June 26, 2025 • 39 mins
Now that Karen Read’s second trial is over, Juror #1 is calling on the FBI to reopen the case and start from scratch! The jury foreman believes, as the Read verdict points to, that the prosecution had no solid evidence to prove O’Keefe was struck by a car. Juror #1, who has withheld his name, says he is haunted by the belief that “something went on inside that house” and that “we just need to find justice for John.” Do you think the case into John O’Keefe’s death should be reopened?
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!
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 (00:00):
It's Night Side with Dan Ray. I'm telling you, Besy
fostens Me Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Thanks to all the callers. And again, if you want
to debate Scott Brown or any person on this program, great,
But when I try to sneak you in late in
the hour, that's not the time to do the debate. Okay,
It's as simple as that, because at that point you
got a minute, make a quick comment, and then move
(00:29):
on because I got people behind you. So again, some
of you insist on calling in late, and you defeat
your own purpose. It's as simple as that. One of
the parts of this program that I like the best
is when people are willing to call in and engage
(00:50):
in a debate, but you try to debate or take
a cheap shot at somebody who, whether it's a Democrat
or a Republican, not going to go down on this program.
One of the questions I didn't get a chance to
ask Scott Brown. I just talked with him off the air.
I asked him if he'd be willing to sit and
debate again. I assume the Democratic nominee. Now I know
(01:12):
it's early and there may be other Republicans who decide
to run. Good luck with that there may be other Democrats,
but apparently Chris Pappis is the Democratic nominee, or the
putative Democratic nominee. I guess he's going to give up
his House seat in an effort to become a US senator.
I asked Gott, I said, would you come on and
(01:32):
debate with Chris Pappus on Nightside? He said, any down.
So we'll reach out to Chris Pappus and see if
he wants to come on, and then if he comes on,
we'll invite him to have a debate with Scott Brown.
And I guarantee you that debate will be fair. I
like Scott Brown. He's a friend, and when he's on
(01:54):
the program, he'll be treated respectfully as he was tonight.
But also if a Democrat comes on, they too will
be retreated respectfully. So anyway, having said all of that,
I want to go to a I want to go
back to a subject that was the hot subject of
a week ago, and that is the Karen Read trial.
(02:17):
Now that trial ended a week ago today with her
acquittal on virtually all of the most serious charges that
she was facing. And I noticed that yesterday. It was
yesterday morning. I believe the foreman of the jury, a
(02:38):
gentleman who I assume is from Norfolk County, who was
identified on NBC News The Morning Show the NBC Morning
News Show as the four of the jury for a
person if we want to be politically correct, and he
basically started to make some comments which were I thought
(03:02):
pretty interesting comments I disagreed with. But the jury foreman
talked about the experience of that jury, and he in
the Herald today he is calling on the FBI Herald
words now to rip open the case and start from scratch.
(03:24):
This is what the juror said today. But before I
quote that told the this is what he said yesterday afternoon,
yesterday morning. I want you to hear him a little bit.
He clearly felt and the point he made was that
Karen Reid was innocent, not merely not guilty. And I
(03:45):
think all of you who listen to this program know
that I insist upon the distinction between innocence and being
found innocent and not guilty. Juries can only say guilty
or not guilty. Now, in a post interview, the foreman
said that he felt that Karen Reid was innocent, which
(04:07):
is his absolute right. And I'm sure that there might
have been other members of the jury who felt that,
but that is not given as an option on a
verdict slip. And the reason for that is you do
not have to prove your innocence to be acquitted in
Massachusetts or anywhere in America. All you have to do
(04:27):
is make sure that the prosecution does not prove the
elements of the crime with which you were charged beyond
a reasonable doubt. And I know to some people's mind
that might be a distinction without a difference, but it
is a very important distinction. People can be found not
guilty and they are truly genuinely innocent. There are people
(04:47):
who have been convicted. I advocated for people who were
convicted and found guilty who were in fact innocent, and
it costs the government more than one hundred million dollars
in payments to those family members and to people who
who were intentionally and wrongfully jailed by corrupt by the
(05:09):
conspiracy of corrupt FBI agents. But that's not the story
for tonight. This was on NBC the Today Show, the
jury foreman. We do not have his name, but this
is what he said. He talked about what it was
like in the jury room, and we'll go with cut
one away, please.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Rob collectively together, we.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Looked at all the evidence that we was presented with
and we made our decision off of that.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
We didn't at first.
Speaker 4 (05:40):
Some had their own personal opinions on what the case
should be or whatever, and was trying to go down.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
Like a personal feelings and stuff like that, and we
had to stick to what evidence we had in front
of us and.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And and go with that.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
So it was more or less just trying to figure
out that part, and it took us a couple of
days to really get the gears going, but when we did,
it was smooth trails after that.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Pretty pretty good description of what it must have been
like in that jury room, gentlemen, very articulate.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
In cut one on nine, he was asked, was there
one piece of evidence that had a big impact on
the jury collectively or individually? This is his response, cut
one on nine. Ru It just was.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
It was.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
It was the whole case altogether, all the pieces, testimony,
witnesses and just a lot together.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
And we people had questions.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
We used the evidence to answer their questions, and we
didn't try to go down these rabbit holes where we're
just getting lost and what all these other things that
was thrown at us in court or whatever, and we
just had to lock down and figure it out through
the evidence.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
And then, interestingly, interestingly enough, one of the Today's show
anchors yesterday morning asked him the question and he comes
back with a great answer. They asked him the question
if he believes Karen Reid is innocent, and this was
his answer, Cut one ten, rub.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Karen Reid is innocent and she didn't do this crime.
No one could prove that she did this crime. So
I looked at her from.
Speaker 4 (07:56):
Day one as an innocent woman that needed to be
proved guilty, and I don't think any of that was
shown in this process.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
And by the way, that is exactly the way it
should be. The defendant enjoys the presumption of innocence. And
he said he didn't have to conclude she was innocent.
All he had to conclude was that the prosecution had
not proven the elements of the crimes charged all beyond
a reasonable doubt. He then was was asked again by
(08:33):
these anchors morning anchors, who probably didn't know too much
about the case, well, who did the crime? And he
gave I thought a really good answer Cut one eleven.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Rup that's not my job.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So good answer.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
I mean, there's.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
Something did happen to mister O'Keefe, and it's foul play
or whatever you want to say.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
But there was no evidence to even.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Through multiple witnesses and testimony by his optopsy and everything,
there was still no one said to solid evidence that
there was a collision or he got hit by a car.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
So you don't think she actually hit him with everybody,
you don't think she hit him with the card?
Speaker 3 (09:23):
All? No, go ahead, you don't think she hit him
with the card?
Speaker 6 (09:26):
All?
Speaker 4 (09:28):
No, I don't, not with the evidence that was put
in front of me and what we what we heard
over everything, No, I don't. This gentleman was a good juror.
And now today in a follow up interview with The Herald, again,
(09:48):
the gentleman whose name we still do not have, I'm
not being he's just being identified as juror number one,
but I believe that he's the fourth person of the jury.
He's calling for the the FBI to rip open the
case and start from scratch. This is what he said
to The Herald yesterday afternoon.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
Quote, there are so many holes that need to be
filled now that the FBI knows Karen Reid is not
a suspect. Something happened, and multiple jurors feel that way unquote, Okay,
that is a legitimate feeling that he should have, that
he has a right to have. I should say, doesn't
(10:29):
necessarily have to have any feeling one way or the other.
