward remember last July, and talked to
defense lawyers and said, we were pretty much ready to
acquit her on one in three and we were only
hung up on two. And that might be the same
situation that the judge might face tomorrow or the next day.
And if that happens, it will be interesting if she
(04:32):
asked the question. It would be really Let's say the
jury comes back and says we're hung. If she were
to dismiss the jury and say, okay, thank you for
your service, I'll talk to you know, back in the
jury room, which most judges do, that would be really
interesting because I would hope that she would say to
this jury, when you tell me that you're hung, mister Foreman,
(04:54):
are you hung on all three counts? Are you deadlocked
on all three counts? Or do you have a consensus
or an agreement on one or more of the counts.
Speaker 6 (05:04):
You can't make that same mistake twice, I would hope.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
I would hope not, because there's nothing wrong with the
jury deciding two, you know, two counts as being acquittal
and the other is being deadlocked. Our two counts being
guilty or one count being guilty in one count being acquittal, right,
And I think I think the jury today was a
(05:27):
little concerned about that too.
Speaker 6 (05:30):
And I'm just getting out of work really, so I
don't even know too much. I just heard a little
bit saying what they they had questions and there were
four questions.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, we went we went over those earlier. There were
four questions that No, that's okay, and you'll you'll read
about them, you know, tomorrow in the newspaper. I have
them here. I can run them pretty quickly by you
just said. There are others I'm sure tonight who have
not heard them. The first question was a question of
the timing of the OUI charge, whether or not what
(06:02):
was the time frame for the the operating under the
influence charge, because remember, the accident occurred or the event
occurred sometime around I guess twelve thirty quarter or one,
and then she drove home and woke up the next
day at five thirty and was then back on the scene.
The second one was more direct and said the video
(06:25):
clips of Karen's interviews evidence and how could we consider them?
And the judge answered that one pretty clearly that for
question two, yeah, the videos are evidence. Weigh the defended
statements as you would any other piece of evidence. On
that question one, which was a more confusing question, the
judge sort of demurred on it and said you are
(06:47):
the fact finder and really didn't answer the question. And
on our question three, which was does guilty on a
subject charge mean guilty on the overall charge? And what
they meant by that is that she's facing three three charges,
(07:08):
including manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor. However,
there are lesser included charges, which would be involuntary manslaughter,
which is different from manslaughter while operating a a motor
vehicle homicide charge which would not include any recommendation, no
(07:33):
finding on alcohol, or operating under the influence. So those
are the three questions, and her response on that one
was a guilty vote on a subordinate charge to o Ui,
manslaughter makes her guilty of the primary charge. They asked
that question and the judge said, let me see here
(07:59):
can degrees.
Speaker 5 (08:02):
That.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Actually, I don't have the I don't have her answer
here a question three, she says guilty. Vote on a
subordinate charge to ouy, manslaughter makes her guilty of the
primary charge. Jackson said the answer is no, obviously and
suggest that the new verdict slip. She I think she
agreed with Jackson on that. So the kid's confusing, doesn't
(08:24):
it doesn't it?
Speaker 7 (08:26):
And thank you so much.
Speaker 6 (08:27):
I feel so special privileged here getting all that updated information.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
Well, there was a lot of other people who probably
haven't heard the entire show either. Sheila, thank you so much.
Thank you keep calling it my show. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (08:40):
Thank you, Okay, I will thanks.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Great night, Good night. We'll take a quick break. Coming
right back on Nightside, Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm
you b Boston's news Radio. Back to the phones we go,
where we're going to go to Michael and Attleborough. Michael
next on Nightside, grow ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:00):
I'm tying Dan, I don't have a charge of Romney
pulled over a half hour ago.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
I'm sorry, man, some of these some of them, yeah.
Speaker 4 (09:06):
Right, hopefully the hopefully the police officers you can't call
them crops. Hopefully they won't pull up and ask me
what I'm doing. They did a few years back.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
That's okay, if they do it, they'll they understand, go
right ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, they buddy ZRs.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
Anyway, you had to throw that in.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
Why why does the judge and why was she allowed
to leave Colin Albert out of it?
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Who?
Speaker 4 (09:31):
By the way, by the way, I believe the foot
edge belonged to him, I think, I think, but whatever, Yeah,
I don't.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Know about that. We understanding is that in the second trial,
the one currently underway, Yeah, just concluded, never brought up
the third party defense, the idea that, okay, that that
anyone else was involved. I think there was a lot
of conversation and testimony in the first trial, but they
(10:01):
decided to take the defense decided to take a different tactic,
which was that, hey, she never hit him. The forensics
in the case are more favorable to us, and let's
not confuse matters. That's what I believe from where I'm sitting,
is there.
Speaker 4 (10:19):
Yeah, Well, that's a ticking. He's a ticking time, but
I'm trying to beat the battery here. I apologize he's
a ticking time.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
I prefer not to slander someone who's not a in
this case because I don't know him. I don't know
if you know him, but I don't know that you
know him. So let's leave him out of it in
terms of good point. But I don't want my station
to be sued for slander.
Speaker 5 (10:45):
Okay, Okay.
Speaker 4 (10:46):
One last thing is I don't see any emotion when
they show oh, Keith Spotty. I see absolutely no emotion
from Karen Reid. Nothing, no wiping tears away, nothing.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
Yeah, I don't think she did. I don't think she
helped herself in those television interviews, which now are the
only in effect testimony from Karen Reid that they're going
to see. Now, maybe maybe the other evidence washes those away,
but yeah, it's it's it's it's one of those cases.
(11:21):
I think that there there isn't you would think that
at some point, maybe when it's over, she'll say I
was devastated. He was the love of my life and
and now he's gone. I had nothing to do with it.
Who knows? You just don't know.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
Okay, Sheila Michael, you too, Thanks for Carlin.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Thanks for your patience. That moves it along a little bit.
Thank you. Next up, Patty on the North Shore. Patty,
you were next on Nightside. Welcome.
Speaker 6 (11:50):
Oh hi, I just wanted to say, I'm quite entertaining
listening to all these people.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Well, that's the whole idea of the show. It it's entertaining,
and maybe it's also a little informative. Maybe it helps
people who haven't had the chance to sit in front
of the TV all day or review the videotapes all night.
Maybe it's gonna help people. That's the whole idea.
Speaker 6 (12:14):
Yeah, but unfortunately they're not telling all the evidence. But anyway,
so the story that the defense want you to believe
is that he went in the house and he had
a fight with his buddies and evidently he died or
the dog bit him and killed him. They dragged the
body and threw it on the front lawn. So Camaron
Reid has her car at her house, and nobody even
(12:38):
knew that John O'Keefe was dead till six in the morning,
six thirty. So Proctor and all the other gangsters went
to her house, cracked her tail light, then went back
to the crime scene and put all the tail light
on the front yard. It's amazing, just amazing. And the
other thing I have to say is I've never seen
(13:01):
a judge give so much leeway to these defense attorneys.
The third thing I have.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
To say, I must tell you I said I thought.
Speaker 6 (13:12):
She was great. Well, I think she's a wonderful judgement.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Well, I'm not making a comment of that, but I
have thought that she's most of her rulings, and this
is just my observation is that she's more a prosecution
prosecutorial inclined judge. I think that the defense lawyers have
battled her much more than the prosecutors have.
Speaker 6 (13:37):
Okay, but I think that she gave on the jury's
slip was quite unusual. She kind of gave them everything
really that they wanted. Jackson. Really, I think she's a
wonderful judge, and how people are bashing her, it's unbelievable.
And also Brennan, Brennan, I think is brilliant. If they
listen to the evidence and listen to everything that you said,
(13:59):
I would find your guilty your second degree murder based
on the evidence.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
How do you how do you come up with I'm
just curious how you come up with that.
Speaker 6 (14:09):
I can't go through all no, we don't have time
right to go off through no no.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
But what I'm saying is second degree murder is the
least likely. Generally, second degree murder is an overcharge here.
