RedHanded - Episode 363 - Karen Read & The Death of John O’Keefe - Part 3

Episode Date: August 23, 2024

In our unexpected third part on this neverending rabbit-hole of a case, we finally take on the big, crucial factors that have sent the internet into a frenzy: the taillight, the flirty texts, the inverted video, and the conduct of one Trooper Michael Proctor.And, finally, we give our verdict: is Karen Read guilty of murder?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 on Apple 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. Follow Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Saruti.

I'm Hannah. And welcome back to the third, and I promise, final part of Karen Reid. Let's pick up where we left off. Yes. We're now into week four of the trial. And it's now that we're getting into the real meat of it. Phone communications Jen McCabe and trooper Michael Proctor are all set to go under the microscope. Let's start with Jen.

And like I said, she is a crucial witness. In my opinion, the most important witness, because she was at the house during the after party, and she was with Kerry Roberts and Karen when they found John the next morning. On the stand, Jen said how she and John had been friends for years, how he was an amazing guy, and that she loved him. And then she cried as she recounted the conversation she had with John's niece when he was missing, telling her that they would find John and that everything would be okay. Jen also stated that she and Karen had got on well. They both had MS and they bonded over that. On the night in question, Jen explained that she was the one

directing John O'Keefe to the house that night, which we told you about already. And that was the reason she was looking out the window. And this is backed up by texts. Just after 12.10, Jen and John spoke on the phone and they text about directions to Fairview. Then at 12.27, Jen texts John saying, here? At 12.31, she says, pull behind me. At 12.40, hello? At 12.42, where are you? At 12.45, hello again? And then at 5am, Jen texts John one last time saying, please answer, Karen is worried, we need to find you, please text so I know that you're okay. These texts are, in my opinion, the texts or the piece of evidence that, for me, blow this whole case open. So let's talk about it. The 1231 text, pulling behind me, makes sense if you consider that this would have been when Karen's SUV was outside the

Albert home and we know that because John's phone GPS data shows him arriving on Fairview at 12 24 a.m. Jen saw Karen's car and told John where she should park and then the hello at 12 40 makes sense because we know that John didn't reply to it because he's dead and his phone didn't move or log any activity after around 12 25 a.m so this text at 12 40 makes it seem really believable that john o'keefe did not go inside that house yeah so let's just you know re-establish what's going on. 1227, Jen texts John. Here? Question mark. She looks outside.

1231, she sees Karen's SUV. And she says, pull in behind me. Because she's been giving John and Karen directions to get to the house, so she's expecting them. Nine minutes later, she texts saying, hello? Question mark. In that nine minutes. I mean, it's longer than that because also the 1231 text is coming after she's looked outside the window and seen him we know that john and karen arrived

at 12 24 because john's phone gps like you said puts them there so say they arrive 12 24 jen looks out the window 12 31 sees the suv so it's still there five minutes later it's still there john had stopped moving his phone had stopped moving at 12.25. So doesn't it make it seem like Karen pulls up, 12.24. John gets out of the car, 12.25. Then his phone stops moving. At 12.31, Karen's SUV is still there five minutes later. And she says, pull in behind me.

But she doesn't. She leaves. So then nine minutes later jen is like hello because she hasn't heard from john we know that because there's no activity on john's phone after that and her saying hello is saying john never came inside the house in those nine minutes john didn't come inside the house now you can think that jen is lying and let's go through that because if you believe that this doesn't prove that John didn't go into the house here are the alternatives right one John did go into the house and somehow Jen didn't see him in the

house and John was killed so she only texts saying hello at 12 40 because she didn't see him go into the house and John was killed by being lured into the basement and very silently murdered and Jen had no clue that this has happened so she keeps texting her friend John hello where are you etc etc or two John did go into the house and Jen did see him and John was killed and Jen being in on the pre-planned murder ruse as the defense claim just coldly kept texting John's phone to make it seem like he never came into the house or three John did go into the house and was accidentally but and this is crucial immediately killed and quick thinking Jen again coldly just keeps texting John's phone so that they could later point to these messages and say that he never came in.

So I think this is the thing that's the real sticking point. Because if we're saying that after she says pull in behind me, or before that, John gets out of the car, goes into the house. Something must happen to John very, very quickly. Because otherwise, why is Jenen texting at 12 40 saying hello if he went into the house and she saw him and he didn't die either this 12 40 text of hello the 12 42 where are you the 12 45 hello again is all a cover or john didn't go into the house yeah or john went into the house and was killed and Jen didn't know about it. Those are the only things that could have happened.

That's why this is the set of texts that make me believe that John didn't go into the house. Who is that quick thinking that John goes in, oh my God, he dies within minutes and you're immediately like, oh, I better text him saying hello so that later we can say he didn't come into the house. Or it's a pre-planned attack and they kill him straight away and then jen is orchestrating all

these texts as part of that which is what the defense say or you've got to think of the unbelievable theory which is also not what the defense say that john went into the house and was immediately very secretly taken down into the basement by brian albert brian higgins and or colin albert and they attacked him down there and then took him out without anybody seeing him. Just see how those are the only options and none of them really make any sense. But like, maybe that's just my opinion. I don't know. I think you have to look at these and think what makes the most sense, really.

These texts also, I think, explain why the defense went with the much more difficult to prove and much more difficult to explain or believe pre-planned attack narrative they do not say that they think john died in an accident and the group conspired to cover it up because for that to be true like i said jen would have to be the fastest thinking person on the planet john's got to go in within eight minutes he's fucking dead and they're texting to cover it up and they are pretty clear about that unetti and jackson from the grab ass practice fighting in the bar to jen texting john directions to lure him to the house and colin and chloe hiding in the basement with the bryans it was an organized murder that is what the defense are arguing here because of

john being a lawn nazi or because brian higgins wanted caran all for himself don't worry we'll get to the text about that and well brian albert is just a murder hungry maniac who is totally fine with murdering a cop in his house on his son's birthday with his whole family there and then jen well she's just a criminal mastermind but then they go to all of this effort all of this string pulling all of this string pulling, all of these texts, the covering up, the dog attack. And then they just dump John's body on the front lawn in front of their own house and then go to bed. Without even checking that he's dead. Because John's not even dead hours later when he's found.