But I think it would be absurd to reopen this
investigation short of someone coming forward with clear proof that
something that some other individual or group of individuals were
(10:51):
responsible for the death of John O'Keeffe. I would like
I'm I guess from maybe some of you are from
Karen Reid fatigue two trials. I think that despite what
Hank Brennan said that he did his own investigation, and
(11:13):
I'm sure he did, and that he felt that the
only person who was responsible for John o'keef's staff was
Karen Reid, I don't think that this. I think it
would be it's unfair to the O'Keefe family, it would
be unfair to the judicial system. I think this is
(11:37):
going to be a crime that will never be solved.
Now some are going to assume, despite what the jury found,
that the jury was wrong. I'm not interested in that.
I'm interested in your position. Very simple question, would you
support any law enforcement agency reopen this investigation? I think
(12:02):
it would be a huge mistake on a number of levels.
I would love to hear your thoughts. Six one, seven, two, five, four,
ten thirty six one seven, nine, three, one, ten thirty.
Let's light these lines up. I'm done with the Karen
Reid case. It was it turned out to be a
case that was not made. Two efforts in the courts,
(12:25):
two strikes in. You're out, coming back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
It's night Side with Dan Ray on Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
All right, let's get back to the calls. Well, let's
get to the calls. The question is pretty simple. Do
you think, under any circumstances, the Karen Reid John O'Keefe
homicide case, not gonna call it a murder case, homicide
case should be reopened. I think it is absurd to
even suggest that that is what the foreman on the
(12:56):
jury is suggesting. I think he's doing it out of
all right impulses and instincts. But I think it would
be a huge, huge mistake. Mary Beth, where were you
on this issue?
Speaker 7 (13:11):
So?
Speaker 8 (13:12):
I thought he was a great jura. Yeah, like they said,
very articulate very reasonable while talk about he did his job.
Yes he did, but no, I mean that would set
a huge precedent. And the judicial system is the way
it is. It's you know, it was put this way
for a reason. You can't start, you know, disassembling it
(13:33):
and it would just create havoc.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Yeah. I mean on the one side of the street,
you probably have people who say something happened. We don't
know what happened. People can have different views in different theories,
but we just don't.
Speaker 8 (13:51):
Know, and honestly have said that we'll never know.
Speaker 7 (13:55):
You know.
Speaker 8 (13:55):
It's one of those things that will never get the
answer to.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Well, I'm beginning to think you might be right here. Uh,
to be honest with.
Speaker 8 (14:07):
You, Yeah, there's just too many holes in it, and
there's just it's just too much to the case.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Well, I don't see how even if let's say there
was a new district attorney that came forward, uh and
said I'm going to institute an investigation, I just don't
see that that that the public. I think it would
be a total waste of money. It's it's a simple
as some something happened, clearly, and I know that there
are people who who believe that something happened inside that house.
(14:37):
And I know that that a lot of people want
to want to know. But if there are people who
think that we as a I'm just hired of the
case to be really honest with you.
Speaker 8 (14:48):
Yeah, it's a gift that keeps on giving.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
Yeah, yes, Mary Beth, thanks for getting us going. I
appreciate it.
Speaker 8 (14:57):
So, yeah, I've never been worst before.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Four.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Well, that's okay, you died quickly in.
Speaker 8 (15:03):
My good I'm on a roll because I'm going on
my tenth grandchild and I've been wrong nine times and
the other day I was right for the first time.
So that's two rights right now.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
Oh well, look at this. So you have nine or
you have ten you soon will have.
Speaker 8 (15:19):
I have nine going on ten.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
And how does that bring down? Gender wise?
Speaker 8 (15:25):
Seven girls, two boys, and this one's a boy. And
I said girl all the way in the last minute,
I was like, nope, no boy.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Well with the trend in your family seven to two,
I guess I would have probably been going the same way. Well,
congratulations the way behind you you too, I'm just one
and one.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
You have one on the way.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
Yeah, no, no, no, my son and my son and
his and his wife had a baby girl in late April.
So we have a Benjamin who is going to be
three on the fourth of July. Uh And now we
have Caroline Ruth who was born on April twenty seventh.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
So Benjamin my grandson.
Speaker 8 (16:08):
My grandson's name is Benjamin also and he's born. He's
born jan Harrison bears the twelfth.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Benjamin Harrison. That's the name of a president, as I'm
sure you know.
Speaker 8 (16:18):
Yep, that's what I said. It's very presidential. The twelfth.
Benjamin Harrison bears the twelfth. Kidd, we're gonna go back
two hundred and fifty years to get to the first one,
give or take. If everyone had a kid at twenty
or so, that.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Is believe this is you have a grandchild who is actually.
Speaker 8 (16:36):
The twelfth, the twelfth, Yep, that is I've never heard.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
I've heard of people who were the the third. I
have a son. I'm a junior. My son is Daniel,
is the third, but they didn't. They chose not to
name him Daniel, and so there's going to be no
Daniel the fourth.
Speaker 8 (16:54):
But wow, Benjamin, I have a Daniel the second. My
son had four girls and they had a boy named
him Daniel Joseph.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
That's my middle name too. That's my middle name.
Speaker 6 (17:06):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Wow's that's funny. Hey, Mary Beth, I love this call.
This was a fun call. Thank you very much.
Speaker 8 (17:12):
Talk Yeah, all right.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
I congratulations ten times. All right, all right, you gotta
take a quick break. We're coming up on the news.
I don't want to short change anyone. Matt and Franklin.
You'll be next, I promise, stay right there. I've got
a couple of open lines. I got one at six one, seven, two, five,
four to ten thirty, and I've got one well, I've
got two at six one, seven, nine three one ten thirty.
(17:36):
The question is this, could you possibly stand? Obviously, Karen
Reid is never going to stand for a trial of this.
I mean she's been acquitted of the major chargers. She
was convicted obviously of the DUI. But the jury four
person or the jury foreman said he wants to know
(17:58):
the mystery. Look, there's there's something happened. We know that.
But we can have our people can have their beliefs.
But I don't think we're ever gonna know. And I'd
love to hear what you think, if you if you want,
I like to try to find sometimes a fifty to
fifty topic that my audience might be close on. So
(18:20):
I want to get a bit of a poll here.
Mary Beth from Hanover says, no, I say no, what
say you? The only lines open are six one, seven, nine, three,
one ten thirty back on night side right after the
message these with the news at the bottom of the ar.
What am I talking about? Messages? We got the news.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Night Side with Dan Ray on WBZ, Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
All right, let's go to the phones. Let's go again.
I got lines here at six one, seven, nine, three, one,
ten thirty. That's the only way to get through right now.
Coming back to Matt in Franklin, Massachusetts, Welcome back. How
are you now?
Speaker 5 (19:02):
I'm doing pretty well. I just hope everybody finds a
new hobby and moves on, and I want it to
happen soon. I was originally I think it'd be like
the MLB trade deadline and somewhere around there. But I
think Karen and our people and the online people are
going to try keeping it relevant as long as I can.
Because she owes a lot of money.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Well, that's not what I'm doing tonight. It's the it's
prompted by the foreman, he's made They made the suggestion,
I can understand if you, I can understand his position
if you sat there as an uninterested person, which by
definition a juror should be, and if you listen to
(19:42):
all of the testimony in the way in which they
have to listen to it, because they're removed when when
there's a they don't hear the sidebar conferences, when there's
going to be a colloquy between the attorneys and the
judges or amongst the attorneys and the judge, they they
are excused for the room, so you know they're hearing
(20:03):
the case in a in a very specific way. And
they get to the point and they say, well, I'm
not guilty. I can understand his impulse here, but I
just think that I feel like you. I'm tired of
the case. I don't think there's a solution. And even
if they indicted some other people a year from now,
the defense of those people are going to be Wait
(20:25):
a second, didn't you didn't you charge Karen Reid with
this case? What do you doing just playing musical chairs?
