Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBZ Foston's Radio.
Speaker 2: All right, as I think all of you know, the
Speaker 2: Karen Reid trial is now in the hands of the jury.
Speaker 2: So it's been a long slog, not only for Karen
Speaker 2: read in this trial, but also in her last trial.
Speaker 2: It's been a long slog. So the jury today got
Speaker 2: the case I guess around two forty and they were
Speaker 2: allowed to deliberate for till two thirty till four thirty,
Speaker 2: a little less than two hours. And you would not
Speaker 2: expect it in a case of this complexity and this challenge,
Speaker 2: such a challenging case, that they would have come up
Speaker 2: with a verdict. So the situation that we find ourselves
Speaker 2: in is that the jury will spend the weekend on
Speaker 2: their own and they will reconvene on Monday. There apparently
Speaker 2: today was some motion made by the defense lawyers which
Speaker 2: would have had Karen Reid I guess was denied by
Speaker 2: the judge. I've never heard of this before, a motion
Speaker 2: whereby Karen Reid would have assisted in the What they
Speaker 2: do is they have eighteen jurors who listen to the case.
Speaker 2: Rob if you could clear that call in number five,
Speaker 2: that would be a good thing, if you had a moment. Okay,
Speaker 2: thank you very much. I appreciate it. And let me
Speaker 2: know with this SoundBite. I can always send that to
Speaker 2: you during the break if I have to. I have that.
Speaker 2: We can take care of all of that. So they
Speaker 2: will spend the weekend on their own, not talking about it,
Speaker 2: not listening to shows like Nightside, not reading the newspaper
Speaker 2: or anything like that. We will then see how it results,
Speaker 2: what happens. I have no idea as to how the
Speaker 2: jury will go on any of these counts. There are
Speaker 2: three major counts, second degree murder, manslaughter while operating a
Speaker 2: vehicle under the influence of liquor. There are a couple
Speaker 2: of what's called lesser included charges there involuntary manslaughter, motor
Speaker 2: vehicle homicide and a simple OUI and then the third
Speaker 2: leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death. So
Speaker 2: these are serious charges and it is a lot for
Speaker 2: the jury to consider, and they will resume their consideration
Speaker 2: Monday morning. And I am interested to find out now
Speaker 2: that the case has been finished, the closing arguments today
Speaker 2: and the instructions of the jury. As I started to
Speaker 2: talk about this motion that was made where by somehow
Speaker 2: never heard of this before. That the defense said that
Speaker 2: in order to maintain the integrity of the judicial system
Speaker 2: that the defendant would never been done before. What they
Speaker 2: do is, you have eighteen people on the jury, and
Speaker 2: eventually twelve will become the jew rows, and six of
Speaker 2: them have to be They basically take them out of
Speaker 2: it kind of looks like a watto barrel, and they
Speaker 2: tick out six who become alternate jurors. And the motion
Speaker 2: that was made was that Karen Reid would be able
Speaker 2: to participate in that. It's generally done by the Clerk
Speaker 2: of Courts, as it was today. Anyway, the point of
Speaker 2: the story is that this case has always been full
Speaker 2: of surprises, and we'll see. I mean, I think the
Speaker 2: jury could come back with anything. They could come back
Speaker 2: with acquittal, they could come back with convictions on some all.
Speaker 2: I don't think they're going to come back with a
Speaker 2: second degree murder. I think that's that is a in
Speaker 2: my opinion, a not guilty pretty clearly. But I'd love
Speaker 2: to know what you think. So here the number six, one, seven, two, five, four,
Speaker 2: ten thirty, six one seven, nine, three, one, ten thirty.
Speaker 2: We were missing a couple of sound bites here and
Speaker 2: I'm going to take a quick break here. Rob and
Speaker 2: I are going to get our act together, and we'll
Speaker 2: be right back after the break here on Nightside.
