Part Five | Did She Do it: The Investigation Into Karen Read

In this episode of Unspeakable, KJ brings you the FINAL episode in this series, where she takes a deep dive into the death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe and brings you into the investigation of his girlfriend Karen Read to finally answer the question…Did she do it?

Follow “Crime Wire Weekly” on it’s new channel HERE:
Apple Podcasts  
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-crime-wire-weekly/id1815864889
Spotify 
https://open.spotify.com/show/3zyrgjtW6gLUVbicJaYXV9?si=0dbf4983938344a2
Amazon Music 
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/3738411d-828e-4138-9976-223ab5de2c87/the-crime-wire-weekly

SOURCES  
https://www.cartwrightfuneral.com/obituaries/John-J-III-JJ-OKeefe obId=29113887 https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/236494717/john_j-o'keefe/photo  
https://whdh.com/news/john-okeefe-was-a-veteran-officer-and-devoted-father-figure/ https://www.today.com/popculture/officer-who-appeared-police-reality-show-bostons-finest-dies-2d11638373
https://www.patriotledger.com/story/news/2014/01/16/two-young-canton-kids-lose/40602672007 /https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/05/07/who-karen-read-trial-murder-case/83476129007/
https://www.masslive.com/news/2025/04/these-are-the-20-people-you-need-to-know-to-follow-karen-reads-2nd-trial.html

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
Welcome to Unspeakable, a true crime podcast where I tell
stories of real crimes with real victims, whose cases are
so shocking that many are left wondering how is this
even real? I use my experiences in law enforcement corrections,
and combined with my years as a criminal justice educator,

(00:28):
dig deep into complex cases of evil acts, some so
evil many feel they are unspeakable. Warning, Unspeakable as intended

(00:52):
for mature audiences. If you are easily offended, then I'm
not your girl. Listening discretion is advised. Hey y'all, kJ
you're back for the other episode of Unspeakable, and this
is gonna be the final, the grand ending. We will
finish the care and read case today. I know you're
excited about that because this has been a long one.
Before I start that, I want to tell you this.

(01:14):
You got a bonus episode coming from my Patreon members.
It'll be posted here shortly after you're listening to this,
So y'all go check that out and I'll let you
know whenever it posts, I'll give you a little message
or whatnot. And also, Patreon members of my Crime family,
all your quarterly gifts have mailed out, so you may
not have received them. Yet, but be on the lookout
because everyone has been put into the mail by this point.

(01:36):
So look for those. I'm really excited about them. I
think they're awesome, and yes I made them, so totally
stoked about that. Now, last episode we left off with
a ton of deleted calls by Jennifer McCabe, and there
was a lot of question about why would you delete
phone calls in your logs? And then there was a
whole bunch of chronic calling that was done between Jennifer

(01:57):
McCabe and John O'Keefe's phone, which was kind of like,
why were you doing that? And then she explained that
a way to be butt dials. And so there was
a whole lot going on when we finished last episode
about some weird looking stuff going on in the cell
phone world of all of these people involved. So let's
pick back up with the date that John died, because
I know this has been a long drawn out series here.

(02:18):
He died on the twenty ninth of January. Well, on
January the thirtieth, it was realized that not only did
Jim McCabe and Carrie Roberts meet up that day, but
both of the women and these are the only two
other women that found John O'Keefe's body with Karen Reid right,

(02:38):
So both women went to none other than Sergeant Lank's
house like his personal home where he lived. Sergeant Lank, remember,
was the first officer that's friends with the in law
Alberts that went in and talked to them at the
very beginning that morning, and it wasn't recorded and there
was no body cam or anything like that. Us women

(03:01):
went to Sergeant Lank's house. But what's interesting about this
is that neither one of them remembered to tell the
police this at any point during the investigation. But they
also both forgot to mention whenever they were testifying in
front of a grand jury to see if this should

(03:23):
go to trial or not. Both women failed to mention
it to the grand jury that they went to the
lead investigator at that moment's home, his personal home together. Now,
the way that this was figured out the records, phone
records and GPS's were being scrutinized of these women, and

(03:45):
so that's how this was figured out. Well, now that
those records and those GPS's were really being looked at,
the women gave an explanation as to why they were
both at the very officer's house who investigated this case
really early on, and when they were both con fronted
about it, they both had an explanation of why they
would have been at his house. Jen McCabe said that

(04:07):
they were there to pick up or they were together. Rather,
the two women were together because they went to pick
up Carrie's daughter, who was friends with Sergeant Lank's kids,
so their kids were friendly, so they had to go
pick up their Carrie's daughter from the house. But then
a year later, when they were questioned about that, she

(04:27):
said that they were dropping off Carrie's daughter. So it
seems like a small discrepancy in nature. But I may
need to remind you of this because this is you know,
we cut off last episode that the day before that
all took place, Jen McCabe had texted her sister in

(04:47):
Lonicole Albert the text of quote, we will get more
info tomorrow end quote. When conveniently, now tomorrow was the
very day that she and Carrie Robert, We're at Sergeant
Lank's house. So were those two related in what they
were saying that we'll get more information tomorrow and then

(05:09):
they end up at the investigator's home or is that
just explained away as we were either dropping off or
picking up a kid, Because it's a different story when
they were asked at different times. So Jim McKay is
saying we either were dropping her off or picking her
up whatever. But you have to ask yourself another question
about this. How long would that have taken after arrival?

(05:31):
So I want it before I go forward. If you
were going to either drop off a kid or pick
up a kid from a friend's house, how long would
that take? Do you have a number in your head?
I'm thinking seven to eight minutes, even if you have
to wave and say hello or whatever. Seven to eight minutes.
Now I wouldn't think that they would be talking because
an investigator would realize that this is a suspect slash
witness at his home the day after a body's been found.

(05:53):
But whatever, we don't all think the same. I'm thinking
seven eight minutes, say hey by, all right, see you later.
Do you think it would take forty five minutes to
an hour to either drop off or pick up a kid?
Because Karen Reid's team realized this, and only then did
Jen McCabe suddenly remember that Sergeant Lank's wife had come

(06:16):
outside when they were there, and she had gotten in
the car and spoke to Carrie and Jen. Sitting in
the car, she said, I never went in the house.
I forgot about this. Lank's wife came out, she got
in the car with us, and we sat in the
driveway talking. But then another problem was raised with that
because her GPS showed that she did in fact go

(06:39):
in the house. Your phone shows this, Jen, So what
is it. You didn't stop, then you did stop for
forty five minutes, then you're proven to have gone into
the house. And then she says, oh, well, I may
have gone inside to use the bathroom, but I know
I did not talk to Sergeant Lank while I was there.