I think the prosecution will be very happy if they
got either a manslaughter or an involuntary manslaughter. To get
second degree murder, you have to prove some intention that
she in her mind she backed the car into him intentionally.
(14:38):
The well the defense is saying. The defense is saying,
there's no evidence that her car hit him, that the
car never hit him.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
That's I know.
Speaker 6 (14:50):
But there's so much evidence, you know, Dan, I just
think if you listen to it and try to understand it,
the engineers really are very confusing, and all the witness
so the defense again in paved and naturally they're going
to say what the defense wants them to say. The
other thing I have to say is why don't people
listen to her speaking all her interviews, she admitted could
(15:13):
I have hit him? I clipped this, it's.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
In front of that all that, all those interviews are
in front of the jury, and as a matter of fact,
one of the questions today, uh was the jury asked
whether or not her interviews could be used as evidence,
and the judge said absolutely.
Speaker 6 (15:26):
Yes, yeah, absolutely. And the thing is, she said in
one of the clips, she said, I I clipped him.
Could I have clipped him? I told Yanetti my lawyer.
My lawyer said I'm culpable, So I don't understand him.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
I don't think oh she said that in one of
the clips as well.
Speaker 6 (15:44):
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Well again, I don't know the context. I don't know
the context. I suspect that there's a bigger context to
that statement because I don't think let me finish play it.
Speaker 6 (15:59):
The defense didn't the full clip.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Well, the defense didn't play. The defense didn't play any
of the flips.
Speaker 6 (16:06):
They know why because yeah, it makes it culpable. The
other one thing because you know, I don't want to
hold it up and everybody.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Yeah, well, by the way, I don't think I think
that if they had that particular statement. Again, you're you're
throwing a lot of stuff at me here and I'm
feeling like I'm back playing goal. And I don't think
that that if the prosecution had her saying oh yeah,
my lawyer told me that I was culpable and that
I had hit him. Uh, that's what I think I
(16:37):
heard you say. I kind of imagine that they would
not have put that in the end.
Speaker 6 (16:42):
They did, because I watched it. They did. I'm not
you know the clip one of the clips you said
originally Brennan had shown shown it and she said, you know,
she was talking a lot and I shouldn't have been
driving on the highway because I had a lot to
She's saying all this, and then she.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Said, well, if you're accurate, if you're accurate, Patty, Okay, no,
but if you're accurate, I want you and when the
verdict comes in, I want you to call and take
a victory lap because you obviously have nailed it. Because
if you're accurate, she's going down on all three.
Speaker 6 (17:20):
Yeah, but they're not watch it. Well, I hope so.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Well. I'm just telling you that your interpretation would come
back as a slim dunk conviction, and I'm not sure
that's what's going to happen. Daddy. I got to run here.
I got to take one morning for the break. Patty.
We've done seven minutes. We've done seven minutes, and I
know you waited a long time, but I get other people.
The next callers has waited thirty eight minutes, so I
have to be fair to everyone. So you got a
(17:45):
lot in and I thank you for your call. Okay,
thank you very much, appreciate it. Next up is Christine. Christine,
go right ahead and get you in before the news here,
go ahead, Christine.
Speaker 7 (17:56):
How you doing, Dan?
Speaker 1 (17:57):
I'm pretty I feel like a in a fifteen round
fight tonight. But that's okay.
Speaker 7 (18:03):
I know that I might have no right to say
that to you.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
No big deal. You know, we believe in freedom of speech.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Okay, go ahead, that's beyond the belt, come on, you know, yeah,
no problem. I had a question her, Oh U want level?
Did they do it? Did they do a breathalyzer with her?
Speaker 1 (18:25):
I'm not sure if it was a breathalyzer or if
it was a blood alcohol content to be honest with you,
but they did something with her, uh at nine, at
about quarter of nine, and I think that they came
back with a either a BAC level UH pretty high.
And if you believe that that you know by time,
(18:49):
you know if you have let's say you have five
drinks in an hour and all of a sudden, those
five drinks have built your alcohol level up let's say
too and and normally what they'll say is that a
mixed drink or a glass of wine or beer will
kick you up point oh two. So if you have
two beers real, yeah, it depends upon your size, it
(19:13):
depends upon your you know your your genetics and and
and you're all of the you know your how much
alcohol you can absorb. But what they're saying is, on average,
if let's say you drink four beers in an hour
or four glasses of wine in an hour, what they
will tell you. The experts will tell you that for
(19:33):
every drink, assuming it's a regular sized drink, your your
alcohol level is gonna go up point oh two. So
let's assume you have four beers, so you go up
point oh two times four. Now you're at point oh eight.
But your body will will in an hour take one
of those beers away. So even though you have four
(19:54):
beers in an hour, you're gonna be point oh six.
That's what the experts will tell you. Okay, Now, if
let's say you start drinking at midnight and you drink
until three o'clock in the morning, and then you leave
the bar and you're caught driving at four and they
(20:16):
do a breathalyzer on you, and you come back at
let's say, at four o'clock at zero point one six,
They're going to be able to work that back and say, well,
probably you know by three o'clock you were zero point
one eight, do you know? I mean, they have ways
(20:36):
in which they can try to figure the mathematics of it,
is all I'm trying to sadier, Christine.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
Is it true that I heard she had nine drinks
like twin bars?
Speaker 1 (20:47):
I think that some of the evidence suggested that at
the bar before the party she had been given seven drinks.
But but she said, she said that on all of
those drinks she only took one or two SIPs. So
if you if you serve seven drinks and you only
take one or two SIPs, if that's the truth, and
(21:09):
there was a video cam, so they probably had some
video cam evidence of that, you could make the argument
that I might have had been served seven drinks, paid
for seven drinks, but I didn't drain seven drinks. I
drank the equivalent of a couple of SIPs here, a
couple of SIPs there, a couple of SIPs here three SIPs. Here,
I drank the equivalent of one or two drinks, even
(21:29):
though I paid for seven.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
Right.
Speaker 7 (21:32):
Wow, that's incredible. Yeah, are those are those bars? Are
they gonna take any disciplinary action if, like with all
of this too, they should.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
I don't know. I don't know. If they're waiting for
the conclusion of the trial, they could potentially if the
argument is in the civil case. I believe there's a
civil case filed against her. I believe the o'key family. Uh,
maybe even even on behalf of the children that he
(22:05):
had adopted. Uh, it's conceivable that obviously the bars have insurance.
The Bars have what's called deep pockets. She may not
have deep pockets at this point, so they may take
her in and enjoy the bars as the Bars as
co defendants if the evidence suggests that they overserved her,
like in any case, YEA, all good questions. Christine enjoyed it,
(22:30):
enjoyed The conversation was yours was one of the more
pleasant conversations of the night, as it always is.
Speaker 7 (22:37):
What's your opinion about it?
Speaker 1 (22:40):
I think she I don't think it's a I don't
think it's a second agree murder case. I think that
that the I don't think it's likely that the jury
will come back in and quit her of everything because
there is a man who lost his life. John O'Keefe.
I I suspect there will be some conviction, but on
(23:05):
a lesser charge.
Speaker 7 (23:06):
If I had to make a guess, I think it's
going to face the Uy. I think that's what it's
all going to come down to.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Yeah. And if that is true, if it is oh
Ui serious case, but in the context of the charges
he was facing, that's a win for the defense.
Speaker 7 (23:21):
Yeah. And I don't know. And they said them about
if they were a hung jewelry, what could happen or something.
I was like, what, there we go again?
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Yeah, I hope not. I mean because I think there's
a lot of fatigue with the case, and that then
is a to put her on trial a third time
in the same case, but again because because there is
a there's a there's a dead person here as a
person who lost their life, and we can't forget that
when you think about it. I watched your dad today
(23:52):
and I thought to myself, well, can you imagine if
that's one of your children who we've all made mistakes
in our lives than anybody who doesn't admit it hasn't
really lived a normal life. I mean there are some
people who I guess, you know, go to the convent
when they're fourteen and they never emerge or whatever. But no,
there's we've all done dumb things. And I'll bet if
(24:14):
she had that night to do over again, uh, she would,
she would be more than happy to have that night
to do over again. Thanks Christine. I got to run.