Speaker 1: You're on night Side with Dan Ray on w b Z,
Speaker 1: Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2: Last night we talked about the case a little bit.
Speaker 2: We started talking about the Karen Read case and then
Speaker 2: we we moved on to the the situation there was
Speaker 2: quickly developing in the Middle East. So tonight I decided
Speaker 2: to do the reverse because obviously people had an opportunity
Speaker 2: towards the end of the show last night to talk
Speaker 2: about the Middle East, and uh, they had an opportunity
Speaker 2: in the beginning of the show to talk about Karen Reid. So,
Speaker 2: having explain to you why I took him in reverse order,
Speaker 2: there was one caller who called in and he leaves
Speaker 2: voicemails for me. He's a caller who just doesn't like
Speaker 2: me or doesn't like my show, and he's I like
Speaker 2: to talk to these people or talk about these people,
Speaker 2: and they're often mistaken, never in doubt. And this is
Speaker 2: this caller doesn't leave his name, but his voice will
Speaker 2: be recognized. And of course when you leave a voicemail,
Speaker 2: for me on the machine. I tell you, hey, this
Speaker 2: might meet be on the air. So we're ab going
Speaker 2: to play the cut that I just sent you. It's
Speaker 2: only seventeen seconds long. But this was a caller who
Speaker 2: was very upset with our discussion. We had a very
Speaker 2: high level legal discussion with a veteran criminal defense lawyer,
Speaker 2: Phil Tracy. Caller predicted the outcome of the case, and
Speaker 2: he put a deadline on it. So I don't know
Speaker 2: if his outcome is going to be right, might be,
Speaker 2: but certainly the deadline that he put on his past
Speaker 2: cut number ten. Go right ahead, Robb.
Speaker 3: Karen read jury will come back and look till late
Speaker 3: afternoon tomorrow with a not guilty verdict. That's making a
Speaker 3: fool out of till Tracy, you and Hank Bennan and
Speaker 3: believe me, I will call to rub it in tomorrow evening.
Speaker 2: Well, if you're out there listening tonight and you'd like
Speaker 2: to call in and take a victory lap and rub
Speaker 2: it in. Oh the jury didn't come back with a verdict. Oh,
Speaker 2: I see. Well, I wonder if this caller, whose voice
Speaker 2: is a very distinctive voice, by the way, is going
Speaker 2: to have the backbone to call in and say, guess
Speaker 2: what I was wrong because he was wrong. Now I
Speaker 2: don't know, and I've said all along, I don't know
Speaker 2: how the case will come out because I haven't been
Speaker 2: in the courtroom every day. I'm prepared to do my
Speaker 2: show every day. So if he's listening and he wants
Speaker 2: to call in and take a victory lap, feel free
Speaker 2: because not only well the words speak for themselves seventeen
Speaker 2: seconds of your thoughts last night, which proved to be
Speaker 2: wrong again. Sorry, no one is hanging their head. Phil
Speaker 2: Tracy's not hanging his head. I'm not hanging my head,
Speaker 2: and Hank Brennan isn't hanging his head. We all happen
Speaker 2: to We all happen to be lawyers. Phil Tracy and
Speaker 2: Hank Brennan a very experienced trial lawyers in the courts
Speaker 2: of Massachusetts. And I'm sure that you probably have a
Speaker 2: deep Whoever this caller is, I'm sure you probably have
Speaker 2: a deep legal background. I bet you probably at some
Speaker 2: point of watch Judge Judy a couple of times, and
Speaker 2: so you have a degree from the school of Judge Judy.
Speaker 2: Let me go to the callers. Six months, seven, two, five, four, ten,
Speaker 2: thirty six one, seven, nine, three, one, ten thirty. First
Speaker 2: up is Gideon in Quincy. Gideon, thank you for calling in.
Speaker 2: You are next on Nightside. Hey, how are you?
