RedHanded - Episode 362 - Karen Read & The Death of John O’Keefe - Part 2

Episode Date: August 22, 2024

In this second (and not-quite-final) part on the Karen Read saga, we take a look at the most talked about trial of the year.In front of a packed courtroom – and with furious demonstrators from both sides lining the streets outside – Karen Read’s defence team painted a picture of a malicious conspiracy that went all the way to the top. The plot, they said, included dozens of public officials, their school friends and distant relatives, and a German Shepherd called Chloe, sent far away up north to avoid incrimination.We discuss the trial, beat for beat – and try to pick apart what really happened at 34 Fairview in the early hours of 29 January 2022.Exclusive bonus content:Wondery - Ad-free & ShortHandPatreon - Ad-free & Bonus EpisodesFollow us on social media:YouTubeTikTokInstagramXVisit our website:WebsiteSources available on redhandedpodcast.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can listen to Red Handed early and ad-free. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey everyone, very quick point before we get on with today's episode. We said last week that this case was going to be a two-parter. Well, I'm sorry, we lied. We finished this record and it was huge. And honestly, we just need some more time to edit it all. So here's what we're going to do. We've split it. And this, the episode you're about to

listen to, is part two of Karen Reid. And part three, the absolute final part, I promise you, will be out tomorrow. So yes, we are not going to make you wait a whole nother week. You're getting two episodes for the price of one this week, and then we'll be done with this case. So let's get on with it. I'm Saruti. And I'm going on holiday tomorrow. I'm Hannah. And welcome to Red Handed, where today, I think we may just, Hannah, chalk up the record for our longest ever record. I think it might happen today. Can't wait.

Everyone ready? Let's do it. This is obviously part two. It's in the title. Please go listen to part one. On the 28th of April, 2024, the trial of Karen Reid began. Let's do it. This is obviously part two. It's in the title. Please go listen to part one. On the 28th of April 2024, the trial of Karen Reid began.

The small Dedham courtroom was packed and the streets outside were filled with demonstrators from both sides. Those who thought Karen Reid was a victim of a cover-up and those who thought that she was a killer whose lies were destroying innocent people. The trial hadn't even started yet but thanks to the massive amount of coverage this case had received and the lies which had been spread it was clear a lot of people had already made up their minds. And that's one of the fundamental issues with this case because that's not how our justice system is meant to work and i think it's

also very reflective through this case of like the problems with true crime in general as a genre today yeah i was gonna say and we've certainly spoken about this on the dvd before i can't remember if we've talked about it on the main show but you may have noticed as a true crime consumer there has been a big leaning towards the wrongful conviction side of things oh yes and that has happened because it makes a case more commercial that is it that is why there are so many uh wrongful conviction podcast documentaries tv shows because commissioners want it it's seen as like soft true crime they want to make true crime it makes money people like it's noble yes however sometimes they fucking do it yeah and i really wish that people would think about that a bit more yeah absolutely i also think that the whole

wrongful convictions space in podcasting and particularly again using karen reed's case as like a lens to look at it through really highlights a significant problem not just with true crime but also with society unfortunately as to like people's distrust of the system people are so quick to be sure that karen reed is the victim of a conspiracy the victim of a cover-up orchestrated by the police because of the total breakdown of public trust with the judicial system, with authority, with the entire quote-unquote system, and with the police in general. And I think it's a really sad testament to how far the mental gymnastics people are willing to do to look past all of the evidence because they are so convinced by to look past all of the evidence because they are so convinced by this narrative. I'm not saying that's the fault of the people that

have fallen for it, by the way. I think it's also the fault of the system, of the police who have done terrible things, which has eroded that trust. But that is what this case is. It's a culmination of all of those things. And there has been so much vitriol online. People from the get-go with this case, it's very, very clear to see, entrenched themselves in one camp or the other and saw every bit of information that could be dug up through the lens of their own bias. And honestly, this case has been absolutely exhausting to research because there are so many, as I said last week, factual inaccuracies out there. But before I collapse into a puddle of sleep-deprived, over-caffeinated sludge, let's get on with it. Before we get to the trial itself, let's just be super clear on what the prosecution and the defence are each alleging. The state, led by prosecutor Adam Lally, was going after Karen Reid for second

degree murder. In Massachusetts, that means prosecutors need to prove that Karen not only caused John O'Keefe's death, but either she intended to kill him, intended to cause him grievous bodily harm, or she intended to commit an act that a reasonable person would have known created a plain and strong likelihood that death would result like hitting him with her car and leaving him in a blizzard so the prosecution have to show intent and to do that they need a motive they don't have to prove one they don't have to prove motive but intent they can't get away from they have to prove that so if they can't say why karen would have wanted to kill or seriously injure john it's a huge weakness in their case as far as showing

intent goes so technically they don't need it but they also kind of do yeah like it's one of those technicalities like you don't have to show motive but you can't show intent without motive and you have to show intent so what about the defense well like we said last week they weren't simply claiming that karen hadn't hit john with her car intentionally or otherwise and that the state was mistaken oh no the very first words out of the defense's mouth once the trial started was Karen Reid was framed. So yes, the defense's case was that this was a large-scale conspiracy to frame Karen Reid for the murder of John O'Keefe. And just to put this out there, before everyone's like jumping down our throats about it conspiracy is the right word i've seen people going nuts online when anyone says conspiracy

like the word implies that it's far-fetched or like you know to believe that you're a conspiracy theorist and like a tinfoil hat wearer no no no if you are alleging that a group of people got together murdered somebody and then work to frame someone else, that is a conspiracy. The legal definition of a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit an offence. Yeah, like, it doesn't have to be fucking Watergate. No, it's a conspiracy to murder. What they're saying is, the word conspiracy makes them sound nuts. Makes them sound like they believe the earth is flat. No, no, no. Conspiracy is the legal term.