But, sticking with Jen for the moment, the time has come for the big one. The Google searches. As we told you last week, the federal inquiry found that at 2.27am, Jen's phone had been used to make a poorly spelled Google search for how long to die in the cold. At trial, Jen disputed the timing, saying that she did make that search, but that she made it at 6.24am, when Karen had asked her to Google hypothermia as the paramedics were moving John into the ambulance. So what's going on here? When did Jen McCabe make this search? Because obviously, that is very, very important.

The defence's digital forensic expert said that a search for how long to die in the cold was made at 2 27 a.m shortly after another search at the same time for a girl's basketball team this is the intergalactic basketball then at 6 24 a.m another search was made for how long to die in the cold this time spelt a little bit less badly jackson put it to j that she left 34 Fairview, went home and searched for the basketball team, then how long to die in the cold, both at 2.27am, because she knew that John O'Keefe was out there dying in the snow. And then, Jackson claims, Jen searched how long to die in the cold again at 6.24am, after John was found, to cover her tracks.

Because even the defence's own experts said that the search at 6.24am definitely did happen. Jackson also said that Jen attempted to delete the search she has made. And if that 2.27am search for how long to die in the cold did happen, then Jen has to be involved. she has to be a gal although we would still have to question the logic of a murderous group dumping john o'keefe in the snow knowing he's not dead why would they do that if he survives and wakes up he's going to tell everyone who tried to kill him obviously yes if that search at.27 was true, if Jen did do that, then yeah, totally buy into the conspiracy. It's all there. They fucking did it either as a fight or a conspiracy, blah, blah, blah. But then you're saying that they knew he wasn't dead. Why would

you leave a man who wasn't dead outside who you were just attacked in the basement? It doesn't make any sense. So get this, the Ontario Liberals elected Bonnie Crombie as their new leader. Bonnie who? I just sent you her profile. Her first act as leader, asking donors for a million bucks for her salary. That's excessive. She's a big carbon tax supporter. Oh yeah. Check out her record as mayor. Oh, get out of here. She even increased taxes in this economy. Yeah, higher taxes, carbon taxes.

She sounds expensive. Bonnie Crombie and the Ontario Liberals. They just don't get it. That'll cost you. A message from the Ontario PC Party. 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.

Claudine 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. But anyway, this whole situation is not that simple, because prosecutors brought in two experts to dispute the timestamps on their searches. First, you've got Jessica Hyde, who's another digital forensics examiner. And then you've got Ian Whifford, a forensic software expert from Cellubrite, which is a software that's being used to analyze the data. They both said that the two how long to die searches happened after 6.20am

on the 29th of January 2022. And that the 2.27 timestamp actually just indicates when Jen McCabe first opened the browser tab that she would later use for these how long searches and she opened it at 2 27 to search for the basketball team and Jen explained that she searched how long to die twice at 6 23 and 6 24 a.m so back to back in the morning and she's doing it at the request of Karen and And she says she did it twice, not to cover her tracks, but because her spelling was so bad. And the reason was because she was freezing and she has MS, so her hands were shaking.

And like we said, the defense don't dispute because they can't dispute the 6.24 a.m. search, which fits with what Jen says happened. So you have to believe that Jen made the same search twice, four hours apart, both times poorly spelt in order to cover her tracks and despite the waves this caused online the defense really don't argue the point that hard in court it's just there again to mislead and it fits their incredibly improbable pre-planned attack story

well kind of because like we said it implies that they knew john wasn't dead which why wouldn't you finish the job oh and also the digital forensic experts could also show that jen didn't delete anything as jackson said in court she closed the tab on her phone so you know like on phone, when you have a tab, you search something and you swipe it up. That's what she did. And that's what was recorded as her having deleted the search. Jen McCable's handed her phone in willingly to the police two days after all this happened. So just to be very clear, the defense do not say that she didn't make the 6.24am search because they can't. The person who works at Celebrite, which is the software that's being used, says no, both searches happened after 6.20am. What you're looking at in that 2.27am

timestamp is just when she opened that tab and she used the same tab four hours later to search how long to die in cold. So it's looking like that first search was made at 224 but again use a little bit of logic how much of a cold psychopath would jen mccabe have to be to go home from this party lie in bed she says she can't sleep after the party so she goes home and she's got basketball on her mind she coaches basketball her daughter's involved in it so she's just laying there googling this basketball team her daughter's been asked to join and then as soon as she's done that she's like oh i better check how long to die in cold because of that my lifelong friend who we kind of murdered but didn't finish murdering and then left on the lawn outside the house i was just in and then four hours later did

it again to quote unquote cover her tracks it just doesn't make any sense so So yeah, again, Jen McCabe is very cooperative. She hands her phone in. She didn't delete anything, although that's been spread online. She just closed the tab and the police had full access to her phone and they found nothing else. Next, let's have a look at Kerry Roberts. Kerry testified to the call she got from Karen at 5am on the 29th of January and how Karen had seemed bizarrely concerned that John had been hit by a plough. Kerry also explained how she went to help Karen to look for John and how when they found him in

the snow, Karen had been shouting repeatedly, did I hit him? Is he dead? And Kerry also made it clear that she saw Karen's broken taillight and that there was a black hole where the red plastic was missing. Because there's a lot of arguments of people saying it was just cracked and Proctor broke it

and then took pieces of it. But Kerry Roberts says when she saw the taillight that morning, there was a black hole where the plastic was missing. So let's ask the question we've asked of everyone else. Why would Kerry be involved in this conspiracy? She wasn't there that night. She didn't even really know Jen McCabe that well or any of the others that were there. And she'd been friends with John since high school. Why would Kerry lie? Surely she would just want the truth. It really throws a big spanner in the defence's pre-planned conspiracy story. But there's more to come, so let's keep going. Because the time has come for us to talk about Trooper Michael Proctor,

the lead investigator on this case. And if you ask the defence, the central character in this cover-up. It's time for him to take the stand. And look, I'm going to say this now. This guy's a dick. He's a total fool. And absolutely a key reason for why this trial has turned out the way it has. And I really think that even those people on the jury,

and people just in general who've come across this case, who might have been open to the idea that Karen did it, because of all of the evidence, may end up still thinking that Proctor is so gross that they don't want him to win anyway. I can totally imagine jurors not being able to find Karen Reid guilty purely because of the actions of Trooper Proctor, despite all of the other evidence that they were presented with. Proctor took over the very morning that John was found

and said that he believed the case was cut and dry. And by 10.53pm on the 29th of January, Proctor was making some bad, bad moves. In a group chat that he was in with childhood friends of his, non-police officer friends, Proctor started talking to them about the investigation. He named John O'Keefe as the victim and Karen Reid as the primary suspect.

