John O’Keefe’s Friend Spills Tea on Karen Read’s "Professional" Drinking, Lawyers, Civil Suit

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Okay, just to be clear, you didn't do it. We
know who did it, Steve, we know, and we know
who spearheaded this cover up.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
You all know if John was beaten up and attacked
in that house.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
Who did it?

Speaker 4 (00:13):
We don't know. We don't know. We don't know, and
it's not for us to know.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Somebody other than Karen, somebody other than Karen is responsible
for that, for the killing of John.

Speaker 1 (00:34):
You are listening to the ROBERTA. Glass True Crime Report,
putting the true back in true crime from New York City. ROBERTA.
Glass is now on the record.

Speaker 4 (01:10):
Okay, good morning, a special morning edition of the ro
Verta Last year Crime Report. I'm really pleased to have
with me Brendan Kine, John O'Keefe's friend, good friend who
was at the hearing yesterday. Welcome, Brendan Kane.

Speaker 3 (01:28):
Join Roberta.

Speaker 4 (01:29):
How are you great? So for people who don't know,
how did you meet John O'Keefe.

Speaker 2 (01:38):
Yes, Johnny and I grew up together, actually on the
same street in a suburb of Boston called Braintree, where
we went to school together. Our entire lives from nursery
school up through high school. Johnny went to Northeastern and
I went away to school in upstate New York. We
remained close all through college through adulthood. Wherever I lived.

(02:01):
I lived in New York for a number of years,
lived in Los Angeles for a number of years. Wherever
I was, Johnny would come visit. It was just one
of those consistent I was very lucky to have a
consistent childhood friend for over forty years.

Speaker 4 (02:16):
And what was he like?

Speaker 3 (02:22):
Johnny was.

Speaker 2 (02:25):
First or for almost hilarious. I mean all the memories,
whether it's selective or not, are just us laughing about
things stupid and serious. But you know, people described Johnny
usually the same way. He was unbelievably athletic. He was
a little bit older. He's a December baby, so he
was like he had like seven or eight months on

(02:46):
most of us, so he was taller than most of us.
As he grew up, he always kept the height advantage.
But he's a really really good basketball player. He's a
good soccer player, a good baseball player. He's just one
of those kids that was just good anything he did.
But you know, even even non organized sports we play.
We have a kind of your prototypical suburban activities. A

(03:09):
lot of street hockey, a lot of whiffle ball in
the backyards in our neighborhood, but always just these are
back in the days where it was come home when
the street lights come on, and that's what we did,
you know, all summer.

Speaker 4 (03:22):
So I saw you, you know, you were on camera
a little bit on Court TV and I thought, oh
my gosh, another hearing. I mean, what is this like
to from you know, that ridiculous verdict, to be back
in the courtroom again with Karen Reid. Were you expecting

(03:44):
her to walk in with her herd of lawyers.

Speaker 3 (03:48):
Yeah, we had heard rumbling. She had an enormous team.

Speaker 2 (03:51):
The experience overall was the equivalent of being forced to
watch a sequel to a movie and you hated the
original movie. So the kind of the surrealness of walking
back in there, and you know, we've had a gap
between the verdict and this three four months where it's
been really kind of nice getting back to normal and

(04:13):
just being able to kind of focus on the family
and not allowing people that have victimized us to take
more of our time. And now somehow I'm sitting back
in a courtroom to support the family, uh, with the
person that killed my friend sitting five feet away, and
her army of attorneys. So it's it's it's hard to describe.

(04:33):
It's still it doesn't be honest, It just surreal. Doesn't
do it justice, It's not, it's just normal.

Speaker 4 (04:39):
Did you ever think that this would be the I
mean did you I mean, did you ever think that that, yeah,
that that you'd be doing something like this?

Speaker 3 (04:47):
I mean no, no, God gosh no.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
I mean, you know, bad things happened to people, good
people every day, but this one thinks a.

Speaker 3 (04:57):
Little bit different.

Speaker 2 (04:57):
It wasn't just the loss of a phenomenal brother, son, friend.
It's it's the pain that came with everything that was
created by by the murder. You know, after she she
killed Johnny.

Speaker 4 (05:11):
And so and what Alan Jackson sitting there? Were her uh,
were her supporters? There was Turtle Boy there. What was
the atmosphere like in front of the courthouse.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yes, so I did get a little bit of a
different vibe than the detam the deadhim courthouse. Everyone always
described it as like a very old historical building. It's
it's not a nice building inside.

Speaker 3 (05:36):
It's old.

Speaker 2 (05:37):
The Plymouth facility that were right yesterday, much newer. Everything
was clean, I did see that they brought a couple
at least two of the court officers over from Plymouth
that were familiar.

Speaker 3 (05:48):
With the circus. The thing that I don't know what
I was expecting driving.

Speaker 4 (05:52):
Down there, I mean from Denham. They brought them over
from Denham to Plymouth.

Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeahham, yeah, yeah, so so this one guy in particular.
So I don't know if that's just normal court officer
rotation or if they did that intentionally. But you know,
driving down there, I didn't really know what to expect.
It's like, this is a civil case. I mean, I
can kind of understand how a cult can get behind
supporting somebody in a criminal case because their freedom is

(06:16):
at stake. But as I pulled into the parking lot
and there's you know, forty or fifty people outside there
to support what Karen keeping her money, I'm not exactly
sure that it's the free Karen Reid can't be the
motto anymore. I'm not exactly sure what they're saying. I've

(06:37):
kind of intentionally ignored most of what they've said over
the last three or four months. I don't really care.
We lost in criminal court. We don't get another bite
of the apple. So I've tried to kind of mentally
come to the acceptance phase on that piece. But to
see these people taking time, I mean I had to
request time off to be able to go to support

(06:57):
my murdered friend's family. But there's four different the people
with nothing else to do but but go to a
civil trial on behalf of a woman that wouldn't.

Speaker 3 (07:06):
Speak to them if she if she had never murdered Jonny.

Speaker 4 (07:11):
Well, yeah, is she a kind of snobby person personally
or you think is it? Is it? Why do you
say she wouldn't speak to them?

Speaker 2 (07:23):
They're beneath her she I mean, you can she she was.
She was high end, her high maintenance. However you want
to look at it, but you know she was big
on on on brands and labels and and style and fashion,
and I mean you could take the best example is
in the first trial, Johnny's niece intentionally wore a pair

(07:45):
of sunglasses on the stand, and at first I didn't
know what she was doing. And as it turns out,
there were like six hundred dollars sunglasses that Karen left
behind when she fled the murdercy. So you know, again,
six hundred dollars sunglasses, great if you can do it.
But that was that that to me kind of epitomizes, Uh.
She she fancies herself to be kind of a higher echelon,

(08:06):
higher societal figure, even before she got all the notoriety
she's received from from this event.

Speaker 4 (08:14):
Yeah, and back to all these supporters, you know, they're
happy to line her pocket. She's always crying poor, but
most of these lawyers are, I would think, are working
pro bono for her. I would think, I mean, do
we know, I.

Speaker 3 (08:30):
Have no idea.