Speaker 5 (20:31):
And then would also like surrendering any civil case to
Karen Reid too, like if you like, say a New
Day came in and we're like, oh, we're gonna indict
the al but family, and it's like, well, isn't that
like kind of justify the whole thing with Karen Reid
wanted to see you guys.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Well, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I don't
think Karen Reid has a lawsuit against the district attorney
or against for that matter.
Speaker 5 (20:57):
They're like the theory of the online people if that's
she's gonna to the States, so everybody involved, And I
don't think she really has a case because it was
like Grand Jerry's and everything.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
But yeah, no, I mean yeah, I don't think the
level the level of proof to to somehow. First, first
of all, she has to defend herself against a civil
wrongful death action from the O'Keefe of the O'Keefe family,
number one, And I think that there's going to be
(21:27):
some level of immunity that as long as the District
Attorney's office was functioning in good faith, and I'm sure
they were functioning good faith, uh, even though they didn't
were not able to convict it. There's a lot of
people who are tried and acquitted but their response they
might be madder as mad as a hatter, but I
(21:49):
don't think that gives them a cause of action against
the grand jury. And a grand jury, a grand jury,
or I should say the district attorney plus elected officials
have a lot of immunity for things that they have
done in the course of their the legitimate you know,
pursuit of there.
Speaker 5 (22:04):
Yeah, it's all gonna fend. It's hopefully gonna happen to
see them, because it's just be a gigantic waste of
time to continue, and it just yeah, I mean she
can be like, oh, Jay Simpsons, it's for the real
killer out there. And I mean she can just look
in the mirror and say she got lucky.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Really well, you know, look, the jurors simply they may
feel she was innocent, but they were only able to
pronounce her as not not guilty. I know that that
you are are on the other side of the street
from the Karen Read supporters, But uh, you know, the
case was not proven against her. There's just no way
(22:41):
to you know, maybe it was proven in your mind,
but it wasn't proven in the mind of the twelve
jurors who were selected as sheriff. You got to look
at that all right? Thanks, no, thank you have a
great night. Let's keep rolling here. We're gonna go next
to Ray in Lowell. Ray, you were next on night Side.
Your thoughts on the straight?
Speaker 6 (23:00):
Yeah, Hey Dan, how are you doing.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
I'm doing great? Thanks for calling it good.
Speaker 6 (23:04):
I uh, I appreciate getting on with you. I love yourself.
They excuse me, and I come out this retired police
and I come out this probably from a little different
angle than most of your listeners, and that would be this. Nobody,
(23:25):
nobody who is a true law enforcement officer has any
love for a bad law enforcement office. I agree we invest.
We invest in them trust the right to take a
license they need if the detainment determined necessary and lethal force.
And we have here with the O'Keefe case. And this
(23:47):
is just my opinion, of course, because I have no
privy information. But somebody died. The throw keeps died. He
was a police officer. There is all kinds of menu
window and so forth, as you and I know about
maybe other members of law enforcement were involved in that depth.
Correct Now, I'm not I'm not saying that I have
(24:10):
any information. I certainly don't, but I'm saying, if God
is a cloud that's hanging over the law enforcement, be
it the district attorneys, off from the various police departments
who are involved. If if that's the cloud that's hanging
over there, and I agree with you, Karen Reid should
be done with this. She's spot free because.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Double jeopardy applies. She could come out tomorrow and say hey,
I did it, you know, and they're not going to
be able to prosecute her. What I'm saying, right, But
the only circumstances which would I would say, if all
of a sudden a police detective was able to develop
a source of information, and if there was in the
(24:55):
you know. Again, I'm not saying it happened, but if
there was some group that somehow had been there and
a fight ensued and all of that, and someone wanted
to break that that sort of sense of omrga, if
you will and go to the DA and say quietly, look,
I have some information. But before I can share that
information with you, I want immunity. I want total and complete,
(25:19):
you know immunity.
Speaker 6 (25:22):
I would do excuse, I'm sorry, but I wouldn't know.
How could that happen if, in fact, the case is
closed because let me just if I say this and
then I'll get right off the phone. But if if, if,
and it's a big if, if there are members of
(25:44):
law enforcement, being a federal, local, or whatever state that
were involved in this man's death to a nefarious degree,
be it a fight, alcohol related to what have you,
do we really want that officer or those officers if
that's the case. Again, if if that's the case, do
we really want those officers to go? Man, we skated
(26:07):
on that one. You know, we we don't have to
worry about that anymore. Or do you want the full
force of the stay the federal government, the FBI and
all that coming in with the proviso that if you
lie to a federal agent you're going to jail anyway?
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Okay, I guess one way, I mean the way you
can get at it. Okay, are you making me think now?
Which is good? One way you could get at it
is if there was some information which was credible. Uh,
you could I guess, h have a civil rights violation? Uh, prosecution,
(26:49):
that's one way that But at the same time, if
I was the defense lawyer and you were prosecuting someone
for his you know, denying him his civil rights. It's
still it springs that that prosecution springs from the same
set of facts that were just adjudicated. So but you know,
(27:11):
I could see a situation wherey could you not where
let's say some officer, if there was a person I'm
not going to say officer, if there was a person
who was involved in some foul play with John O'Keeffe,
and if that person some all of a sudden had
great pangs of guilty and they decided to, you know,
(27:33):
talk with some spiritual counselor, and the counselor said, look,
I'm bound by you know, by by the rules of
the religion. I can't give you up, but for your
own peace of mind, I can, you know, forgive whatever
you've done, but maybe it would be helpful for you
to to tell the story. And at that point I
(27:55):
could see, hypothetically, now we're getting very hypothetical, that someone
would hire an attorney. The attorney would go to the
DA's office and say, look, I currently represent an individual
who has some information that you should be aware of.
I guess you could get to a prosecution that way,
but it would be it would be a tough case to.
Speaker 6 (28:17):
Make yeah, I just if I may conclude with this,
I just having worn the badge and know the fellowsand
gals that I work with in the law enforcement community,
and how reputable they were and how amazingly brave they
were in circumstances, I don't think I have no sympathy whatsoever,
(28:39):
none for anybody who tournishes the badge at all.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
None.
Speaker 6 (28:44):
And I believe, I believe that it's the possibility, however remote.
That is, if the possibility exists that members of law
enforcement currently on the job had something to do with
this man's death and SAPs through two trials and never
had the dump or the gonads to come forward and say,
you know what, this is wrong, this is wrong. We're
(29:06):
here to protect and serve the community, and that includes
Karen Reid. And if they knew, if they knew that
they were involved with somebody, they knew were involved and
never came forward. And I don't even want to think
for a moment that they are good cops, because they
are not. I have all that's respectful law enforcement, God bless.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Them, but no, obviously, how long how long did how
long were you a police officer?
Speaker 6 (29:37):
I was in the city of Baltimore. I went out
on disability. I was I did a total of this
shy of thirteen years.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
Wow, and were you from Massachusetts originally? Did you?
Speaker 3 (29:48):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (29:49):
Yeah, yeah, I grew up in Drake at mass and
I was in the military police in the Army, and
then I get out and I went on the US
Capitol Police for a while. Then I went on to
Baltimore and uh, once from the flying pan as they say,
to the fire Baltimore.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Baltimore is a tough city.
Speaker 6 (30:07):
It's a tough we have to joke about. We used
to joke about Baltimore to deaf deaf in Baltimore by gunshot,
which should be considered natural causes.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
And I hear you. Now there's a lot and there
have been police officers in Baltimore who have been murdered.
There was a woman absolute a few years ago who
was literally assassinated. I think it was either Christmas Eve
or a couple of nights before Christmas. Women police officer,
female police officers. I believe she had four children and
(30:38):
she was assassinated by some gang bangers.