(07:00):
But then she was confronted with yet another issue. Initially,
she claimed that they left John's that day and then
dropped Karen's daughter at Lan's, saying, we went together, We
had Karen's daughter, We went to John's house, and then
we went to Lank's house. But again that peschial cell

(07:21):
phone showed something different. Jen McCabe left her house, did
go to John's house. I believe it was had to
do with kids again, exchanging kids. But then she went
back to her house, and then she went to the
in law Albert's residence i e. Her sister's house, and
then she went to Sergeant Lank's house for almost an

(07:43):
hour and then back home. So again after she was
faced with this information, she then remembered, Oh, yeah, we
went by the house, but again only after GPS proved this,
and she says that they they just drove by the house.

(08:03):
She says, we did not pick anybody up. We didn't stop,
We just drove by the house, just randomly drove by
on the way to Sergeant Lank's house. That she completely
forgot to mention it, and even though it was completely
out of her way, she and Carrie just drove by
her sister's house just to look at it, but didn't
pick anybody up. So were the women all getting together

(08:28):
and then going to Lank's house to quote get more
information to ensure that their stories aligned or is this
all just a forgotten coincidence? I know I think that
that stinks, but I'm gonna let you decide what you think.
Maybe they just don't have a good memory of what
they did that day. And the texts and her phone
were also being scrutinized in relation to this even more

(08:50):
because remember the family group text that I mentioned last episode,
specifically where she was telling the people in her family
Carrie is here, meaning at the mcab home, because she
said she had asked Karen to come over to go
over a timeline. Okay, remember that. Well, this was also
on February first, one day before she handed over her

(09:13):
phone to police. They were trying to put a timeline together.
The day before she turns over her cell phone to police,
and then a few days after that, Jen mccab calls
Trooper Proctor, who she claims she doesn't know fourteen times.

(09:34):
I'm gonna sprinkle something else in here that it was
just too glaringly obvious for me to ignore. So I
just want to add this in. Okay, the day after
John's death, Jen McCabe went to John's house and said
she wanted to see the family, She wanted to share
in their grief, She wanted to show her love and
support at the house. Okay, lots of people were there,

(09:57):
People were in and out, they were dropping off food
and doing those things that we all do during times
of grief when there's a loss of somebody. And Jen
McCabe stayed for a few hours at John's house. And
this in and of itself is normal. I don't have
any issues with that, except when you mix it with
everything that I've just mentioned. Plus, she continued to stay

(10:18):
in touch with Carrie, a woman she wasn't previously tight with,
and after John's death, all of a sudden, they just
are staying really She's staying really tight with this woman
that she was not friends with before, really tight. And
she said this was because they just became close friends
after John's death and they had bonded through the trauma.

(10:40):
But if that's all it was, then why was Jen
McCabe asking Carrie to call the DA's office and ask
questions for her. Why wouldn't Jen McCabe just call herself
unless you didn't want the DA's office to know it
was you that actually had the questions, maybe because you

(11:01):
might be a suspect in something. She also knew that
Carrie was also following the case closely on TV. Carrie
was even going to court hearings because she wanted to
know what happened to her friend. Carrie wanted to know.
Carrie knew a lot. Like I said, I feel like
Jen McCabe was using Carrie as a pawn. She was

(11:23):
a tool in the game, and it kind of seemed
like Jen McCabe went to John's house to go listen
and maybe see what was being said at the house.
I know that's a reach for some people, but she's
not directly being involved or calling the DA's office herself.
She's getting Carrie Roberts to do it. And then she
goes and stays a couple hours at a house where

(11:47):
most people were just staying for a little while, dropping
off food and doing their thing. But I'm gonna let
you decide what you think there. But back to Karen's SUV.
So by now Karen's SUV data had been pulled because
they had the vehicle in custody, and it gave a
lot of insight to her driving the night of John's death.
Because this has been huge what exactly happened while she

(12:09):
was parked in front of the house. So what I'm
gonna tell you is based on experts explanations of her
vehicle's movement the night of John's death. And I'm basically
gonna be summarizing here to get to the point, because
I mean, I could spend a whole hour just on this,
but you're not interested in that, I'm gonna sum it

(12:29):
up for you, So here we go. A digital forensics
expert analyzed the data from the SUV and identified what
we're referred to as two triggering events. One was the
vehicle turning on, which was at twelve twelve, and the
second one was nineteen minutes later, and it was a

(12:51):
three point turn that was made. So in that three
point turn that was done, the data from her SUV
showed that her SUV drove forward about thirty five feet
before backing up roughly sixty two feet. But here's the thing.
At seventy four percent throttle, which meant she was gassing it,

(13:15):
and she reached twenty four miles per hour going back
that sixty two feet. So I want to start out
with saying that's fast for anyone to drive in reverse,
and a reasonable person, I would say, would know that
this was not appropriate. But I wanted to make sure
I was really clear on how far that was. So
I did what I do, and I know that I'm

(13:38):
distance challenged. I couldn't necessarily narrow that down to put
in a perspective in my mind's eye, so I googled
it sixty two feet is the length of a bowling lane,
So you're driving almost twenty five miles an hour in
reverse the length of a bowling lane. So her car
was also a smart car in terms of electronics, and

(14:00):
her car would beep if she was close to something
as well as she had a three hundred and sixty
degree overhead camera on that SUV that showed all of
her surroundings, assuming that she was even looking at it
at that rate of speed. So I want you to
get a picture of what all she would have had
in her cabin of her vehicle and how fast she

(14:20):
was going. According to John's phone, he didn't move after
twelve thirty two, So if you add nineteen minutes to
the time of the vehicle being turned on, it equals
the time that John was believed to be hit and

(14:40):
the time that his phone stopped moving. So the reason
that I'm saying add the nineteen minutes is because I
just told you her vehicle was turned on at twelve twelve,
so I don't know. You know, she's in the front
of the house. She cuts it off. She Karen Reid
said that she sat out there a long time, but
before she got pissed off and she left the house.

(15:02):
So if the car turned on at twelve twelve and
then the next triggering event was nineteen minutes later, if
you add them together, you get the same time that
John's phone stopped moving. That's why I'm telling you that.
So after that event, John's phone didn't move again until

(15:23):
six h four a m. I think you're kind of
getting what I'm getting at It almost makes perfect sense
that she would have hit him, like literally, the times
add up perfectly that he stopped moving at that time.
But the other issue then became that John's phone may
not show that it's moving anymore, but his health data

(15:46):
app did on his phone. It showed that John took
eighty two steps over three minutes minutes, which included three
flights of stairs. So, looking at this the end in
law Albert's home had a basement. It also had an upstairs,
but it was plausible to say that John could have

(16:08):
gone in the house and then down to the basement
and then carried back up after an altercation. But the
data also showed that this happened between the twelve thirty
one and the twelve thirty two timeframe, in which if
you remember which I know you don't. That's why I
keep having to go back and forth and tell you this.

(16:30):
Karen's phone had already connected to John's WiFi by then,
so it's just not jiving here. The vehicle data of
Karen's SUV also did not show a collision in the
data of her car, But to be fair, the experts
also said that a human versus a vehicle's velocity at

(16:52):
the speed she was going, he wouldn't weigh enough to
register a quote unquote crash on the data. So the
fact that but it wasn't there didn't mean anything in
that regard. Jim, did you see what happened in Texas today?