So, yeah. The defense's claim was that John was murdered by someone or someone's who had been at the after-party at 34 Fairview in the early hours of the 29th of January 2022. And, and this is very important, that it was a pre-planned attack. This is an accusation of a conspiracy. So like we told you last week, they're going for the some other dude did it argument.

But despite what we may have all seen on TV, the defence can't just say whatever the fuck they want, throw a bunch of stuff at the wall and see what sticks. The defence may not have to prove that someone else did it, because, as you should know by now, the burden of proof isn't on them, as we've seen all the free Karen readers screaming all over the shop. But they do have to prove that there is enough evidence that someone else could have done it, to create what they need, which is beyond a reasonable doubt, as to Karen Reid reed's guilt but it is ultimately up to the jury to decide and the jury has got to buy what the defense is selling

it doesn't really matter whether the judge thinks it's horseshit or not and it's like they they can say whatever they want right within reason as we said at the end of last week's episode they can't just say any old nonsense anything they want to use in this sort of third party culpability defense anything because they want to point to other people what they say has to be relevant competent and admissible they can't just be like well the fucking dr zeus could have done it it has to be relevant it has to be competent it has to be admissible if they're going to point fingers at people who were there at that house that day the evidence that they present about that they don't have to prove it but it can't just be made up it has to be convincing enough that

it does actually poke enough holes in the case against karen reid and the defense have actually given themselves a huge task here because they're claiming that it was a pre-planned murder, not an accident, like there was just a fight and they tried to cover it up. And that's very important to bear in mind before we go on. Yeah, because what I'm worried is going to happen, right, is either people who know this story and have already made up their minds that Karen Reid was framed or people who don't know this story and are coming into it fresh are going to think, why are we going on about the most extreme possibility? Why are we talking about this as the most extreme possibility that it was a pre-planned, pre-organized hit? Why aren't we considering the possibility that it's an accident? We'll talk about that possibility, but that's not what the

defense is saying. That's not the defense's case. So I just want to be clear about why we're taking the narrative we are. So let's get started. The first week of the trial saw 12 witnesses take the stand. Mostly it was John's family and first responders from the scene. First, they had Canton Police Officer Stephen Seraph. He was, if you remember, the cop that Jen McCabe and Kerry Roberts flagged down when they first found John. And he testified that at the scene, she, Karen, kept saying, this is all my fault, this is all my fault, I did this.

Then there was Canton firefighter and paramedic, Timothy Nuttall. He treated John at the scene. He also testified that he heard, quote, the woman with blood on her face repeatedly saying, I hit him, I hit him. He said that he was focused on trying to save John's life. Because remember, John wasn't dead when they found him. There was no signs of lividity. He was still alive.

So Timothy Nuttall is a firefighter paramedic. That's his primary job. He said, I wasn't there to launch an investigation. So I didn't question the woman on what she was saying. He also said that he couldn't be sure which of the three women that had been there said it, so Kerry Roberts, Jen McCabe or Karen Reid, but that it was definitely the woman who had blood on her face

and only Karen had blood on her face from trying to do CPR on John. Next up, we have Lieutenant Anthony Flamati, a Canton firefighter and EMT. He also said that he heard Karen Reid repeatedly say, I hit him, I hit him. He testified that when he asked Reid follow-up questions, she, quote, just repeated the phrase over and over again.

And it was Flamati who told hospital staff that John may have been hit by a car based on what Karen had said to him. So again, you have people taking action and doing things based on what Karen said to them. They're not just saying it retrospectively. They did things based on what she said to them. Flamati also said that when Karen kept saying this over and over again, another woman at the scene told her to stop talking

as we'll soon discover this was jen mccabe why would she do that if she was part of the conspiracy to frame karen surely you would want her to keep yelling i hit him it's perfect for your devious plot it's so infuriating literally karen as we kind of heard when we listened to the the 911 call and again if you did go and watch the dash cam footage from officer seraph's car karen is hysterical she's screaming again and again and again and jen tells her stop talking when she keeps saying i hit him i hit him i hit him because i think the impression i get is everyone's like you're you're slowing everything down just stop stop. Stop for a second. If we think that Jen McCabe was part of this conspiracy,

having pre-arranged a hit against John McCabe, and then you have, for some reason, your whole plan coming together because you want to frame Karen Reid, and for some reason she is saying, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him, why would you tell her to stop talking? Yeah, because Karen Reid is framing herself. Yes. it doesn't even make sense why she thinks that but why would you tell her to stop and we've also got another firefighter called katie mclaughlin who also testified that she

heard karen reed say i hit him i hit him i hit him so we've listed out quite a lot of people right that heard this. And I just want to do this because I want it to be clear. It's not just the Canton police officers. It's not just the Massachusetts State Police. Why are these firefighters and paramedics now involved in this conspiracy? Why are they all lying? Just hold that in your heads. I'm Jake Warren. And in our first season of Finding, I set out on a very personal quest to find the woman who saved my mum's life.

You can listen to Finding Natasha right now, exclusively on Wondery Plus. In season two, I found myself caught up in a new journey to help someone I've never even met. But a couple of years ago, I came across a social media post by a person named Loti.

It read in part, Three years ago today that I attempted to jump off this bridge, but this wasn't my time to go. A gentleman named Andy saved my life. I still haven't found him. This is a story that I came across purely by chance, but it instantly moved me.