Speaker 6 (30:41):
Literally the first the first three years I was on,
which was in the Selonies, the first three years I
was on. We had nine of our office killed on
the streets.
Speaker 3 (30:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:52):
And Baltimore is a very similar city to Boston in
terms of it's an East coast city, it's on the water. Uh,
it's similar in size, but it's uh very violent, very
very violent city. It is off the charts compared to Boston.
We are I can hear this out. I can Boston
(31:13):
politicians with the best of them, But I have no
idea what the politicians have been like in Baltimore that
have that have allowed that city to get so far.
Speaker 6 (31:22):
There's a little smile for a little smile player. And
I'm not making this up. It's a very extremely violent
city Baltimore. And and you know, and you can check
me on us. The nickname of the city is tom City.
Speaker 2 (31:37):
Yes, I'm aware of that. No, I am very much
aware of that. And uh, look I remember in the
uh you know, after that Freddie Gray story, they had
to literally play baseball games with no fans in the field.
When that happened, Ray, I got to run. Thank you
for your call, appreciate, thank you for your service. Good night,
(31:59):
six one four ten thirty one line there six months,
seven nine three, one ten thirty I would have liked
to try to get this for a couple of hours,
but if not, we'll just wrap it up at eleven.
We're coming right back on Night's Side after the break.
The question is pretty simple. Do you think do you
think that there should be another FBI investigation of what
(32:24):
did or did not happen to John O'Keeffe. I think
it would probably be a fruitless investigation. And I think
that I am done with the Karen Reid case. And
obviously she's never going back to trial, There's no question
about that. Okay, she's not guilty. Whether she's innocent, that's
not what the jury decides. The jury decides she's not guilty.
(32:48):
You have every right to believe that she's innocent. That's fine.
Some people do, many people do, some people don't. But
something happened to John O'Keeffe, and maybe there are people
who conspired to do that and they will never face justice,
and I guess I'm okay with that under the circumstances.
(33:08):
Back on Nightside, feel free join the conversation right after this.
You're on Night.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
Side with Dan Ray on Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
By the way, that Baltimore police officer God rest her
soul kean O. Holy holly, uh. There were two men
who were charged and convicted a fire of murder in
that case. Just just sad, just sad.
Speaker 7 (33:40):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Let me go to Tim and Wilburn. Tim are going
to get you and Mike and Revere.
Speaker 9 (33:43):
And go ahead, Tim Dahn, thank you for taking my call.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
You're welcome. You're welcome. Thanks to caring.
Speaker 8 (33:49):
Now, if they had the nerves.
Speaker 9 (33:52):
I watched that guy today, right, the guy, the foreman,
and I listened to everything he said. Ye with Karen Reid,
I followed the first case. I followed this case every day.
I listened to this guy. This guy's out to lunch.
You want to try. They won't leave her alone.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
No, no, he's not talking. No, no, no, no, let
me be clear, he is not. He was the foreman
on the trial. As the foreman of the trial, he
was one of the twelve who found that she was
not guilty of any of the serious charges involving the
death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe. He says that
(34:34):
he still believes that there should be some justice for
the O'Keefe family and should they should find out. He
advocates that there should be an FBI investigation, not of
Karen Reid, but of and in a clear, clean and
new investigation to try to.
Speaker 9 (34:54):
Figure out what general in general in general.
Speaker 2 (34:57):
Right, So that's his position. I think that that's almost
an impossible a task for the District Attorney's office to accomplish.
Absent someone coming forward through the lawyer with information that
(35:18):
is undeniably provable that there was some other group of
people or individuals who were involved in it. I just
think it's not going to happen. He's not. This guy
was one of the twelve who acquitted Karen Reid. He's
not suggesting there would ever be Yeah, no problem, no problem.
I may not have made it clear, and for that
(35:38):
I would apologize to you, Tim So.
Speaker 9 (35:41):
But she should never be tried again.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
Now she can't be tried. She cannot be tried again
because of double jeopardy. She was acquitted of the murder
charge and of the manslaughter charge and of the leaving
the scene of an accident charge. So she's good to go.
I mean this, you no, it's cost her tremendous amount
of money, toss lots, aggravation and all of that.
Speaker 9 (36:03):
Was you got it anyhow, The only thing they got
they got along, was driving under and they're going to
take a license for a year.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
That's exactly it. That's exactly it, and and so therefore
all the serious charges. I'm sure that she would she
would have easily accepted that. As difficult it is, I
think that she accepted that pretty easily.
Speaker 9 (36:25):
My heart goes out to her. Let me tell you,
my heart goes out to I was so glad when.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
I heard the results.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (36:31):
Absolutely, on one another thing. One other thing.
Speaker 6 (36:34):
You've got a Volvo, right, I had this.
Speaker 9 (36:37):
Girl, and I had a Volvo nine two seater with
a stick, and I drove it great. Cas I'm sitting
in my two thousand Toyota right now listening to you.
Speaker 2 (36:47):
Good for you, Good for you? All right. I like
Toyota too, Thanks, Mike. Let me keep rolling here. Mike
and Revere are going to go from uh, Tim and
Wilber to Mike and Revere.
Speaker 7 (36:56):
Go ahead, Mike, Hello, mister Reid, mister this evening.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
My name is Ray. I said that I'm right you
actually when you're young man, I think you said, mister Reid.
You might have misspoke, but go right ahead, or I
might have misheard one or the other. Go right ahead. Mike.
Speaker 7 (37:13):
Yes, Well, further start off by saying I'm a first
time caller.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
Well right, we'll give you a rude of applause. It's
the first time. Caloby always like our digital audience to
stand and applaud.
Speaker 7 (37:23):
Go right ahead, Court officer. Unfortunately, usually I agree with
all your opinions in the various topics of your programs.
Periodically I listen. Then, however, this evening, I think I
think we're off the mack. I think, yeah, yeah, all
one hundred percent right. It might be a waste of
time to reinvestigate the situation, but the fact remains, we
(37:47):
don't know why John O'Brien died.
Speaker 2 (37:51):
You're correct on that. Will disagree, and.
Speaker 7 (37:56):
I don't live in a perfect world by all means,
and I was there for a long time. I'm but
I think the family something has to be done. I mean,
you just can't. I don't think we can just let
it go. I'm not trying to sound like a flame
of liberal and I've said no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
No, no no no. Look, I delighted you call because
I was hoping that I would get a variety of
viewpoints on this, and you're the first one who was
basically saying, hey, we need to my feeling is that absent,
and you're a court officer. Very difficult prosecution to make
a second case. If all of a sudden, a year
from now, they say, oh, we've now finally solved the case,
(38:34):
people are going to be pretty skeptical. Wouldn't you say? Yeah,
I mean, well, how do we end?
Speaker 7 (38:40):
How do we end? And just let it go. The refamilies,
you know, obviously they're content with the situation. And I
didn't think she was guilty either. However, I about your
teeth family. They lost the sun whether it was I.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
Understand the point you're making. I'm just talking this out.
There is a question I'm I'm I'm saying that I'm
tired of the Karen Reid stuff. If someone came forward
and said, hey, I now have information from a client,
and you know you conceivably it'd be very difficult.
Speaker 7 (39:14):
You have to be something worthwhile before the bench rep.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
You got it, Like, I'm flat out of time. I'm
so glad you called because you represented a different point
of view. Maybe your call will inspire some other people
to call. After the eleven o'clock news, So I got
to let you run because.
Speaker 3 (39:31):
They got the news.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
Coming back. Thank you, Mike, thanks for your first time call.
Come on back anytime. Appreciate it.