Speaker 2 (17:11):
Wait before you tell me that, let me tell you
what happened in New York.

Speaker 1 (17:15):
It cannot be as crazy as the case I told
you about yesterday in Louisiana.

Speaker 2 (17:18):
You know what, we should do a podcast.

Speaker 1 (17:21):
About it, and with that we did. Crime War Weekly
covers the crime news headlines that have dominated the week.

Speaker 2 (17:27):
We cover trending crimes from all over the country and
even sprinkle in a few globally.

Speaker 1 (17:33):
Crime War Weekly is available now wherever you listen to
your podcasts.

Speaker 2 (17:37):
Simply by searching Crime War weekly or clicking the link
in the description of this podcast.

Speaker 1 (17:49):
So if the health app is to be believed, then
Karen couldn't have possibly hit him. The time doesn't work,
but if the phone clock is to be believed, then
she could have. So this is where I'm gonna insert
my personal thoughts here. My own daughter and it was
very bizarre that this happened. But my own daughter and
I were looking at her health app about a week

(18:11):
ago and it showed on her phone that she had
gone up two flights of stairs that day when she
had been at work in a one story building, and
we laughed about it. She's like, what stairs did I
go up? I said, I don't know. That app's stupid. Well,
knowing what I know, I know that that happened in

(18:32):
my life. Knowing what I know, I'm more inclined to
trust the phone time, not the health app. And I
even went to the health app myself in my phone
to look at it, and the app says explicitly that
a flight of stairs is logged if a person experiences
a ten foot elevation change. So that got me going hmhm,

(18:53):
because the average home in the US has nine to
ten foot ceilings for reference. Okay, so it would be
hard to fake that type of elevation change or to
simply just get it wrong and then three times at that.
So I don't know where you would stand with that.
I know in my personal experience, I've seen it's wrong

(19:16):
on the health Data app. But it also says that
there's a ten foot elevation change required for it to
show a flight of stairs. But you do you. I'm
just telling you the facts of what were presented. So
now let's go to Karen's tail light last episode. I
told you all about the tail light pieces that were
found after none were found the first search, and there

(19:38):
then were more pieces found later on. And then the
more pieces that were found were never documented nor photographed,
yet they were turned in as evidence. So how could
this possibly be explained? Well, Karen's team believed that the
light may have been cracked when she bumped into John's
car backing out the morning when they went to go

(20:00):
find him, but the prosecution's case was that she hit
John and the tail light shattered at the scene. The
snow then must have inhibited the collection of all of
the pieces, and so that's why they were found over
the next few days, including a whole ass shoe of
John's that was missing. So let's back up here for

(20:23):
a second. When when Karen's car was taken into custody,
there was a trooper. His name was Nick Barrows. Okay,
Trooper Nick Barrows was called out about two thirty pm
to go and get Karen's SUV. He was called by
Trooper Proctor, and Trooper Proctor said it was to be

(20:43):
seized because it was used in a homicide. And by
the way, I want to make sure you understand this,
I'm talking about the very same day of John's death.
He already called this trooper who was with another agency,
by the way, to say we're coming to get this
vehicle used in a homicide. This is the very same
day that he's dead. How did he come to the

(21:04):
conclusion of homicide so quickly. Well, Trooper Barros was from
another agency, like I said, but I want to make
sure to point out he was no way affiliated with
state Police or with Canton PD. What this was was
a was basically a courtesy call. Proctor called that agency
because it was a different jurisdic jurisdiction Proctor was going

(21:27):
to have to go into this other jurisdiction, which is
where Karen's parents lived, where the SUV was parked. Now
to go get that car. So as a courtesy, he
made the call to say we're coming in your jurisdiction,
and the trooper from that jurisdiction would come and meet
Trooper Proctor while the exchange happened. Okay, So Trooper Barros

(21:48):
made it to Karen's parents' house around three twenty seven
PM and he watched the entire thing go down. When
Karen's vehicle was being towed away, a company named Diamond
Towing arrived and they had a flatbed truck and they
loaded Karen's vehicle on to that truck. Now, Trooper Proctor
and his boss, which is Buchanic, they were on the

(22:09):
scene as well. They were there with Trooper Barrows, but
they were inside talking, I'm assuming with Karen's parents or
whomever was in the house. So when Trooper Barrows got
out of his unit when he first arrived, he walked
up to Karen's vehicle that was being towed and he
specifically walked around the vehicle all the way to the

(22:30):
back and he stood there and he watched her vehicle
being loaded on to that flatbed, and he noted in
his report because he had to write a report too.
Anything that happens, there's got to be a report written.
He noted in his report that the right rear tail
light was damaged, but his report stated that there was
a crack in the light and that only one piece

(22:54):
was missing. And the wording on the report said the
light was quote not completely damaged, and that the piece
that was missing was roughly six inches by three inches.
So his report stated that there's a crack, but it's
not completely damaged. And he was shown this trooper was
shown a photo from evidence of Karen's rear tail light,

(23:19):
and they said, is this the condition of the tail
light when you were watching it being towed? And he
stated that the light in that picture was and this
is a direct quote, absolutely not in the same condition
that the light was when the vehicle was being towed.
He said, this picture is absolutely not the same as

(23:39):
the condition of the light when it was being towed.
And he specifically said that the middle section of the
tail light was intact when he saw the vehicle. The
only thing that he mentioned was missing, he said, was
this tiny piece and he said it was nowhere near
what that light looked like now in that photo. Trooper

(24:01):
Baros not only wrote a report about this, but he
also noted the exact time when he quote unquote cleared
the scene. And I want to explain what this means.
Whenever you arrive on scene as a police officer, you
have to radio in when you arrive, and then when
you clear the scene, you have to radio out that
you're leading the scene. So leaving the scene or clearing

(24:25):
the scene means that your mission is complete. And in
his case, that Karen's vehicle was gone, it was being towed.
The time that he cleared the scene was at four
seventeen PM. And I'm being so specific right here because
it will matter. Even the cameras at the read home,
at the parents' home, captured the towing process and their

(24:46):
cameras showed this happening, and you can see the car
being towed up and guess what. The tail light in
the back of that car is definitely way more intact
than the evidence photo in the reports by trooper You
can see it with your own eyes. And by the way,
I do have pictures of this that I will put
on Patreon for you. You can go make your own

(25:07):
judgment call if you don't trust or if you want
to just make your own judgment call either way. So
Karen's defense team got to wondering how the hell could
the tail light change so much from the time that
it was towed to the time that the evidence photos
were taken. Well, Karen's vehicle was reported to have been
towed to the Canton PD Sallyport as evidence already, so