Thank you so much, oh so much.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
People.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
No, no, no, no, I fight back, but I'd like
to fight back fairly.
Speaker 7 (24:30):
Okay, that what to say? What that might say? That
that was still ow's a belt?
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Yeah, well that's that's fine. I'll stand on on how
I conduct my program. And I appreciate your support. Thanks Christine,
Thank you much. You're greatfull I you too. Good night
six one seven four ten thirty one line there and
six one seven nine three one ten thirty. If you've
been dialing feverishly for the last couple of hours, now's
the time to dial and I can get you in
(24:57):
and I get you on before midnight for sure. I'm
back on Nightside. You're on Nightside with Dan Ray on
Boston's news radio. Okay, let's keep rolling trying to pick
it up a little bit here, Dan, let's go to
Mike and Lawrence. Mike, you were next on Nights. I
appreciate your call. Go right ahead, Mike. All right, we're
gonna put Mike on hold and we'll get back to
(25:19):
him in a moment. In the meantime, we'll go to
Bob and Cambridge. Bob, you're next on Nightside.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
Go right ahead, Hi, Dan, thanks for taking the call.
Good show tonight. I'm gonna make this quick.
Speaker 4 (25:29):
I don't know.
Speaker 5 (25:30):
I think it's.
Speaker 3 (25:31):
Involved in this Karen Marie case. Is a gentleman from Cambridge,
mass named Brian Higgins. How is he involved in this?
I thought he was involved in first trial or something.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Yeah, I think that he again, if I if my
memory serves, I think he's an ATF officer who was friends.
He may live in Canton or whatever, and he's friends
of the I think the family where the party was
being held. Yeah. But but again, the defense has kind
(26:04):
of walked away from that that defense strategy of saying
that they basically have said they've tried to simplify their
case a little bit and not they have not used
that sort of third party defense. It was a third
party that did it, not our client, and that would
have got his name mentioned, I think a little bit.
(26:26):
But again I've I'm a little uncomfortable with that because
I don't know all of the allegations and I've heard them,
but you know it, you know, unless it's really out
there on the public record, I just as soon stay
away from it, frankly, unless you have something.
Speaker 3 (26:47):
Well, I can say something, but I don't want to
sland the noble or anything.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
But that's what I'm saying. I mean, you say it
and I allow it in and and if it's not true,
these people maybe public figures, but if you just gotta
be careful in my in my opinion, at least here
on the radio. I mean, you can talk about theory
is or what thing might have happened, but you know,
(27:14):
I mean it just we're getting into kind of choppy
waters here when you when you bring.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
Okay, let me say this. If it's not right, I'll
apologize now, Bryan Higgins, Bob.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
You know, look, how about if I called the show
and said, hey, you know that guy, Bob and Cambridge
and I got your last name and I said that
about you? What was you think you know, I mean,
we'd in the street. That's one of those things if
you said to me, if you said to me, well,
you know, Donald Trump got impeached twice, that's a fact.
(27:52):
It's not a nice thing. Probably it's not that it's
something he wears for a badge of honor. But but
when when it's when you say word in the street,
how do you quantify word on the street? You know,
two guys. Yeah, and I'm just talking to you more
now as a lawyer as opposed to a talk show host.
So anyway, I appreciate you calling, and we'll talk again.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
One of the quick things.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Yes, Victoria Slanders, go ahead, go ahead.
Speaker 5 (28:22):
I hope it ain't gonna be. I hope it's not
gonna be. The only reason why I said what I
said is because.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
No, please don't go there. No, do not go there,
because at that point, now you're going to try to
slip it in. I'm the judge here, so it's it's irrelevant, immaterial.
Uh and uh, yeah, it's not allowed, simple as that.
I thought you were going to talk about something different.
But the only reason I said it was because no,
(28:48):
Thanks Bob, I appreciate it very much. Okay, folks, it's
not Sometimes I have to be a judge and jury.
Here Billy and braintreet Billy, you're next on night side,
Glad Billy.
Speaker 5 (29:02):
Hey Dan, how are you doing? First time caller? Welcome
to you all the time, you get a great show.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
Got to give you a ride of the clause is
the first time caller? Okake her right ahead, all.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
Right, I'll take it. Thank you real quick. Once I'm
done telling you, you'll never have to discuss this again.
I got all the answers.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
Then, I'm sure you do. I'm sure you go ahead.
Speaker 5 (29:25):
Yeah, okay. So here's what happens. They're at the bar,
they're drinking. She gets buzzed up. Uh, these little pocket lots.
She's very tight. Squeeze she's trying to get out. Uh,
you know, you don't have to slam into something to
break a tail light. You can very lightly press it
into a telephone pole. Whatever may be right breaks the
(29:50):
tail light on her way out, she drives into the house.
She pulls up out front. Maybe she hits the maybe
ships the rock bump something, some of the tail like
balls off, some of this left on there. He gets
out of the car, shuts the door, maybe a little
more tail like, balls out. He goes up to the house.
(30:13):
At some point he encounters the dog. Now the dog
didn't like him.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
Yeah, but but here's the deal. Here's the deal, Billy, Billy, Billy,
we've heard that. That's not part in my opinion, that's
not part of what is being said in this trial.
That was mentioned prominently in the first trial. So would
you would you're going to suggest the dog thing, know
(30:38):
what I'm saying. You're going to suggest to me, did
he go in the house or did he not go
in the house.
Speaker 5 (30:43):
He did not go into the house.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
Okay, so you've got a different theory. Your theory is
that the dog didn't like him. Why did dog like him?
Speaker 5 (30:52):
I don't know that I've heard that.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Have you talked to the dog?
Speaker 5 (30:59):
I wish I couldn't.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
We could put the dog in the witness stand. Okay, So,
so the dog didn't like it. The dog snapped at him.
Then what happened?
Speaker 5 (31:07):
Snapped at him, jumped on him. It's icy, it's snowing. Yeah,
his feet of wet. Maybe he's in the garage. He
hits his head. The jog dog jumps on and he
hits his head. On the set of brick steps. Okay,
so the dog, the wound expert says that what he
hit was long, straight, and irregular. That describes brick steps.
Speaker 1 (31:28):
Okay, right, so the dog should.
Speaker 5 (31:31):
Have jumps up. He's gonna be He's gonna get away
from the dog. He gets away from the dog. He says,
he's holding his head. He says, maybe Karen's still out there.
He goes running down there, wor staying for a person
who's bleeding out, Yeah, to be running. He gets down there.
By the time he gets to the edge of the lawn,
he blacks out. She never sees any of this. She's
(31:53):
she just pulls away and just went home with it.
Where there a broken tail.
Speaker 1 (31:57):
Maybe maybe we indict the dog. I don't know, no
one I will say this. I gotta give it to
you for creativity. I gotta give it to you for
you win the Creativity Award of the Night built being
a wise guy when I say that. But that's the truth,
all right. Thanks Bill, I appreciate your call. Thank you
very much. You did it well. You did it well,
(32:20):
my friend. You did it well, and you did you
did not the fame or slander any human being. You
may have slandered the dog, but I.
Speaker 5 (32:29):
He caught sue us.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
Okay, thanks Bill, talk to you later. Good night. All right,
we'll take a quick break. We're coming right back on
night side. Uh. You know, I I got two lined up.
I can take another one or two if you want.
Six one, seven, two, five, four, ten thirty or six
one seven, nine three, one ten thirty. Gary and Dan
back on Nightside. I hope Dan is not Mike. If
(32:54):
we had Mike from Lawrence when we lost him. We'll
figure that that out of the moment. Coming back on nightside.
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on.
Speaker 4 (33:04):
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
All right, let's go to Gary in Foxboro, home with
the New England Patriots. Hey, Gary, welcome, How are you? Gary?
Are you there? We'll put Gary in hold and we'll
go to Kathy and Wilmington. Kathy welcome, How are you?