And it's taken me to a place where I've had to consider some deeper issues around mental health. This is season two of Finding, and this time, if all goes to plan, we'll be finding Andy. You can listen to Finding Andy and Finding Natasha exclusively and ad-free on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Hi, I'm Lindsey Graham, the host of Wondery Show American Scandal. We bring to light some of the biggest controversies in U.S. history. Presidential lies, environmental disasters, corporate fraud. In our latest series, NASA embarks on an ambitious program to reinvent space exploration with the launch of its first reusable vehicle, the Space Shuttle. And in 1985, they announced they're sending teacher Krista McAuliffe into space

aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, along with six other astronauts. But less than two minutes after liftoff, the Challenger explodes. And in the tragedy's aftermath, investigators uncover a series of preventable failures by NASA and its contractors that led to the disaster. Follow American Scandal on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. Experience all episodes ad-free and be the first to binge the newest season only on Wondery Plus. You can join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Start your free trial today. Now, there is a frustrating issue. Firefighters don't typically write up reports after, right?

So these firefighters who say that they heard Karen Reid saying this, they didn't go away like police officers are supposed to and write down a full report of everything that was said to them because they're not investigating the crime, right? So we don't have contemporaneous reports from them that they heard Karen say this. And the cop that was there first, Officer Saraf, didn't actually write down what he heard Karen say this. And the cop that was there first, Officer Seraph, didn't actually write down what he heard Karen say either in his notes from that day. I have

absolutely no idea why he didn't. In the doc, he said it was an oversight. There is so much sloppy police work on show in this case that allows the defense wiggle room to scream conspiracy. And it is infuriating. But before people get hung up on the fact that Saraf didn't write it down, I just want to say this. The defense don't actually claim that Karen didn't say it. Despite the fact that they called to the stand cops who were also there that day who said that they didn't hear Karen say anything along the lines of I hit him. There were too many people that heard her say it. Too many people that are too credible who heard her say it. So the defense say that Karen was asking, did I hit him? Could I have hit him? They say she didn't say I hit him. They said,

did I? Could I? So I just want to be clear. They don't say that it didn't happen. They just tweak the language ever so slightly. And as for the police that got on the stand and said that they didn't hear Karen say anything of the sort, if they're involved in this giant cover-up, why would they do that? How does that help their case? And you could say, well, maybe they were cops who weren't involved in it. But the accusation is the Canton Police Department is involved in this conspiracy. Why would you allow any of your members to take the stand two years after it's happened? So plenty of time to get to them, plenty of time to pressure them and allow them to testify that they didn't hear Karen say this. And I think let's talk about the difference between I hit him and could I have hit him.

It's interesting I think I can completely see how on the one hand she's running through possibilities of what could have happened and then the other hand is she's admitting total responsibility but there's still a bit of me that I don't know if even if she said I hit him I don't even know if that I do think she hit him I do think she's guilty but if you're extraordinarily upset and blaming yourself for possibly an accident I could see a situation in which someone would say that if they hadn't I think possibly and I think you know there will be people that make that argument for me the difference between whether she said I hit him or could I have hit him did I I hit him? It's kind of neither

here nor there. I think for me, Karen saying either of these things speaks to like that consciousness of guilt. Why would anybody in this circumstance at all ever wonder if they could possibly have hit their boyfriend with the car unless they had some valid reason to think that? That's the thing that I keep coming back to with it why would you even wonder if you would hit him if there was no reason at all for you to think that you did because she was blackout she says she says and her story changes at first she says she can't remember anything then she says she didn't see john go into the house when she dropped him off then later when she realized that that's kind of not that helpful she says i did see him i saw him go into the house. That's the final iteration of the story that she lands on.

Why are you wondering if you hit him? And why does she wake up in the morning thinking he's been hit by a snowplow and worrying that John is dead? If I woke up in the morning and my boyfriend hadn't come home, my mind wouldn't immediately go to the fact that he was dead or he'd been hit by a snowplow. I would just think he's fallen asleep somewhere. Why does Karen's mind go there? I think it speaks to a consciousness of guilt and I cannot get away from that. Now you could ask, rightly, well, if she knew she had hit him, why was she saying it at all, if she wanted to get away with it? And this is the closest reason I can land upon for that, right? Because when they find John, he isn't dead. I think Karen was saying this out of panic

because she may have thought by telling the EMTs what had happened, they might have been able to save him, right? You know that if you're in a medical crisis, the EMTs, the people that are trying to help, them having all of the information as to what could have happened, gives that person the best chance of survival. Is that why she's saying it? I don't know. Maybe. But it's very important that after John died, Karen changed her story twice. The best chance the defence had to try and undermine these damning statements by paramedics and firefighters was to try and drag them down. And they focused on Katie McLaughlin. The defence questioned her about her relationship with Caitlin Albert,

Brian's daughter. Katie said that they were just acquaintances. The defence accused her of committing perjury, claiming that Caitlin and Katie were in fact very good friends and had been since high school. But we're going to have to call bullshit on that. The defence got their hands on a bunch of pictures of Katie and Caitlin together from school and then a few from the year before John died where they were at a mutual friend's baby shower. It's all so incredibly tenuous. The idea that Katie, a firefighter in Canton,

would lie to cover up for her friend's dad, Brian Albert, or her friend's dad, Brian Albert, or her friend's cousin, Colin Albert, I know we haven't met all these people, we're getting to it, or her friend's family friend, Brian Higgins, from having murdered a cop. I am sure there are photographs of me at school where I'm sat next to someone I fucking hate. Okay, let's also, let's like cut that out, right?

Your best friend. Your best friend. You find out that there's a party. She comes to you one day and she's like, look, there's been a situation. My dad slash my cousin slash a family friend of ours has murdered a cop. Can you just lie? Can you just lie and say you heard this woman say I hit him, I hit him, I hit him. Are you doing it? Can you just lie and say, you heard this woman say, I hear him, I hear him, I hear him. Are you doing it?