One of his friends asked, I'm sure the owner of the house will receive some shit. To which Proctor replied, Nope, homeowner is a Prost and cop too. In the doc, Proctor said it wasn't because Albert was a cop, but because he hadn't been involved. And Jackson questioned him with, And you knew this, 16 hours into your investigation, less than a day.

And Proctor said, Yes. That doesn't seem that unusual. He like starts to say things like, Yes, because we found the daylight evidence, because Karen said, and then Jackson's like, I didn't ask for an explanation. So can you just answer the questions I ask you? Jackson even said at one point to Proctor,

and this is so crucial, I thought, this is the only way to get to the bottom of the lies in this case, is to watch every single fucking piece of testimony and listen to every single thing that Jackson and Yannetti say. He says this to Proctor, quote, so before you ever went to the crime scene, before you ever went into the house, only having interviewed three folks, even though it was four because he'd spoken to Karen as well, you had this case nice and wrapped up didn't you well that statement there proves that the defense knows that proctor didn't go to 34 fairview the day that john was found because he says before you even went to the house and these texts were sent at nearly 11 p.m that night so just hold that

in your heads because how could proctor have planted the fucking tell that evidence that was found at nearly 6 p.m that day as we discussed last week if he hadn't gone to the house for days as jackson confronts him with in court you can't say well you didn't even go to the fucking house did you and then also say but you planted the evidence didn't you that was found that day it can't be both things and honestly this is how i was first convinced because i kept seeing what time proctor went there what time he picked up the car everybody argues because he writes down the wrong time he tows karen reed's car and everyone's like aha but he gets it an hour

wrong again sloppy police work but he doesn't go there until the 3rd of february so how is he planting evidence that was found there on the 29th of Jan? And I'm telling you, this is the only way to get to the truth. So yes, this is just one example that got spread online, which became so baked in, this taillight evidence became so baked in by the time of the trial, that even when the defence openly here revealed that they know that the evidence planting can't have happened it's too late because everybody already believed it if anyone listening at home just googles karen reed taillight this is nowhere to be seen you just come up with video after video after video of youtubers and tiktokers and people just being like look there's a picture of her car it's red

it's glowing red the taillight's still there explain to me then how pieces of karen reed's broken taillight were found on the lawn of 34 fairview buried in the snow covered in john's touch dna at 6 p.m that day yes i grant you half an hour after proctor tows karen reed's car or possibly an hour and a half i don't know but days before he ever goes there it doesn't make any sense proctor doesn't help himself though because he says more stupid shit in this group chat he called karen reed a whack job cunt and said that she had a leaky balloon knot and he hopes that she just kills herself proctor also told his mates that he was searching k's phone, looking for nudes. Yeah, he's horrible.

Yeah, he's disgusting. The leaky balloon not reference is because Karen Reid has Crohn's. And that's all I'm going to say about that. When confronted with these disgusting messages in court, Proctor admitted that they were juvenile, unprofessional and regrettable, but said they had zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation and i think he's a worm man but i think he's right because yeah he's absolutely nasty he's a he's a filthy person and these texts were absolutely devastating to the prosecution. And I can totally see how this would have impacted the jury.

When I first read this, it impacted me. The idea that a man in law enforcement, a trooper, and the state police would say these kind of things. Of course it would affect anybody. When I first read all of this, I was like, yeah, of course he planted evidence. Of course he deleted videos, which we'll get on to. Of course he brazenly orchestrated a conspiracy to frame Karen Reid. Look at him. But the thing is, firstly, why?

To which Jackson would say that it's all down to Proctor's links to the Alberts. Because yes, Proctor had ties to the Albert family. Like we said, when he's first sort of handed this case, he doesn't recuse himself. Whether he should or not, I don't know. I'm not a cop. It's really not for me to say, but he doesn't recuse himself. He also downplays his connection to the Albert family. I think that's safe to say. The FBI federal investigation into this case found that he had these connections basically his sister Courtney was very good friends with Julie Albert who had even babysit like we said last week Proctor's kid in the weeks leading up to John's

death he absolutely downplayed this and did not recuse himself when he probably should have done and also yes this is true 10 years before a seven-year-old Colin Albert had been a ring bearer at Proctor's wedding does that mean that he would cover up a murder of a cop that Colin would go on to commit a decade later maybe I'm not saying that's not possible but what we are saying is that there is no evidence at all, anywhere, that anyone other than Karen killed John or that Proctor covered it up. Also, he didn't know that he was going to get assigned this case. No one did.

No one could have. And we know that he did not go to the crime scene for days after the incident. And the defence themselves admitted it. So he just cannot have planted that taillight evidence yeah like he doesn't put himself in charge of this investigation sergeant buchanek puts him in charge of that investigation so again if you're saying very much like the argument we made earlier with katie mcclaughlin you're saying that either he was always privy to this pre-planned

conspiracy attack and therefore that's why straight away from the off he's gunning for Karen Reid or somebody got to him afterwards like Brian Albert somebody Kevin Albert somebody gets to him and it's like listen quick man this all went down can you just do us a solid go after Karen Reid because you remember you remember Colin like my son slash nephew slash whoever was a ring bearer for you we are we're all mates can you do this like it happens way too quickly with both katie mclaughlin and trooper michael proctor both these people that they say have like close family connections to the alberts for them to get on board with the plan that fast or you have to say they were a part of the pre-planned conspiracy which is what the defense say which again like i said the more people you pull into this pre-planned conspiracy a motiveless murder of a man that was very very

well liked everyone in this community knew what john had done by taking on his niece and nephew after his sister and brother-in-law tragically died why would they murder this man it doesn't make any sense and the more people you add in the more unbelievable it is so yeah look let's be clear proctor in my opinion shouldn't be anywhere near a job in law enforcement because yes absolutely law enforcement should be held to a higher standard and all the shit that has rained down on him since this case he deserves it all and again coming back to what i said at the start of this episode it's shit like this with cocky dickhead Proctor playing the big man to his mates on WhatsApp, because I honestly think that's what it was, that makes the public not trust law enforcement. How can you look at those texts and have faith that this man carried out a fair investigation?