Speaker 2 (08:31):
I mean, it's just just it's just for the visibilities
and for the promotional value of being on that team.
I mean, frankly, it was it was bortalin comical as
the lawyers introduced themselves in front of that judge yesterday,
where when it got to the sixth and seventh lawyers,
even they were they couldn't start, they couldn't not smile
because you know, on behalf of mis read, on behalf
of mis read on behalf of miss read. Then that

(08:52):
there was two extra lawyers that came and fit at
the table that were in the front row, the front pew,
if you will. Uh that when they're and there were
introducing themselves, induced themselves like with a smile, like even
we realize how ridiculous this is, that that's what I
got out of it?

Speaker 4 (09:09):
And were you surprised, I mean, just going back quickly
through the criminal trial, were you surprised that her behavior
was just never called out? The eye rolling, the the
kind of smiling and laughing even I mean, I think
the New York Post called it out when she was
looking at the autopsy pictures, she was smirking through them.
I mean, are you surprised that she still has so

(09:32):
many supporters after the way she behaves in court?

Speaker 2 (09:35):
I mean, I am, Uh, I don't Have'm surprised, just
because I'm not sure what to expect a society these days.
To be honest, there's always going to be a there's
always going to be a subset of folks that are
looking to fill their time. The way I've always looked
at that is is this this uh, this notion of
a third place, that people need a third place to

(09:55):
have a complete life. And some people join a book
club and some people do rectory national basketball. This is
this is this group of people's third place, and it's
a very low barrier to entry.

Speaker 3 (10:06):
It's put on a.

Speaker 2 (10:07):
Pink shirt, and hold a sign and you're part of
a club. So from that perspective, but you know, a
place to find belonging. It's a strange place to find belonging,
but I guess I can try to guess what the
psychology is there.

Speaker 4 (10:23):
And also you never I mean, because I mean we
have we're bound by the facts. They never change. But
with this, it's their conspiracy mindset is a part of
innocence fraud, and they can keep going with these theories
for forever with very little evidence. They'll never come to anything.
They can test. They can test all these items and

(10:46):
get incomplete. I mean, this is what the thing I've
noticed about innocent fraud campaigns is they go on forever
because they can go a zillion different directions, and it
constantly can keep their mind preoccupied and off their boring
life that there's some kind of conspiracy that's just around.
It's like a car a constant dangling carrot in front

(11:07):
of a donkey. You know, the conspiracy will be solved
any minute now, just any minute, any minute, you know,
and we heard in this case, you know the Feds
are coming, the Feds are coming. And then when the
Feds weren't coming, you know, Karen Reid sort of had
to prop them up and say, no, they're really coming.
They're just lying about it. They're really coming. Oh no,
it is closed. It is closed. They found nothing. But yeah,

(11:29):
maybe then oh well, that's a conspiracy in itself. They
cover that up. It's a cover up on a cover up,
on a cover up. I mean forever on this.

Speaker 2 (11:38):
Yeah, it's perpetual, it's it's it just just with a
little bit more of your financial support, we might be
able to finally solve this.

Speaker 3 (11:45):
You know, it's a grift. It's a grift.

Speaker 2 (11:49):
And frankly, I've learned a lot about this topic listening
to you. This is clearly my first experience with nisence fraud.
I happened to hit really close to home the first
time I am dealt with it. I'm still kind of
crossing think some of it, frankly, But yeah, it is
a they can they can keep us going for a
very very long time, and evidenced by some of the

(12:10):
statements made by her counsel in court yesterday, they intend
to keep it going in a very specific manner.

Speaker 4 (12:15):
So ye get to that in a second. But did
you see the film of Alan Jackson running around the
basement of thirty four fair View and they're gonna, you know,
pull up the carpets here. There's this, there's that you know,
they're they're running around. I mean there they can grift

(12:36):
off of that for forever. I mean, you know, the
uh uh DNA the carpet. I mean, what we'd like
to think is that there's some kind of like specific DNA,
but I mean we leave DNA everywhere everywhere, you know,
so I mean they can keep looking for this for forever.
Uh So, yesterday back yesterday, so very early into the hearing,

(13:02):
I won't force anyone to We went over it twice yesterday.
I think that's more more than enough. But yesterday, very
early on into the hearing, Karen Reid's South African lawyer
announces that they want to join in all these people
and Karen Reid is actually the victim, she's not the defendant.

(13:23):
She wants to be a plaintiff in this and she
wants to sue a list as long as your arm
of people. What was your reaction to that moment in
the court.

Speaker 2 (13:36):
And nothing they do surprises me at this point. My again,
my theory on it. As I was sitting there listening
to it was just kind of more Alan Jackson type
style that they're trying to intimidate these people from from
doing anything in this case to try to try to
try to confuse the situation.

Speaker 3 (13:58):
Misdirection.

Speaker 2 (13:58):
Yet again, let's combine this with a with a basic
h a civil trial, and and here's how we're gonna
do it. To me, it's again perpetuating that grift H
and making innocent people the villains in their mind. From
from what I have not been over to Canton recently,
but from what I understand that they still stand in

(14:19):
front of the police station every Friday with signs, and
they still harass that pizza uh Chris Albert's pizza joint
on like Thursday nights. I think they stand across the
street with signs. It's it's it's shocking that these folks
have nothing else to do. What the actual motivation is.
But yeah, as you had surmised, it has continued.

Speaker 4 (14:42):
Yeah, I just don't think this is ever. I mean
that this is she's gonna this is Karen Read's new identity.
You know, she said she wants to uh you know
she really I mean, she's studied this movement and she knows.
I mean, she's going by the playbook. I said she
would soon civilly if she got a favorable verdict in

(15:04):
any way. But you know, there is a kind of
odd thing that nobody's talking about is that she was
convicted of driving drunk. So when she wants to say
that her civil rights were violated, it's a little bit
of a problem there. You know, she was driving drunk
and she was convicted of it. People forget that. So, uh,

(15:27):
I don't know how she's going to say her civil
rights were violated. How does that work?

Speaker 3 (15:32):
Brendan no idea.

Speaker 2 (15:35):
No, yeah, I mean I guess it was ever a
time I was thankful she got convicted on anything. It
would it would be now because I agree, you know,
she just and we other people asked the bottom line
and she was found not guilty.

Speaker 3 (15:48):
That doesn't mean she was innocent.

Speaker 2 (15:50):
We know all the you know, in hindsight, all the
issues with the jury, and you know, did Hank do
a great job with the presentation of the case. I
thought he did a good job, But we lost that
case at the jury selection.

Speaker 3 (16:03):
We did not have a chance, not a chance.