Speaker 8 (33:21):
I'm good, Thank you? How are you Dan?
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Well? I'm delighted to hear your voice. For some reason,
we've had some people tonight at the end here, we
had Mike from Lawrence. He left. I think they've had
a power outage in Lawrence. Because we had Mike from
Lawrence and then Dan from Lawrence and Gary from Fox
was Gary back there, Robert Hill. Oh good, Okay, go ahead, Kathy,
you're next, go right ahead.
Speaker 8 (33:44):
Oh I think that he did go in the house, Okay.
And I mean, I just hope in the end, regardless
of what happens, that justice is found for him.
Speaker 1 (33:58):
That's a great instinct. I would hope so too, because
obviously a life has been lost, and we all would
like to see that. I would hope we all would
like to see the truth come out.
Speaker 8 (34:10):
Yes, I mean, and I was wondering also about the bar.
I was glad the woman asked that question because I
was really curious about that if they were going to
be held in some way liable, if they did overserve.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Yeah, well that's always going to be a question. Bartenders
realize that they have to shut people off. Obviously, bartenders
at busy bars can get a little lazy. And look,
they have these laws that are on the books which
make the bar potentially liable. They're commercial enterprises. I would
hope that if you had a bar, you're paying some
(34:44):
money somewhere to someone to make sure you have insurance,
just like if you have if you own a home,
you need to have some home insurance. What happens if
the mailman's will walking up the step someday or walking
up the walk and it's not shovel and he falls
or something. Yeah, you get it's it's part of our
(35:04):
litigious society.
Speaker 8 (35:07):
Yes, And just the only thing that blows my mind
is that nobody come out of their houses.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
Well, that bothers me a lot, because you would think
that they would see the activity. It also bothers me
that apparently the police did not go up to the
house and say, hey, anybody hear anything, we got a
we got a dead guy out on the front lawn here,
or you know, do you have a do you have
a home video camera by any chance?
Speaker 8 (35:30):
Right, my first instinct considering it was like Jen McCabe's sister,
I would have ran to that house. I would have
went right past John and ran to see if my
sister and her husband and everybody was okay.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
Yeah. Again, the the inter relationships, you almost got to
have a scorecard either's covered every day or or a
scorecard to keep who's related to whom and what relate
you know, what relationships and what is a former relationship
and all of that. It's tough. It's tough. You gotta
gotta can't tell the players with that without a scorecard.
Speaker 8 (36:07):
Thank exactly. I do think the defense though, I do
think the defense did do well misproving their fairy.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
Well, we will find out, I assume within the next
day or so. Uh, and we'll have it for you.
We'll talk about it tomorrow night if it comes down,
that's for sure. Thank you, Kathy. Appreciate your call. Thanks
very much for calling.
Speaker 8 (36:27):
You have a great night.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
You ta appreciate it. All right. We're gonna go to
Gary and Foxborough. Gary, I hope you're there. How are you?
I'm here?
Speaker 2 (36:35):
Yeah, Man Dan retired police officer out of Foxboro. I've
been a canine officer, done homicide.
Speaker 1 (36:43):
Did you know my pal Did you know my pelt
Tom Kareem?
Speaker 2 (36:46):
Oh yeah absolutely. I worked with him great in the
in the eighties and nineties.
Speaker 1 (36:52):
Yeah, Tommy and I, Tommy and I grew up together.
Oh yeah, he's a good athlete, good ballplayer.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
Yeah. Absolutely, don't forget.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
He's Irish, absolutely well, you know his his family. He
came from the Karins. They had a Karine on the
nineteen sixty Olympic hockey team, which was like a relation
of his so Bobby Billy and Bobby Karane. They were.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
He talked highly about about hockey and on the department
he was one of the motorcycle guys.
Speaker 1 (37:27):
I know.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Any way, I just wanted to, you.
Speaker 1 (37:29):
Know, by the way, not to take your time. But
I hope everything's as far as you know. I'm sure
Thom's retired at this point, but I hope everything's going well.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
Yeah, yeah, it is absolutely okay. I was going on
work in security and I listened to your show, and
I think the officers could have done things differently. I
think they could have done things better, But I don't
think in general it was wrong. I think it's winter,
it's a storm. They show up, they believe they've got,
(38:00):
you know, an injured person they've got to take care of.
That's the priority. You're not likely to do a canvas
in the neighborhood at twelve thirty one o'clock in the morning.
You can always do it after No, they did.
Speaker 1 (38:10):
They didn't show up, and they weren't showing up until
six o'clock in the morning. His body wasn't found until
right five thirty quarter six, so the police are there.
I just think I'm not I'm pretty pro police. I
have family members, including my brother who worked at the
Foxboro Barracks for many years.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
Yeah, I'm not saying that they couldn't have done more,
but I believe her statements kind of speak highly of it.
And it is not uncommon for people to be drinking
late at night and driving around. She didn't want to
go into the house. He probably wanted to go to
the party. They had some argument about that, yep, But
it wouldn't be hard for him to step out, slip
(38:52):
her to hit him and he falls. I think she
loved him. I don't think there was any intention that
she wanted to hurt of her kill him. When people
are drunk, things happen, Accidents happen, sometimes people die as
a result of it. So you've got involuntary manslaughter on
the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Speaker 1 (39:13):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
Think it's a pretty simple case.
Speaker 1 (39:15):
Well, let's see what the jury comes in. I'm rushing
the old because I got about fifteen seconds left that
I got to. Let you go do your favorite Gary
call again. I enjoyed the call. And if you see
Tommy Crane, say hi for me.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
Okay, I will take care now.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
Thanks, Thanks you I appreciate it all right, done for
the night. Great job Rob is always great job to
Marita back today, was actually back yesterday. I did mention
Julie Town last night, who was a wonderful companion with
us on Saturday at the Franklin Park Zoo. Julie, I'm
glad you heard it last night. I hope you heard
again tonight. All dogs, this is for you, Julie. All dogs,
(39:49):
all cats, all pets go to heaven. That's my pal
Charlie Rays, who passed fifteen years agoing forever. That's why
your pets are her past. They loved you and you
love them. I do believe you're going to see them again.
We will see you again tomorrow night. And I'm sure
that Julie's bunny rabbits are up there as well. Thanks everybody.
I'm on night side Facebook in just a moment. We'll
see you tomorrow night
It's nice side with Dan Ray. I'm going Boston's niche radio.
Dan Watkins, Is Dan Watkins still in the newsroom? Still here?
What's going on?
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Dan?
Speaker 1 (00:12):
How come we cot get guys like Brad Marshan.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
I know, Brad marsh and Aj Greyer, Jesper bo Quiz.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
There was like four former Bruins that all handed the
cup to each other right in a row in succession.
Speaker 5 (00:23):
It was a little painful to watch.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Let me tell you. I was rooting for marsh and
I really was same are them you know? I mean
that little ball of hate in a row? Wow? Wow?
Thanks Thanks Dan. Thanks for the update of devas I
mentioned that as well. So Raffie's City five hundred for
the Giants and the Socks are down eight nothing So
(00:46):
oh it's another night. It's another New England night. Thanks
Dan Watkins. As always, we are talking about the Karen
Reid trial and it's getting a little spirited, which is okay,
and I think some of you would taken a little personally.
Don't take it personally, okay. I want to hear your viewpoints,
but when you start telling me stuff that I haven't
(01:06):
heard about in the trial, I get a little worried
because the implication of what John from Boston was saying
that this Boston police officer who apparently did have someone
what would seem to be inconsistent testimony, but she claimed
that she had incorrectly recalled something and then walked up
(01:28):
the stairs to meet the commissioner's office. I've criticized Michael Cox,
but I don't think Michael Cox would be involved in
and he's the police commissioner. So I do not want
anybody's name on this program disparaged unfairly. That's one of
the things. I'm pretty cognizant of slander laws and defamation laws.
(01:49):
So you know, police, I know all of you are
you know, probably better lawyers than I am, and probably
have much more experience in courtrooms than I do, which
is fine not but again, if we're having a conversation, uh,
and I challenge you on the conversation. That's what I do.