I totally get that point. But the fact is, there is no proof that he planted evidence. And everyone who saw all of this, saw all of these texts from Proctor and believed the conspiracy theory, again, I do not blame you. But in light of the rest of the evidence, while you can absolutely hold on to your disgust

for Proctor, I just don't see how you can think anyone else but Karen did it. Before anyone screams about the missing video clips or inverted videos of the Canton Police Department's Sallyport, let us clarify. Yes, there were clips from various ring cameras like the one at John's house and also the Albert's neighbour's one that were missing. But the defence don't even say how these missing clips impact the case

and they would if they thought there was any chance they could get away with it. And again, look, I get it, the defence are there to point out sloppy police work, point out things. But when they say missing, it's not like there's even evidence that they were deleted. Although some people would say that the ring footage from John's house that should have shown Karen coming home, like, because remember, I don't dispute that she came home because the Wi-Fi, she connects to the Wi-Fi automatically. But that footage is missing. Like, why would they delete that? They didn't delete the fact that the Wi-Fi connected to her phone,

which proves that she went back to John's house. It's an inconsequential thing. The defense are just, you know, firing bullets at any hole they possibly can. But again, they're making something out of what looks like nothing. There was also a video that was played to jurors of Karen's SUV at Canton Police Station Sallyport, which was for some weird and annoying reason, inverted. Oh my god, this is, this probably dominates several million hours of YouTube videos on this particular topic. It's obvious that the footage is inverted because the numbers on the wall appear backwards.

And all of those armchair internet detectives totally lost their shit about it, saying that the police had flipped the video to hide Proctor or someone else tampering with Karen's taillight once it was in their custody. But hello! If you flip a fucking video or image, you don't magically see the other side of the thing that is in the shot, of the object that's in the shot. And here, I've taken a picture, Hannah, that I'm showing you of a box of tissues.

That while I was writing this out, was trying to you know formulate how i was going to explain this here is a picture of a box of tissues right we can only see the yellow side of the box of tissues we cannot see the blue side if i invert it using my phone can we see the blue side or can we only still see the yellow side so just because it's flipped for some i don't understand why it's flipped i do not understand why it's flipped but the idea that it was inverted in order to hide evidence in order to hide somebody tampering with it in order to you know obscure a part of that cast or this tissue box doesn't make any sense because yes because it's flipped you just see the mirror image the damaged taillight was never in the shot to begin with and wouldn't be visible whether the

video was inverted or not but despite this painfully obvious fact this threw yet more fuel on the conspiracy fire and it comes back to the police doing yet more sloppy work in this case it's so obvious like you said it's inverted why did they submit that to court and i watched reporters who were there were like when it was shown and then it was like the defense point out that it's inverted the jury are like because yes on the face of it it makes it sound like it's some... Been tampered with. It's just so stupid. So yes, it's absolutely infuriating because it's again stuff like this that leaves holes for the defence to wiggle about in,

which is absolutely their job. But this is nonsensical. And I do also think again, it's really bizarre to me how sloppy the police were in handling this case, especially because they were dealing with the death of another officer. So finally, let's get on to the evidence against Karen Reid, even though the internet doesn't want us to.

You've probably figured out by now because we've said it with our mouths, but we do think she did it, and this is why. As we said at the beginning, and as you already know, the prosecution needed to show intent for that second-degree murder charge. So they dug around in the couple's relationship. They hit the jury with the Aruba trip that we told you about last week. That was just three weeks before John died, and it showed that Karen could get very jealous,

very drunk, and very angry. The prosecution also had John's niece and nephew testify, because they're minors, their names are never used, and also we can't watch the video testimony of what they say. But, obviously it is reported on afterwards. And they confirmed that the couple argued all the time. And apparently, before his death, John had indicated to them that the relationship was over.

Probably because he knows he's exposing these two kids to somebody who's constantly arguing. John's niece also told the court how Karen had been frantic the morning of the 29th of January, talking about a snowplow having hit her uncle. Long before, like we keep saying, anyone would have had any cause to think anything other than maybe John had just fallen asleep on someone's sofa. This story that Denise told matches what Kerry Roberts and Jen McKay both said. The explanation for this online? Jen coached the girl and Kerry to lie.

Jen is just fucking the best criminal ever. But then also does sit around in her house googling how's long to die in cold. And leaving a man who's not dead but they tried to murder in front of her house she was in. But sure. So prosecution also pulled up all of the texts and calls that we went over last week when karen just non-stop harassed john all day long before they went out drinking because that's one of the things everyone's like look at the videos of them the cctv of them in the bar they were so happy they were so lovey-dovey i'm sorry have you people never been in a relationship before they argued all day before that night out.

Then they're obviously in like the we've just made up honeymoon phase while they're out. And then they argue in the car. I have no doubt about that. And then all night long, Karen sends him abusive message after abusive message after abusive message. Who cares if they were lovey-dovey in the bar? That doesn't mean she didn't kill him. Also, if they were trying to frame Karen for John's murder, like the defence say that the 34 Fairview after-party group are, why wouldn't they just say,

oh yeah, they seemed really on edge and unhappy, they spent the whole time arguing and bickering and we could sense all this tension, we could feel it was leading to something. But nobody says that. They all just say, yeah, Karen and John seemed good. But the defence came out with a big one. It was time for Brian Higgins to take the stand. He and Karen had been exchanging flirty texts for weeks before John had died. It all started after Brian had gone to John's house one day to watch a football game. As he left, Karen walked out and kissed him, quote, not like a friend. It all started after Brian had gone to John's house one day to watch a football game.

As he left, Karen walked out and kissed him, quote, not like a friend. After this, she started texting him, saying that she thought he was hot. Brian comes across as confused in the text exchange. He says things like, really? Are you messing with me? It's hardly Danielle Steele, but that is what the internet is making it out to be honestly the number of youtube videos are like saucy texts between brian and they're not they're just like her putting it on him but not even she's just like i think you're hot and he's like really because i think brian higgins has got quite a low opinion of himself like physically i don't he's like just seems baffled by it so yes in court brian admits that he was attracted to karen but she blew hot

and cold and that she was still with john so he didn't really know what was going on and she's fucking bonkers she run away brian higgins what are you doing she is bonkers and i really think the thing with karen reed has become almost like she was the one who was killed. Like, you know how you can't say anything bad about the victim. Don't ever say anything bad about the victim. That's what it's become like about Karen Reid. But can we just say for a second that Karen Reid is absolutely fucking bonkers? It's true.