Speaker 4 (16:05):
No. But even with that jury, I mean, you look
at those jurors. I mean, one nightmare juror after the next.
I thought some of the first jurors, I mean one
joined Karen Reid's legal team was pretty awful, but this
jury was some of the most. I mean just completely
you know, had criminals and their family were just like

(16:27):
totally but even they couldn't fully absolve Karen Reid. They
still convicted her of drug driving. I mean, as much
as they wanted to, with the pressure of the entire
you know, huge massive people outside saying free Karen Reid,
totally absolver her, they couldn't totally absolve her. They're like, look,
she was driving drunk, you know, and they could have

(16:50):
given her two years in prison, which I still don't
understand why Hank Brennan didn't at least even as a
token with Kenoni, You're not going to get far. She's
no innocent fruster judge in my opinion, but I mean,
you know you're not gonna get far with that, but
at least as a as a toke, like as some
kind of token that you're you know, he just completely

(17:13):
just put his tail between his legs and folded at
the end there. I don't understand why he didn't push
for two years in prison, which was which she could
have gotten just for the drunk on the drunk driving
charge because it related resulted in the death. So you know,

(17:33):
once again, it looks like Karen Reid has like a
mass these lawyers, has started early on defending herself in
this civil case. It seems like way ahead. And once
again we're looking at the in this case, it's the
plane of side a little bit flat footed. They didn't

(17:54):
have any of the any of the paperwork. They haven't
started deposing people. Uh, what do you feel? How do
you feel? Do you know anything about? Uh heard of
the plaintiff's legal team.

Speaker 2 (18:09):
Uh, just Mark Diller. Mark Diller was around sporadically throughout
the criminal trials, and Frank I thought he they did
a pretty good job.

Speaker 4 (18:18):
Yesterday I did too, But.

Speaker 3 (18:24):
It's just par for the course.

Speaker 2 (18:25):
Though it's more it's essentially the the position of the
defense yesterday was springing, springing things on the court. Again,
I againting no paperwork has been filed. The judge said
that three times. This is like a pre trial. Uh
kind of he said, tracking a tracking report to kind
of lay out the timeline, uh, and the range of

(18:47):
when a trial could happen. He said that the trial
he did, court's ready to go in the spring. But clearly, uh,
listening to what us both sides said yesterday, there's no
way that's gonna happen. So this will get dragged out
yet again, maybe until early twenty twenty seven.

Speaker 3 (19:01):
I think was stated yesterday.

Speaker 2 (19:03):
But I think I think Attorney Dillar did a pretty
strong job yesterday. I at least I did not know
what to expect. I'd met him in person, but I've
never seen him in court. But I thought he was
pretty strong.

Speaker 4 (19:16):
I thought so too. And uh, why is why is
John's family suing? I mean my understanding is that I
think we were talking yesterday and you said they don't
need the money, they don't need the money. Why are
they putting themselves through this?

Speaker 2 (19:32):
I mean yeah, I mean yeah, the suit itself again
like that there should be a financial.

Speaker 3 (19:40):
Recourse for you know.

Speaker 2 (19:42):
For the loss of a of a son and a
father figure and a guardian. So don't get on that side,
but I think it's frankly, I think it's more important
that on some level, in some way, even if it's
in civil court, kind of akin to OJ, they want
they still want justice. They want her to be held
countable in some official capacity for what she did. And

(20:05):
you know, we know what happened the first two times
in the in the criminal efforts, and this is the
kind of the last shot at getting anything quote unquote
officially in court where she is found responsible.

Speaker 3 (20:16):
I think that's the most important.

Speaker 4 (20:18):
Yeah, this is not unusual. I mean, this is the
playbook of any of any innocence frauds for ever. I
mean it's not that she's not only not taking responsibility,
she's saying she's a victim. She's the victim, and she's
she told Natalie Bernschneider WEWIKI that she erased all of
John's pictures. I mean, she's trying to literally erase John

(20:41):
o'kee from the face of the earth. So I mean
badly that everybody has to go through this. You know, again, she's.

Speaker 3 (20:51):
Done a good job.

Speaker 2 (20:52):
But you know, people will never speak ill of the dead.
But I will tell you that the the size of
the network of folks that that legitimately and genuinely loved
John O'Keefe, well, she can do whatever she wants to
that we will never lose his memory. He will always
there are so many people. There's constant discussions about what
else can we do with a golf tournament. We're talking

(21:14):
about doing something on December eighth, would have been his
fiftieth birthday. We're talking about that. You know, this is
not The support for the O'Keefe family has not waned.
The one observation I wanted to share with you from
yesterday was, you know, obviously it's a it's a media
circus and debtum during a criminal trial. Uh And the

(21:34):
one thing I did expect to see what there was
far there was there were no reporters in Plymouth yesterday.
None there were I mean that TV reporters. So there's
nobody interviewing outside. There were folks in the there were
press in the in the courtroom, but it wasn't the
kind of outsid There's no cameras outside, you know, struggling

(21:56):
with each other to try to get a quote from someone.
I think they did interview Diller on the way out,
but it was just far less of a circus than debtam.

Speaker 4 (22:06):
So were there just few the no TV crews.

Speaker 3 (22:10):
Just when we walked in there were no TV crews.

Speaker 2 (22:14):
I believe the TV crews had shown up later in
the afternoon because I believe I saw Diller get interviewed
on the way out, but it was not. It was
it was a fraction of what I don't think there's
any There's definitely no national coverage. Remember in Debtham with
the civil civil case, you had Dateline there and ABC
National and NBC, and there was I saw the Channel

(22:37):
five that the ABC affiliate in Boston.

Speaker 3 (22:40):
They had a van in the parking.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
Lot, but that was the only media vehicle I saw,
So it did seem to be muted. I know, as
you've educated me, that the grift can go on forever,
but the news cycle does roll on, and there has
to be Karen Read fatigue at some point, right at
least from the from the Matt population perspective.

Speaker 4 (23:01):
As long as she can make money. I mean, speaking
of making money, I want to get back to the
family in the second but I mean, what did you
think of her selling her story or getting movie rights
and selling book Great Stewarts Story. So we're going to
get the Karen Reid movie in addition full Karen Read Book.

Speaker 3 (23:23):
We fully expected it. We fully expected it.

Speaker 2 (23:28):
Like whatever she can get, whatever project she can get
money for to tell her fictitious story.

Speaker 3 (23:34):
We figured she would.

Speaker 4 (23:36):
And was Turtle Boy there yesterday?

Speaker 3 (23:38):
I didn't see him. I didn't look for him either,
but I did not see him. It was it was,
it was a much from what I again, it was
a quick glance.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
I tried to focus on what I focus on, which
is what's going on in the courtroom.

Speaker 3 (23:50):
But it was an older demographic yesterday.

Speaker 2 (23:56):
I would say median age of her supporters is probably
mid sixties. I didn't see all those young folks that
happened to happen to correlate with crowds on demand dates.
I didn't see a single I didn't see a single
person under sixty. So I mean maybe that's whether they
have nothing else to do.

Speaker 3 (24:17):
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (24:20):
Yeah, I mean you would think. I mean it's demanding,
getting your court and everything. I mean speaking of I mean,
how is how is John's family holding up? Are they
Someone's asking about Paul specifically in the Irene is asking
about Paul. How are they doing?

Speaker 2 (24:39):
I mean, the best I can say is that they're
doing the best they can under the circumstances. You know,
there's there's there's there's there are children to focus on,
which I think is a kind of a welcome distraction.
But so you know, missus o'keef is still the primary
for Johnny's niece and nephew.

Speaker 3 (24:56):
And then Paul has two.

Speaker 2 (24:57):
Beautiful nieces of his own, beautiful daughters of his own
that are two of my favorite kids.

Speaker 3 (25:02):
To be completely honest with you, there's awesome, awesome people,
all four of them.