(25:29):
they wanted to go. The team wanted to go look
at the video of when the car was towed and
compare the tail light to the condition upon arrival versus
when it was first toad from the read parents' house. Well,
issue number one, Karen's vehicle or the light nor the
light were photographed when they first arrived at this sally port,

(25:51):
so the comparison would not be possible. There was no
picture to compare when it first arrived. Another issue was
that the crime lib had trouble removing her tail light initially.
So Gallagher, who works for the at the Canton pdee
the Lieutenant Gallagher, he called and had another Canton officer
show up who works on their fleet vehicles. This is

(26:14):
very commonplace to have an officer that works on the
fleet vehicles. That officer came to assist and pull the
light out. Well, since they struggled pulling the light out,
was it possible that it was broken at that point? Well,
no one has mentioned this as an issue at all,
So to guess that or infer that, no one has
said it, and I think that that would be improper.
No one has testified or made a statement that that happened. Well,

(26:37):
the video at the sally Port showed that the vehicle
arrived by tow truck at five thirty seven pm, but
that was now not matching Proctor's report. His report said
that he took custody of the vehicle at five point
thirty pm. But remember I just told you he actually

(27:01):
took custody of it when it left the Reeds Home
back at four fifteen, four seventeen timeframe. This is gonna
matter in a huge way in just a second. Okay,
hang with me. The car arrived via tow truck to
the sally Port and Trooper Proctor as well as Chief Berkowitz,

(27:23):
the chief of Canton p D. They walk in that
sally Port shortly thereafter, and the camera shows Proctor is
standing near the rear light of the car but it
was on the opposite side of the car. Have y'all
ever seen the movie Speed. It's got Sandra Bullock in
it and Keanu reeves the bus Speed. Yeah, it's a
great movie. Jim loves it. Yeah, you'll leave that in. Okay,

(27:46):
we'll leave that in for y'all. Yall can hear Jim
be excited? Okay, great movie. But the way that they
got busted, Do y'all remember how they got busted when
they were trying to trick the bad eyes. It's because
the video looped to show It was supposed to show
that they were all seated, but the woman, the little
Asian woman, slightly moved her arm and that's how the
bad guy caught on because her arm would move, it
would jerk and say he was like, wait a minute,

(28:08):
this is loop ah right, And that's how the movie
kind of goes Well, what happens here is kind of
along the same lines, because while the defense team is
watching and really scrutinizing this video, they noticed that suddenly
someone appears out of thin air in the video at
the very corner of the screen. It's like, what the hell,
how did someone just appear? Did someone has this film

(28:32):
been edited? How did someone just appear? So a closer
look and y'all, it's up in the corner corner. It's
not the center of the frame. So you would have
to really really be looking to see this. But show enough, woop,
somebody just appears. So a closer look would show that
either the video had been edited or quote randomly missing

(28:54):
a portion of the tape endo quote like you know
when right when by the vehicle, What do you think
is it randomly missing a piece of tape? Or do
you think that someone edited it? Well, when they looked
at it even closer, try to understand what was going on,
Karen's defense team noticed something else. The video was actually mirrored, Okay,

(29:19):
mirrored meaning flipped. That would mean that Proctor when he
walks in, he's actually on the right side of the
rear of the vehicle, not the left. That means he's
standing right next to the tail light. That is going
to be argued as in a different condition than when
it left. And he uh the read home and he

(29:41):
took possession of the vehicle, so he's right out. You
can't see him. He's behind the vehicle and he's on
the right taillight. What the hell is he doing? So
why does someone magically appear in this edited video that
it looks like? And then why is it mirrored? Y'all?
It's a lot, it's a lot to take in. So

(30:02):
that's when the defense had an aha moment. They're like,
hold up, hold the fucking phone. No light pieces were
found in the first search after John's body was found. None.
Then that's when that SRT team was called in. But
they were called in and didn't show up until around

(30:23):
five pm. The reports even said this, and that's when
they found all of those pieces that no one had
seen before and a shoe. Well, whenever Sergeant Propters asked
about this, he's like, wait a minute, no, no, no, no, no,
that's not what's going on here. That must just be
a typo on my report. But it sure seems a

(30:47):
little more sus when you have a you're saying it's
a typo on what time you picked it up. But
combined with a mirrored video as well as someone magically appearing,
I don't know, y'all. Coincidences, I don't believe in them.
And if he had the vehicle at four fifteen pm,
yet he lied or errored, made a mistake, as he said,

(31:07):
it would have been an hour and fifteen minute error.
And then the video received was clearly edited and mirrored.
And the other unrelated officer from another town said that
the light was nowhere near the condition that he was
seeing in this picture when it left his possession. So

(31:29):
it sure seems like that left enough time now think
about it. That error on the report now left a
little bit over an hour where someone I don't know
could have possibly further broken the tail light and then
brought the pieces to thirty four Fairview to help out
his friends before the SRT team got there to do

(31:52):
the additional search. It sounds crazy until you put it
all together. And now his report showed that there was
some extra time there over an hour, and he's standing
right near the tail light that is now in much
different condition than it left the read residence. The incorrect

(32:12):
report time also adjusted in that regard for there to
not be enough time for him to go and disperse
more light fragments because he narrowed the window of opportunity.
So I don't know, y'all, this looks more like on
purpose than an accidental error on what time he says

(32:33):
he got the vehicle in his possession. It stinks. All
of this combined it stinks. So continue on with the
crime lab doing its thing. During their processing, they identified
glass on the back bumper of Karen's vehicle. That glass,
when it was tested, was found to not match any
glass from the vehicle. So still to this day, still

(32:58):
right now as I am recording this, I have no
answer as to where that glass came from, and neither
does anybody else. I have a theory. Okay, I can't
prove it at all what I'm about to what I'm
about to say, but it's clear that the light was
broken after it went into Procter's possession, or further broken

(33:20):
after it went in Proctor's possession. There's no other thing
that you could think happened here. With everything combined, it
almost seems like maybe someone used a similar glass like
John was holding and drinking when he got out of
the car, to further break the tail light, so the
pattern break could possibly be similar. I can't prove that

(33:42):
at all. I'm telling you now, I'm saying allegedly because
I can't prove this, but there are still to this
day no answers as to where this random glass came from.
It didn't come from the light bulbs in the rear
of the light. It didn't come from the tail light.
No one can match it to anything. So where did
this rando glass come from? Still no answers. They also

(34:03):
found zero blood, zero from John O'Keefe on that vehicle.
So now you're saying to me, Karen hit him and
killed him, but no blood transferred, none transferred on this vehicle.
They did recover one one hair, one single hair on

(34:24):
the back quarter panel of the vehicle, but that meant
nothing to me personally. I mean, he's in that car,
he's out of that car all the time. His hair
being there doesn't tell me anything, especially one like one
hair doesn't tell me anything. So as far as the
lab and John's clothing was concerned, it too was tested
for DNA that clothing and an animal DNA expert was

(34:46):
used for this because remember those scratches looked like a dog.
They look like a scratch and a bite. Well, they
did not find dog DNA. Did not find dog DNA.
But the reasoning would make complete sense because even according
to the dog expert, dog nails are made of keratin.