That's what my job is. I'm not supposed to sit
here like a potted plant and say, well, John, you're
(02:12):
on the ear. You go right ahead for five minutes
and let me let me listen to your wisdoms. That's
not what I'm doing. That's not the way I conduct
the show, and I'm surprised that John doesn't know that
because John is a regular call it. Anyway, let's continue
right now. We're going to pick the pace up here
and to go to Sheila in Boston. Sheila, you are
next on Nightside. Welcome.
Speaker 6 (02:34):
Oh well, hello, thank you for taking my car.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Oh hello, Shela.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
My question.
Speaker 7 (02:40):
You know, I'm not an expert at all.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
Well, we've had enough experts. We've had a lot of
experts tonight ahead, right, But.
Speaker 7 (02:50):
My thing is being able to like, why haven't they
had another judge on the second time around here?
Speaker 5 (03:01):
Why wasn't another judge pick?
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Well, first of all, it's not required if the judge
wants to recuse him herself, himself or herself and say, gee,
I sat in the first trial and I would prefer
to to allow a second judge to sit here. I
don't think that there was a recusal motion made by
(03:27):
the defense. If the defense thought that the judge was
inherently unfair, they could make a recusal motion at any point. So,
to the best of my knowledge, no such motion was made,
and that the judge basically, no judge knows the case
better than the current judge. I think that I criticized
(03:48):
the judge a year ago. I felt that, in my opinion,
just my opinion, that she should have inquired of the
jury when they came back and said that they were
that they were hung, that she should have said you
are you deadlocked on all three counts or on you
know lesser, And she never asked that question. And then
(04:10):
the jurors came forward remember last July, and talked to
defense lawyers and said, we were pretty much ready to
acquit her on one in three and we were only
hung up on two. And that might be the same
situation that the judge might face tomorrow or the next day.
And if that happens, it will be interesting if she
(04:32):
asked the question. It would be really Let's say the
jury comes back and says we're hung. If she were
to dismiss the jury and say, okay, thank you for
your service, I'll talk to you know, back in the
jury room, which most judges do, that would be really
interesting because I would hope that she would say to
this jury, when you tell me that you're hung, mister Foreman,
(04:54):
are you hung on all three counts? Are you deadlocked
on all three counts? Or do you have a consensus
or an agreement on one or more of the counts.
Speaker 6 (05:04):
You can't make that same mistake twice, I would hope.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
I would hope not, because there's nothing wrong with the
jury deciding two, you know, two counts as being acquittal
and the other is being deadlocked. Our two counts being
guilty or one count being guilty in one count being acquittal, right,
And I think I think the jury today was a
(05:27):
little concerned about that too.
Speaker 6 (05:30):
And I'm just getting out of work really, so I
don't even know too much. I just heard a little
bit saying what they they had questions and there were
four questions.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, we went we went over those earlier. There were
four questions that No, that's okay, and you'll you'll read
about them, you know, tomorrow in the newspaper. I have
them here. I can run them pretty quickly by you
just said. There are others I'm sure tonight who have
not heard them. The first question was a question of
the timing of the OUI charge, whether or not what
(06:02):
was the time frame for the the operating under the
influence charge, because remember, the accident occurred or the event
occurred sometime around I guess twelve thirty quarter or one,
and then she drove home and woke up the next
day at five thirty and was then back on the scene.
The second one was more direct and said the video
(06:25):
clips of Karen's interviews evidence and how could we consider them?
And the judge answered that one pretty clearly that for
question two, yeah, the videos are evidence. Weigh the defended
statements as you would any other piece of evidence. On
that question one, which was a more confusing question, the
judge sort of demurred on it and said you are
(06:47):
the fact finder and really didn't answer the question. And
on our question three, which was does guilty on a
subject charge mean guilty on the overall charge? And what
they meant by that is that she's facing three three charges,
(07:08):
including manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor. However,
there are lesser included charges, which would be involuntary manslaughter,
which is different from manslaughter while operating a a motor
vehicle homicide charge which would not include any recommendation, no
(07:33):
finding on alcohol, or operating under the influence. So those
are the three questions, and her response on that one
was a guilty vote on a subordinate charge to o Ui,
manslaughter makes her guilty of the primary charge. They asked
that question and the judge said, let me see here
(07:59):
can degrees.
Speaker 5 (08:02):
That.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Actually, I don't have the I don't have her answer
here a question three, she says guilty. Vote on a
subordinate charge to ouy, manslaughter makes her guilty of the
primary charge. Jackson said the answer is no, obviously and
suggest that the new verdict slip. She I think she
agreed with Jackson on that. So the kid's confusing, doesn't
(08:24):
it doesn't it?
Speaker 7 (08:26):
And thank you so much.
Speaker 6 (08:27):
I feel so special privileged here getting all that updated information.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
Well, there was a lot of other people who probably
haven't heard the entire show either. Sheila, thank you so much.
Thank you keep calling it my show. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (08:40):
Thank you, Okay, I will thanks.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Great night, Good night. We'll take a quick break. Coming
right back on Nightside, Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm
you b Boston's news Radio. Back to the phones we go,
where we're going to go to Michael and Attleborough. Michael
next on Nightside, grow ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:00):
I'm tying Dan, I don't have a charge of Romney
pulled over a half hour ago.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
I'm sorry, man, some of these some of them, yeah.
Speaker 4 (09:06):
Right, hopefully the hopefully the police officers you can't call
them crops. Hopefully they won't pull up and ask me
what I'm doing. They did a few years back.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
That's okay, if they do it, they'll they understand, go
right ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, they buddy ZRs.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
Anyway, you had to throw that in.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
Why why does the judge and why was she allowed
to leave Colin Albert out of it?
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Who?
Speaker 4 (09:31):
By the way, by the way, I believe the foot
edge belonged to him, I think, I think, but whatever, Yeah,
I don't.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Know about that. We understanding is that in the second trial,
the one currently underway, Yeah, just concluded, never brought up
the third party defense, the idea that, okay, that that
anyone else was involved. I think there was a lot
of conversation and testimony in the first trial, but they
(10:01):
decided to take the defense decided to take a different tactic,
which was that, hey, she never hit him. The forensics
in the case are more favorable to us, and let's
not confuse matters. That's what I believe from where I'm sitting,
is there.
Speaker 4 (10:19):
Yeah, Well, that's a ticking. He's a ticking time, but
I'm trying to beat the battery here. I apologize he's
a ticking time.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
I prefer not to slander someone who's not a in
this case because I don't know him. I don't know
if you know him, but I don't know that you
know him. So let's leave him out of it in
terms of good point. But I don't want my station
to be sued for slander.
Speaker 5 (10:45):
Okay, Okay.
Speaker 4 (10:46):
One last thing is I don't see any emotion when
they show oh, Keith Spotty. I see absolutely no emotion
from Karen Reid. Nothing, no wiping tears away, nothing.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
Yeah, I don't think she did. I don't think she
helped herself in those television interviews, which now are the
only in effect testimony from Karen Reid that they're going
to see. Now, maybe maybe the other evidence washes those away,
but yeah, it's it's it's it's one of those cases.
(11:21):
I think that there there isn't you would think that
at some point, maybe when it's over, she'll say I
was devastated. He was the love of my life and
and now he's gone. I had nothing to do with it.
Who knows? You just don't know.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
Okay, Sheila Michael, you too, Thanks for Carlin.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Thanks for your patience. That moves it along a little bit.
Thank you. Next up, Patty on the North Shore. Patty,
you were next on Nightside. Welcome.
Speaker 6 (11:50):
Oh hi, I just wanted to say, I'm quite entertaining
listening to all these people.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Well, that's the whole idea of the show. It it's entertaining,
and maybe it's also a little informative. Maybe it helps
people who haven't had the chance to sit in front
of the TV all day or review the videotapes all night.
Maybe it's gonna help people. That's the whole idea.