Speaker 4: Thank you? I'm great.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 4: First of all, Dan, I do like you and I
Speaker 4: do like your show, so I want to start with that.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 4: You're welcome. Okay, So about Karen Reid, what I really
Speaker 4: want to say is, I don't think she's a murderer.
Speaker 4: I just don't believe that. You know, I agree with you.
Speaker 2: I yeah, I agree with you. I don't think she Yeah,
Speaker 2: I don't think the case was made to a convictor
Speaker 2: on the second degree murder charge. I agree with you.
Speaker 4: Go right ahead, right And you know, with the alcohol
Speaker 4: and everything, we don't really know what happened. I'm not
Speaker 4: sure i'd buy the widespread conspiracy. But based on her behavior,
Speaker 4: you know, I understand she was the next day, she
Speaker 4: was worried about whether.
Speaker 5: She'd hit him.
Speaker 4: She was not behaving like a murderer. Now, you know,
Speaker 4: maybe leaving the scene of an accident. But you take
Speaker 4: the fact they charged her with murder, and then you
Speaker 4: add on top of that some of the mistakes that
Speaker 4: were made of the trial and what was you know
Speaker 4: true for Procto, the things he said, looking through her phone,
Speaker 4: with the looking for the nude pictures. You take all that,
Speaker 4: put it all together, and I hope she gets a pass.
Speaker 4: I feel sorry for the family. I feel sorry for
Speaker 4: the victim, I really do. But I just don't think
Speaker 4: she's a murderer. And you put it all together, and
Speaker 4: I think that she I think she should get a pass.
Speaker 2: You know, well, here's the prom my thought. Okay, no, no,
Speaker 2: those thoughts, and I agree with you. In order to
Speaker 2: prove murder, even murder in the second degree, you have
Speaker 2: to prove a level of intent that I just don't
Speaker 2: think is there. However, when when you have someone whose
Speaker 2: life has been cut short, and you have someone who
Speaker 2: and I don't know exactly how old mister O'Keeffe, officer
Speaker 2: O'Keefe was, but it looked to me like he was
Speaker 2: somewhere in his forties. He obviously had many years of life.
Speaker 2: Something happened, something happened. It's up to the jury to
Speaker 2: decide if what happened involved her, So if if hypothetically
Speaker 2: she was overserved, and if hypothetically she had been in
Speaker 2: an argument with mister O'Keefe, and if hypothetically the argument
Speaker 2: got heated and he wanted to go into the to
Speaker 2: the party and she had no interest in doing that.
Speaker 2: And if she decided that she was once he left
Speaker 2: her vehicle or the vehicle, she was going to make
Speaker 2: a dramatic departure, let's put it like that, and in
Speaker 2: the middle of a snowstorm, I guess was a pretty
Speaker 2: intense snowstorm, decided to just step on the gas and
Speaker 2: go away to make the point that she was upset.
Speaker 2: And if, unfortunately the car was in reverse and not
Speaker 2: in forward going you know, in drive, If if the
Speaker 2: jury would have believed that, do you still give her
Speaker 2: a pass?
Speaker 4: I don't, you know, I don't know. It's tough. I mean,
Speaker 4: I'm glad I'm not on that journey jury. I mean,
Speaker 4: I'm really glad, And I don't know. But I just
Speaker 4: think that if the government, I think I think it
Speaker 4: seems a little unfair that the government can charge her
Speaker 4: with murder and then sort of say, well, okay, she's
Speaker 4: not a murderer, but well then jumped down to you know,
Speaker 4: leaving the scene of an accident and manslaughter. I just
Speaker 4: feel it should be you know, either murder or not murder.
Speaker 2: Well again, there's well, Gideon, Gideon, there's there's every case,
Speaker 2: the facts of the case to find what the charge
Speaker 2: might be. Now, is she overcharged? I would armor from
Speaker 2: the case I saw that she's overcharged when he come
Speaker 2: to murder. But can you get a man slain of
Speaker 2: conviction out of there? Voluntary or involuntary? I think that's possible,
Speaker 2: certainly on the involuntary leaving the scene of an accident.