(35:08):
Keratin degrades substantially in that weather that they had with
the snow turning water, the cold conditions, and especially if
it was not collected correctly, that's it made sense that
there would be no dog DNA on the clothing. But strangely,
you know what they did find. They found pig dna.

(35:32):
No explanation there, really, they found pig dna. So it's like,
are there any rogue pigs running around out in a snowstorm?
That that's kind of crazy. So they talk more with
these with these experts, and the expert says, look, we
would need an actual claw from Chloe the dog to
test for scratching from an animal, but that wasn't provided

(35:55):
and it wasn't able to even be obtained because the
in law, Albert's, had since gotten rid of Chloe. Now
this became an argument too, They say we didn't get
rid of her, we re homed her. They also said
that Chloe had already gotten in a fight with other
dogs and even a person. Actually two women in recent

(36:18):
history went to the hospital trying to break up a
fight between Chloe and another dog. So they said they
they gave Chloe to some farmer in another state, right
whenever this happened. So I'm also going to add here
that they got rid of their home as well. The
in law Albert sold the family home that had been

(36:39):
in their family for fifty years. After this happened. The
in law Albert said that they had discussed this for
two years and this wasn't weird because their kids were
all growing up and about to be gone, and so
they were wanting to downsize because it was just too
much house. So some believed it was to get rid
of the house because something happened in that basement, maybe

(37:00):
a fight or something. Because guess what else, The in
law Alberts refinished their basement just before selling it, but
it wasn't fully remodeled, just the basement, and then here
ad this twice. The basement was ripped up. It was
done before John died because they said they had a

(37:23):
plumbing issue, but then it was remodeled again after John died.
It would it would take me too much time to
go through like everything in all of this. But basically
one side was saying, yeah, they had to redo it
twice because of sewage issues and so it had to
be resolved before it could be sold. But the other

(37:44):
side believed it was because blood cannot be erased. From cement,
and they believe that there might have been blood on
that cement floor, and so it had to be dug
up because not all of the basement was remodeled, just
a section of it, and not once but twice in
just a few years. So I'm leaving again, I'm leaving
that up to you to decide. You can decide which

(38:05):
side of that you want to be on. What about
the doctors involved in all of this, was further testing
done or observation done on John's body, Well, the wounds
found on John were not consistent with a vehicle strike. Well,
at least I'll tell you the ones on the arm
were not. Those looked more like animal scratches and bites.

(38:26):
If anything. The autopsy findings found that John did not
this was across the board, did not look to have
been hit by a car. And the medical examiner wouldn't
commit to this as a cause of death because it
was very unclear even with the information provided to her
what happened to John. But she would not say a

(38:48):
car hit him. It didn't look like it. And I
already told you about John's wound, so I'm not gonna
repeat all that here, but I'm gonna add a little
bit more information for your consideration. His blood alcohol content.
This was taken from his eye fluids. It was point
two eight. And by the way, ee fluid blood alcohol
content is a little bit more reliable than say, taken

(39:10):
from the dead body you know, elsewhere, because eye fluids
lag in their reduction rate of alcohol, so you can
get a better testing from eye fluids. So the doctor
that did this, her whole belief was that John had
struck the back of his head, and when he hit
the back of his head, that is what caused the

(39:30):
eye swelling and those eyes to feel full of blood.
They were a result to the back of the head.
The doctor was very clear about this. He had no
knuckle bruising at all. So if he had been in
a fistfight, he would have had knuckle bruising. She said,
he did not have any knuckle bruising. She said, the
bruise that she saw on him she believed to be

(39:50):
from an IV put in his hand. And she even
said because the actual needle point in the hand like
the little hole. She could see it, so when you're
looking at the pictures of it, his hands are like
there is a bruise. She said that was from IV
when they were trying to bring him back and try
to keep him alive. She also said, yeah, he did
have rib fractures. So you're like, okay, well the car

(40:11):
could have hit him, and she said nope. She said
those rib fractures were consistent with CPR and extensive resuscitation efforts.
She's seen it a million times. And she said he
also would not have died immediately with what was going
on here. So, as far as being directly asked, was

(40:31):
John hit by a car? Can you say yes or no?
Her exact words were, quote, it's likely and it's unlikely.
It just depends on too many factors. So they took
John's brain. They sent his actual brain to a brain specialist,
and her findings were based just on the injury to

(40:52):
his brain. And this specialist said that the damage to
his brain showed the initial impact was from the back
of the head, not from the front, like a fistfight.
So what about in terms of probability, what's the probability
that he was hit by Karen's car based on the
crime scene reconstruction. And I know I'm throwing a lot

(41:13):
at you, but that's just the way we're gonna have
to summarize here. Well, the state did do an initial
investigation investigation using their crime scene reconstructionist, And I want
to give you a little bit of info on this guy.
His name was Trooper Paul and he was certified to
do reconstruction accident reconstruction. How was he certified? I wanted

(41:35):
to tell you this because he had an associate's degree
and then he went to some trainings and took some
courses to qualify him for this. So, based on his
drawing and his math calculations, he felt that basically Karen
hit John. He flew backwards towards the flagpole, and that's

(41:56):
how he got all his injuries. And without going into
specific because it's technical and it's unnecessary for me telling
the story, the math wasn't mathing. Even the experts said,
this math isn't mathing where the pieces of tail light
were found. It just did not compute with where John's
body was found. He would have had to have literally

(42:18):
flown backwards in the air, purewetted, and then landed where
he was in relation to where the pieces were later
found in the taillight. It just didn't make sense, and
I felt he may know. When I was listening to
this man talk, okay, I personally felt like he may
know how to do accident reconstruction, but he came across

(42:40):
as not well prepared and he was unable to specifically
articulate how he got to the findings that he found.
And I would personally have to agree that there was
something called confirmation bias in his quote unquote reconstruction that
he did. Basically, when he pulled up, they told him
what happened, and he may the evidence fit what he

(43:01):
was told happened instead of pointing out the obvious flaws.
And I say this because another reconstruction specialist was brought
in to determine what he thought could have happened. Now,
this guy's name is doctor Daniel Wolf. He is an
accident reconstructionist and if you're on TikTok you will know
him because TikTok loves him. He's handsome. I'm sure that helps, okay,

(43:24):
But he is clearly more qualified in the physics and
mathematics portion of accident reconstruction versus the officer who made
his report. This guy is an expert. He is a PhD,
very confident, and he's a third party in this case,
with no hiring by either side the prosecution or the

(43:45):
defense in this for his opinion. So the first guy
had an associate's degree, a two year community college degree,
and then he did some trainings. This guy that I'm
about to tell you about PhD big time. No fight in,
no dog in the fight. He just came up with
his conclusions. And his specialties include bio mechanical engineering and physics.