Speaker 2 (25:06):
So then they're all very busy, they're all very active,
they'll play sports. So I think that that normal life
has has you know, it'll.

Speaker 3 (25:15):
Never return to where it was prior to the murder,
but I feel like.

Speaker 2 (25:18):
They've they're they've been able to do the best they
can under the circumstances and and and make things as
normal as possible for their kids.

Speaker 4 (25:30):
Okay, so Eva is asking, I can answer this, but
excuse me if is if the o'keefes win civil suit,
can she still profit over a movie and book deal?
What do you know about that, Brendon, I think.

Speaker 3 (25:44):
You normally that's the son of Sam Law, right, I
think that's.

Speaker 4 (25:48):
Those sons of Sam Laws were totally destroyed by Uh.
We did get a great movie out of it, Goodfellas,
But there is a good Fellas is based on a
book called Guys by Nick Poledge, and when they went
in to make that the son of Sam laws. At
least this is in New York, so they were challenged

(26:09):
and when gotten rid of. They still are on the
books in various states. I don't know about Massachusetts, but
they don't really they're not really enforced ever. Yeah, they're
really just a token, sort of a token to victims'
rights that never really gets enforced. So Son of Sam

(26:30):
at least in New York is but some states do
have some kind of son of Sam laws, but they're
rarely enforced. I mean, whence the last time you remember
hearing about some kind of.

Speaker 2 (26:41):
That's That's the kind of the general approach I have
now after everything we've been through, is my expectations on
any of this. They frankly could not be any lower.
I expect nothing from the court. I expect nothing even
to the civil civil decision made that I think they'll
ever get any money out of her. I have no
idea that they move things to offshore accounts. I mean,

(27:04):
you know, she and her father worked for Fidelity. They're
not they're not dumb people. They know what to do
with with money. So again at this point I have.
I have the most positive hopes that that, you know,
as I did for the last three and a half
four years, but my expectations are admittedly zero at this stage.
We were failed by so many layers of government and

(27:29):
policing and the judge. And it's like, you know, even
though we it's really tough because we know what happened.

Speaker 3 (27:35):
We followed the evidence.

Speaker 2 (27:39):
In an objective fashion, and.

Speaker 3 (27:42):
We did not get justice.

Speaker 2 (27:43):
So how can I expect to get an objective jury
in a civil case that just got moved over one
county when we frankly weren't able to get an objective
jury twice in this criminal case. So if I'm being
reasonable and rational, you know, I'll be there to support
the family until I'm dead. But my expectations are really low.

(28:04):
I don't think people can deal with more disappointment, right.

Speaker 4 (28:08):
Expectations are down payment on disappointment. Have you heard that?

Speaker 3 (28:12):
Yeah? Exactly.

Speaker 4 (28:15):
So yesterday there was kind of a remarkable back and
forth between the lawyers about Kelly. I know you're closer
with Patrick. We'll talk about that in a second. But
saying that Calley cannot get is not do any any

(28:36):
kind of financial reward for pain and suffering because Karen
Reid didn't run over John O'Keefe in front of her
ineed and she hid her crime and she and I
thought that the practice. When Diller was strongest, he had
two really strong moments I thought in court. One was
when he talked about the relationship between Karen Read Basically

(29:01):
he was talking about innocent fraud and and and Turtle
Boy and how how she's basically put pressure on the
courts from from outside and she's moved you know, the
court of public opinion into the into our courts. And
the second, uh was when he was talking about her

(29:22):
going back to John O'Keefe's home, not her home, sneak
going in like a I always say, sneaking in like
a burglar, and and starting to and what he said
was a plot and plan her cover up right there
and and in his home where she's an uninvited guest.
At that point, he didn't say, he said, come stay

(29:43):
with us for the weekend. It's going to be a storm.
But he didn't say, after you murder me, you're welcome
to come into my home and start to plan your
cover up. I mean, she's an uninvited guest at that point,
the fact that she hid her crime for hours is
now suddenly Kelly's Cally can't be traumatized because she wasn't

(30:05):
informed till hours after. I thought that was a remarkable,
really probably pretty Stummach turning argument. How did you feel
listening to it?

Speaker 2 (30:17):
Yeah, it was disgusting. I also did think that was
Dillar's strongest moment. The other piece that he made clear
was that, you know, for better or for worse, over
the previous eighteen to twenty months, Karen had served as
some form of maternal figure in that household. She knew
full well what the kids had been through losing both

(30:39):
of their parents. So you know Diller's point that that
knowledge of you know, maybe fragility or having gone through
such trauma prior to her murdering her uncle, it is
an important facet where knowing this, she still woke her up,
shook her awake, and said, you know, he got hit
by a plow. He's dead. Maybe I hit him with

(31:01):
my car, is the defense assertion. To me, again, it
is absurd to me. The only I mean again, public
sentiments one thing, But if at the civil trial, which
has the ability to get you know, more people to
actually see the truth. And you and I have talked
about the many examples of innocence fraud in the past,

(31:23):
and the fact that Amanda Knox is still perpetuating, you know,
and and all these other examples of things that have
been produced. Is not is not guilty doesn't mean innocent?
That uh, that more people will finally be able to
see the truth. Like, wait a minute, they missed that
in the criminal trial and they didn't know this, They
didn't know that. And I, frankly I Diller made a

(31:46):
couple of points yesterday that were really strong, kind of
underlined reiterations of things that have come up in the
criminal trial that make absolutely no sense.

Speaker 3 (31:57):
And it starts with her waking waking up Kayley.

Speaker 4 (32:01):
Right, And I mean, these people aren't It's not like
I'm finding borderline cases. I mean, to me, these are
pretty overwhelming. How did you know microscopic pieces of Karen's
tail light end up embedded in John O'Keefe's shirt. I mean,
there's there. They've not been able to prove any kind
of And also, I mean just the whole timeline with

(32:24):
the car already on the way to the Sally part
when the cert team's arriving and finding pieces of Karen's
tail light. I mean, you know, there's no time to
plant anything.

Speaker 2 (32:37):
So then I'll tell you this too. So they hank
Hank Brandan when I'm not using it. He went with
apertures approach, which okay. But following the first trial, to
his credit Adam Walley, there was a there's a core
of us that were court quite a bit. You know,
fifteen to twenty of us were in rotation and manly
Johnny's family, and three or four of us close as

(32:58):
friends and and a couple of them, a couple of
our buddies are actually lawyers, so they had even better perspective.
But as we sat through and listened to every word
of the trial, after the first trial and the hung jury,
Adam Nalley had asked us, you know what, what what
do you guys.

Speaker 3 (33:13):
Have for us?

Speaker 2 (33:13):
Like we're willing to listen, and I'm fairly vocal. I said,
I'll go. I said he hadn't done in the first trial,
which was the the I believe still the contention of
the defense, which is that she cracked her tail light
on Johnny's traverse backing out in that infamous court TV
ring video where she bumped the bumper. There was never

(33:33):
in the first trial Trooper Paul was talking about the
height of the bumpers. There was never a pictures videos
like can we get a picture and some video to
show that that's not possible? And to Lally's credit, two
days later we did that. We brought Johnny's traverse down
to a State Police Barracks parking lot and we recreated
the lexus backing out from both angles.