No. Exactly. I mean, the idea that, like, anyone would do this and put themselves under this level of scrutiny, to me, is shocking. But then the idea that they're trying to drag Katie McLaughlin down

and destroy her reputation by saying that she's lying about the extent to which she's friends with Caitlin Albert, it doesn't prove anything. And also, it's not only Katie that says she heard this right. If it had only been Katie, maybe you could make this argument. All her colleagues are saying it.

Why is Timothy Nuttall saying it? Why is Anthony Flamati saying it? Why are all of these other paramedics and EMTs saying it? To cover for Katie? It just doesn't really ring true or make sense. And it just adds yet more and more people into this conspiracy theory, which makes it more and more bonkers. I also think the idea that Katie's a part of this conspiracy, which is something you have to believe

if you think she's lying. And it's also what the defense accused her of doing. They're saying you're a part of this conspiracy. Well, wasn't it just great bloody luck that Katie, Caitlin's BFF, just so happened to be on duty the morning that John was found? And if you're going you're a part of this conspiracy well wasn't it just great bloody luck that katie caitlin's bff just so happened to be on duty the morning that john was found and if you're going to go a step further and be like well maybe she made sure she was on duty so she could get there and find this body and you know help them all out by saying she heard karen say i hit him i hit him i hit him okay but that seems again like a stretch that i would ask why why is this woman so willing to throw her livelihood away throw her life away to murder a man that she would ask why why is this woman so willing to throw her livelihood away throw her life away to murder a man that she had no connection to or to be a part of a conspiracy to murder a man she had no connection to and if we say it was an accident and then she just happens

to be there and she's covering well she said that she heard Karen say I hit him straight away she got on board with this entire plan very quickly, if that's the case. I just think it makes no sense the minute you scrutinise the defence's claims, even just the tiniest bit. Next up, it was the turn of the Canton cops and their handling of the crime scene that the defence sunk their teeth into. They went after them hard for the leaf blower, the plastic solo cups and some of their personal connections with the Alberts, mainly Sergeant Michael Lank. He was the canton cop on the scene

who first interviewed the Alberts. Jackson went after Lank about a 2002 incident which happened while he had been off duty. Lank testified that he had once been close with Chris Albert, the pizza shop owning Albert brother, who wasn't even at 34 Fairview. And yes, in 2002, he, Lank, had been out drinking when Chris Albert told him two brothers were threatening him and his family. According to Lank, he tried to stop the fight, but when things escalated, he did jump in to help Chris Albert.

Those men later filed a complaint against Officer Lank. And Jackson questioned Lank about this at trial. He asked, Is that an example of you using your position as a police officer to come to the aid of one of the members of the Albert family? So obviously he's implying that Lank is doing the same thing now in a murder investigation and that he's got form. But Lank's not having any of it and neither should he he replied that he would describe it as coming to the aid of a citizen who was in fear for their safety who just so happened to be an albert yeah

i wouldn't say that getting involved in a fight on behalf of your friend who just so happened to be an albert while you're off duty so not even wearing your uniform or anything, is using your position as a police officer. Like, he didn't turn up at the house with his uniform on and, like, use that position in order to pervert things. So, they were friends.

He got involved in a fight with him. And look, the defence is there to poke holes and make it look like the Canton police were covering up for the Alberts because Brian was a Boston cop, Chris was mates with cops, and Kevin, another brother who wasn't there that night, was also a Canton cop. But I do want to point out another incident, where an Albert brother was involved in a hit-and-run incident years before.

And the Canton Police Department went after the Alberts. They found and seized the car that was involved and built a case against them. It was the prosecution who dropped it. So, I just don't think it's possible to say that the Canton Police have some long history of covering up for the Alberts, as the defence were trying to claim. Also, they handed the case over to the state police almost immediately because of Kevin Albert. They recused themselves. If they wanted to pervert the investigation, why would they do this? Yeah.

Anyway, the trial trudged on, and next in the stand was Brian Albert himself, a retired Boston police officer and, of course, the owner of 34 Fairview. He testified that neither John nor Karen ever entered his home the night of the incident. He said, they never came in, but I wish John had. And everyone who was in that house that night

says the same thing. So let's meet them all. And sorry, there's going to be a lot more names to add to that pile, but there is just no avoiding it. And sorry, there's going to be a lot more names to add to that pile, but there is just no avoiding it. And don't worry, we are also the meme of the lady with algebra floating around. That is also happening to us. We're going to get through it together.

We are. So, who's at the house? We have Brian Albert Jr., Brian and Nicole's son. It was his birthday on the 29th of January, and he was at the house with some of his friends while his parents were out at the Waterfall Bar. By the time his parents got back at about 10 past midnight, some of Brian Albert Jr.'s friends had already gone home.

But still there were Julie Nagel, Sarah Levinson, and Brian Jr.'s cousin, Chris Albert's Albert's son Colin who was just 17. Brian and Nicole's daughter Caitlin also joined the party at around 12 just before her parents got home. As the Alberts arrived Ali McCabe, Jen McCabe's daughter, got there as well but only to give Colin a lift home. She didn't come inside the house. Colin's parents, who were out with the group at the Waterfall Bar, but gave the after-party a miss, say that Colin came home at about quarter past twelve. We'll come back to Colin, because the defence would claim that he never actually left the party, but instead went and hid in the basement at his auntie's house and lay in wait for John to arrive so he could murder him.