(44:07):
So his job that he does is also part of
studying sports injuries because they play a large role. His
company that he works for plays a large role in
aiding and better equipment to avoid injuries, and also in vehicles,
so think like sport, you know, football helmets and things.
So he has to actually know the body and specifics

(44:29):
to injuries in car wrecks and sports, etc. He seems
very qualified for this, the most qualified person I think
they could find. Basically, his question that he was asked
was how much force is allowed before injuries occur and
what type will they be? So they often use crash

(44:49):
test dummies and they're testing to allow for what they
call human factors. And his overall finding and these are
my words, by the way, not his, but his overall
finding was that John O'Keefe was not hit by a
car and his damage to his body would have been
much worse if so. He also said the car light

(45:09):
would not have exploded at the rate of speed that
the car data showed. It just wouldn't have worked that way.
Tail Lights are made of polycarbonate specifically because of their
impact resistance, and so the curvature, admittedly on a light
at some points does have it can create a concentrated

(45:30):
area of stress. But again he opined this that it
simply was not possible as the state's reconstructionists said it happened,
It's not physically possible. So then a doctor, Elizabeth Lopisada
was brought in. She's a forensic pathologist. She reviewed John's
physical injuries and her overall finding was that John's injuries

(45:52):
were not consistent with a vehicle strike. Another doctor, doctor
Marie Russell, she's a dog bite x She said that
John's arm injuries were consistent with dog bites. And I'll
add to this for your knowledge that she was this
was her specific specialty. She was a medical doctor who

(46:14):
studied dog bite wounds for many many years and was
even published in the field. So Basically, what I'm telling
you is that every qualified expert from every angle agreed
that this was not consistent with being hit by a car.
So then why the hell you have to ask yourself
was all the sketchy shit happening by the in law Alberts,

(46:36):
the mccabs and so many officers that knew them. Well,
let's summarize real quick the two overall theories at play.
The prosecution's theory was that John and Karen were fighting
because he was going to break up with her. She
got mad, she gassed her vehicle and she backed into
him in a drunken fit of anger, and then she

(46:58):
tried to cover it up with all of the calls
and all the searching that she did the next morning.
Karen's defense and opposite their theory was that Karen dropped
John off at the party. John went in the house
and was some point, at some point either attacked by
the dog or by a person, and specifically they kind

(47:21):
of were leaning towards at f Higgins, which killed him.
And then they tried to frame Karen with the help
of the police and the brother the Brothers in Blue.
So for starters, Karen did go on trial for this
and her first trial ended in a mistrial. It ended
up being a mix of unable to agree on the
evidence combined with a confusing verdict form, and the jury

(47:45):
didn't know if basically they had to do an all
or nothing vote or if the multiple charges could be separated.
That jury said they did agree behind closed doors that
she was guilty of one of the charges. It was
the involution luntary manslaughter, which was a lesser included, but
they kept debating on whether it had to be all
or nothing on how they voted, and that's why they

(48:08):
became hung. This is per a juror that was on there,
and I listened to him talk about it. Some of
the jurors wanted to ask questions, some didn't. The process
was so confusing for them. They are not experts, and
a lack of explanation to the jurors was the issue
so open discussion for lay people. My point here is

(48:28):
that it's vital. Yet the fear of persuading an outcome
is what I think the judge was facing, because if
you know, they couldn't straight up ask if they were
deadlocked on one but clear on another charge, can we
come to the conclusion or just one or must we
come to a conclusion on all three and the judge,

(48:50):
you know, they didn't get to do that, and everyone
was afraid that they might influence the judge and it
would or the judge would influence the jury and this
would become a hot mess. So the mistrial happened. So
that's when the state doubled down and they went after
Karen Reid again. And in the second trial, the lead
investigator of this proctor, the guy I've been talking about

(49:13):
for five plus hours in this series, the lead investigator
did not even testify. How insane is that a state
is going after Karen Reid, not once, but twice because
they are so convinced that she killed John, Yet the
lead investigator, the guy who led the charge against her,

(49:37):
doesn't even testify. That's crazy, that's asinine, it's insane, and
it's all because, in my opinion of everything I've just
told you, this case fell to shit whenever Karen Reid's
defense team put on a clinic on how to defend somebody,
an absolute clinic on how it's done. And Karen Reid,

(50:00):
i will let you know, was found not guilty after
thirty one days of testimony in her second trial. So
here it is, y'all, the big event. What do I
think happened? Since everyone in their mama has been asking me, Kelly,
what do you think happened? What do you think happened? Well,
I'll tell you this. It's something that no one else
has specifically said. But I feel very confident in my

(50:22):
theory and that I watched this trial from beginning to end,
and this is my opinion based on everything I personally
weighed in this case. I also want you to know
that I cross reference to my timeline to the best
that I could to see if what I thought was plausible,
and it is. So here goes. Are you ready? I

(50:44):
do not think that Karen Reid hit John O'Keefe, but
I also do not think anyone else did either, And
I'm going to defend my opinion. So hold you damn
horses if you're tripping right now, all right, this is
what that I happened. They were all drinking at the
waterfall atf Higgins texted Karen while they were there and

(51:07):
was following up on all of their sexy flirting, but
per everybody's discussion about this, Karen never answered him. Hang
on to that old neighbor Alberts. That's Chris and Julie
that owned the pizza Alberts. Julie left early because she
had a headache. Chris stayed a little bit longer and

(51:28):
then he walked home, which took him about five to
eight minutes. It was really really cold, and so when
he got there, he went straight up to his room,
he changed clothes, and he got in bed with Julie. Meanwhile,
Karen and John got in her car to head to
the in law Alberts. I want you to know neither
one of them had ever been to the in law
Alberts before. While they were driving, I believe that John

(51:53):
saw the unopened text message from ATF. Higgins on Karen's
phone because it would have right there on the screen
and at the top of the text message list. Remember
she never answered him, and that notification would have been
on the iPhone popped up right there as a red circle.
Maybe John thought that it was the directions to the

(52:16):
house because they didn't know where to go. But I
think that John opened her phone and that's when he
found that ATF. Higgins had sent her that text. He
had already confronted Karen in the past about thinking something
was going on. She admitted that, well, I think they
had only been texting for twelve days. Remember, I think

(52:37):
that he scrolled back in those text messages to understand
why they were texting to begin with, and he sees
the sexy talk. This would explain the quick shift from
lovey dovey in the bar to fighting in just minutes
during the drive, because everyone's like, how could that happen?
That's how the hell that could happen. So now they're
in an argument. They're fighting Ellen Albert, the nephew left

(53:02):
the in law Albert's home at that point. He was gone.
The text messages in my timeline show that Karen and
John arrive in front of the in law Albert's home
and they are in the suv fighting out front of
the house. John's wanting answers and Karen is feigning that
he is being ridiculous because he knows what he saw