Speaker 2: You know, again, that's tough because that's a state of
Speaker 2: mind situation, motor vehicle homicide. That's that's that's doable. So anyway, look,
Speaker 2: it's the way the court system works. The court system
Speaker 2: isn't perfect. Yeah, as someone once said, it's the second
Speaker 2: worst court system in the world, and the first worst.
Speaker 2: The worst ones are all the others. So we'll see.
Speaker 4: They say the same thing about democracy, right, all the others.
Speaker 2: That's a good one.
Speaker 4: That's a great time.
Speaker 2: Geddy and I enjoyed the conversation. Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Let me go to Matt in Florida. Matt has strong
Speaker 2: viewpoints always. Matt, welcome back, Dan.
Speaker 5: What do you think happened? You've you've yet to give
Speaker 5: your theory. Well, or can you not because you know
Speaker 5: they could see you?
Speaker 2: No, no, no, I can give a theory. I can
Speaker 2: give a theory.
Speaker 5: I want to I want to hear it. I've been
Speaker 5: waiting for it for years.
Speaker 2: Well, well, the more I look at it, I find
Speaker 2: it difficult to believe that he got into the house.
Speaker 2: And I know that there's all the evidence that people
Speaker 2: will hear that he get into the house and he
Speaker 2: got into a fight and either was intentionally killed or
Speaker 2: someone hit him with a lucky punch and he hit
Speaker 2: his head. But he's dead in the house. And then
Speaker 2: at some point someone said, well, what are we going
Speaker 2: to do? And you've got like all these people kicking around,
Speaker 2: and they're going to conclude, you know, let's just put
Speaker 2: them out in the front lawn. No one's going to
Speaker 2: notice that. That, to me, stretches credibility. What doesn't stretch
Speaker 2: credibility is that there could have been a horrible accident,
Speaker 2: meaning that these two folks are have a and no
Speaker 2: one knows, I mean the only person who knows, and
Speaker 2: maybe she doesn't even know because she had apparently she
Speaker 2: was over served that night. So so assume they have
Speaker 2: a big, a big argument and she's turned the car
Speaker 2: around and the car she thinks the car is in drive,
Speaker 2: and it's actually in reverse. He gets out of the car,
Speaker 2: and she decides that she's going to make a dramatic
Speaker 2: getaway and hits the gas pedal thinking she's going to
Speaker 2: go forward, and it goes backwards by mistake.
Speaker 5: That's right, the eyes.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the only conceivable theory that makes any sense
Speaker 2: to me. Although I can't prove that, right, you know,
Speaker 2: I don't know that the prosecution should prove that.
Speaker 5: Yeah, right. And this is the thing. I was so
Speaker 5: into the conspiracy, and you know, I listened to Brennan,
Speaker 5: who I can't stand. I don't like him, but I
Speaker 5: mean his I thought his closing arguments were actually pretty good.
Speaker 5: And like, I just think Karen Reid got really really
Speaker 5: really really really times a thousand lucky in that there
Speaker 5: was just no evidence of what actually happened. You know,
Speaker 5: I think she actually, after years of looking at this,
Speaker 5: I don't know, I just I'm doing a complete one
Speaker 5: eighty here, but I think she did it, and she
Speaker 5: got a great lawyer, and she lucked out in that.
Speaker 5: You know, he didn't, you know, what if he saw
Speaker 5: the car coming back where then he slipped, And you know, like,
Speaker 5: I just think she got really lucky in that there's
Speaker 5: really no evidence against her, really, and I just that's
Speaker 5: my theory now, is just that she got lucky. There's
Speaker 5: no evidence and all the evidence has really fed the
Speaker 5: conspiracy because the heart evidence is it's more plausible looking
Speaker 5: at the heart evidence that there was a conspiracy versus
Speaker 5: her actually hitting them.