Yeah. So, yes, apparently she texts Brian all the time, telling him things like how strained the relationship with John had become and how the kids were spoiled and he was the perfect candidate for this because Brian didn't know John that well and by all accounts he was pretty lonely but I don't think that this was a match fated for a passionate affair for which Brian Higgins was willing to kill but according to the defense this tryst did give Brian Higgiggins a motive to kill john tenu and slept together they just had this weird kiss that karen had planted on him but anyway there are issues with this because brian higgins actually left the albert's house party early he left around 12 15 and he didn't just go home where he's sitting in his house and he's like well no one saw me there

he actually went to the canton police department where he had an office go home where he's sitting in his house and he's like, well, no one saw me there. He actually went to the Canton Police Department where he had an office. And he said he was there to move his work vehicles so snowplows could manoeuvre around them. The defence claimed that Brian Higgins went there to keep an ear out for any calls coming in about John being found. I can't, I can't, you know what? Why? I can't even be bothered to think how that would even remotely make sense. It makes no sense at all. If anyone found John outside 34 Fairview, the people in the house would know first.

They're like, no, but Brian, you go to work and keep an ear out for any calls coming in about a body being found. But not even a body, because we don't even know if he's dead. We'll Google it later. And, you know, if you can fucking shove your brain into this thought shape, which I can't, Brian was only at the police station for ten minutes, so that's not exactly stellar surveillance. Yep.

And according to Brian, he only found out about john the next morning now one thing that brian higgins did do that makes him look super guilty so guilty that again and i'm going to admit to all of this when i first read this my jaw dropped and i was like prison was that he took his phone after the investigation started to an FBI office and had a friend of his help him download all relevant texts. So like those between him and Karen. And then he printed them all out. So he had hard copies.

And then he drove to a military base and threw his mobile phone and SIM card in a dumpster on said base. And this all went down one day before he was going to be subpoenaed to hand his phone over. Yes, I am not going to sit here and deny that that is incredibly suspicious. It really looks like he had something to hide, and that someone within the police force had tipped him off. And that may well be true. And he probably did have something to hide.

In court, Brian said that as an ATF agent, he had worked with an informant who had discovered his personal number. So he had destroyed that phone to cut off contact. And maybe. But there's just no evidence of Brian being involved in John's death anyway. If Brian Higgins killed John O'Keefe because he was obsessed with Karen,

why would everyone else get involved in a pre-organised hit? True crime is messy. Sometimes people do things that make them look guilty. But you do need a bit more than that. Oh, bit of dodge. Not sure I like the sound of that. So we don't know what Brian Higgins was trying to hide,

but there's no proof it was connected to John's death. That's the key thing. There's obviously something he doesn't want to come out on, whether it's to do with work or whether it's to do with something else. He gets rid of his phone. But that in isolation, again, is not enough because there is no evidence pointing to Brian Higgins having been involved in John's death. Or that what he destroyed was connected to that. Again I get it people are going to find that hard to swallow but please look at the evidence in its entirety. 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. 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. So let's get back to Karen. Specifically, her car and John's injuries. Karen Reid's SUV had a broken taillight, scratches and pieces of glass on the bumper and a dent about 48 to 50 inches off the ground. As we mentioned last week, a hair belonging to John was found frozen onto the bumper. His DNA was all over the bumper and his DNA was also on the taillight pieces found at the scene and tiny

taillight pieces were found embedded in his clothes and John's injuries consisted of a blunt force impact injury to the head, multiple skull fractures as a result, a cut above his left eye, two black eyes and lacerations to his arm. So was John hit by a car or was John not hit by a car? Dr Renee Stonebridge, a medical examiner, said that his injuries could have come from either a fall or a traffic collision. She also said she saw no obvious signs of an altercation or a fight. John had no defensive wounds at all, so a fight just doesn't fit. Then, the medical examiner who carried out the post-mortem on John,

called Dr Irini Scordibello, testified that the injuries to John were not immediately lethal, but they could have been incapacitating. She added that the injuries could have come from a fall, being hit with a blunt object, or being hit with a car. But she stated that, from the information that she had she couldn't be sure which one of these three things killed john too much depends on the

position of john's body and the car during a potential strike so basically she says it's possible that john was hit by a car but she cannot tell us definitively because of the positioning of the body and the car. She doesn't know what those are. Yeah, at the time of the impact. There's just no way she could know. But of course, it is entirely possible that John was hit by the car and he hit his head on frozen ground. Yeah, that's her sort of final say on the matter. Now, what about the car? Trooper Joseph Paul was the one who examined the SUV and the scene for the state police and he took the stand. He explained that John's missing shoe, which was eventually recovered from about nine feet away from his body, the broken plastic from

the taillight that was found about eight foot from his body and the broken glass from his drink glass was found about a foot away from his body and that all of this the pattern in which they're distributed everything about the seam he said in his experience was consistent with a vehicular strike there was also vital information from karen's car itself that trooper paul explained and i think this is again very important trooper paul says there were two periods of activity that night at around the time that Karen would have got to the Alberts. He says in the first event, the data from the car indicated

that it, quote, slowed down and made a U-turn. This would have been Karen pulling up at the Alberts because she basically overshoots the house and has to come back. In the second event, which occurred about eight minutes later, again, everybody cast your mind back to Jen's texts, that gap of about eight to ten minutes from when she sees Karen's car and then she texts saying hello because John doesn't come inside. After that eight-minute gap, Karen's vehicle moved forward slightly,

shifted to reverse, and then rapidly accelerated to 24.2 miles an hour in reverse. The speed then dropped to 23.6 miles an hour half a second later as the steering wheel jostled slightly. But Karen Reid did not brake. She hit something. This, according to Trooper Paul, is absolutely typical for a pedestrian strike. So if she'd have hit a car or hit a wall, the velocity would have dropped a lot more. But it only drops her by about a mile because he's saying she swipes a body and not hard, not full impact, but enough to knock him over.