So just to be clear, because that's a lot of names, and a lot of relations, and a lot of times, but at the house, 34 Fairview, we have Brian Albert, his wife Nicole Albert, their daughter Caitlin, whose BFF's with Katie the firefighter, their son Brian Albert Jr., and his two friends, Sarah and Nicole. And Colin Albert has either left and gone home, as he and his parents claim and Ali McCabe claims,

or he's hiding in the basement. My brain hurts. Then, sorry, more people into the mix, the McCabes, Jen and Matt, arrive at the house, followed by ATF agent Brian Higgins. These three, so Jen, Matt and Brian, all say that they did not see Colin Albert at the house. So either they're all lying, or he did leave, as he said he did before the three of them arrived, or they didn't know that he was hiding in the basement. So now we've got all of the names of the people who were at the house,

let's cast our minds back to the defence's statement from last week. To believe the conspiracy defence, you have to believe that all of these people were involved to some extent. And if you either believe that, or imagine a version of you that could believe that ask yourself firstly how and then why maybe let's give a bit more of a reasonable explanation let's not even go down the route that the defense is claiming, right? Let's just say that it's the Bryans that are planning this murder. Brian Albert and Brian Higgins, his mate. They're the ones doing this. Nobody else knows that this is going on. My first question would be, why would they fill a house with witnesses made up of their own family

members and then lure a man, a cop no less, to the house to be killed while everybody's there. Seriously, Brian Albert, when he was at the Waterfall Bar, was inviting everyone back to his, including people who said no. So it's not just his brother, Chris Albert and Julie and like Karen who didn't come in. There are other people at the bar who he invited back who just didn't come. Why would you do that? And especially why would you do that if he was planning on killing John all along? And that's not me putting words in the defense's mouth. That's what they're saying. When the defense questioned Chris Albert, they honed in on a text that he sent to John saying, if you don't come to the bar, I'll kill you.

It even had a laughing emoji. But apparently, this text was Chris, who didn't even go to the after party, let's remember, luring John O'Keefe to the bar. That's the other thing. The reason Chris sends that text is because John wasn't even meant to be out with that group that night. He's at C.F. McCarthy's with his other friends. Chris texts him and says, come to Waterfall Bar.

Come here. If you don't come here, I'm going to kill you. Laughing emoji. So how is this pre-planned attack going down if John was never even meant to be out with you? I guess it's because Chris Albert all along was going to text his friend and lure him there. So that his brother could kill him. Or his son could kill him or some combination of those matt mccabe would also be questioned in court about some cctv from the bar in which brian albert and brian higgins were play wrestling and when he's asked this you can go watch the trial footage when matt mccabe is asked this question he's visibly like what the fuck he even laughs which the defense gets all pearl clutchy about like none of this is fucking

funny but matt mccabe laughs because as he says quote i recall them grabbing each other talking about brian albert and brian higgins i don't remember them squaring up like they were fighting each other no because that's what the defense is implying they're implying that they were practice fighting and he says matt mccabe says they were playing a little grab ass which is not what i thought it was i thought that's something sexual he does clarify that it isn't actually grabbing ass but that's what they call play fighting they're joking around a friend of mine at university did his dissertation on homoerotic bonding in male sports teams and i was like please please please call it no homo and he did not but missed opportunity in my opinion very much so but yeah i just want to make it clear that like the defense bringing this

up right bringing up the fact that brian higgins andins and Brian Albert are fighting in the bar is to say they're practicing the attack they're practicing what they're going to do to John O'Keefe and or they're saying or it just shows how aggressive they are look at these two men it is insanity let's get back to the party. What was the atmosphere like? Well, Sarah Levinson said in court that she didn't really know the McCabes or the Alberts that well. She was only friends with Brian Jr. But even still, everyone was having fun, drinking, dancing, eating. It was a good time.

She also said she never saw Karen Reid or John O'Keefe, and she didn't see Colin go into the basement either. Next up in the dock was Julie Nagel. Just like Sarah and everyone else at the party, Julie said that the Waterfall Bar Group arrived from 10 past 12 onwards. She also said she never saw Karen or John. She did say that she kept looking out of the window at the Alberts' house, though, and saw a black SUV matching the description of Karen's car outside the house. And she also said that she saw it move position three times.

This is backed up by Jen McCabe, who also saw this. And some people question why they were both looking out the window again and again at a party. Well, Julie Nagel had texted her brother to come and pick her up, so it's perfectly reasonable that she was looking outside to see if he'd arrived. And Jen, well, she was the one directing John to the Albert house, either because she's his friend

and wants him to join the party or because she's in on the plot to murder him for some reason. Jen was texting John repeatedly after she left the bar, something the defence tried to make seem like she was desperately luring him to the house. But of course she was checking the window to see where John was. And there'll be more on this, and the text to back it up, when we get on to Jen's testimony.

For now, let's continue with Julie. She said in court that she turned down the lift from her brother after she'd texted him and asked him to come pick her up up because she was having such a good time and decided to stay. So, again, you know, you could say, oh, they're all saying we're having a great time. But if it's like a party, you've planned to murder somebody. It is interesting that everyone's having such a good time that Julie's like, oh, thanks for coming to get me, bro. But actually, I'm going to say because it's so great. If there was something off, if there was something weird going on weird going i'm like thank fuck i can get out of here if my brother text me at one o'clock in the morning in a blizzard yeah and

said will you come and get me and then i get out of my bed yeah Yeah. And I get into my car. And I drive. Yeah. Through a blizzard in the middle of the night. And I get there. Uh-huh. And he's like, oh, no, I'm actually going to stay. I would be like, get in the fucking car. I think Ryan was already out because he turns up, as we'll get on to later, with two of his friends.