Speaker 3 (39:37):
Thank you much.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
All right with you too. We'll take a break. If
you'd like to continue talking about this, Light them up
six one seven two flat four ten thirty six one
seven nine three one ten thirty. If this is not
something to float your boat, we'll move on to something else.
Coming back on night side
It's Night Side with Dan Ray. I'm telling you, Besy
fostens Me Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Thanks to all the callers. And again, if you want
to debate Scott Brown or any person on this program, great,
But when I try to sneak you in late in
the hour, that's not the time to do the debate. Okay,
It's as simple as that, because at that point you
got a minute, make a quick comment, and then move
(00:29):
on because I got people behind you. So again, some
of you insist on calling in late, and you defeat
your own purpose. It's as simple as that. One of
the parts of this program that I like the best
is when people are willing to call in and engage
(00:50):
in a debate, but you try to debate or take
a cheap shot at somebody who, whether it's a Democrat
or a Republican, not going to go down on this program.
One of the questions I didn't get a chance to
ask Scott Brown. I just talked with him off the air.
I asked him if he'd be willing to sit and
debate again. I assume the Democratic nominee. Now I know
(01:12):
it's early and there may be other Republicans who decide
to run. Good luck with that there may be other Democrats,
but apparently Chris Pappis is the Democratic nominee, or the
putative Democratic nominee. I guess he's going to give up
his House seat in an effort to become a US senator.
I asked Gott, I said, would you come on and
(01:32):
debate with Chris Pappus on Nightside? He said, any down.
So we'll reach out to Chris Pappus and see if
he wants to come on, and then if he comes on,
we'll invite him to have a debate with Scott Brown.
And I guarantee you that debate will be fair. I
like Scott Brown. He's a friend, and when he's on
(01:54):
the program, he'll be treated respectfully as he was tonight.
But also if a Democrat comes on, they too will
be retreated respectfully. So anyway, having said all of that,
I want to go to a I want to go
back to a subject that was the hot subject of
a week ago, and that is the Karen Read trial.
(02:17):
Now that trial ended a week ago today with her
acquittal on virtually all of the most serious charges that
she was facing. And I noticed that yesterday. It was
yesterday morning. I believe the foreman of the jury, a
(02:38):
gentleman who I assume is from Norfolk County, who was
identified on NBC News The Morning Show the NBC Morning
News Show as the four of the jury for a
person if we want to be politically correct, and he
basically started to make some comments which were I thought
(03:02):
pretty interesting comments I disagreed with. But the jury foreman
talked about the experience of that jury, and he in
the Herald today he is calling on the FBI Herald
words now to rip open the case and start from scratch.
(03:24):
This is what the juror said today. But before I
quote that told the this is what he said yesterday afternoon,
yesterday morning. I want you to hear him a little bit.
He clearly felt and the point he made was that
Karen Reid was innocent, not merely not guilty. And I
(03:45):
think all of you who listen to this program know
that I insist upon the distinction between innocence and being
found innocent and not guilty. Juries can only say guilty
or not guilty. Now, in a post interview, the foreman
said that he felt that Karen Reid was innocent, which
(04:07):
is his absolute right. And I'm sure that there might
have been other members of the jury who felt that,
but that is not given as an option on a
verdict slip. And the reason for that is you do
not have to prove your innocence to be acquitted in
Massachusetts or anywhere in America. All you have to do
(04:27):
is make sure that the prosecution does not prove the
elements of the crime with which you were charged beyond
a reasonable doubt. And I know to some people's mind
that might be a distinction without a difference, but it
is a very important distinction. People can be found not
guilty and they are truly genuinely innocent. There are people
(04:47):
who have been convicted. I advocated for people who were
convicted and found guilty who were in fact innocent, and
it costs the government more than one hundred million dollars
in payments to those family members and to people who
who were intentionally and wrongfully jailed by corrupt by the
(05:09):
conspiracy of corrupt FBI agents. But that's not the story
for tonight. This was on NBC the Today Show, the
jury foreman. We do not have his name, but this
is what he said. He talked about what it was
like in the jury room, and we'll go with cut
one away, please.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Rob collectively together, we.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Looked at all the evidence that we was presented with
and we made our decision off of that.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
We didn't at first.
Speaker 4 (05:40):
Some had their own personal opinions on what the case
should be or whatever, and was trying to go down.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
Like a personal feelings and stuff like that, and we
had to stick to what evidence we had in front
of us and.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And and go with that.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
So it was more or less just trying to figure
out that part, and it took us a couple of
days to really get the gears going, but when we did,
it was smooth trails after that.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Pretty pretty good description of what it must have been
like in that jury room, gentlemen, very articulate.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
In cut one on nine, he was asked, was there
one piece of evidence that had a big impact on
the jury collectively or individually? This is his response, cut
one on nine. Ru It just was.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
It was.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
It was the whole case altogether, all the pieces, testimony,
witnesses and just a lot together.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
And we people had questions.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
We used the evidence to answer their questions, and we
didn't try to go down these rabbit holes where we're
just getting lost and what all these other things that
was thrown at us in court or whatever, and we
just had to lock down and figure it out through
the evidence.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
And then, interestingly, interestingly enough, one of the Today's show
anchors yesterday morning asked him the question and he comes
back with a great answer. They asked him the question
if he believes Karen Reid is innocent, and this was
his answer, Cut one ten, rub.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Karen Reid is innocent and she didn't do this crime.
No one could prove that she did this crime. So
I looked at her from.
Speaker 4 (07:56):
Day one as an innocent woman that needed to be
proved guilty, and I don't think any of that was
shown in this process.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
And by the way, that is exactly the way it
should be. The defendant enjoys the presumption of innocence. And
he said he didn't have to conclude she was innocent.
All he had to conclude was that the prosecution had
not proven the elements of the crimes charged all beyond
a reasonable doubt. He then was was asked again by
(08:33):
these anchors morning anchors, who probably didn't know too much
about the case, well, who did the crime? And he
gave I thought a really good answer Cut one eleven.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Rup that's not my job.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So good answer.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
I mean, there's.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
Something did happen to mister O'Keefe, and it's foul play
or whatever you want to say.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
But there was no evidence to even.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Through multiple witnesses and testimony by his optopsy and everything,
there was still no one said to solid evidence that
there was a collision or he got hit by a car.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
So you don't think she actually hit him with everybody,
you don't think she hit him with the card?
Speaker 3 (09:23):
All? No, go ahead, you don't think she hit him
with the card?
Speaker 6 (09:26):
All?
Speaker 4 (09:28):
No, I don't, not with the evidence that was put
in front of me and what we what we heard
over everything, No, I don't. This gentleman was a good juror.
And now today in a follow up interview with The Herald, again,
(09:48):
the gentleman whose name we still do not have, I'm
not being he's just being identified as juror number one,
but I believe that he's the fourth person of the jury.
He's calling for the the FBI to rip open the
case and start from scratch. This is what he said
to The Herald yesterday afternoon.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
Quote, there are so many holes that need to be
filled now that the FBI knows Karen Reid is not
a suspect. Something happened, and multiple jurors feel that way unquote, Okay,
that is a legitimate feeling that he should have, that
he has a right to have. I should say, doesn't
(10:29):
necessarily have to have any feeling one way or the other.
But I think it would be absurd to reopen this
investigation short of someone coming forward with clear proof that
something that some other individual or group of individuals were
(10:51):
responsible for the death of John O'Keeffe. I would like
I'm I guess from maybe some of you are from
Karen Reid fatigue two trials. I think that despite what
Hank Brennan said that he did his own investigation, and
(11:13):
I'm sure he did, and that he felt that the
only person who was responsible for John o'keef's staff was
Karen Reid, I don't think that this. I think it
would be it's unfair to the O'Keefe family, it would
be unfair to the judicial system. I think this is
(11:37):
going to be a crime that will never be solved.