(53:24):
in those messages y'all. But she's feigning that he's just
being ridiculous and you know, you're out of line and
I didn't do anything. He says, Okay, well fine, I'm
gonna go ask him myself. Come on, let's go ask him.
I just see this happening as an argument. Get out
of the car. Let's go. He's in there, Let's go
talk to him. Karen says no. The reason she says no,
she's drunk and she knows she's cooked. She is cooked

(53:45):
if she has to answer questions right there, face to
face with everybody while all of this is happening. That's
when that boy that witness pulls up and he stops
to get his sister. But remember she says, never mind.
When they go to leave the house. The brother when
he goes to drive off, John I think had already

(54:07):
exited Karen's vehicle and he was on the house side
of Karen's suv as that guy was driving pass. So
basically that's why he saw Karen alone with the dome light.
Because he was going on one side of the suv
while John was on the back side of the suv.
He simply would not have seen him. And I think

(54:29):
that John still had the drinking glass in his hand
because we know he left the bar with it. So
Karen's now pissed because she's gonna get busted about the
Brian atf Brian Higgins situation. So Karen is now in
the dome light in the suv and she's kind of
looking through her phone to kind of remember what all
had been said to atf Higgins because John got out

(54:51):
pissed and he's now going up to the house. I think,
so remember that that in law Alberts and everybody are
now inside the house. They were waiting for John and
all of them to show up. Chloe the dog started
barking whenever she heard people at the house. So the
in law Albert's are at the back door. Brian Albert

(55:12):
himself said, I opened the door and I let Chloe
out to potty. And something that stuck with me during
the testimony is that he said that she misbehaved around
other people. She's not good with people. And so the gate,
if you're looking at the front of the house, the

(55:33):
gate to the backyard is directly to the left hand
side of the home, which is directly in line with
the flagpole, which was right there where Karen Read's vehicle
was parked. So he let Chloe out. The gate was open,
the one right in front of where Karen is parked,

(55:53):
even Nicole Albert in law Albert Nicole said Chloe used
the bathroom in the backyard unless the gate was left open,
which obviously had already happened in the past because of
the past dog bite incident in front of the house.
So Karen gets pissed and she does the infamous three
point squeal, tires back out, and she drives off mad Chloe.

(56:18):
In the meantime, she has made her way out of
the open gate, and I think that she either spooked
John who slipped and fell, or I think that John
was still in that area of Karen's car as she
did the back out, but maybe he tried to get

(56:39):
out of the way and he slipped and he fell
because his feet came out from underneath him, which one
I don't know exactly, but don't forget his blood alcohol
content was like pretty high, so he was drunk. Balance
would have been an issue, I'm sure either way. So
either either way, I think that John slipped and fell
backwards and hit his head. Well, Chloe goes up to

(57:03):
John and she tries to kind of rouse him to
wake him up. She digs and then she kind of
does the little snip at him to get him up.
This is why the wounds don't look like a dog attack,
but rather a nip or a bite. And they're scratching.
And this also makes complete sense to me because of
the pig DNA that was found. Why because while I

(57:23):
was writing my notes, I looked down and watched my
own weeny dog, Toby in my living room chewing on
a pig ear. The light went off. Duh. Chloe was
chewing on a pork treat of some type type before this,
a pig ear or whatever. It's so common. The scratches
wouldn't have DNA remaining because the claws were made of

(57:46):
the keratin and the snow would have dissolved this, but
the pig DNA would have remained from the teeth from
chewing on a dog treat. Then Brian Albert, who is
still at the back door, is calling for Chloe, and
Chloe either comes back for the recall or Chloe does

(58:06):
not come back for the recall, So somebody went outside.
I don't know if it was the in law Albert's
that went out front to try to find Chloe, or
if it was the mccabs, but somebody went outside at
that point. Maybe the mccabs were leaving, or maybe it
was out Brian Albert going to find the dog, but
either way, someone went outside and that's when they found

(58:28):
John on the ground. Chloe is out there and they think,
oh my god, did Chloe attack him. This would have
been the second attack where she did something that injured someone,
and John's wounds were clearly grave. Two women were injured
and had to go to the hospital to break up

(58:49):
a dogfight with Chlode, which tells me she has been
loose out front before and has not been monitored closely
every single time. And in their minds they were gonna
lose everything everything. Even Brian Junior testified that he got
in bed after twish and he admits Brian Senior admits

(59:11):
that he and his wife were awake, supposedly doing sexy time,
but during sexy time, supposedly he calls Brian Higgins at
two twenty two am. Then roughly five minutes later at
two twenty seven that's when Jen McCabe searched how long
to Die in the snow to see if there was
a possibility to save him, and there wasn't. I googled

(59:36):
it myself, by the way, how long to die in
the snow? And the answer that pops up if you
google that says, quote extremely cold temperatures, especially with wind
chill can cause frostbite within minutes. Hypothermia, where the body
loses heat faster than it can produce, can lead to
death in under an hour in very cold conditions. This

(59:58):
meant Chloe had and let out over two hours by now,
so John would have been past saving. They left him
there because he was already gone, hoping someone else would
find him, allowing them plausible deniability because there wasn't anything
they could do to save him, and they didn't want

(01:00:20):
their dog to be the link to them being responsible
for it. They didn't kill him, but they knew they
had to distance themselves from him. Thus that's why ATF.
Higgins dropped by the Canton p D. Forty five minutes later.
What were they doing in the forty five minutes trying
to figure out what to do? But I digress, And
that's why ATF. Higgins claims he left the Alberts home

(01:00:42):
with no explanation. He didn't tell anybody by. He just
decided to leave, and then he checked for any calls
whenever he poked his head in and said hey to
Sergeant Good, trying to figure out has anyone called in
for the body yet? But they just said hey, man,
what's going on? Slow night? Not much going on. When
he was there ATF Higgins, put his phone in a

(01:01:03):
Faraday bag so that it could not track his movements
whatever he was doing at that point. Karen then leaves
the voicemails. Remember I say then, but I'm kind of
I can't say things at the exact same time. But
all of those voicemails, I want to address those. It
makes sense that Karen left the voicemails calling John a
pervert because he accused her of putting the f in

(01:01:24):
ATF Higgins. If you follow what I'm saying. He accused
her of sleeping with him or messing with him or whatever.
And that's why she brings up John's discretions in the voicemails,
saying that you want to hook up with other women
because when they were on vacation, Remember John had kissed
that other girl. Well, she's drunk, Karen's drunk, and she's

(01:01:45):
bringing up John's indiscretions to justify that he is wrong.
He is a pervert for accusing her of that. Remember,
you want to hook up with the other women, blah
blah blah blah blah, because they're both toxic together and
they're acting like teenagers whenever they fight. She drove to
John's house, passed out, and awoke a few hours later,

(01:02:06):
realizing John never came home. That's why she called the women,
because those women might know where he is because they
knew him. She was not good friends with those women,
but she knew they knew him, and they agreed to
co help find him. Jen McKay says to Karen Reid,