And again, this is how good a fucking time they're having that Julie goes out there and is is like hey ryan it's actually really fun and she says do you and your friends want to come inside so again who's giving permission to julie to invite more people into the house if they're fucking planning on murdering why are you adding more witnesses into this mix again is it possibly to confuse the situation the defense even asked julie at one point was all the music and the dancing that was going on at the house to cover up the murder that was going on in the basement? Like, is it, let's cram as many people in here to cause as much confusion. Let's create as much noise as possible so nobody hears us murdering John. I'm really trying to think of it from the perspective of somebody who's planning this, right?

It doesn't make any sense. But Ryan, thank God for him saying no, because otherwise he too would have been dragged through the mud. Him and his friends are like, no thanks, and they leave. So yeah, Julie decides to stay at 34 Fairview, and she only leaves at 1.45 a.m. with Sarah Levinson, when Jen McCabe and her husband Matt McCabe gave them both a lift home. As Julie left in the McCabe's car,

she mentioned that she saw a black blob by the flagpole area close to the street on the lawn near the Alberts' house. She claimed that she said it at the time in the car. She said, I saw something. But nobody really responded to her, so she forgot about it. You don't believe in ghosts? I get it. Lots of people don't. I didn't either, until I came face to face with them. Ever since that moment, hauntings, spirits, and the unexplained have consumed my entire life. I'm Nadine Bailey. I've been a ghost tour guide for the past 20 years. I've taken people along with me into the shadows, uncovering the macabre tales that linger in the darkness,

and inside some of the most haunted houses, hospitals, prisons, and more. Join me every week on my podcast, Haunted Canada, as we journey through terrifying and bone-chilling stories of the unexplained. Search for Haunted Canada on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. They say Hollywood is where dreams are made. A seductive city where many flock to get rich, be adored, and capture America's heart. But when the spotlight turns off, fame, fortune, and lives can disappear in an instant. When TV producer Roy Radin was found dead in a

canyon near LA in 1983, there were many questions surrounding his death. The last person seen with him was Lainey Jacobs, a seductive cocaine dealer who desperately wanted to be part of the Hollywood elite. Together, they were trying to break into the movie industry. But things took a dark turn when a million dollars worth of cocaine and cash went missing. From Wondery comes a new season of the hit show Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder. Follow Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. You can binge all episodes of The Cotton Club Murder early and ad-free right now by joining Wondery Plus.

So let's talk about what the defense say they think happened. They are saying that this was a planned attack, perpetrated by Colin Albert, Brian Albert, and or Brian Higgins with the help of Chloe the German Shepherd. And let's recap what we told you last week. The injuries John suffered were a head injury from blunt force impact, a small abrasion above one eye, two black eyes and lacerations to his right arm. The defence make the claim that the head injury and black eyes were the result of a fight and the wounds to John's arm were made by Chloe the dog attacking him.

Okay, firstly, the fight angle. John was not a small guy. He was also a 16-year veteran police officer. I reckon if someone went for him, John would have at least got a few punches in. But he had no defensive wounds, no abrasions to his knuckles, absolutely nothing. And also, and I think this is very important, none of the men at the party, or 17-year-old Colin, had any injuries to them either. How is it possible that there could have been a deadly fight? Even the medical examiner who does the post-mortem on John O'Keefe noted that she saw no indications

of a fight. We'll come on to this in more detail later. And I just want to say as well, I think the term black eyes being used, because John did have two black eyes, makes people think there was a fight, right? But the black eyes makes people think there was a fight right but the black eyes were caused due to the bleeding on his brain from the head injury. Also how did no one hear this fight going on? If a dog attacks you does it not bark? Nobody reports hearing Chloe bark. The defense alleged that what happened was that either Colin went and hid in the basement with Chloe the dog, and nobody saw him do that, and then when John arrived, Brian Albert immediately led John O'Keefe down into the basement where Colin punched or beat him over the head with something, and then Chloe scratched John's arm.

After that, the two of them carried John's body outside and left him in the snow to die. Either all of those things happened in a house full of people who had no clue and didn't hear a single thing, which seems like an extraordinary risk to take, or in a house full of people who knew that a murder was happening or did hear something and now just all lying yeah there's only a few possibilities right they all genuinely didn't hear anything which is very surprising not impossible very surprising but what a big risk of brian albert to take by inviting all those people into the house and risking that somebody heard something or they all knew it was going on or

they did hear something they heard a dog barking they heard some crazy noises they saw something but they're all now lying and saying that they didn't hear anything those are the only three options right or it didn't happen but if in some universe the defense's version of events did happen why why would two of Brian Albert Jr.'s friends lie? What would they have to gain? And why would Colin Albert be the one to murder John O'Keefe? This is the thing, look, you can say they're all family, they're all friends, they're all interconnected, they're all, you know, sisters, brothers, all of this, that's why they're lying. Sarah Levinson and Julie Nagel are just Brian Albert Jr.'s friends.

Why the fuck would they lie for these people? It doesn't make any sense. But let's come on to the very important question you asked Hannah of why would Colin Albert murder John. Well apparently according to the defense it was because Colin and John, 17 year old Colin and grown-ass 46 year old John had an ongoing feud about Colin walking across John's lawn and basically they say that Colin is like a hothead psycho who gets into fights all the time the defense even pulled up photos of Colin at other parties with red knuckles that they found back on social media. And yeah, look, I'm not going to deny it, it does look like Colin has been in a scrape or two.

But he was 17. I cannot imagine that he would have won in a fight against a 46-year-old cop. But what if it was a sneaky-uppy surprise? Sure, surprise attack, right? John walks down into the basement, bash, bang over the head. Sure. But then the question is, why? Why would you do this in a house full of people?

And also for Colin, 17-year-old Colin, to do this, attack John, a cop, knowing that he might kill him, or planning to kill him as a defence, say, he must have had reassurances surely from his ex-cop uncle Brian Albert that he'd help him or something but why would Brian Albert help his teenage nephew murder a cop and you could say well maybe Brian Albert didn't say that maybe Colin Albert just did it hit him over the head well who got John into the basement did Colin Albert come up without anyone seeing him and get John Albert to go down into the basement and then sneak attack him? Sure.