Speaker 6 (12:14):
Yeah, but unfortunately they're not telling all the evidence. But anyway,
so the story that the defense want you to believe
is that he went in the house and he had
a fight with his buddies and evidently he died or
the dog bit him and killed him. They dragged the
body and threw it on the front lawn. So Camaron
Reid has her car at her house, and nobody even
(12:38):
knew that John O'Keefe was dead till six in the morning,
six thirty. So Proctor and all the other gangsters went
to her house, cracked her tail light, then went back
to the crime scene and put all the tail light
on the front yard. It's amazing, just amazing. And the
other thing I have to say is I've never seen
(13:01):
a judge give so much leeway to these defense attorneys.
The third thing I have.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
To say, I must tell you I said I thought.
Speaker 6 (13:12):
She was great. Well, I think she's a wonderful judgement.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Well, I'm not making a comment of that, but I
have thought that she's most of her rulings, and this
is just my observation is that she's more a prosecution
prosecutorial inclined judge. I think that the defense lawyers have
battled her much more than the prosecutors have.
Speaker 6 (13:37):
Okay, but I think that she gave on the jury's
slip was quite unusual. She kind of gave them everything
really that they wanted. Jackson. Really, I think she's a
wonderful judge, and how people are bashing her, it's unbelievable.
And also Brennan, Brennan, I think is brilliant. If they
listen to the evidence and listen to everything that you said,
(13:59):
I would find your guilty your second degree murder based
on the evidence.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
How do you how do you come up with I'm
just curious how you come up with that.
Speaker 6 (14:09):
I can't go through all no, we don't have time
right to go off through no no.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
But what I'm saying is second degree murder is the
least likely. Generally, second degree murder is an overcharge here.
I think the prosecution will be very happy if they
got either a manslaughter or an involuntary manslaughter. To get
second degree murder, you have to prove some intention that
she in her mind she backed the car into him intentionally.
(14:38):
The well the defense is saying. The defense is saying,
there's no evidence that her car hit him, that the
car never hit him.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
That's I know.
Speaker 6 (14:50):
But there's so much evidence, you know, Dan, I just
think if you listen to it and try to understand it,
the engineers really are very confusing, and all the witness
so the defense again in paved and naturally they're going
to say what the defense wants them to say. The
other thing I have to say is why don't people
listen to her speaking all her interviews, she admitted could
(15:13):
I have hit him? I clipped this, it's.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
In front of that all that, all those interviews are
in front of the jury, and as a matter of fact,
one of the questions today, uh was the jury asked
whether or not her interviews could be used as evidence,
and the judge said absolutely.
Speaker 6 (15:26):
Yes, yeah, absolutely. And the thing is, she said in
one of the clips, she said, I I clipped him.
Could I have clipped him? I told Yanetti my lawyer.
My lawyer said I'm culpable, So I don't understand him.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
I don't think oh she said that in one of
the clips as well.
Speaker 6 (15:44):
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Well again, I don't know the context. I don't know
the context. I suspect that there's a bigger context to
that statement because I don't think let me finish play it.
Speaker 6 (15:59):
The defense didn't the full clip.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Well, the defense didn't play. The defense didn't play any
of the flips.
Speaker 6 (16:06):
They know why because yeah, it makes it culpable. The
other one thing because you know, I don't want to
hold it up and everybody.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Yeah, well, by the way, I don't think I think
that if they had that particular statement. Again, you're you're
throwing a lot of stuff at me here and I'm
feeling like I'm back playing goal. And I don't think
that that if the prosecution had her saying oh yeah,
my lawyer told me that I was culpable and that
I had hit him. Uh, that's what I think I
(16:37):
heard you say. I kind of imagine that they would
not have put that in the end.
Speaker 6 (16:42):
They did, because I watched it. They did. I'm not
you know the clip one of the clips you said
originally Brennan had shown shown it and she said, you know,
she was talking a lot and I shouldn't have been
driving on the highway because I had a lot to
She's saying all this, and then she.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Said, well, if you're accurate, if you're accurate, Patty, Okay, no,
but if you're accurate, I want you and when the
verdict comes in, I want you to call and take
a victory lap because you obviously have nailed it. Because
if you're accurate, she's going down on all three.
Speaker 6 (17:20):
Yeah, but they're not watch it. Well, I hope so.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Well. I'm just telling you that your interpretation would come
back as a slim dunk conviction, and I'm not sure
that's what's going to happen. Daddy. I got to run here.
I got to take one morning for the break. Patty.
We've done seven minutes. We've done seven minutes, and I
know you waited a long time, but I get other people.
The next callers has waited thirty eight minutes, so I
have to be fair to everyone. So you got a
(17:45):
lot in and I thank you for your call. Okay,
thank you very much, appreciate it. Next up is Christine. Christine,
go right ahead and get you in before the news here,
go ahead, Christine.
Speaker 7 (17:56):
How you doing, Dan?
Speaker 1 (17:57):
I'm pretty I feel like a in a fifteen round
fight tonight. But that's okay.
Speaker 7 (18:03):
I know that I might have no right to say
that to you.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
No big deal. You know, we believe in freedom of speech.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Okay, go ahead, that's beyond the belt, come on, you know, yeah,
no problem. I had a question her, Oh U want level?
Did they do it? Did they do a breathalyzer with her?
Speaker 1 (18:25):
I'm not sure if it was a breathalyzer or if
it was a blood alcohol content to be honest with you,
but they did something with her, uh at nine, at
about quarter of nine, and I think that they came
back with a either a BAC level UH pretty high.
And if you believe that that you know by time,
(18:49):
you know if you have let's say you have five
drinks in an hour and all of a sudden, those
five drinks have built your alcohol level up let's say
too and and normally what they'll say is that a
mixed drink or a glass of wine or beer will
kick you up point oh two. So if you have
two beers real, yeah, it depends upon your size, it
(19:13):
depends upon your you know your your genetics and and
and you're all of the you know your how much
alcohol you can absorb. But what they're saying is, on average,
if let's say you drink four beers in an hour
or four glasses of wine in an hour, what they
will tell you. The experts will tell you that for
(19:33):
every drink, assuming it's a regular sized drink, your your
alcohol level is gonna go up point oh two. So
let's assume you have four beers, so you go up
point oh two times four. Now you're at point oh eight.
But your body will will in an hour take one
of those beers away. So even though you have four
(19:54):
beers in an hour, you're gonna be point oh six.
That's what the experts will tell you. Okay, Now, if
let's say you start drinking at midnight and you drink
until three o'clock in the morning, and then you leave
the bar and you're caught driving at four and they
(20:16):
do a breathalyzer on you, and you come back at
let's say, at four o'clock at zero point one six,
They're going to be able to work that back and say, well,
probably you know by three o'clock you were zero point
one eight, do you know? I mean, they have ways
(20:36):
in which they can try to figure the mathematics of it,
is all I'm trying to sadier, Christine.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
Is it true that I heard she had nine drinks
like twin bars?
Speaker 1 (20:47):
I think that some of the evidence suggested that at
the bar before the party she had been given seven drinks.
But but she said, she said that on all of
those drinks she only took one or two SIPs. So
if you if you serve seven drinks and you only
take one or two SIPs, if that's the truth, and
(21:09):
there was a video cam, so they probably had some
video cam evidence of that, you could make the argument
that I might have had been served seven drinks, paid
for seven drinks, but I didn't drain seven drinks. I
drank the equivalent of a couple of SIPs here, a
couple of SIPs there, a couple of SIPs here three SIPs. Here,
I drank the equivalent of one or two drinks, even
(21:29):
though I paid for seven.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
Right.
Speaker 7 (21:32):
Wow, that's incredible. Yeah, are those are those bars? Are
they gonna take any disciplinary action if, like with all
of this too, they should.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
I don't know. I don't know. If they're waiting for
the conclusion of the trial, they could potentially if the
argument is in the civil case. I believe there's a
civil case filed against her. I believe the o'key family. Uh,
maybe even even on behalf of the children that he
(22:05):
had adopted. Uh, it's conceivable that obviously the bars have insurance.