Now some are going to assume, despite what the jury found,
that the jury was wrong. I'm not interested in that.
I'm interested in your position. Very simple question, would you
support any law enforcement agency reopen this investigation? I think
(12:02):
it would be a huge mistake on a number of levels.
I would love to hear your thoughts. Six one, seven, two, five, four,
ten thirty six one seven, nine, three, one, ten thirty.
Let's light these lines up. I'm done with the Karen
Reid case. It was it turned out to be a
case that was not made. Two efforts in the courts,
(12:25):
two strikes in. You're out, coming back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
It's night Side with Dan Ray on Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
All right, let's get back to the calls. Well, let's
get to the calls. The question is pretty simple. Do
you think, under any circumstances, the Karen Reid John O'Keefe
homicide case, not gonna call it a murder case, homicide
case should be reopened. I think it is absurd to
even suggest that that is what the foreman on the
(12:56):
jury is suggesting. I think he's doing it out of
all right impulses and instincts. But I think it would
be a huge, huge mistake. Mary Beth, where were you
on this issue?
Speaker 7 (13:11):
So?
Speaker 8 (13:12):
I thought he was a great jura. Yeah, like they said,
very articulate very reasonable while talk about he did his job.
Yes he did, but no, I mean that would set
a huge precedent. And the judicial system is the way
it is. It's you know, it was put this way
for a reason. You can't start, you know, disassembling it
(13:33):
and it would just create havoc.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Yeah. I mean on the one side of the street,
you probably have people who say something happened. We don't
know what happened. People can have different views in different theories,
but we just don't.
Speaker 8 (13:51):
Know, and honestly have said that we'll never know.
Speaker 7 (13:55):
You know.
Speaker 8 (13:55):
It's one of those things that will never get the
answer to.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Well, I'm beginning to think you might be right here. Uh,
to be honest with.
Speaker 8 (14:07):
You, Yeah, there's just too many holes in it, and
there's just it's just too much to the case.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Well, I don't see how even if let's say there
was a new district attorney that came forward, uh and
said I'm going to institute an investigation, I just don't
see that that that the public. I think it would
be a total waste of money. It's it's a simple
as some something happened, clearly, and I know that there
are people who who believe that something happened inside that house.
(14:37):
And I know that that a lot of people want
to want to know. But if there are people who
think that we as a I'm just hired of the
case to be really honest with you.
Speaker 8 (14:48):
Yeah, it's a gift that keeps on giving.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
Yeah, yes, Mary Beth, thanks for getting us going. I
appreciate it.
Speaker 8 (14:57):
So, yeah, I've never been worst before.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Four.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Well, that's okay, you died quickly in.
Speaker 8 (15:03):
My good I'm on a roll because I'm going on
my tenth grandchild and I've been wrong nine times and
the other day I was right for the first time.
So that's two rights right now.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
Oh well, look at this. So you have nine or
you have ten you soon will have.
Speaker 8 (15:19):
I have nine going on ten.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
And how does that bring down? Gender wise?
Speaker 8 (15:25):
Seven girls, two boys, and this one's a boy. And
I said girl all the way in the last minute,
I was like, nope, no boy.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Well with the trend in your family seven to two,
I guess I would have probably been going the same way. Well,
congratulations the way behind you you too, I'm just one
and one.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
You have one on the way.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
Yeah, no, no, no, my son and my son and
his and his wife had a baby girl in late April.
So we have a Benjamin who is going to be
three on the fourth of July. Uh And now we
have Caroline Ruth who was born on April twenty seventh.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
So Benjamin my grandson.
Speaker 8 (16:08):
My grandson's name is Benjamin also and he's born. He's
born jan Harrison bears the twelfth.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Benjamin Harrison. That's the name of a president, as I'm
sure you know.
Speaker 8 (16:18):
Yep, that's what I said. It's very presidential. The twelfth.
Benjamin Harrison bears the twelfth. Kidd, we're gonna go back
two hundred and fifty years to get to the first one,
give or take. If everyone had a kid at twenty
or so, that.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Is believe this is you have a grandchild who is actually.
Speaker 8 (16:36):
The twelfth, the twelfth, Yep, that is I've never heard.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
I've heard of people who were the the third. I
have a son. I'm a junior. My son is Daniel,
is the third, but they didn't. They chose not to
name him Daniel, and so there's going to be no
Daniel the fourth.
Speaker 8 (16:54):
But wow, Benjamin, I have a Daniel the second. My
son had four girls and they had a boy named
him Daniel Joseph.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
That's my middle name too. That's my middle name.
Speaker 6 (17:06):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Wow's that's funny. Hey, Mary Beth, I love this call.
This was a fun call. Thank you very much.
Speaker 8 (17:12):
Talk Yeah, all right.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
I congratulations ten times. All right, all right, you gotta
take a quick break. We're coming up on the news.
I don't want to short change anyone. Matt and Franklin.
You'll be next, I promise, stay right there. I've got
a couple of open lines. I got one at six one, seven, two, five,
four to ten thirty, and I've got one well, I've
got two at six one, seven, nine three one ten thirty.
(17:36):
The question is this, could you possibly stand? Obviously, Karen
Reid is never going to stand for a trial of this.
I mean she's been acquitted of the major chargers. She
was convicted obviously of the DUI. But the jury four
person or the jury foreman said he wants to know
(17:58):
the mystery. Look, there's there's something happened. We know that.
But we can have our people can have their beliefs.
But I don't think we're ever gonna know. And I'd
love to hear what you think, if you if you want,
I like to try to find sometimes a fifty to
fifty topic that my audience might be close on. So
(18:20):
I want to get a bit of a poll here.
Mary Beth from Hanover says, no, I say no, what
say you? The only lines open are six one, seven, nine, three,
one ten thirty back on night side right after the
message these with the news at the bottom of the ar.
What am I talking about? Messages? We got the news.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Night Side with Dan Ray on WBZ, Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
All right, let's go to the phones. Let's go again.
I got lines here at six one, seven, nine, three, one,
ten thirty. That's the only way to get through right now.
Coming back to Matt in Franklin, Massachusetts, Welcome back. How
are you now?
Speaker 5 (19:02):
I'm doing pretty well. I just hope everybody finds a
new hobby and moves on, and I want it to
happen soon. I was originally I think it'd be like
the MLB trade deadline and somewhere around there. But I
think Karen and our people and the online people are
going to try keeping it relevant as long as I can.
Because she owes a lot of money.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Well, that's not what I'm doing tonight. It's the it's
prompted by the foreman, he's made They made the suggestion,
I can understand if you, I can understand his position
if you sat there as an uninterested person, which by
definition a juror should be, and if you listen to
(19:42):
all of the testimony in the way in which they
have to listen to it, because they're removed when when
there's a they don't hear the sidebar conferences, when there's
going to be a colloquy between the attorneys and the
judges or amongst the attorneys and the judge, they they
are excused for the room, so you know they're hearing
(20:03):
the case in a in a very specific way. And
they get to the point and they say, well, I'm
not guilty. I can understand his impulse here, but I
just think that I feel like you. I'm tired of
the case. I don't think there's a solution. And even
if they indicted some other people a year from now,
the defense of those people are going to be Wait
(20:25):
a second, didn't you didn't you charge Karen Reid with
this case? What do you doing just playing musical chairs?
Speaker 5 (20:31):
And then would also like surrendering any civil case to
Karen Reid too, like if you like, say a New
Day came in and we're like, oh, we're gonna indict
the al but family, and it's like, well, isn't that
like kind of justify the whole thing with Karen Reid
wanted to see you guys.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Well, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I don't
think Karen Reid has a lawsuit against the district attorney
or against for that matter.