Speaker 2: But so let me ask you this. Okay, if you
Speaker 2: go back to the to the conspiracy, if he went
Speaker 2: into the house and there were words exchanged and a
Speaker 2: fight ensued, and I know that people are gonna call
Speaker 2: it in, tell me about the rug was taken out
Speaker 2: and the dog was put somewhere. All of that. I
Speaker 2: was hoping that the forensics on the automobile would be
Speaker 2: more dispositive of what might have happened. But let's assume
Speaker 2: hypothetically that it for no good reason, there's a fight
Speaker 2: and somebody pushes him, and this can happen. People hit
Speaker 2: their head and they die. I mean they you know,
Speaker 2: no one was intentionally going to kill him, But let's
Speaker 2: assume that that is the theory. I think that in
Speaker 2: that situation, and I'm not I don't believe that is
Speaker 2: what happened. But I would think that that it would
Speaker 2: be very difficult to get you know, five six, seven,
Speaker 2: eight nine people who were in the house at that
Speaker 2: point to say, Okay, here's what we're going to do.
Speaker 2: We're going to put him out in the front lawn.
Speaker 2: And we're all everybody's mum's, you know, nobody's saying anything, right,
Speaker 2: There's just too many people there, and and well, I think,
Speaker 2: what did they go ahead? Go ahead?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 5: So what I think could have happened really was and
Speaker 5: what I believe was there was a fight, and you know,
Speaker 5: he walked out on his own volition and then passed out.
Speaker 5: You know, they yelled at him, they said, get the
Speaker 5: hell out of hair, you drunk, and he just was
Speaker 5: walking out and you know, basically passed out. Because I
Speaker 5: can't get over the evidence of the toeture of of
Speaker 5: the snowplow driver and the the testimony of the kid
Speaker 5: who was picking up his girlfriend from the house or
Speaker 5: his sister and he said he saw Karen Reid, but
Speaker 5: no one else was in the suv. Those those are
Speaker 5: two third party people who have nothing to do with it.
Speaker 5: The snow plow driver and the kid picking up his
Speaker 5: sister or his girlfriend.
Speaker 2: I just can't snow the snowplow. Yeah, the snowplow driver
Speaker 2: doesn't give me much of a problem because I've been
Speaker 2: I covered enough snowstorms, uh, and have driven in enough
Speaker 2: snowstorms at night that if you're if you're in the
Speaker 2: middle of a snowstorm, and particularly I'm not a snowplow driver.
Speaker 2: And once the snow there's three or four inches of
Speaker 2: snow on the ground or two or three inches of
Speaker 2: snow on the ground, things have covered up, so that
Speaker 2: again I'd like to know more about the time of
Speaker 2: when he came by. And uh, but whatever, we'll we'll
Speaker 2: find out. We neither one of us were in the
Speaker 2: court room for the entirety for the trial. And I
Speaker 2: learned a long time ago, both as a lawyer and
Speaker 2: as a reporter. Uh, the only people who really are
Speaker 2: going to understand this case, and maybe they won't are
Speaker 2: the yours.
Speaker 5: That's fair. And I just, I just I have no
Speaker 5: faith in humanity, So I think, I think I don't.
Speaker 5: Every day I run into people and I just shake
Speaker 5: my head and go, what is what is wrong with
Speaker 5: this world? So I don't believe that you know, However,
Speaker 5: many people are on that jury. I cannot believe that
Speaker 5: every single one of them can have sat there rationally
Speaker 5: and listen to everything. I just don't. I just can't
Speaker 5: do it. But well, interesting, I'll tell you this, that's
Speaker 5: for sure.
Speaker 2: If they do hook her for something, it's going to
Speaker 2: be the she never should have done those television interviews.
