Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - 3 Shocking Developments in Woman Accused of Murdering Cop Boyfriend With SUV

Starting point is 00:00:00 Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law & Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. The car didn't hit him, and he wasn't hit by the car. New revelations as Karen Reid makes a last-ditch effort to get the case against her thrown out weeks before she's scheduled to go on trial for killing her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. There was no fight. There was no dog attack. I'm Anjanette Levy. Welcome to Crime Fix. Karen Reid's trial is scheduled to begin in April, but she's hoping the case doesn't make it that far. Although I'm telling you right now,

Starting point is 00:00:40 it will. What she's asking the judge to do to throw out the indictment is something that rarely happens. Reed claims she's the victim of a sweeping police conspiracy, a frame up for the death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe. Her lawyer, Alan Jackson, says O'Keefe's fellow police officers and other witnesses lied to the grand jury, so the indictment should be tossed. That presentation was packed with lies, known lies by the investigators and the omissions and the manipulations and deceit by the very people that are supposed to be the ones that we in the community can trust. Reed claims she didn't hit O'Keefe with her Lexus SUV and leave him to die in the snow, but that Boston police officers beat him up inside the house where he was found and that a vicious dog attacked him and that everyone lied to frame

Starting point is 00:01:31 her. We have been saying since September 16th, 2022, in lengthy motions that we filed before this court and filed with the Commonwealth, there is a conflict. You're not investigating the conflict. That conflict was never described to the grand jurors. And we've been rebuffed at every single turn. The prosecutor vehemently denies that Karen Reed is the victim of any type of conspiracy. Their testimonies are largely consistent with the defendants making declarative statements that she didn't, not a question mark at the end, but clear definitive statements on scene. Now, one thing that's a little unique about this case and frankly, pretty odd is the fact that the U.S. attorney is investigating John O'Keefe's death

Starting point is 00:02:18 and no one really seems to know why. A federal grand jury has heard testimony and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts isn't saying when the investigation started or why and what the status of it is. I've asked and I was told no comment. One of Reed's lawyers, Alan Jackson, said new information was revealed during the federal grand jury that helps his clients. The federal investigators hired, independent of us, we had no idea, and independent of the Commonwealth, hired a professional reconstructionist, three PhDs, to look into exactly this issue. Did Karen Reid's car, her SUV, made contact with John O'Keefe. And their conclusion to a person was his injuries were inconsistent with the damage on the car.

Starting point is 00:03:20 The damage on the car was inconsistent with having made contact with John O'Keefe's body. In other words, the car didn't hit him and he wasn't hit by the car. Now, the prosecutor didn't address that claim the other day, but maintains the case should move to trial and that Reed killed John O'Keefe and no one else. In a new development, Massachusetts State Police say lead detective Trooper Michael Proctor is under investigation, but the agency isn't saying why or if it's related to a specific case, only issuing the following statement. We have opened an internal investigation into a potential violation of department policy by Trooper Michael Proctor. Trooper Proctor remains on full duty. Joining me to discuss the latest in this controversial case are two people who've

Starting point is 00:04:03 been following it. One very, very closely. He's Aiden Carney. You probably know him as Turtle Boy if you've been following this case. And Daryl Cohen, he's a former prosecutor, but also a criminal defense attorney. He also practices entertainment law. He wears a lot of hats. Thanks to both of you for coming on. Aiden, I'll start with you. I actually want to just call you Turtle or Turtle Boy. Why do you support Karen Reid? You know, the Commonwealth says we've got all this evidence against her. John O'Keefe's DNA is on her cracked taillight pieces. She was drunk. She backed into him and hit him. The evidence is there. They were saying this in court this week. So why do you

Starting point is 00:04:43 think that there's a conspiracy? I support Karen Reid because she's 100 percent factually innocent. And all of the evidence belies that a child who spends 10 minutes looking at this case can clearly see that there is no possible way that Karen Reid killed John O'Keefe. This was confirmed yesterday by in court when it was announced that the FBI hired a specialist who determined that it was impossible for John O'Keefe's injuries to be caused by a car and it is impossible for the car to have the damage it had after hitting his six foot two, 217 pound body. I also support Karen Reid because I, although I didn't know her prior to this, I generally believe that corruption needs to be exposed and that an injustice to