Speaker 3 (33:55):
Frankly, because the the.

Speaker 2 (33:57):
Right side, the right side of the tail light was
gone at that point, because they had taken it for
evidence to show, and we proved beyond the shadow of
a doubt. As the bumpers are crunching into each other,
you can hear on the video of the bumpers crunching
there is a two inch gap between the ba Her
tail light and Johnny's traverse. It was physically impossible for

(34:18):
that tail light. Who've ever made contact with his car?
And again, you know Monday morning quarterbacking. And I'm not
an attorney, but looking back at trial too, they went
with the aperture version of that, and I frankly, I
think the Mass Day Police had better video proving that
there was absolutely zero chance that tail light was damaged
in Johnny's driveway.

Speaker 4 (34:40):
Yeah, yeah, And I knew what we were losing. When
when you hire experts like that, you lose the you
lose the kind of moral high ground, like we didn't
hire our experts. Our experts are nervous Trooper Paul, like,
he's not a professional expert. We're not paying him. And
you know, Brendan went another way and paying bringing experts,

(35:03):
paid experts in and then you kind of you have
two paid experts up against each other and who it
becomes like the battle of the experts, right. You know,
I actually have a I don't know you've heard, I
don't know. Listen to my show. You probably let me
see if I have this clip hanging around. Hold on
one second, I think I got rid of it. But

(35:24):
Dominic Dunn says, you know, these experts, He says, you know,
I only cover the trials of the rich and famous
because they have the big bucks to pay for these,
you know, experts. Karen Reid was lucky. She sort of
grifted off the federal investigation, which was in basically another

(35:45):
arm of the defense that came up with nothing, but
it helped her you know, helped her. She got to
use those and then she got she got her you know,
she got her experts paid for by her, by her supporters.
But she said they have the big bucks to pay
for these experts. And he says juries fall for these

(36:05):
expert witnesses all the time. I personally give me nervous
Trooper Paul any day over any expert. You know, I
just find them a little bit more trustworthy than the
than the paid experts. That's, you know, been my position.

Speaker 2 (36:20):
I think amateur, maybe explosive. Had the Trooper Paul was
correct about a lot a lot of his data, it
was just made the delivery that was challenging.

Speaker 4 (36:31):
Yeah, I know, I know. It's just like and then ARCA,
that final you know, I mean, can we talk about
that final video of ARCA. I mean it just basically
sort of proves the state's case almost exactly. They have
the dummy twisting around. They're like, what did he pure wet?

Speaker 2 (36:50):
Yes?

Speaker 4 (36:51):
Apparently, you know, apparently the fourth turns you around and
flings you. I mean, uh, all of these things are soot.
We don't know, we don't know where he was when
he was hit. I mean, so many things we don't know,
but just the basics of it, the basic mechanics. We
we got a great view that you know, final day

(37:13):
in court. I mean, for me, it just seemed like
the jury was like I don't care what I see.
I you know, I hate the government. I hate that
and I'm here to Like I just felt like we
had a jury nullification totally in the in this case,
Like I'm not going to follow any of the evidence
in this case. So I mean not just like a
little evidence. There's like so much evidence. I mean from

(37:34):
the phone records to the you know, the cell phone,
to the to the pieces of tail light to I
mean whatever else you would. But you know, Karen Reid
supporters were coped well ARCA. ARCA proved that he wasn't
hit by a car. Well, that's what they're paid to do.
It wouldn't be on the stand if they if they
found out otherwise. And certainly, I mean, what was so

(37:57):
shocking in that trial, and I don't think I've seen
in any other trial is expert witnesses talking on an
encrypted app and all the hiding of the evidence from
the state with no repercussions. I mean, what was that
like sitting through that stuff in court. Were you there
that day when you know that state?

Speaker 2 (38:18):
If I wasn't in person, I was watching the stream
at that point, and it kind of become like less
surprising because there's just it just seemed like there was
no depth they would sink to. It's just that they
were never being held accountable by the judge. I think,
and even even earlier in our conversation today, there was

(38:40):
one glimmer in that in the two trials where CANNONI
said it's something funny, miss read the only time she
ever and the defendant never stopped making faces or.

Speaker 3 (38:51):
Rolling her eyes or turn around talking to dad.

Speaker 2 (38:55):
You know, one time at the end of a of
a I think of a hearing, it's something funny, miss read.
That was the only only Oh ways things gonna start
to change here.

Speaker 3 (39:04):
No, they're not.

Speaker 2 (39:05):
They're not the buffer zone out no way about the
buffer zone. They can hire people and have people surrounding
the courthouse like it's a football game. The strangest thing
for me and in that in that second in the
second trial, is that you're you're sitting there and you're
you're you're where our box was, you're facing the jury,
so like it's like you're not you're trying not to
stare at them, but if you look straight ahead, you're

(39:26):
looking at the jury. So you know, yes, you do
study them over time, and you're you're admittedly projecting, You're projecting.

Speaker 3 (39:32):
The whole time.

Speaker 2 (39:34):
And you know, a couple of the folks that that
the people that went that went public afterwards, there were
definitely some some concerns, you know, even early on looking
at them and were they're taking notes and what their
facial reactions were. The irony to me was there was
one juror that I was most concerned about, frankly that

(39:54):
he never went public, so I have absolutely no idea
exactly what his what his role was in the operation,
but we never heard anything from him. But there was
one gentleman that I was like, we are in trouble
with that guy, and it turns out I was. I
should have been more worried about a coloprado, but you know,
she didn't instill me with confidence either with some of

(40:15):
her reactions. And yeah, there was a there was a
very young jur on the right hand side that found
everything Alan Jackson said hilarious. So you know that doesn't
take an expert to say, that's that's problematic.

Speaker 3 (40:27):
Very young, Jerry, very young, very young.

Speaker 4 (40:30):
Especially, I thought so. I thought that was terrifying. I
mean they've had I mean, they've had nothing, but you know,
wrongful conviction, years of wrongful conviction, innocent fraud media, you know,
just embedded in their brain. At that point, I told
you what I was a juror. This young guy says,

(40:53):
the first vote when I was a juror was eleven
to one guilty. So most of us thought this gentleman
was guilty as a child preditation case, and so we
had to we had to flip this one juror who
didn't really understand, hadn't misunderstood some of the evidence, and
we had to flip her. And we did that in

(41:13):
about two hours. Right as we're about to hand in
our verdict, this guy stands up and says, well, there
are a lot of wrongful convictions, but I don't think
this is one of them. I thought, you think any
jury thinks that they're handing in a wrongful conviction?

Speaker 3 (41:28):
You know what I mean?

Speaker 4 (41:28):
Do you think any jury is is a borderline on
their on their verdict handing it in? I mean you
have to be so sure, uh, you know you're looking
for anything as a jury to to to absolve someone.
But I didn't feel like Karen Reid brought anything to
the table except you know, some mean texts. Uh Eva says,

(41:54):
thanks Roberta for your time and faith and justice, although
denied for John O'Keefe, blessings for Brendan, Thanks so much much,
appreciate it. Eva, what there's one other thing I wanted
to Oh, this is what I wanted to just say.
Then there was another really remarkable part of the hearing

(42:14):
at the end where the judge do you know anything
about this judge?