The Bars have what's called deep pockets. She may not
have deep pockets at this point, so they may take
her in and enjoy the bars as the Bars as
co defendants if the evidence suggests that they overserved her,
like in any case, YEA, all good questions. Christine enjoyed it,
(22:30):
enjoyed The conversation was yours was one of the more
pleasant conversations of the night, as it always is.
Speaker 7 (22:37):
What's your opinion about it?
Speaker 1 (22:40):
I think she I don't think it's a I don't
think it's a second agree murder case. I think that
that the I don't think it's likely that the jury
will come back in and quit her of everything because
there is a man who lost his life. John O'Keefe.
I I suspect there will be some conviction, but on
(23:05):
a lesser charge.
Speaker 7 (23:06):
If I had to make a guess, I think it's
going to face the Uy. I think that's what it's
all going to come down to.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Yeah. And if that is true, if it is oh
Ui serious case, but in the context of the charges
he was facing, that's a win for the defense.
Speaker 7 (23:21):
Yeah. And I don't know. And they said them about
if they were a hung jewelry, what could happen or something.
I was like, what, there we go again?
Speaker 1 (23:30):
Yeah, I hope not. I mean because I think there's
a lot of fatigue with the case, and that then
is a to put her on trial a third time
in the same case, but again because because there is
a there's a there's a dead person here as a
person who lost their life, and we can't forget that
when you think about it. I watched your dad today
(23:52):
and I thought to myself, well, can you imagine if
that's one of your children who we've all made mistakes
in our lives than anybody who doesn't admit it hasn't
really lived a normal life. I mean there are some
people who I guess, you know, go to the convent
when they're fourteen and they never emerge or whatever. But no,
there's we've all done dumb things. And I'll bet if
(24:14):
she had that night to do over again, uh, she would,
she would be more than happy to have that night
to do over again. Thanks Christine. I got to run.
Thank you so much, oh so much.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
People.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
No, no, no, no, I fight back, but I'd like
to fight back fairly.
Speaker 7 (24:30):
Okay, that what to say? What that might say? That
that was still ow's a belt?
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Yeah, well that's that's fine. I'll stand on on how
I conduct my program. And I appreciate your support. Thanks Christine,
Thank you much. You're greatfull I you too. Good night
six one seven four ten thirty one line there and
six one seven nine three one ten thirty. If you've
been dialing feverishly for the last couple of hours, now's
the time to dial and I can get you in
(24:57):
and I get you on before midnight for sure. I'm
back on Nightside. You're on Nightside with Dan Ray on
Boston's news radio. Okay, let's keep rolling trying to pick
it up a little bit here, Dan, let's go to
Mike and Lawrence. Mike, you were next on Nights. I
appreciate your call. Go right ahead, Mike. All right, we're
gonna put Mike on hold and we'll get back to
(25:19):
him in a moment. In the meantime, we'll go to
Bob and Cambridge. Bob, you're next on Nightside.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
Go right ahead, Hi, Dan, thanks for taking the call.
Good show tonight. I'm gonna make this quick.
Speaker 4 (25:29):
I don't know.
Speaker 5 (25:30):
I think it's.
Speaker 3 (25:31):
Involved in this Karen Marie case. Is a gentleman from Cambridge,
mass named Brian Higgins. How is he involved in this?
I thought he was involved in first trial or something.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Yeah, I think that he again, if I if my
memory serves, I think he's an ATF officer who was friends.
He may live in Canton or whatever, and he's friends
of the I think the family where the party was
being held. Yeah. But but again, the defense has kind
(26:04):
of walked away from that that defense strategy of saying
that they basically have said they've tried to simplify their
case a little bit and not they have not used
that sort of third party defense. It was a third
party that did it, not our client, and that would
have got his name mentioned, I think a little bit.
(26:26):
But again I've I'm a little uncomfortable with that because
I don't know all of the allegations and I've heard them,
but you know it, you know, unless it's really out
there on the public record, I just as soon stay
away from it, frankly, unless you have something.
Speaker 3 (26:47):
Well, I can say something, but I don't want to
sland the noble or anything.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
But that's what I'm saying. I mean, you say it
and I allow it in and and if it's not true,
these people maybe public figures, but if you just gotta
be careful in my in my opinion, at least here
on the radio. I mean, you can talk about theory
is or what thing might have happened, but you know,
(27:14):
I mean it just we're getting into kind of choppy
waters here when you when you bring.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
Okay, let me say this. If it's not right, I'll
apologize now, Bryan Higgins, Bob.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
You know, look, how about if I called the show
and said, hey, you know that guy, Bob and Cambridge
and I got your last name and I said that
about you? What was you think you know, I mean,
we'd in the street. That's one of those things if
you said to me, if you said to me, well,
you know, Donald Trump got impeached twice, that's a fact.
(27:52):
It's not a nice thing. Probably it's not that it's
something he wears for a badge of honor. But but
when when it's when you say word in the street,
how do you quantify word on the street? You know,
two guys. Yeah, and I'm just talking to you more
now as a lawyer as opposed to a talk show host.
So anyway, I appreciate you calling, and we'll talk again.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
One of the quick things.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Yes, Victoria Slanders, go ahead, go ahead.
Speaker 5 (28:22):
I hope it ain't gonna be. I hope it's not
gonna be. The only reason why I said what I
said is because.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
No, please don't go there. No, do not go there,
because at that point, now you're going to try to
slip it in. I'm the judge here, so it's it's irrelevant, immaterial.
Uh and uh, yeah, it's not allowed, simple as that.
I thought you were going to talk about something different.
But the only reason I said it was because no,
(28:48):
Thanks Bob, I appreciate it very much. Okay, folks, it's
not Sometimes I have to be a judge and jury.
Here Billy and braintreet Billy, you're next on night side,
Glad Billy.
Speaker 5 (29:02):
Hey Dan, how are you doing? First time caller? Welcome
to you all the time, you get a great show.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
Got to give you a ride of the clause is
the first time caller? Okake her right ahead, all.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
Right, I'll take it. Thank you real quick. Once I'm
done telling you, you'll never have to discuss this again.
I got all the answers.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
Then, I'm sure you do. I'm sure you go ahead.
Speaker 5 (29:25):
Yeah, okay. So here's what happens. They're at the bar,
they're drinking. She gets buzzed up. Uh, these little pocket lots.
She's very tight. Squeeze she's trying to get out. Uh,
you know, you don't have to slam into something to
break a tail light. You can very lightly press it
into a telephone pole. Whatever may be right breaks the
(29:50):
tail light on her way out, she drives into the house.
She pulls up out front. Maybe she hits the maybe
ships the rock bump something, some of the tail like
balls off, some of this left on there. He gets
out of the car, shuts the door, maybe a little
more tail like, balls out. He goes up to the house.
(30:13):
At some point he encounters the dog. Now the dog
didn't like him.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
Yeah, but but here's the deal. Here's the deal, Billy, Billy, Billy,
we've heard that. That's not part in my opinion, that's
not part of what is being said in this trial.
That was mentioned prominently in the first trial. So would
you would you're going to suggest the dog thing, know
(30:38):
what I'm saying. You're going to suggest to me, did
he go in the house or did he not go
in the house.
Speaker 5 (30:43):
He did not go into the house.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
Okay, so you've got a different theory. Your theory is
that the dog didn't like him. Why did dog like him?
Speaker 5 (30:52):
I don't know that I've heard that.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Have you talked to the dog?
Speaker 5 (30:59):
I wish I couldn't.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
We could put the dog in the witness stand. Okay, So,
so the dog didn't like it. The dog snapped at him.
Then what happened?
Speaker 5 (31:07):
Snapped at him, jumped on him. It's icy, it's snowing. Yeah,
his feet of wet. Maybe he's in the garage. He
hits his head. The jog dog jumps on and he
hits his head. On the set of brick steps. Okay,
so the dog, the wound expert says that what he
hit was long, straight, and irregular. That describes brick steps.
Speaker 1 (31:28):
Okay, right, so the dog should.