Speaker 5: Well, and that's what makes me think, ultimately, I think
Speaker 5: she did it. You know, she's just like I said
Speaker 5: at the beginning of the phone call, my final answer,
Speaker 5: I think she did it. She just really lucked out
Speaker 5: in that there was just no hard evidence against her
Speaker 5: because I don't I haven't seen it yet. You know.
Speaker 2: Well, again, it's it's one of those it's one of
Speaker 2: those cases, and maybe we'll never know the truth. I
Speaker 2: just think it was a huge mistake how her lawyers
Speaker 2: allowed her to do those phone calls, to do those interviews.
Speaker 2: I just think that it's.
Speaker 5: Oh, can I ask you one last quick question as
Speaker 5: a lawyer, would you do you see do you think
Speaker 5: it's weird that no one in the house or the
Speaker 5: lady google in how long does it take to die
Speaker 5: in the snow? Do you find it bizarre that not
Speaker 5: one of them have done a TV interview or is
Speaker 5: that just kind of the right thing to do, just
Speaker 5: don't even get involved, to shut up and just let
Speaker 5: it take its course.
Speaker 2: Why would anyone do a TV interview here? I mean,
Speaker 2: no one, No one is going to No one is
Speaker 2: the person who you know, if there was someone who
Speaker 2: get well, no, but I'm saying there, why would anybody?
Speaker 2: First of all, all you're going to do is put
Speaker 2: yourself under the light of suspicion. So if you did something, uh,
Speaker 2: if you were somehow involved, you don't do the interview.
Speaker 2: If you weren't involved, why do you want to put
Speaker 2: yourself The only way you should you would do an
Speaker 2: interview is if you happened to walk out two minutes
Speaker 2: after the uh O'Brien either fell down or it was
Speaker 2: hit by the car, and you somehow gave him multimouth
Speaker 2: resuscitation called nine to one one and saved his life
Speaker 2: and you're a hero.
Speaker 5: No, I just yeah, you're just not getting anything out
Speaker 5: of it. So yeah, all right, thank you, apprecious.
Speaker 2: Thanks Matt, great dear you have great weekend, Happy Father's Day.
Speaker 2: He hung up real quickly six one, seven, two, five, four, ten,
Speaker 2: thirty six, one seven, nine, three, one ten thirty. Again
Speaker 2: it's up to the jury. What generally juries get it right.
Speaker 2: We'll see. I kind of imagine what this woman has
Speaker 2: gone through, uh for the last three years now. Uh,
Speaker 2: this is it just it just shows that that that
Speaker 2: that that life can be unfair. It certainly wasn't fair
Speaker 2: to John O'Keeffe whatever happened to him, and maybe it's
Speaker 2: going to be unfair to Karen Reid. But life is unfair.
Speaker 2: Six one seven, two four thirty, six one seven, nine thirty.
Speaker 2: Coming right back on night Side.
Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Y Boston's News Radio.
Speaker 2: I love that phrase getting stored. That's an interesting piece
Speaker 2: by Mike Macklin. Thank you all. Okay, we're going to
Speaker 2: continue talking about the Karen Reid case. It is now
Speaker 2: in the hands of the jury. I hope that the
Speaker 2: jury I think, I hope the jury can come to
Speaker 2: a decision. Whatever the decision is, I'm willing to accept it.
Speaker 2: I think that, Uh, there's I don't think there should
Speaker 2: be a third trial, although it would be. It's very
Speaker 2: hard for a prosecutor to walk away if there's a
Speaker 2: couple of mistrials. We'll see again. I don't have. I'm
Speaker 2: not particularly invested in the whole case, and for a
Speaker 2: long time really kind of stayed away from the case.
Speaker 2: But there came a point in time where it just
Speaker 2: became too big to avoid. Let me go to Donna
Speaker 2: in Berkeley, Massachusetts. Donna in Berkeley, Welcome, how are you hi, Idanne,
Speaker 2: I've talked to you before.
Speaker 6: I'm on my way to work.
Speaker 7: I'm a nurse.