Speaker 3 (42:19):
Nothing?

Speaker 4 (42:21):
Do you know his name? Even I don't know.

Speaker 2 (42:26):
I went to missus Johnny's mom I'd sent me a
text on Saturday and said, hey, we're employment on Monday.
So when Johnny's mom sent you a text, it's like
I'm going to go. I had absolutely no idea what
to expect yesterday. So I went in kind of blind,
kind of blind.

Speaker 4 (42:40):
Oh look, how good my audience is. Ohshia, thank you, Julia, oshay,
thank you. Oh but of course my great pronunciations.

Speaker 3 (42:50):
Well, a lot of iris, a lot of irish.

Speaker 4 (42:52):
Oshay okay, uh, Daniel o'sha, thank you. Okay, So he
goes into this long speech. I think you just referenced
it about how you know, long these these civil cases
can go on for and how they should probably try
to settle it amongst themselves if they don't want this

(43:15):
thing to drag on till you know. He says, I
have a case that's eighteen years old, and I'm looking
at Karen Reid. I mean, I like, I felt like, say, judge,
have you been following this case? Do you know? Do
you know the do you know this woman? I mean,
she's never gonna admit guilt ever. Ever. If she gets

(43:36):
if she gets there's a miracle in this case and
she gets some kind of guilty verdict, she will be
trying to overturn it for years. I mean, it will
go on for years.

Speaker 3 (43:48):
I mean, yeah, I.

Speaker 2 (43:49):
Think that pieces music to her ears. The longer the
longer this goes, the better it is for her. Yeah.
He spent a long time on that piece and kind
of kind of approached both sides with it, you know,
even talking about the timeline of when the trial could
be set and and even in a civil in a

(44:11):
civil case, the appellate piece, if it could go on
for decades, and yeah, I mean he kind of he
kind of set up some some reality for us yesterday where.

Speaker 3 (44:22):
It's okay, yeah, this thing is not going to end.

Speaker 4 (44:25):
Yeah, Brandon, I think of it. I ended here. I mean,
do you have anything else you want to add? Anything
I missed?

Speaker 2 (44:34):
I mean no, I mean, there's so much we could
talk about, but you just couldn't just at the foundational level.
I hope historically people look back and you you you
brought up the one key point about the microscopic.

Speaker 3 (44:47):
Pieces of tail light in the sleeve.

Speaker 2 (44:48):
The jury decided to ignore to me at this point,
you know, because the details get lost over time. But
the two pieces that that jury ignored were the tailight
pieces in the sleeve and the ten second window that
we had from her car from the time it was
triggered by putting it in reverse and jamming on the accelerator,
and the fact that that coincided within a very small

(45:12):
time window of Johnny's phone stopped moving forever. And so
the jury looked at both of those pieces of clear
evidence and simply dismissed them. So to anybody, and again,
everyone's tell their opinion. I have my opinion. I believe,
I know exactly what happened that night, and believe I
know what happened.

Speaker 3 (45:31):
After that night.

Speaker 2 (45:32):
But to me, it's like you can go through all,
oh what about this, what about that? And there's a
thousand things they can try to bring off Procter and
the mean text everything else. Something needs to explain to
me how the hell the phone stopping moving in the
within the ten second window of the trigger and the
microscopic tale I fragments earnest sleep And when SEMy Kay
explained that to me, then maybe that will never happen

(45:55):
Number one, But it's something I'd love to hear somebody
argue they'd never argued those pieces.

Speaker 4 (46:01):
Oh, Irene has a good question. Why are the bars
being sued?

Speaker 2 (46:07):
I got standard civil procedure in an OUI again, I'm
on the attorney.

Speaker 3 (46:11):
But the one, the other ones that served.

Speaker 4 (46:13):
Her, I mean just so many drinks, one after another.
I mean you go to the timing of those drinks
that she was over served? Yeah, yeah, I mean just
every I think it's something like every don't quote me
on this, but every ten minutes something like that, she's
getting another. I think she had nine drinks, one whiskey

(46:40):
and nine t you know, I can't remember if it's
eight t do's and something like that.

Speaker 2 (46:50):
At seven and a couple of shots. But the other
thing that people kind of glance over is, you know,
people go to a bar. I've never had a girlfriend
or wife that orders the side shot and chucks it
in the chucks it in the old mixer.

Speaker 3 (47:06):
I mean like that that is like some like.

Speaker 2 (47:08):
Old school professional drinking that she's that you can see
on video. It's the drink wasn't strong enough, so get
me a shot on the side, little sidecar, toss it
into the to whatever's left of the tonic and the glass.
She was just ordering new drinks. She was dumping ounces
of vodka into the drink. So there's no question always
a light drink. It was a heavy drink, which she

(47:28):
had contended, Oh, they're so weak, the drinks are so weak.
There maybe weak to you because you are a professional
at this, but you know we have video evidence.

Speaker 3 (47:38):
Of of of of her being overserved. So I think
that's the answer on the bars.

Speaker 4 (47:43):
Great, and you had spent a day with her and
you were shocked by how much she could drink. Can
you talk about that?

Speaker 3 (47:52):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (47:53):
So, I mean again, it's that that relationship.

Speaker 3 (47:58):
Happened really because of COVID.

Speaker 2 (48:00):
COVID had another victim, john There's Johnny raising two kids
now he's he's essentially home bound due to COVID, and
he starts reaching out to a number of people frankly,
and she's the one that answered. And uh so, there
wasn't a whole lot of direct in our action, personal

(48:21):
interaction role in our houses. But then when things started
to clear up a little bit, Johnny called me up
one day and said, hey, we also had a rule
that if my wife was going to get to know
any of Johnny's girlfriends, he had to be dating them
for at least a year, because there has been a
few and uh they were She.

Speaker 3 (48:41):
Called me it it's been.

Speaker 2 (48:42):
Over a year's I'm like, uh huh. And I talked
to Karen a couple of times on the phone or
via text or we'd been in contact a couple of times,
and weren't you know, we never met each other. And
we spent we went to a Bruins game. It was
a Saturday. It was a day game against the Rangers.
All these details are very clear.

Speaker 3 (48:59):
It was a noon game.

Speaker 2 (49:00):
And my wife's contention was what if she sucks, that's Forbatim,
And I said, if she sucks, then we will enjoy
live hockey because live hockey is great, and then we'll
go home. And they kind of hit it off. And
they both worked at the same They had both worked
at Fidelity, so they knew a lot of the same people.
So again we have a one day sample here. Don't
get me wrong, it was not a close relationship, but

(49:23):
this is my exposure and you know, beers at the
game and then okay, so everybody's getting along and I
got the you know, more time to get spent, Johnny
the better and we start hitting some bars around Boston.
We are not big drinkers at this stage. At one
point in my life, I definitely was, but this is
probably the most I've drank in years that day. But
we drank from like noon till around ten o'clock. We

(49:45):
wound up back in Braintree, our hometown, to have dinner
at like ten, and then went home around ten thirty.
But what was notable was I think we drank beer
all day and spaces out a little more. But she
was just she was pretty much pounding vodka all day long,
and she was you could not even tell she was
tipsy by the end of the night. And again this

(50:05):
is all very clear in hindsight. At the you know,
on the drive home from that day, it was wow,
she's I think Johnny found a really smart girl. She's
very intelligent. And as I go back and rewind it
in my head multiple times, her approach, now self analyzed
by me, a non psychologist.