Speaker 5 (20:57):
They're like the theory of the online people if that's
she's gonna to the States, so everybody involved, And I
don't think she really has a case because it was
like Grand Jerry's and everything.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
But yeah, no, I mean yeah, I don't think the
level the level of proof to to somehow. First, first
of all, she has to defend herself against a civil
wrongful death action from the O'Keefe of the O'Keefe family,
number one, And I think that there's going to be
(21:27):
some level of immunity that as long as the District
Attorney's office was functioning in good faith, and I'm sure
they were functioning good faith, uh, even though they didn't
were not able to convict it. There's a lot of
people who are tried and acquitted but their response they
might be madder as mad as a hatter, but I
(21:49):
don't think that gives them a cause of action against
the grand jury. And a grand jury, a grand jury,
or I should say the district attorney plus elected officials
have a lot of immunity for things that they have
done in the course of their the legitimate you know,
pursuit of there.
Speaker 5 (22:04):
Yeah, it's all gonna fend. It's hopefully gonna happen to
see them, because it's just be a gigantic waste of
time to continue, and it just yeah, I mean she
can be like, oh, Jay Simpsons, it's for the real
killer out there. And I mean she can just look
in the mirror and say she got lucky.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Really well, you know, look, the jurors simply they may
feel she was innocent, but they were only able to
pronounce her as not not guilty. I know that that
you are are on the other side of the street
from the Karen Read supporters, But uh, you know, the
case was not proven against her. There's just no way
(22:41):
to you know, maybe it was proven in your mind,
but it wasn't proven in the mind of the twelve
jurors who were selected as sheriff. You got to look
at that all right? Thanks, no, thank you have a
great night. Let's keep rolling here. We're gonna go next
to Ray in Lowell. Ray, you were next on night Side.
Your thoughts on the straight?
Speaker 6 (23:00):
Yeah, Hey Dan, how are you doing.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
I'm doing great? Thanks for calling it good.
Speaker 6 (23:04):
I uh, I appreciate getting on with you. I love yourself.
They excuse me, and I come out this retired police
and I come out this probably from a little different
angle than most of your listeners, and that would be this. Nobody,
(23:25):
nobody who is a true law enforcement officer has any
love for a bad law enforcement office. I agree we invest.
We invest in them trust the right to take a
license they need if the detainment determined necessary and lethal force.
And we have here with the O'Keefe case. And this
(23:47):
is just my opinion, of course, because I have no
privy information. But somebody died. The throw keeps died. He
was a police officer. There is all kinds of menu
window and so forth, as you and I know about
maybe other members of law enforcement were involved in that depth.
Correct Now, I'm not I'm not saying that I have
(24:10):
any information. I certainly don't, but I'm saying, if God
is a cloud that's hanging over the law enforcement, be
it the district attorneys, off from the various police departments
who are involved. If if that's the cloud that's hanging
over there, and I agree with you, Karen Reid should
be done with this. She's spot free because.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Double jeopardy applies. She could come out tomorrow and say hey,
I did it, you know, and they're not going to
be able to prosecute her. What I'm saying, right, But
the only circumstances which would I would say, if all
of a sudden a police detective was able to develop
a source of information, and if there was in the
(24:55):
you know. Again, I'm not saying it happened, but if
there was some group that somehow had been there and
a fight ensued and all of that, and someone wanted
to break that that sort of sense of omrga, if
you will and go to the DA and say quietly, look,
I have some information. But before I can share that
information with you, I want immunity. I want total and complete,
(25:19):
you know immunity.
Speaker 6 (25:22):
I would do excuse, I'm sorry, but I wouldn't know.
How could that happen if, in fact, the case is
closed because let me just if I say this and
then I'll get right off the phone. But if if, if,
and it's a big if, if there are members of
(25:44):
law enforcement, being a federal, local, or whatever state that
were involved in this man's death to a nefarious degree,
be it a fight, alcohol related to what have you,
do we really want that officer or those officers if
that's the case. Again, if if that's the case, do
we really want those officers to go? Man, we skated
(26:07):
on that one. You know, we we don't have to
worry about that anymore. Or do you want the full
force of the stay the federal government, the FBI and
all that coming in with the proviso that if you
lie to a federal agent you're going to jail anyway?
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Okay, I guess one way, I mean the way you
can get at it. Okay, are you making me think now?
Which is good? One way you could get at it
is if there was some information which was credible. Uh,
you could I guess, h have a civil rights violation? Uh, prosecution,
(26:49):
that's one way that But at the same time, if
I was the defense lawyer and you were prosecuting someone
for his you know, denying him his civil rights. It's
still it springs that that prosecution springs from the same
set of facts that were just adjudicated. So but you know,
(27:11):
I could see a situation wherey could you not where
let's say some officer, if there was a person I'm
not going to say officer, if there was a person
who was involved in some foul play with John O'Keeffe,
and if that person some all of a sudden had
great pangs of guilty and they decided to, you know,
(27:33):
talk with some spiritual counselor, and the counselor said, look,
I'm bound by you know, by by the rules of
the religion. I can't give you up, but for your
own peace of mind, I can, you know, forgive whatever
you've done, but maybe it would be helpful for you
to to tell the story. And at that point I
(27:55):
could see, hypothetically, now we're getting very hypothetical, that someone
would hire an attorney. The attorney would go to the
DA's office and say, look, I currently represent an individual
who has some information that you should be aware of.
I guess you could get to a prosecution that way,
but it would be it would be a tough case to.
Speaker 6 (28:17):
Make yeah, I just if I may conclude with this,
I just having worn the badge and know the fellowsand
gals that I work with in the law enforcement community,
and how reputable they were and how amazingly brave they
were in circumstances, I don't think I have no sympathy whatsoever,
(28:39):
none for anybody who tournishes the badge at all.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
None.
Speaker 6 (28:44):
And I believe, I believe that it's the possibility, however remote.
That is, if the possibility exists that members of law
enforcement currently on the job had something to do with
this man's death and SAPs through two trials and never
had the dump or the gonads to come forward and say,
you know what, this is wrong, this is wrong. We're
(29:06):
here to protect and serve the community, and that includes
Karen Reid. And if they knew, if they knew that
they were involved with somebody, they knew were involved and
never came forward. And I don't even want to think
for a moment that they are good cops, because they
are not. I have all that's respectful law enforcement, God bless.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Them, but no, obviously, how long how long did how
long were you a police officer?
Speaker 6 (29:37):
I was in the city of Baltimore. I went out
on disability. I was I did a total of this
shy of thirteen years.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
Wow, and were you from Massachusetts originally? Did you?
Speaker 3 (29:48):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (29:49):
Yeah, yeah, I grew up in Drake at mass and
I was in the military police in the Army, and
then I get out and I went on the US
Capitol Police for a while. Then I went on to
Baltimore and uh, once from the flying pan as they say,
to the fire Baltimore.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Baltimore is a tough city.
Speaker 6 (30:07):
It's a tough we have to joke about. We used
to joke about Baltimore to deaf deaf in Baltimore by gunshot,
which should be considered natural causes.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
And I hear you. Now there's a lot and there
have been police officers in Baltimore who have been murdered.
There was a woman absolute a few years ago who
was literally assassinated. I think it was either Christmas Eve
or a couple of nights before Christmas. Women police officer,
female police officers. I believe she had four children and
(30:38):
she was assassinated by some gang bangers.
Speaker 6 (30:41):
Literally the first the first three years I was on,
which was in the Selonies, the first three years I
was on. We had nine of our office killed on
the streets.