(01:02:28):
come to my house because Jen wanted someone else with
her to find him. I think that she already knew
that John would be found out there, and I think
that she was trying to protect herself and her sister
by having someone else with her whenever they find the body.
So when Karen backs out, that's when she bumped John's car,

(01:02:48):
causing that jagged broken piece at the top of the
tail light. All of the women get together after that
point and they all go back to John's house, which
love be for Jen McCabe. That's when Karen noticed that
her tail light was broken, and that's when Jen realized
that that would tie her to hitting John and it

(01:03:10):
would take the heat off of her sister. So the
shock was genuine and it was real with Karen when
she found John, because she did wonder, oh my god,
maybe I did hit him. Maybe I did hit him.
Whenever she sped away from the house all pissed off,
she was in shock. She was giving CPR because the

(01:03:30):
sight of him dead was new to her. That's why
she was screaming, Carrie, Carrie, Carrie, Jen Jen. It seemed
very very real to me. But Jen was more calm
whenever she calls nine one one. I wonder why, because
she already knew that he was there. So the in
law Alberts never came out because they knew the deal
and they wanted to seem unaware. The police arrived at

(01:03:53):
five am. Jen McCabe called her sister thirty eight seconds long,
but maintained she didn't talk to her. But I think
that this was some type of alert of some sort
to say, all right, the police are here. Lank goes
in the house alone, talks to his good friends. They
kind of are like, we didn't do anything. She hit
him with her car, you know, blah blah blah blah blah.

(01:04:14):
So going off of the new broken light awareness, they
all start shifting to say Karen said she hit him,
rather than could I have hit him then other friends.
Sergeant Proctor is assigned lead. The original reports said thirty
four Fairview, but that changed to the next door address

(01:04:36):
given at some point, so it kind of seems like
that's the next door neighbor's property and not a direct
tie to the Alberts directly. Are you following me? Because
it's remember it switched to thirty two Fairview. Jim's search
data would make sense in that the planeted pieces of
tail light weren't yet thought of, and she didn't know

(01:04:58):
about the broken tail light yet. At that point, they
were just gonna pretend they didn't know what happened to John.
He must have fell outside or something, but they think
Chloe did something. You follow me? Proctor then says she's
fucked in the text messages because he's going to make
sure that the case against Karen is solid. Proctor further

(01:05:20):
broke the tail light to add more evidence because he
believed the Alberts and he wanted to seal the deal
against Karen. It's not that I think that they were
This is going to sound weird. I don't think that
Proctor had a vendetta against Karen personally. I think he
was just trying to make it more clear and convincing

(01:05:41):
that Karen must have hit him based on what the
Alberts told him. He goes into the sally port after
the vehicle. The video, by the way of that exact
moment is missing and was inverted and then given to
the defense to look like he was on the other
side of the car. He then went, but when he

(01:06:02):
was there is when he broke those pieces further. He
then went, in that hour and a half threw those
pieces in the yard before the SRT team was contacted.
This also explains why no reconstructionist could make it make sense,
because they weren't in the right place, nor distributed properly,
nor would a light explode like that. The only way

(01:06:24):
that that could have happened is someone put those pieces there.
But Proctor never imagined he would be questioned on this.
He thought that he was just going to seal the deal.
That's why he lied on the report time of getting
the vehicle, and the other non affiliated cop said the
light did not look anything like what the picture showed,
because it would mean that he had time to plant

(01:06:46):
the pieces unless he made the timeframe too close. Jen
then calls Karen to quote unquote go over the timeline
to make it make sense. She tells Carrie that Karen
said I hit him. She tells Carrie that Karen asked
her to google how long to die in the snow,
which Carrie then later admitted she did not hear herself

(01:07:07):
that Jen had reminded her. Jen is steadily texting the
family in the group messages updating them about everything that's
going on. Then the group of ladies go by Lank's house.
They stay for forty five minutes to go ahead and
make sure they're sharing up all of the details. In
law Brian Albert and ATF. Higgins both get rid of

(01:07:28):
their cell phones conveniently, and then Jen deletes her messages
and her search history within two days before her cell
phone was seized. Chloe was then rehomed and the house
was sold. That is what I think happened, Karen read
then goes on trial again the second time, and realizing
that Proctor is a total fuck up and that they're

(01:07:50):
busted on what's going on. He doesn't even testify even
though he is the lead investigator, and then Karen is
found not guilty. Now one more time, y'all, I wasn't
there whenever John died. I have no direct knowledge of
any of this, but I am someone who watched thirty
one days of testimony. I weighed the evidence myself, and
I have come up with that conclusion myself. I could

(01:08:12):
be wrong, but that's how I have interpreted everything from
this case. Shitty policing, lying, and drunkenness is why John
O'Keefe has been lost in all of this. If you've noticed,
I have now spent hours telling you a story that
two sides have fought about and how they're saying that

(01:08:33):
each other is lying. But John, he's still dead. He
is still gone. Everyone he devoted his time too and
considered his quote unquote people in the end proved to
be quite useless to him. His friends looked shady as hell,
police seemed unconcerned with finding the truth behind a brother

(01:08:57):
in Blu's death, and his girlfriend was cheating on him.
I don't know into how many more ways someone could
be victimized, what else could have been done to him?
All of these same people smiled in his face just
minutes before he died. In whatever way it went down,

(01:09:18):
they all should be ashamed in my opinion, all of them,
And I do hope I know this has been a
long series, but I do hope you will remember that
John O'Keefe was real and that his life was ended
in some way that we now will probably never know.
No one, I bet will ever be held accountable because

(01:09:40):
it turned into a shit show, with John O'Keefe the
victim being lost in all of it. Usually I give
y'all a little snarky ending, but this time I'd rather
give John the last word. I'll tell you I never
knew him personally, but if he had something to say
to all of these people that night, I bet it

(01:10:02):
would sound a little something like this. If you're hearing this,
congrats y'all outlived me. It must be nice, huh. One
less person to ignore, to betray, or to emotionally drain.
To my so called friends, thanks for disappearing when things
got real. You mastered ghosting like it was a damn

(01:10:25):
Olympic sport. To my coworkers, your backstabbing and fake smiles
were almost impressive. If mediocrity and manipulation ever needed a mascot,
you'd all be in the running. And to my girlfriend,
you were the cherry on top of this shit Sunday,
you love bombed me you drained me and you called
it passion. It's really cute. But don't worry, y'all. I'm

(01:10:49):
not bitter. I'm just dead. And now, finally I don't
have to carry the weight of people who treated me
like a footnote in their story. You all got what
you wanted, your freedom from having to pretend that you care.
So sleep easy. No more fixing what you broke, no
more forgiving what you never apologized for. The snow that

(01:11:12):
fell that night contributed to my death just as much
as y'all did, and in the same fashion, when the
sun came out, y'all both disappeared. If I had to
choose between your friendship and the snow, I'd pick the snow.
You know why, because at least it did what we
all expected it to do.