Hannah, I'm not someone who drives. So can I ask you, reversing at 24.2 miles an hour that's fast yeah real fast okay because if you consider that when you're reversing you can't see so usually you are doing it very cautiously unless you are 100 sure of what is behind you no if you're reversing at 24 miles an hour that's uh that. Interesting. And I guess that it would only add to that if it was dark, because it's after midnight, there's a blizzard, and you're drunk. Yeah. Despite all of those factors, this really did become a battle of the experts. Two additional experts were hired by the FBI as a part of their investigation into the handling of this case, and they testified on behalf of the defence. Dr Daniel Wolfe, an accident reconstruction expert, and Dr Andrew Reitschler, is a biomechanics expert. Wolfe said that the damage to Reid's car was not

consistent with a vehicle-pedestrian collision, and Reitschler said that John's injuries were not consistent with being hit by a car. When Dr Wolfe was cross-examined by the prosecution it was revealed that he had never viewed the SUV for himself he also didn't know John's hair was found stuck to the bumper or that John's DNA was found on the taillight pieces or that pieces of the taillight had been found embedded in John's clothes it's quite a lot of information to not know to come to the conclusion that the car didn't hit John. To be an expert witness. Yeah. Wolfe also admitted that when Karen hit John's parked car,

this wouldn't have caused the damage seen to the SUV's taillight, as the defence try and claim. And obviously we know why we think Karen did that, but what else but hitting John could have caused Karen's taillight to smash and for pieces of the plastic to be found with John's DNA on surrounding his body

and for tiny pieces of the plastic to also be in his clothes? Yeah, like if we are saying we've already dealt with the planting evidence side of things not being possible and there being no proof for that happening. What else other than Karen hitting John with her car? Because Wolf himself, he's a witness for the defense. He himself admits when he's shown the ring video footage of Karen backing into John's car the morning she goes out to look for him after he's already going to be lying outside 34 fairview

she says that's how my taillight got damaged wolf watches out and says that couldn't have caused the damage to the car people will therefore argue well trooper proctor broke it and planted the evidence that's why it's broken but we've dealt with that he couldn't have done it because he doesn't go to the crime scene for ages after. So what else other than Karen hitting John with her car and the taillight smashing could explain the taillight pieces with John's DNA found at the crime scene? The pieces of the taillight found on John's clothes and the fact that his DNA is on it at all?

How else can we explain that? You can't. You just fucking can't. So yeah, if you, like us, can put aside this whole idea that Proctor planted the evidence, because it really doesn't make any sense unless you're going to go down the road of, well, it wasn't Proctor, it was some other cop who did it after they took Karen's SUV, then fine, maybe you can make the argument in your head that they plant the evidence of the broken taillight pieces at 34 Fairview they make

John's body touch it so his DNA's on there or they plant it and then you'd also have to tell yourself that they crushed up pieces of the plastic from the taillight and sprinkled it into John's clothes that's the only way it all kind of makes sense but the defense gave it a go. They suggested to explain away the taillight evidence and again, the very fact that they come up with an explanation for this proves that they themselves don't believe that Proctor could have planted it. They suggested that John threw his cocktail glass at Karen's car once he got out. It smashed, causing the glass to embed in the bumper.

But this glass also broke the plastic taillight, which shattered and sprayed back onto John's clothes. And some pieces of it broke and fell onto the floor outside 34 Fairview. Show me the cocktail glass that can break a taillight. Uh-huh. We're not talking a scratch. We can break a taillight. Uh-huh. Not, we're not talking a scratch. We're talking a hole in it. Apparently the glass is from the Waterfall Bar and Grill in Canton, Massachusetts.

Well, they're onto something. They should get on the phone to NASA because that is something I've never fucking heard of in my life. And again, like I said, this is proof, the fact that they say this, that they know the evidence, the taillight evidence wasn't planted and okay let's move away from this what about everything else how do we explain the lacerations or scratches to John's arms Renshaw said John's injuries, including these lacerations to his arm, were not consistent with being hit by a car. But, this is very important, biomechanics expert Rentschler never examined John's body.

Another person who didn't examine John's body was Dr. Marie Russell. She's a retired doctor and forensic pathologist. She took the stand and claimed that john had definitely been attacked by a dog and the injuries to his arms were consistent with dog bites or claw marks fucking pick one they're not those aren't even remotely similar things but anyway cue internet hysteria have you hannah seen the pictures of john's arm no can you please yes this second and everyone at home if you would like to join in please google john o'keefe arm right so like hannah said dr marie russell did not see john's body she just used photos arguably probably better photos than the

ones we're looking at she maybe had it from multiple different angles. But we are currently looking at a picture of John's arm and the wounds to it. I mean firstly, let's start with the obvious. Do you think they look like dog bites? I think they look like significant injuries but they do not

look like they came from a dog. No. I think for me, the issue with them looking like dog bites is that i've been bitten by a dog and when the dog bit me it left a puncture wound where its tooth and it was a shih tzu not a fucking german shepherd bit me and its tooth went into my hand and there was a puncture wound that's how dogs bite but there are no puncture wound. That's how dogs bite. But there are no puncture wounds. I think that's fair to say, right? Not that I can see, no.

No. They look more like scratches. Yes. Deep ones, but scratches. Yes. Prosecutor Lally points this out to Marie Russell. He says there are no puncture wounds, there was also no bruising, and no crushed bones. All of which, Lally said, you'd expect to see in a dog attack. Also, and this is also very important, there are no wounds to the underside of John's arm. So they're all on the top half of his arm.

If a dog bites you, surely you would have teeth marks on both sides of your arm. Because dogs have teeth on the top and the bottom of their mouths. So would you not have puncture wounds on both sides when it grabs you with its mouth? But John doesn't have that. I have seen people online saying things like, I showed my vet these pictures and they said it's 100% a dog bite. Apparently these

people even questioned these no doubt baffled vets about why there were no bites on the other side of John's arm, like we've been asking. And the consensus among some people is that if you're in a defensive position when a dog attacks you, you would naturally pull your arm into your body to protect yourself. And so the dog may not be able to grab hold of the underside of your arm as well as the top side, hence no bites on both sides. And okay, maybe, but I'm still not convinced that it's a bite due to the lack of puncture wounds. Yeah. So let's say that Chloe the dog didn't bite John for some reason. Maybe she's muzzled.

But then again, you would ask, why would you sneak her down into the basement for this planned attack and then muzzle your dog? Because that's what the defense claimed. They said that's why she was down in the basement. So let's say it's just scratches caused by Chloe. The problem is there was no dog DNA on John O'Keefe. There was no dog hair, no dog saliva, nothing. I cannot even touch Big Blue, my family dog, without getting covered in his hair.