Speaker 3 (30:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:52):
And Baltimore is a very similar city to Boston in
terms of it's an East coast city, it's on the water. Uh,
it's similar in size, but it's uh very violent, very
very violent city. It is off the charts compared to Boston.
We are I can hear this out. I can Boston
(31:13):
politicians with the best of them, But I have no
idea what the politicians have been like in Baltimore that
have that have allowed that city to get so far.
Speaker 6 (31:22):
There's a little smile for a little smile player. And
I'm not making this up. It's a very extremely violent
city Baltimore. And and you know, and you can check
me on us. The nickname of the city is tom City.
Speaker 2 (31:37):
Yes, I'm aware of that. No, I am very much
aware of that. And uh, look I remember in the
uh you know, after that Freddie Gray story, they had
to literally play baseball games with no fans in the field.
When that happened, Ray, I got to run. Thank you
for your call, appreciate, thank you for your service. Good night,
(31:59):
six one four ten thirty one line there six months,
seven nine three, one ten thirty I would have liked
to try to get this for a couple of hours,
but if not, we'll just wrap it up at eleven.
We're coming right back on Night's Side after the break.
The question is pretty simple. Do you think do you
think that there should be another FBI investigation of what
(32:24):
did or did not happen to John O'Keeffe. I think
it would probably be a fruitless investigation. And I think
that I am done with the Karen Reid case. And
obviously she's never going back to trial, There's no question
about that. Okay, she's not guilty. Whether she's innocent, that's
not what the jury decides. The jury decides she's not guilty.
(32:48):
You have every right to believe that she's innocent. That's fine.
Some people do, many people do, some people don't. But
something happened to John O'Keeffe, and maybe there are people
who conspired to do that and they will never face justice,
and I guess I'm okay with that under the circumstances.
(33:08):
Back on Nightside, feel free join the conversation right after this.
You're on Night.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
Side with Dan Ray on Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
By the way, that Baltimore police officer God rest her
soul kean O. Holy holly, uh. There were two men
who were charged and convicted a fire of murder in
that case. Just just sad, just sad.
Speaker 7 (33:40):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Let me go to Tim and Wilburn. Tim are going
to get you and Mike and Revere.
Speaker 9 (33:43):
And go ahead, Tim Dahn, thank you for taking my call.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
You're welcome. You're welcome. Thanks to caring.
Speaker 8 (33:49):
Now, if they had the nerves.
Speaker 9 (33:52):
I watched that guy today, right, the guy, the foreman,
and I listened to everything he said. Ye with Karen Reid,
I followed the first case. I followed this case every day.
I listened to this guy. This guy's out to lunch.
You want to try. They won't leave her alone.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
No, no, he's not talking. No, no, no, no, let
me be clear, he is not. He was the foreman
on the trial. As the foreman of the trial, he
was one of the twelve who found that she was
not guilty of any of the serious charges involving the
death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe. He says that
(34:34):
he still believes that there should be some justice for
the O'Keefe family and should they should find out. He
advocates that there should be an FBI investigation, not of
Karen Reid, but of and in a clear, clean and
new investigation to try to.
Speaker 9 (34:54):
Figure out what general in general in general.
Speaker 2 (34:57):
Right, So that's his position. I think that that's almost
an impossible a task for the District Attorney's office to accomplish.
Absent someone coming forward through the lawyer with information that
(35:18):
is undeniably provable that there was some other group of
people or individuals who were involved in it. I just
think it's not going to happen. He's not. This guy
was one of the twelve who acquitted Karen Reid. He's
not suggesting there would ever be Yeah, no problem, no problem.
I may not have made it clear, and for that
(35:38):
I would apologize to you, Tim So.
Speaker 9 (35:41):
But she should never be tried again.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
Now she can't be tried. She cannot be tried again
because of double jeopardy. She was acquitted of the murder
charge and of the manslaughter charge and of the leaving
the scene of an accident charge. So she's good to go.
I mean this, you no, it's cost her tremendous amount
of money, toss lots, aggravation and all of that.
Speaker 9 (36:03):
Was you got it anyhow, The only thing they got
they got along, was driving under and they're going to
take a license for a year.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
That's exactly it. That's exactly it, and and so therefore
all the serious charges. I'm sure that she would she
would have easily accepted that. As difficult it is, I
think that she accepted that pretty easily.
Speaker 9 (36:25):
My heart goes out to her. Let me tell you,
my heart goes out to I was so glad when.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
I heard the results.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (36:31):
Absolutely, on one another thing. One other thing.
Speaker 6 (36:34):
You've got a Volvo, right, I had this.
Speaker 9 (36:37):
Girl, and I had a Volvo nine two seater with
a stick, and I drove it great. Cas I'm sitting
in my two thousand Toyota right now listening to you.
Speaker 2 (36:47):
Good for you, Good for you? All right. I like
Toyota too, Thanks, Mike. Let me keep rolling here. Mike
and Revere are going to go from uh, Tim and
Wilber to Mike and Revere.
Speaker 7 (36:56):
Go ahead, Mike, Hello, mister Reid, mister this evening.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
My name is Ray. I said that I'm right you
actually when you're young man, I think you said, mister Reid.
You might have misspoke, but go right ahead, or I
might have misheard one or the other. Go right ahead. Mike.
Speaker 7 (37:13):
Yes, Well, further start off by saying I'm a first
time caller.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
Well right, we'll give you a rude of applause. It's
the first time. Caloby always like our digital audience to
stand and applaud.
Speaker 7 (37:23):
Go right ahead, Court officer. Unfortunately, usually I agree with
all your opinions in the various topics of your programs.
Periodically I listen. Then, however, this evening, I think I
think we're off the mack. I think, yeah, yeah, all
one hundred percent right. It might be a waste of
time to reinvestigate the situation, but the fact remains, we
(37:47):
don't know why John O'Brien died.
Speaker 2 (37:51):
You're correct on that. Will disagree, and.
Speaker 7 (37:56):
I don't live in a perfect world by all means,
and I was there for a long time. I'm but
I think the family something has to be done. I mean,
you just can't. I don't think we can just let
it go. I'm not trying to sound like a flame
of liberal and I've said no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
No, no no no. Look, I delighted you call because
I was hoping that I would get a variety of
viewpoints on this, and you're the first one who was
basically saying, hey, we need to my feeling is that absent,
and you're a court officer. Very difficult prosecution to make
a second case. If all of a sudden, a year
from now, they say, oh, we've now finally solved the case,
(38:34):
people are going to be pretty skeptical. Wouldn't you say? Yeah,
I mean, well, how do we end?
Speaker 7 (38:40):
How do we end? And just let it go. The refamilies,
you know, obviously they're content with the situation. And I
didn't think she was guilty either. However, I about your
teeth family. They lost the sun whether it was I.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
Understand the point you're making. I'm just talking this out.
There is a question I'm I'm I'm saying that I'm
tired of the Karen Reid stuff. If someone came forward
and said, hey, I now have information from a client,
and you know you conceivably it'd be very difficult.
Speaker 7 (39:14):
You have to be something worthwhile before the bench rep.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
You got it, Like, I'm flat out of time. I'm
so glad you called because you represented a different point
of view. Maybe your call will inspire some other people
to call. After the eleven o'clock news, So I got
to let you run because.
Speaker 3 (39:31):
They got the news.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
Coming back. Thank you, Mike, thanks for your first time call.
Come on back anytime. Appreciate it.
Speaker 3 (39:37):
Thank you much.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
All right with you too. We'll take a break. If
you'd like to continue talking about this, Light them up
six one seven two flat four ten thirty six one
seven nine three one ten thirty. If this is not
something to float your boat, we'll move on to something else.
Coming back on night side
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
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!
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