Starting point is 00:05:35 someone like Karen Reid could be an injustice to any of us if we don't stand up and do something about it. Now, Aiden, you are facing criminal charges. We need to be clear about that related to this case. You're accused of intimidating witnesses. The prosecution in this case says that you and Karen Reed, you know, have a friendship, I guess, or you know each other, you've gotten to know her signal messages going back and forth. Is she kind of using you or to kind of get her message out there and do her PR? Is that true as the Commonwealth would contend? Absolutely not. I never knew Karen Reed prior to this. I'm a journalist covering her story. If I want to speak to a source on or off the record,

Starting point is 00:06:17 I can. That's what Karen Reed is. She's a source for stories that I write. She does not direct what I do at all. She knows that. Some of the other court documents actually belie that, in which she said that she wished I talked about other things more, but I don't. I've been doing this for 10 years, investigative journalism. This is one of thousands of stories that I've published, and nobody controls the content on my website. I've certainly never intimidated any witnesses. The same corrupt cops who are framing Karen Reid for murder, and who I've been writing about, are coincidentally the same corrupt cops who are framing Karen Reid for murder and who I've been writing about are coincidentally the same police that determined that I'm intimidating witnesses. It now appears, now that we know as a fact that John O'Keefe was not hit by a car, thanks to the

Starting point is 00:06:56 FBI's independent investigation, that the people, that the so-called witnesses are actually soon to be criminal defendants. And it appears as if they are the ones who killed John O'Keefe. And they are simply attempting to prevent me from asking these people legitimate questions. All of my protesting and activism yesterday was justified in court. Everything I did was vindicated. And at the end of this year, the charges are going to be dropped and the people charging me are going to be the ones facing criminal charges themselves. Daryl, I want to bring you into this. It was revealed in court by Karen Reid's defense attorneys that there was some type of federal, an expert hired by the feds who said he concluded, and this is what the defense is saying about this expert, the state did not respond to this when it was brought up in court, that there was an expert who said,

Starting point is 00:07:51 oh, I don't think he was hit by her vehicle or something to that effect. The Commonwealth did say in court, though, we presented all of this evidence to the grand jury. This indictment should stand. This case should go to trial. There is all of this evidence showing that Karen Reed committed this crime. Very interesting. One, because it's an expert hired by the FBI doesn't make him or her better or worse. It makes them different. There is a perception that if you're hired by the feds, that you're better. That's not necessarily the case, as we see from the FBI's little problem with Hunter Biden and a certain informant that's no longer there. So that bothers me. But the question is, why would

Starting point is 00:08:39 the prosecution go after Karen Reid? What possible explanation do we have for why they would go after her if they didn't believe that she was guilty? Having said that, an indictment by the grand jury is not a big deal. When I was a prosecutor in Miami, a prosecutor in Atlanta, we used to say a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich, or depending where you are, it might be a corned beef sandwich. So the grand jury is spoon-fed all of the evidence, and it's very unusual and unlikely that the grand jury would say, no, Bill, which is, we're not going to bring the charges. That doesn't concern me. If a prosecutor wants charges brought, he or she is going to have them brought. Simply simple. What does concern me is the evidence or lack of evidence. And the state says they have DNA.

Starting point is 00:09:33 Well, DNA does not stand for does not apply. And so that's a big concern. don't understand why they would go after Karen Reed unless they actually believe, based upon the evidence that they have, that she's guilty. They said that they have this, you know, they have her saying at the scene, I hit him, I hit him, things of that nature to paramedics. You know, it sounds like they think they have all of these things that they pull together to show, or at least the state thinks that they do, that Karen Reed hit him, that they'd been out drinking. The relationship wasn't going as well as maybe some people would think that it was.