And if I go anywhere near his face also saliva how am i getting attacked by a dog and getting no dog dna on me yeah now yes people will say that they did not test john o'keefe's wounds for dog dna they only tested his clothes and sure again i don't know why they didn't test the wounds because this whole issue could have been avoided but i think it's because when they saw it they didn't think it was a dog attack so they didn't test the wounds for dna but again how are you going to get attacked without getting dog dna on your clothes what they did find on john's clothes was pig dna which led people to wonder if it had been a group of feral pigs that had maybe gone for John's arm.

In Canton, Massachusetts. Sure. The home of the wild boar. Uh-huh. People also say, and again, it's another one of those Columbo internet moments, that maybe the pig DNA had come from a dog treat that Chloe had been munching on before she took a munch at John's arm, or scratched John's arm. But if that was the case, you'd still expect dog DNA to be there, alongside the pig DNA.

I think the pig DNA was probably just from food that John had eaten and then gotten on his clothes. Now we've got the issue of how no one saw John's body. When he was found, he was under four inches of snow, but there was grass underneath him, so he must have been on the ground outside 34 Fairview before the heavy snow started, which was after 12.30. So how did all of those people walk out of the Alberts' house when they left the party without seeing him. I think they were just drunk. It was dark and there was a blizzard going on. If they hadn't seen John within an hour of him,

like falling or, you know, being placed on or ending up on the lawn, it's easy to imagine that he got covered by snow and tragically became impossible to see. Then, of course course we have to bring up the snowplow driver Lucky that the defence called at trial. Lucky said that he was ploughing the streets in the area and that he went past the Alberts house at around 2 45 a.m on the 29th of January and didn't see a body. But my point here is that if as we know john's phone stopped moving and stopped having any activity after around like 12 25 26 if that's the case john's been on the lawn for over two

hours by the time lucky says he goes past the albers he could easily have been covered by snow by that point yeah totally that's the whole reason that he's ploughing in the first place. It snowed. Exactly. Also, at trial, Lucky makes so many mistakes with timings, things he saw, when he saw them, what he saw. Like, I don't think he's a nefarious actor, but I don't by any means think that he is like my turning point of this case.

And it's with Lucky that we're going to finish our run-through of the trial. On the 25th of June, closing arguments were heard. The defence hammered home the frame job, while the prosecution focused on how the evidence and the words out of Karen's own mouth pointed to her guilt. Deliberations began, but two days later, on the 28th, jurors sent notes to the judge telling her that they were deadlocked. She asked them to continue to try and reach a verdict.

But by July 1st, the jury was still deeply divided. Judge Canone asked them to return for one final round of deliberations, but later that day, she declared a mistrial due to a hung jury. Hours after the mistrial was declared, Massachusetts State Police announced that trooper Michael Proctor had been relieved of duty. And much to Cerruti's chagrin, there is a date next year for a retrial. So let's wrap this episode and series up by talking about what we think happened. Well, as far as I can tell, there are only a few options for what could have happened here. One, the conspiracy.

That this group of people got together to kill their friend John O'Keefe with no clear motive. Two, John died in 34 Fairview but it was an accident or a fight that got out of hand and the people inside covered it up. Three, John slipped and fell and it was a complete accident that nobody else was involved in. Four, Karen hit him with her car but she didn't know she hit him and she didn't mean to hit him. Five, Karen hit him with her car, but she didn't know she hit him and she didn't mean to hit him. Five. Karen hit him with her car, but she didn't mean to hit him, but she knew. Or six.

Karen hit him with her car and she meant to do it. Conspiracy, I think we've well and truly debunked. It makes no sense and there's no evidence. But there is plenty of evidence pointing away from it, like the taillight pieces covered in John's DNA. Not least the idea that for the conspiracy theory to work, you need dozens of people to know and be involved in it to some extent, as the defence claimed themselves. But somehow none of these people have cracked over the last two years.

And when we first heard about it, we thought it was a cover-up too. But there just isn't the evidence. Alright, next. The idea that John died in an accident and the group covered it up. Again, it has the same issues as the conspiracy to murder him in a pre-planned attack, only this time it's much worse in terms of explaining away the evidence. Which is why the defence went for the much harder to prove pre-planned angle. The timings for it to have been an accident, if you look at Jen McCabe's text, are way too tight. John would have to encounter this accident immediately for those texts to make sense

and for the lack of movement on his phone to make sense. And then also all the stuff we said about people like Katie McLaughlin, the firefighter or Trooper Proctor. How would they know to start that cover up so quickly as soon as they got involved with the case, if it was just an accident? Number three, John slipped and fell. I'm not on board with this one because it doesn't explain the taillight pieces or Karen's own admissions of I hit him.

So the question really becomes, if Karen hit him, did she mean to or not? Personally, I think Karen hit John on purpose. Now, I understand why some people might not agree with that, but let me talk through why I think that's the case. I think that night she was drunk and angry and they'd also been arguing perhaps because John even maybe told Karen it was over and then John gets out of the car and starts to walk away. Karen loses it, puts the car in reverse, speeds backwards in the dark in blizzard conditions and strikes John from the side. He's knocked off his feet, his shoes come off, he falls to the ground and bangs his head. The glass in his hand breaks and the taillight is smashed. Karen then drives away. And the reason I think she meant to do it was because of the sheer speed with which she reversed. She went from zero to 22.6 miles an hour in a blizzard in the dark.

Some people might argue she just reverses that quickly because she's angry. They've just had an argument. He gets out the car. She wants to be like, fuck you. Maybe. But if you are traveling at that speed and then suddenly the velocity of your car drops the way in which trooper paul said the car's own data shows that it did again let's come on to the fact of how drunk she was and she noticed or not are we seriously saying she wouldn't have known

she hit something i think i take all of your points I think she knows she hit something. Yeah. I don't, I'm not convinced she knew it was him. Okay. Because it's dark and it's a blizzard and she's drunk. Okay. I think that's fair. I think that's a fair thing to say. I do, however, have more thoughts on why I think Karen knew she hit John. But before I get to that, I do have do have a question yes she's not driving a

banger she's driving a lexus suv does your car again i'm not a driver does your car alert you if you hit something or if you get too close to something completely depends interesting my car beeps at me i have had many a car that doesn't it i would imagine if she's driving a lexus it would have sensors and it would beep yeah okay so i think the most kind interpretation of the situation that i can have towards karen reed is that she didn't know she hit john i don't necessarily deep down in my heart believe that. I think she knew that she hit him. And this is kind of why, right? Not just the reversing,