Speaker 3 (50:25):
Was just asking a lot of questions.

Speaker 2 (50:27):
She asked a ton of questions all day, Like, I
don't think we found.

Speaker 4 (50:35):
That's how she I mean, that's how she got away
with profiled every single person in this like psychopaths too profiling.
I think we.

Speaker 3 (50:44):
Asked questions back. It wasn't like a one.

Speaker 2 (50:46):
It's strange how in hindsight it's so clear, but we
would add her answers back would be either short or
kurt or didn't.

Speaker 3 (50:52):
Have much detail.

Speaker 2 (50:54):
But then she want to know about our daughter, and
she want to know about oh this girl fidelity and
oh so you know we went to know her name.

Speaker 3 (50:59):
Okay, tell me about Notre.

Speaker 2 (51:00):
Dame like it was like it was like a nine
hour interview. But in the in the like I got
fooled buyer. I said that in other places where you know,
I generally feel like I can't. I don't get fooled
that often. I was fooled by Karen Reid, Like I
legitimately was like, Wow, he found a good one, you know,
highly motivated, driven, she was successful, clearly intelligent. So the

(51:24):
psychopathy didn't become clear until after she murdered my friend.
But so I feel a little dumb. But she's good
at what she does. She's good at what she does.

Speaker 4 (51:34):
Yeah, And that's the question I had for you, is
I guess when we first talked, I just wanted to know,
and I think a lot of people want to know
in this case, is why John let her drive after
having all those drinks? And can you? Can you repeat
your I mean, what did you? What did you What
was your answer? I thought I thought of it. You

(51:56):
said she was a professional.

Speaker 3 (51:58):
I mean, yeah, she's she could he Johnny even drinking
the night too.

Speaker 2 (52:02):
But is it possible that even subconsciously Johnny knew that
she could handle her liquor better than he did?

Speaker 1 (52:08):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (52:09):
I mean Johnny's drinking Miller lights he had every time
we go out as a group or whatever, we still
order John drinking bud lights, sorry, bud lights. And in
the summer, you drink bud Light lime, which is like undrinkable,
but we have to order one at every bar we
go to when when we're together and honor giants. No
one's gonna drink this bud Light line, guys, but yet
we order it in honor.

Speaker 1 (52:29):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (52:29):
So he was drinking just bud Lights that night. Again,
maybe you know, was it anybody drinking drive evert new?
But you know, you get comfortable in your small suburb
and it's only two minutes away, And was it a
bad decision? Uh yeah, objectively, yeah, but but maybe on
some level, you know, she she she she was just

(52:51):
a machine.

Speaker 3 (52:53):
She could, she could.

Speaker 4 (52:54):
Yeah. It doesn't touch the sides, Yeah yeah, yeah, That's
why I always had trouble with this. It was this
sort of line that she was so drunk and she
got I don't I don't ever feel like she was
so out of control drunk. I really feel like she was,
you know, like she says that within her senses. You know,

(53:15):
she wasn't blind drunk and just was in a blind
rage and all this stuff. I just don't see it
like that. I've always said, you know, alcohol doesn't seem
to touch the sides with her and uh, not, no way,
I'm just objectively. But yeah, it's scary the mask people wear,

(53:35):
isn't it scary? I mean we all can be fooled.
It's scary.

Speaker 2 (53:40):
I think it's been enlightening in the worst possible way.

Speaker 4 (53:45):
Yeah, true, true. And then there's also I mean, just uh,
there's let me see if I can pull it in.
Hold on one hot, hot minute, please hold. I should
have gotten this. But you know, the picture that I
used on the thumbnail of you and John has like
an interesting history. Do you want to do you want
to talk about that, like how that picture was taken?

Speaker 2 (54:09):
Yeah, so so you know when all this happened and
people are looking for, you know, get pictures of you
as as I don't know, this is like a male thing.
And and the fact that we didn't have cell phones
in our pockets take pictures every five minutes. But like
we weren't like taking polarid pictures of ourselves like like

(54:30):
in high school or you know, at a bar in college.

Speaker 3 (54:33):
Like it just we weren't documenting the stuff we were doing.

Speaker 2 (54:36):
So a lot of the pictures that that I was
able on earth either came from my mom's closet, from
the time we were four to the time we were twelve,
from birthday parties. Uh.

Speaker 3 (54:45):
And then I'm actually really thankful that I have.

Speaker 2 (54:47):
This picture you're referring to, which is the last picture
we ever took again, one of not very many, but
I kind of forgot about it a little bit and
the context, but uh, it was we took a picture
on Landsday Street. It was the last Red Sox game
we ever went to. It was the fall of the
Fall of twenty one. And that was the other piece

(55:11):
with Johnny was was was always great parking. He'd always
eat great parking, BPD would take care of their own
on the parking. As we go to Fenway, we have
a good spot. And we went into the Landsdown Bar
and he wanted to take a picture, and I'm sure
I said something like why what are you doing? And

(55:32):
his response was essentially he had to prove to Karen
where he was and who he was with. I found
that very odd, and that was like my first red
flag where my spidy senses were tingling, like, wait, what
you know. I know some couple share location and such.
I share my location with my wife for safety, not

(55:53):
because she's worried about where I am. So that was
the first kind of view I had into any concerning
component of their relationship.

Speaker 3 (56:04):
But I love that. I don't care why. At this point,
I'm glad I have that picture. It's on my wall.

Speaker 2 (56:10):
Uh, it's it's uh. I think our teeth look good.
We have good teeth. So from that perspective, it's like,
I'm very thankful I've got it, the last one of
the last memories I'll I'll share with him. But yeah,
did to further complicate the matter and and give context
to how it played out, maybe in August of twenty one,

(56:32):
I should have had more concerns than I did.

Speaker 3 (56:34):
But it's tough to.

Speaker 2 (56:35):
Tell your uh, you know, forty something year old buddy, like,
hey man, that's weird, don't do that.

Speaker 4 (56:42):
But he was also he seemed, you know, like extremely organized,
extremely neat. Uh. You know, it didn't seem like, just
from talking to the few people I've talked to, it
didn't seem like you would be a friend that you
would worry about being in a relationship like this.

Speaker 2 (56:57):
You know, I think Johnny be one of those people
I was never worried about in any way, shape or form,
not just relationships like he just he was always he
always wanted to be a cop.

Speaker 3 (57:06):
He's unbelievably hard working.

Speaker 2 (57:09):
I mean, we worked at a gas station in high
school in our hometown, and he's like this was like
he'd worked constantly. He goes to high school, he's working
like forty hour shifts for forty hour weeks. He just
he's very street smart too, very very aware, very self aware.
I never had a single concern. I never worried about Johnny,

(57:30):
and I really didn't. So the dating piece of it was,
you know, he had a type. It happened to be
the opposite of my type. So we never had any
type of issues there. I'm happy about that because he
would have won most of.

Speaker 3 (57:41):
Those face offs.