But then you're talking about a cover-up for a fight, right? But that's not what the defense say. The defense say it's a pre-planned attack. And I know I keep saying this, but we will come on to Jen McCabe's text later, which proved that it cannot have been anything other than that. And even that doesn't make sense. And if it was a planned attack,

why did they fucking dump John's body on the front lawn anything other than that and even that doesn't make sense and if it was a planned attack why did they fucking dump john's body on the front lawn by the road in front of their own house brian albert is an ex-cop why would he do that it makes no sense and honestly the way the defense treated colin albert is pretty gross he was just 17 and they're accusing him of murdering a police officer in cold blood with malice of all thought and the way they went after ali mccabe wasn't much better also 17 she picked colin up at 12 10 and took him home so for the colin did it theory to be believable or to work ali also has to be lying the pair of them are still in high school and they're being dragged through this whole mess

with absolutely no evidence. And there's people on the internet calling them all sorts of names, harassing them, turning up at their sports games, at their houses. It's madness. So we're going to leave Colin and Ali alone for now. We haven't found anything that convinces us that they're lying or that they had anything to do with john's death perhaps you're not so sure yet and that's fine but

try and hold off judgment until we get to the end and i think the thing that is convincing me the most is that like this is all so confusing that like like, it just has to be impossible. Like, the reason this episode has taken Porter so long and sapped her life force is trying to make it make sense. And it doesn't. There's only one thing that makes sense. It's that Carrie did it. And look, again, like Hannah said, if you still aren't totally convinced that it wasn't Colin, that it wasn't a fight, it wasn't an accident, which again is not what the defense

is saying, or it wasn't a pre-planned attack, please wait until we get to Jen McCabe's testimony. She really is, for me at least, like the keystone in understanding this entire case. And it's also why Turtle Boy went after her so hard. So right, let's keep going with the theories. The other theory that the defence suggest is that Brian Albert did it. Why? Well, because he's just a crazy guy who loves to fight and the defence went after Brian in the stand for a few things.

One, he traded in his phone for a new one on the 22nd of September 2022. You will notice that that is months and months and months and months after the murder of John O'Keefe. But it was, and I will be fair about this, it was just days before he was to be told by the police to preserve his phone. Again, when you read that in isolation, you're like, well, my God. Brian said that he did it because his phone was falling apart and it was his birthday that month. So he decided to upgrade. A lot is made of this, like I said.

But he did do what most people do when they get a new phone. He transferred all of the data over to his new handset anyway. So, do you know what I mean? It's one of those things that in isolation, again, if you just take it out of context, sounds wild, but it really is just a bit like disappointing when you hear, well, but I did transfer all of the data. But the defense is like, well, I didn't ask you about that. So yeah, salacious, but he never actually got rid of his phone, per se. Brian Albert was also asked at trial if an investigator or any forensics teams had ever gone into his home to search it or take photographs. To which Brian Albert says the thing that I honestly think is one of the most truthful things he says,

no, but I wish they had. Which brings us neatly onto something we just have to address the police never search the albert home which is gonna open you up to all sorts of bollocks isn't it and yeah it's a big thing when i first read that i was like oh my god but let's talk about it let's talk about it calmly and then we can we can see how we feel at the end. And then we can have a mental break. For a lot of people, quite understandably, this lack of search is a major sticking point. And for us as well. Until you consider a key thing, probable cause.

The police had no reason to search the Albert home. Not one witness placed John inside the house. Even Karen, in her original statements to the police, said that she dropped him off, but she didn't see him go inside. So, we understand it. And when we first heard about this case and read that the police hadn't searched the house, that the victim had been found dead in front of,

it does seem odd, because John was in front of the house because he was planning on going inside the house but john's phone data never places john inside the house and if the police had forced a search of the albert home without probable cause and while they had evidence pointing the finger at someone else's guilt i.e Karen's own statements of I hit him and the taillight pieces that have been found on the lawn anything they found during that search of the house would have been thrown out as inadmissible anyway so the police to be able to get a warrant to search somebody's house have to show probable cause so a witness, something,

something that puts that person inside the house. Or a bullet hole like on Breaking Bad. Yeah. And they cannot have evidence that points at somebody else. By this point, they've already fucking found the taillight evidence and Karen Reid has been screaming her head off, saying, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him. Oh, sorry.

Could I have hit him? Could I have hit him? Could I have hit him could I have hit him could I have hit him so even if they'd gone in it would have been pointless anyone who would have looked at evidence after any decent judge would have thrown that out because they had no right to go in and search the house I get it though I get it it feels instinctively wrong that the police from a lay person's point of view didn't search the house but we have to look past that and look at the legalities of how you search somebody's house. So yes, absolutely, with certain parts of this case, I will say, I wish the police did a more thorough job, a less sloppy job, so that we could avoid these claims of cover-up.