but also the fact that as soon as she drives off, she starts texting and calling John again and again and again. Immediately. If you look at the timestamps, given how quickly she gets to John's house in Canton, and we know that she did because her phone connects to the Wi-Fi, almost immediately after leaving John at the Albers, she starts calling him, leaving him voicemails,

texting him again and again and again. We went over this last week's episode. And those texts and voicemails are incredibly abusive. She's calling him a pervert. She's calling him a fucking loser. All of these things are very, very hostile. And do you know what it reads like to me it reads like to me with those messages like she's provoking john to message her back because all day when they'd been arguing before they went out to the bar

when john wouldn't pick up the call from her he texts her and say stop calling me but he doesn't do that this time she messages him again and again and again he doesn't even reply to say fuck off fuck off karen i'm at the alberts i'm having a good time leave me the fuck alone and i think especially her saying the kids are alone the kids are alone i think she's doing it to get john to reply to her because i think she's starting to realize that he might be dead or really injured which is what makes me think that either she hit him on purpose or at least when she left immediately within minutes less than minutes of leaving she starts leaving him messages because she strongly suspects that she hit him

and this is where it's very difficult because John lay in the snow for hours. If she had stopped when she'd sent those voicemails, instead of just waiting, hoping he'll reply to me and I'll know, oh, phew, he's fine. If she'd have just stopped and gone back, she could have saved John's life. It's the messages. And it's also that call that she makes at 1am. The one where she says, no one knows where you are. We talked about this last week.

Does she really not remember dropping him off 27 minutes ago? Or is she trying to lay the groundwork for the, I just had no clue, I didn't even know where he was, defence. The next morning, she also starts calling people and saying that John might have been hit by a snowplough. I don't know. I think she then drove to Fairview to try and see if John's body was there. Like we said, there's a missing 15 minutes or so where we don't know where she was

between going to the waterfall bar that morning and going to Jen McCabe's house. If she went to Fairview, maybe she saw John's body under the snow outside the house. And I think maybe, and again, this is just speculation, maybe she didn't want to discover him alone this would explain why Kerry and Jen both say they couldn't see John at all when they got to 34 Fairview yet somehow Karen ran straight to him when the police and the EMTs arrived Karen told them that she had hit him because perhaps she wanted them to have all of the information they needed to try and save john because she didn't want him to die but maybe somewhat ironically when jen mccabe told her to stop talking perhaps that sobered karen up a bit because soon after that she just started to say

that she couldn't remember a thing and then her stories change after he dies where she knows it's not in my benefit anymore to keep saying that and look again i'm gonna say this i honestly went from a one that it was a conspiracy when i started the research to a two to a three to a four a five and now i'm at a six i could say i'm at a 5.5 i agree that when i was in that sort of middling phase that karen probably did do it but that the police didn't have enough evidence to convict her and that they had overcharged her with second degree murder but i now think that she is guilty of second degree murder that's just my opinion like i don't think they probably should have gone for that i think it was a very strong

charge but i think the prosecution did a poor job at trial. And I think the police work was incredibly sloppy, making it so much harder than it needed to be for them to get the conviction. So when people, because I've seen a lot of people saying this and I agreed with them, there's just not enough evidence to convict her. There was enough evidence, or there should have been enough evidence to convict her. It was all just so poorly handled that they flopped this case. But ultimately, I just want people to think about the mental gymnastics you have to do

to think this was a frame job. Either what you need to believe is that over 15 people, let's dial it back, let's say 10 people, over 10 people are all psychopaths who could kill their friend and their neighbour and then lie their arses off about it for years with no guilt, no remorse. They can just get on with their lives and continue to demand that this didn't happen.

Or there's one person who is a cold, hard liar. And be in no doubt, there is corruption at the heart of this case. Karen Reid and her lawyers undoubtedly gave confidential information to Turtle Boy and used it to poison the entire case before the trial even began. And Proctor is also a huge piece of shit that played a large role in fucking this up. But Karen and her lawyers are financially benefiting from this behaviour. Because Turtle Boy's blog, that they have kept very well informed, is paying for Karen Reid's defense.

And I've really, really tried over the past two episodes to be as thorough as I can with this case. Without us spending like a month's worth of episodes talking about it. But I'm sure there will still be people listening who will say, you didn't talk about this, you didn't talk about this, you didn't talk about this. But guys, the answer doesn't lie in some tiny detail with this case. It's been scrutinized from every angle. Everything has been talked about, but the answer isn't there. Look at the case as a whole and ask yourself what makes sense given

the evidence we have and what just doesn't and importantly it's quite easy i think to get so carried away with talking about karen reed that everyone forgets about john o'keith and we just want to finish up this absolute mind maze by saying how sad we are for the O'Keeffe family, especially John's mum, who lost two of her children and also John's niece and nephew. They lost their parents a year apart when they were just babies. And now they've lost their uncle and surrogate father as well. And I'm pretty sure they'll be robbed of any sort of justice. Because I think reed will probably get away with it yeah yeah i think that's exactly what's going to happen and look if you end with

that kindest idea that she didn't know she hit him which again to me the voicemails kind of make that hard to believe that she didn't know straight away but she's lying now about not saying things like i yeah which like fine but also about things like asking jen mccabe to make that google search and she's willing to throw a lot of people under the bus and i think that rubs me up even more of the wrong way yeah yeah so yeah that's it guys you may not agree with me on my analysis of it but that's where i've landed and i really want to make it clear i i don't think anyone who believes this is stupid who believes that it was a conspiracy i think it is that the fault of law enforcement that we're in a position now where people are so willing to believe that all the

police officers involved in this were corrupt to the core rather than it's a really sad story of a group of adults who acted really irresponsibly by getting drunk and driving around in a fucking blizzard and people who don't want to take responsibility for what happened and I think Karen was drunk it's a simple story if you ask me she was drunk they had an argument she either hit him on purpose or hit him by accident because she fucking reversed at that speed and then john o'keefe ended up paying for it with his life and his poor niece and nephew who have lost another adult in their lives and that's it that's all i've got to say we're gonna go and lie down now and we'll see you next week where we we won't be talking about Karen Green. No, never again.

Until the retrial. But even then, no, we'll do an update. I can't do it again. That's it, guys. We'll see you then. Bye. Bye. 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.

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 L.A. 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