Speaker 2 (57:42):
But but at the end of the day, it's you know,
there were he dates somebody for a while, and he
had a couple of serious girlfriends over the years that
you know, didn't work out for different reasons.

Speaker 3 (57:53):
But I can't remember a time where Johnny went very
long without a girlfriend. He was he was genuine. It
wasn't that he was like smooth, he was just genuine.
It was a real guy and what you saw was
what you got.

Speaker 2 (58:09):
And I guess the fact it's objectively good looking didn't
hurt either, But uh, yeah, I mean it was it was,
there was, there was some rotation, there was some turnover
in the in the girlfriends.

Speaker 3 (58:21):
So uh, some of them I didn't get to know
very well.

Speaker 2 (58:23):
A couple of them I got to know really well
and still talk to and they're wonderful people. And yeah,
he just it's it's uh, it was never a scenario
where he's gonna he's gonna wind up dating one of
these girls that's gonna wind up killing him.

Speaker 3 (58:36):
Like that was not no, that was not in the cards.
It's just, uh, he just pulled the wrong card, pull
the wrong one.

Speaker 4 (58:42):
Yeah, well, Brenda, this has been like really fun for me,
and I know my audience is really uh joined it.
Someone's asking what was John's type?

Speaker 3 (58:55):
Nope, nope, I'm talking physically. It was usually thin and blonde.
H and blonde.

Speaker 2 (59:02):
I prefer sure brunettes for the record, But.

Speaker 3 (59:05):
But yeah, it was.

Speaker 2 (59:07):
There was a period of time for both of us
where we had an ongoing joke where, you know, if
I had three three girls in college that came home
over the summer and he would ask me, that's not
the same girl. It's like, no, that's a different girl.
They just look similar. And I turn it right on
him because he had multiple girlfriends in a row that
we're all tall and blonde, they all could be related.
So it was it was a kind of an not

(59:29):
even an insight, just a straight up.

Speaker 3 (59:30):
Joke between us.

Speaker 2 (59:31):
But again, I'm thankful our types are different, to be
completely honest.

Speaker 4 (59:37):
Yeah, this has been really fun for me. I hope
you'll come back. I know my audience is asking you
to come back and keep us, keep us abreast of
what's going on and in in court with we're going.
It just feels like after two trials, this is I
feel so sad for the family to have to go

(59:58):
through this again, this psychopath uhath.

Speaker 3 (01:00:06):
I do too, and again I will.

Speaker 2 (01:00:08):
I will tell you in your audience that there is
still a tremendously strong network of support that surrounds that family,
not just in Canton, but they've got a big support
of family, and and you know there's there's Johnny had
a number of very close friends. I'm one of many.
By the way, there's a few others that frankly couldn't
speak publicly for different reasons. A couple of them are

(01:00:31):
police officers, so they can't do that stuff. So I
kind of dorew this short straw on the on doing
some of the press stuff, which I frankly didn't ever.

Speaker 3 (01:00:39):
Want to do.

Speaker 2 (01:00:39):
I wasn't comfortable doing it. I don't want to see
myself on camera ever. But but but the reality of
the situation was no, I.

Speaker 3 (01:00:47):
Did you know. I had to.

Speaker 2 (01:00:49):
I had to do it, and I felt like I
know for a fact he would have done it for me.

Speaker 4 (01:00:53):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:00:53):
And again I just I appreciate you having me, Roberta,
and I appreciate everything.

Speaker 4 (01:00:57):
You A couple of quick questions. I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Was there kitties is asking? Great show? And guess was
there any gossip or discussion? I think we've all heard
these rumories about Karen's previous boyfriends. What do you know
and what have you heard?

Speaker 2 (01:01:14):
So nothing legit and nothing's ever been proven. The gossip
or the rumors were that she again this is all speculation.

Speaker 3 (01:01:23):
Uh, there was that she set.

Speaker 2 (01:01:25):
Someone's car on fire supposedly. Again, I had no idea
there's any truth to that rumor at all. So, but
that was the other pieces. No one knows anything for
sure about any of the ex boyfriends.

Speaker 3 (01:01:37):
And then the question was, you know, the Commonwealth couldn't.

Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
Find any of them, Like, you know, you can't use
prior bad acts against somebody in a criminal case. I
get that, but for to give context or to try
to figure out exactly what we're dealing with, the only
thing we ever saw that was documented was the issue
she had with her neighbor about the barking dog when
she threatened the neighbor. But as far as ex boyfriends goes,

(01:02:03):
I mean, I don't know where they are, Uh, if
they're still with us, who knows. I'm not sure that
there was nothing u factual that ever came up about anybody.

Speaker 4 (01:02:14):
In our past right and TJ's asking. And there was
also the other rumor that she held a knife to another.

Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Yeah, yeah, I heard that.

Speaker 2 (01:02:24):
I mean, I can tell you this, until the night
she hit Johnny, there was not there was no physical
uh interaction between the two.

Speaker 3 (01:02:32):
I can tell you that with certainty.

Speaker 4 (01:02:35):
But I mean certainly he was asking her to move
out and she wouldn't. I mean, you know, it has
all the harmarks of TV kind of relationship. I mean,
have you have any of X any of the ex
boyfriends reached out to you? Uh TJ's asking.

Speaker 2 (01:02:53):
No no, and our assumption on that was always that
they're too scared to come forward.

Speaker 4 (01:02:58):
Yeah, they've want to live.

Speaker 2 (01:03:01):
Okay, you know, I don't want to be involved.

Speaker 4 (01:03:04):
Oh this has been a great pleasure. Brendan Kane, thank
you so much. Thank you, appreciate you, Thank you soon bye.

Speaker 3 (01:03:11):
Thanks.

Speaker 5 (01:03:20):
I hit my boyfriend with my car.

Speaker 6 (01:03:24):
It wasn't an accident, but with Lyon lawyers, I'll go far.
Lion lawyers and witness harassment, all avoid prison.

Speaker 5 (01:03:40):
It was some one. I pushed the pad on. Now
get him hard now, the legal system my clonel.

Speaker 7 (01:04:00):
Incense for a campaign to save my skin.

Speaker 5 (01:04:07):
Making hony. Truth is my second victim, carry carry ginger
like John You were Mama.

Speaker 7 (01:04:19):
My innocence for a campaign is my biggest too.

Speaker 5 (01:04:25):
That I hit my boyfriend with my coat. It wasn't

(01:04:59):
an ad.

Speaker 7 (01:05:04):
Both Lilying lawyers all go far, Lion lawyers and witness harassment.

Speaker 5 (01:05:13):
I'll avoid prison. It was snowing. I pushed the pedal down.
Hit him hard. Now the legal system of my clown.

Speaker 7 (01:05:29):
In a sense for a campaign to save my skin.

Speaker 5 (01:05:36):
Making money. Truth is my second victim

Speaker 7 (01:05:41):
Carry carrying ginger like John Your word my mon, but
innocence for a campaign is my big hidden it

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}John O’Keefe’s Friend Spills Tea on Karen Read’s "Professional" Drinking, Lawyers, Civil Suit

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

All Episodes

John O’Keefe’s Friend Spills Tea on Karen Read’s "Professional" Drinking, Lawyers, Civil Suit

Stuff You Should Know