But with this, there was nothing they could do. I'm not making excuses for the police for why they didn't. They literally couldn't do this. And before anyone rolls their eyes, these sorts of protections for the police not being able to just come into your house and search it are there to protect people like us, protect civilians. The idea that the police cannot just come into your home without probable cause and if they have strong evidence pointing at somebody else for the crime is a good thing and another thing about the albert's home it is true that after john's death they did remodel it with a particular focus on the basement and then they did sell the house the onliners don't like that they're nuts about it but the house had been on sale from 2021 a whole year before john died

it obviously hadn't sold so they did some work on it and it only sold in late 2023 i'd love to know what they did to that fucking basement to sell a house that became the center of this incredibly bloody volatile murder investigation what did they do to be able to sell it but again it's like everyone's operating with half the information yeah and coming to these wild conclusions the alberts did get rid of chloe the dog as well um they said in court that she went off to live with a family in vermont and they rehomed her because she was too hard to control and look again when i first had that i was like oh my god they used chloe as a weapon to attack john and then they got rid of her and they were like oh she went to go live on a farm

in vermont they killed her honestly all these thoughts went through my head so i'm not trying to make people who believed in this conspiracy feel stupid that is the last thing i'm trying to do i'm just saying there's more to it right but i yeah and it's you know a dog can't tell on you like why why would you do that exactly and then people will be like well they got rid of her so they couldn't test her a teeth marks for john's uh lacerations but as we'll go on to find out there was no dog dna found on john anyway chloe had bitten someone before so she obviously did have behavioral problems and just because she bit someone else doesn't mean she bit john and there's also absolutely no dna evidence to back up the idea that chloe bit john at all ever and before people like oh

they didn't test the wounds they only tested his shirt how are you going to get attacked by a dog and not get dog dna on your shirt anyway we're jumping ahead let's stay focused after this the defense then hammered brian albert about the calls back and forth between him and brian higgins after the party brian albert said that some of these calls were butt dials and some of them were calls in which the two men had spoken. Now look, there is a lot of talk of butt dials in this case. Again, when I heard it, I'm just like, why are these people lying? They're lying because they were calling each other to cover up this fucking murder. I don't know if they're butt dials. I don't know if they actually spoke to each other. Butt dial seems incredibly implausible, especially

with modern phones. I can't remember the last time I butt dialed all the time okay that's interesting that's interesting because again i'm looking at it from my my lived experience i'm just like i can't remember when i last but i accidentally call people all the time interesting if i like put my phone in my bag and i haven't locked it or like if i've accidentally left whatsapp open got. And it's like clattering around in my bag. I accidentally call people all the time. Okay, well, there you go. But Ken, whether they're making butt dolls or whether they were actually speaking to each other, I don't know what it proves. Because Jackson asked Brian Albert in court,

well, all these calls, you had to be talking about the event. And he says this as if that's crazy. Or something that automatically points to these men being involved in a cover-up and like some sort of attempt to get their story straight. Sure, maybe. But as Brian Albert said in court, quote, of course we were talking about it. It was a horrible situation that was going on. Everyone was distraught and there were a lot of phone calls. Comes back to what we said last week. If they hadn't been calling each other,

and they were like, let's just, you know, stay out of each other's way for a while, that's more suspicious. We've got even more for you, though. Next up was Matt McCabe, Jen's husband. Matt was called out by the defence on some of the texts he had sent, mainly one to a group chat that he was in with his wife and Brian and Nicole Albert. And he said in there, tell them the guy never went in the house.

To which Brian replied, exactly. Is this to get their story straight? Or is it because Matt is saying, just tell them the truth, that John didn't come in, which he didn't. Yeah, like in court, Jackson makes it seem like he's ordering them. Just tell him that he never came in the house. But again, it depends how you're already looking at this case, right? Everybody's looking at this in a different way and coming to different conclusions.

If you read it like, just tell them he never came in the house. It's like, okay, he's ordering everybody. Or you're just like, just tell him he never came in the house. It's like, okay, he's ordering everybody. Or you're just like, just tell him he never came in the house. Full stop. And Brian's like, exactly. Exactly, he never came in the house. So I'm not going to hammer on about this too much because if you already have an opinion on this,

you're going to see this in different ways. But it just doesn't really prove anything for me. There was another text in the same group saying, hope they don't think she's making it up after the fact for some reason that's referring to kerry roberts telling the police about karen telling her she was worried john had been hit by a snowplow before he was found which just doesn't do it for me to be honest no it's basically the reason that the defense pounce on this or what they pounce on it with is saying that jen mccabe coached kerry roberts to lie and say that karen had said the stuff about the snowplow and then they're like well

i hope the police don't suspect us of telling kerry roberts to say that and then worry that she might be lying no they just say i hope they don't think kerry rober Roberts is making it up after the fact because it sounds too convenient. Okay, we're gonna wrap this episode up here. I know it feels a bit abrupt, but like I said at the start, we didn't plan on splitting this episode in half. Circumstances have forced our hand. But don't worry. Episode three, the final part, will be out tomorrow. And you do not want to miss it. Because it is in tomorrow's episode that we will be getting into the details of the weird how long to die Google searches, the saucy text between Karen Reid and Brian Higgins,

and of course, also our theories about what really happened. Harvard is the oldest and richest university in America. But when a social media-fueled fight over Harvard and its new president broke out last fall. That was no protection. Claudian Gay is now gone. We've exposed the DEI regime, and there's much more to come. This is The Harvard Plan, a special series from the Boston Globe and WNYC's On the Media. To listen, subscribe to On the Media wherever you get your podcasts. He was hip-hop's biggest mogul, the man who redefined fame, fortune, and the music industry. The first male rapper to be honored on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, Sean Diddy Cone.

Diddy built an empire and lived a life most people only dream about. Everybody know ain't no party like a Diddy party, so. Yeah, that's what's up. But just as quickly as his empire rose, it came crashing down. Today I'm announcing the unsealing of a three-count indictment, charging Sean Combs with racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, interstate transportation for prostitution. I was f***ed up.

I hit rock bottom, but I made no excuses. I'm disgusted. I'm so sorry. Until you're wearing an orange jumpsuit, it's not real. Now it's real. From his meteoric rise to his shocking fall from grace, from law and crime, this is the rise and fall of Diddy. Listen to the rise and fall of Diddy exclusively with Wondery Plus.