Starting point is 00:10:15 It was rather toxic, according to what they would contend in some court documents, at least the prosecutors. And they were out drinking that night. She drops him off at this house or whatever, and she backs into him and then and takes off. It was basically like a drunk driving hit and run. I mean, do you think that from what you know of the case, Daryl, that the evidence is there for that? I think the evidence is there and the evidence is not there. The fact that she says I hit him, according to the paramedics, doesn't mean a lot to me. It might that she says I hit him according to the paramedics doesn't mean a lot to me. It might mean she thought she hit him. It might mean she thought that's what she said, should have said, or it might mean she really did hit him. She didn't say that she did

Starting point is 00:10:55 it intentionally. If it was a DUI and she hit him and she left, not good for her. If on the other hand, she didn't hit him and the evidence shows enough, and remember, this is a criminal case, so it has to be beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt, not every doubt, but every reasonable doubt to convict her. So there's a lot to be played with. And in my view, depending how she looks in court, depending on her body language, depending on her facial expressions, her hairstyle, that's what a jury looks at. They don't listen to the evidence as much as people think they do. They look at the defendant and they analyze the defendant and then they sort of go

Starting point is 00:11:38 from there. I don't know if you're always disagreeing with me, but that's the way it is, in my view. Have either of you seen the autopsy photos? I have. I have not. Yes, so the autopsy photos. I've seen the autopsy photos. I have them on my phone. So they have, he has what appear to be dog bites all over his arm.

Starting point is 00:11:58 Inside the house lived a German shepherd who, according to Canton Animal Control records, sent two people to the ER for biting them. He also had black eyes and a three inch laceration in the back of his head. He had no broken bones or bruises below his nose. And they want us to believe and he was found on the grass. He landed on grass and they want us to believe that those injuries somehow came from a three ton Lexus backing into him at a rate of speed that they have not determined yet. They initially said 24 miles an hour. They've taken that back because it's impossible to accelerate it to 24 miles an hour in just 62 feet.

Starting point is 00:12:37 When you look at him, it looks like a man who got the crap kicked out of him and was chewed up by a dog. It does not look like a man because Alexis's do not have teeth. Alexis's weighs three tons. He would have a shattered pelvis. He would have bruises on his body. It doesn't make sense at all. And to answer your question before you asked, why would they do this? Why would they go after her? And the answer to that is simple. The lead detective in this is state police detective Michael Proctor. Michael Proctor hid from the grand jury, as we found out yesterday, that he has been close family friends with the homeowners, the Alberts, for over two decades. At his sister's wedding, eight-year-old Colin Albert was the ring bearer. And as it so happens, Colin Albert was inside 34 Fairview Road that night, and he was never questioned, never questioned by Trooper Proctor.

Starting point is 00:13:28 Trooper Proctor never mentioned that this family, that they called Alberts a second family, that he had Julie Albert, Colin Albert's mother, try to babysit for him just 10 days before John O'Keefe was killed. That is how close these people are. So to answer your question about why would they frame her, that Colin Albert and the people inside that house aren't questioned, aren't treated as suspects, and don't go to jail because somebody has to be responsible for John O'Keefe's death. Makes no sense, Turtle Boy.

Starting point is 00:13:57 Makes no sense to me at all. You can be friends. I've had friends for 15 years or more. That doesn't mean I would lie for them. It doesn't mean they would lie for them. It doesn't mean they would lie for me. It might mean I would go more lightly on them than otherwise, but that doesn't make sense to me. And I'm sorry, as a former prosecutor, maybe I don't see it the way defense lawyers do. Most of the time I try to. I think it's important we point out, too, as far as the dog bites go, they say that they say and obviously none of us are in the autopsy room.

Starting point is 00:14:31 But the dog bite theory, you know, the prosecution is saying there is no dog DNA on John O'Keefe during the autopsy. That's not that's not true because the arm tissues, the arm tissue samples have disappeared. They've just disappeared. A lot of things have disappeared in this case, like the Canton Library video from 1237 to 1239, which would have shown Karen Reed driving through the center of town and would have given a perfect image of whether or not her taillight was in fact broken. That footage was handed over to Trooper Michael Proctor, the same detective who was good friends with the homeowners. And then two minutes, the exact two minutes when Karen Reed drove by has just disappeared. They