Speaker 5 (31:31):
Have jumps up. He's gonna be He's gonna get away
from the dog. He gets away from the dog. He says,
he's holding his head. He says, maybe Karen's still out there.
He goes running down there, wor staying for a person
who's bleeding out, Yeah, to be running. He gets down there.
By the time he gets to the edge of the lawn,
he blacks out. She never sees any of this. She's
(31:53):
she just pulls away and just went home with it.
Where there a broken tail.
Speaker 1 (31:57):
Maybe maybe we indict the dog. I don't know, no
one I will say this. I gotta give it to
you for creativity. I gotta give it to you for
you win the Creativity Award of the Night built being
a wise guy when I say that. But that's the truth,
all right. Thanks Bill, I appreciate your call. Thank you
very much. You did it well. You did it well,
(32:20):
my friend. You did it well, and you did you
did not the fame or slander any human being. You
may have slandered the dog, but I.
Speaker 5 (32:29):
He caught sue us.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
Okay, thanks Bill, talk to you later. Good night. All right,
we'll take a quick break. We're coming right back on
night side. Uh. You know, I I got two lined up.
I can take another one or two if you want.
Six one, seven, two, five, four, ten thirty or six
one seven, nine three, one ten thirty. Gary and Dan
back on Nightside. I hope Dan is not Mike. If
(32:54):
we had Mike from Lawrence when we lost him. We'll
figure that that out of the moment. Coming back on nightside.
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on.
Speaker 4 (33:04):
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
All right, let's go to Gary in Foxboro, home with
the New England Patriots. Hey, Gary, welcome, How are you? Gary?
Are you there? We'll put Gary in hold and we'll
go to Kathy and Wilmington. Kathy welcome, How are you?
Speaker 8 (33:21):
I'm good, Thank you? How are you Dan?
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Well? I'm delighted to hear your voice. For some reason,
we've had some people tonight at the end here, we
had Mike from Lawrence. He left. I think they've had
a power outage in Lawrence. Because we had Mike from
Lawrence and then Dan from Lawrence and Gary from Fox
was Gary back there, Robert Hill. Oh good, Okay, go ahead, Kathy,
you're next, go right ahead.
Speaker 8 (33:44):
Oh I think that he did go in the house, Okay.
And I mean, I just hope in the end, regardless
of what happens, that justice is found for him.
Speaker 1 (33:58):
That's a great instinct. I would hope so too, because
obviously a life has been lost, and we all would
like to see that. I would hope we all would
like to see the truth come out.
Speaker 8 (34:10):
Yes, I mean, and I was wondering also about the bar.
I was glad the woman asked that question because I
was really curious about that if they were going to
be held in some way liable, if they did overserve.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Yeah, well that's always going to be a question. Bartenders
realize that they have to shut people off. Obviously, bartenders
at busy bars can get a little lazy. And look,
they have these laws that are on the books which
make the bar potentially liable. They're commercial enterprises. I would
hope that if you had a bar, you're paying some
(34:44):
money somewhere to someone to make sure you have insurance,
just like if you have if you own a home,
you need to have some home insurance. What happens if
the mailman's will walking up the step someday or walking
up the walk and it's not shovel and he falls
or something. Yeah, you get it's it's part of our
(35:04):
litigious society.
Speaker 8 (35:07):
Yes, And just the only thing that blows my mind
is that nobody come out of their houses.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
Well, that bothers me a lot, because you would think
that they would see the activity. It also bothers me
that apparently the police did not go up to the
house and say, hey, anybody hear anything, we got a
we got a dead guy out on the front lawn here,
or you know, do you have a do you have
a home video camera by any chance?
Speaker 8 (35:30):
Right, my first instinct considering it was like Jen McCabe's sister,
I would have ran to that house. I would have
went right past John and ran to see if my
sister and her husband and everybody was okay.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
Yeah. Again, the the inter relationships, you almost got to
have a scorecard either's covered every day or or a
scorecard to keep who's related to whom and what relate
you know, what relationships and what is a former relationship
and all of that. It's tough. It's tough. You gotta
gotta can't tell the players with that without a scorecard.
Speaker 8 (36:07):
Thank exactly. I do think the defense though, I do
think the defense did do well misproving their fairy.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
Well, we will find out, I assume within the next
day or so. Uh, and we'll have it for you.
We'll talk about it tomorrow night if it comes down,
that's for sure. Thank you, Kathy. Appreciate your call. Thanks
very much for calling.
Speaker 8 (36:27):
You have a great night.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
You ta appreciate it. All right. We're gonna go to
Gary and Foxborough. Gary, I hope you're there. How are you?
I'm here?
Speaker 2 (36:35):
Yeah, Man Dan retired police officer out of Foxboro. I've
been a canine officer, done homicide.
Speaker 1 (36:43):
Did you know my pal Did you know my pelt
Tom Kareem?
Speaker 2 (36:46):
Oh yeah absolutely. I worked with him great in the
in the eighties and nineties.
Speaker 1 (36:52):
Yeah, Tommy and I, Tommy and I grew up together.
Oh yeah, he's a good athlete, good ballplayer.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
Yeah. Absolutely, don't forget.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
He's Irish, absolutely well, you know his his family. He
came from the Karins. They had a Karine on the
nineteen sixty Olympic hockey team, which was like a relation
of his so Bobby Billy and Bobby Karane. They were.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
He talked highly about about hockey and on the department
he was one of the motorcycle guys.
Speaker 1 (37:27):
I know.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Any way, I just wanted to, you.
Speaker 1 (37:29):
Know, by the way, not to take your time. But
I hope everything's as far as you know. I'm sure
Thom's retired at this point, but I hope everything's going well.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
Yeah, yeah, it is absolutely okay. I was going on
work in security and I listened to your show, and
I think the officers could have done things differently. I
think they could have done things better, But I don't
think in general it was wrong. I think it's winter,
it's a storm. They show up, they believe they've got,
(38:00):
you know, an injured person they've got to take care of.
That's the priority. You're not likely to do a canvas
in the neighborhood at twelve thirty one o'clock in the morning.
You can always do it after No, they did.
Speaker 1 (38:10):
They didn't show up, and they weren't showing up until
six o'clock in the morning. His body wasn't found until
right five thirty quarter six, so the police are there.
I just think I'm not I'm pretty pro police. I
have family members, including my brother who worked at the
Foxboro Barracks for many years.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
Yeah, I'm not saying that they couldn't have done more,
but I believe her statements kind of speak highly of it.
And it is not uncommon for people to be drinking
late at night and driving around. She didn't want to
go into the house. He probably wanted to go to
the party. They had some argument about that, yep, But
it wouldn't be hard for him to step out, slip
(38:52):
her to hit him and he falls. I think she
loved him. I don't think there was any intention that
she wanted to hurt of her kill him. When people
are drunk, things happen, Accidents happen, sometimes people die as
a result of it. So you've got involuntary manslaughter on
the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Speaker 1 (39:13):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
Think it's a pretty simple case.
Speaker 1 (39:15):
Well, let's see what the jury comes in. I'm rushing
the old because I got about fifteen seconds left that
I got to. Let you go do your favorite Gary
call again. I enjoyed the call. And if you see
Tommy Crane, say hi for me.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
Okay, I will take care now.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
Thanks, Thanks you I appreciate it all right, done for
the night. Great job Rob is always great job to
Marita back today, was actually back yesterday. I did mention
Julie Town last night, who was a wonderful companion with
us on Saturday at the Franklin Park Zoo. Julie, I'm
glad you heard it last night. I hope you heard
again tonight. All dogs, this is for you, Julie. All dogs,
(39:49):
all cats, all pets go to heaven. That's my pal
Charlie Rays, who passed fifteen years agoing forever. That's why
your pets are her past. They loved you and you
love them. I do believe you're going to see them again.
We will see you again tomorrow night. And I'm sure
that Julie's bunny rabbits are up there as well. Thanks everybody.
I'm on night side Facebook in just a moment. We'll
see you tomorrow night
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.