Starting point is 00:15:14 have the rest of it, but they don't have those two minutes. If Karen Reed actually did it and her taillight was actually shattered, they would have her dead to rights right there. But they didn't. It's just magic. A lot of things have disappeared in this case. Turtle Boy, Karen Reid is asking the court to dismiss the indictment against her. And that never, in my experience, never happens. I mean, I've never seen a judge just toss out an indictment. So do you really think realistically that she thinks she has any shot at this happening? Yeah, I mean, you've probably never seen a murder case where the police themselves and the district attorney's office themselves are under investigation by the United States Attorney's Office, in which they commence a grand jury that lasts for several months in which every single one of the so-called witnesses are treated as essentially suspects by the federal government. We've never seen anything like this before. So I understand that it's

Starting point is 00:16:09 probably not common, but if the judge has any decency or common sense to her, she will absolutely dismiss this. I mean, it's right in the FBI's investigation. John O'Keefe was not hit by a car. His injuries are inconsistent with that. How can you move forward with a murder case in which the woman is accused of driving a car into John O'Keefe if the FBI is saying that didn't in fact happen? I think we need more information about that. Both sides are going to have their experts. You know, the prosecution is also saying, Turtle Boy, that the defense basically wrote to them, wrote to the U.S., the prosecution is also saying, Turtle Boy, that the defense basically wrote to them, wrote to the U.S. attorney's office and was like, we think you

Starting point is 00:16:49 need to look into this. There's some stuff going on. There's some malfeasance, police cover up and things like that. So the prosecution is basically accusing the defense of making this up and instigating this federal investigation. That sounds like they're saying that the FBI is easily fooled. If the FBI didn't think that any of this was credible, they would have told Karen Reid's defense team to pound sand. Instead, they launched a probe that has lasted now in excess of about 15 or 16 months investigating this. Clearly, they know something is going on here, something is wrong here, or they wouldn't be wasting all this time and resources on it. Daryl, you're a former prosecutor. The prosecution in this case, I mean, we don't have access to

Starting point is 00:17:33 these federal investigative materials, the grand jury materials from the federal grand jury. I mean, the prosecution in this case is saying, well, what the feds have released backs up what we've been saying, that she did this. And the defense is saying, oh, they're saying Karen Reid couldn't have done this, couldn't have hit her with her car. And they're claiming this is exculpatory. I mean, obviously, we've got two sides who want two different outcomes here. How do we get a federal investigation into this case? Is it because John O'Keefe was a Boston police officer? I mean, I just don't get where this is coming from. It's coming from Hollywood soap opera writers, if they still existed, couldn't write this any

Starting point is 00:18:17 better. All of this is much ado about nothing and much ado about a lot. Did she back up and hit him and did he die as a result of it? I don't know that that makes any difference in terms of whether or not the FBI or the U.S. Attorney's Office is investigating. If it's taken, as Turtle Boy says, this long, it tells me there's not a lot of fire where there may be smoke. They have to be a lot more concise, much more quick on the draw than this, in my view. If there was a lot, I think we would have heard about it beforehand. On the other hand, who knows? Darrell, I'm assuming you agree with me that there's no chance the judge is going to dismiss this indictment. I think there's less than no chance that the judge will

Starting point is 00:19:06 get rid of the indictment, will dismiss the indictment. And as far as never being convicted, when I negotiate, someone says, we never do this. I stick out my right hand and I shake their hand and say, welcome to never. You can never say never, according to James Bond. Well, Daryl Cohen, thank you for the James Bond reference. And Aidan Carney, Turtle Boy, I should call you. Thanks for coming on. We appreciate it. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix.

Starting point is 00:19:34 I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with us. We'll see you back here next time. Until then, have a great night. You can download Crime Fix on Apple, Spotify, Google, and wherever else you get your favorite podcasts and new episodes post each weeknight at 6 Eastern time on Law and Crime's YouTube channel. Daniel Camacho does our video editing.

Starting point is 00:19:54 Our head of social media is Bobby Zoki. Our senior director of social media is Vanessa Vine. Savannah Williamson is one of our producers. Diane Kay and Alyssa Fisher book our guests. And Brad Mabey is our audio editor.

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - 3 Shocking Developments in Woman Accused of Murdering Cop Boyfriend With SUV

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.

Your Ad Here

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - 3 Shocking Developments in Woman Accused of Murdering Cop Boyfriend With SUV

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.