Speaker 2: Thank you for what you do. Thank you.
Speaker 7: But two things I watched both trials, and if I'm
Speaker 7: not mistaken, doctor Sordy Bellow in the first trial not
Speaker 7: the second trial, said that John o'keith launched three liters
Speaker 7: of blood. And I just had a patient bleed out
Speaker 7: last week and she bled out twenty two hundred CC's
Speaker 7: of blood. That is a lot of blood. So when
Speaker 7: you're talking about all the forensics and all the evidence
Speaker 7: and everything else where, was three leaders of blood if
Speaker 7: this man was supposedly died on the side of the road.
Speaker 7: That's one.
Speaker 6: The other one is they never took swaths of each
Speaker 6: of the marks on his arms. They never did that,
Speaker 6: and there's where you probably would have found some DNA
Speaker 6: of whatever. My other question to you is I agree
Speaker 6: with you that I don't think she should have done
Speaker 6: the interviews.
Speaker 7: I think that was kind of.
Speaker 2: A shot in the foot.
Speaker 8: But does she get paid where she's so in debt,
Speaker 8: does she get paid for those interviews?
Speaker 2: Well, in the old days, no self respecting journalists would
Speaker 2: ever pay for an interview that was not considered appropriate. However,
Speaker 2: times have changed, and as we've gotten away from the
Speaker 2: big three networks, ABC and b C, CBS. Uh, and
Speaker 2: you get to some of these shows that that I
Speaker 2: think she was on. Uh, it's not inconceivable that that
Speaker 2: she that she was paid, but I don't know, is
Speaker 2: it possible? Yeah, but uh, you know, the the journalistic
Speaker 2: ethics that existed in the era of Walter Cronkite no
Speaker 2: longer exist in my in my opinion, So yeah, so
Speaker 2: it's conceivable. But again, I can't imagine that she would
Speaker 2: have done those with the with the support of her attorneys,
Speaker 2: because it makes their I mean that that she did
Speaker 2: not come across in those interviews as an empathetic figure,
Speaker 2: and they can be they've been used in court. Obviously
Speaker 2: she didn't have you know, she she could have stayed
Speaker 2: off the witness stand and obviously and basically choose to
Speaker 2: invoke her rights against self incrimination. But once you do
Speaker 2: that television interview and it is out there, it's part
Speaker 2: of the public record. So I don't think again if
Speaker 2: she does, if she does get convicted for anything, those
Speaker 2: interviews might be the downfall. We'll have to see, we'll
Speaker 2: have to see what.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 7: And like you said, you know, maybe the lesser chargers,
Speaker 7: but you know again about leaving the scene and all that,
Speaker 7: they didn't prove that there was a scene yet, you know,
Speaker 7: they didn't, they didn't really, the Commonwealth didn't really prove
Speaker 7: you know, sure, yeah, yeah, that was Jackson.
Speaker 2: That was Jackson's arguments. As a matter of fact, I
Speaker 2: had some sound bites of the closing arguments that I
Speaker 2: but unfortunately we don't have them available for you. But
Speaker 2: you're you're, you're, you're, you're, you're quoting essentially what Jackson
Speaker 2: told the jury and if the jury chooses to believe
Speaker 2: that and if there was no impact and uh and
Speaker 2: they they believe there was no impact.
Speaker 7: Time, Yeah, right, there's no scene. Did you see jas
Speaker 7: You probably didn't watch it today, but Jackson got choked
Speaker 7: choked up on the lost sentence. Did you happen to
Speaker 7: see that.
Speaker 2: No I didn't explain it, I'm sure you can describe it.
Speaker 8: So the last three things he said was not guilty.
Speaker 8: And then on the second one he said not guilty,
Speaker 8: and you could see him get choked up. And then
Speaker 8: on the third one he said not guilty. And it
Speaker 8: was like he was so passionate, and it was like, oh,
Speaker 8: you had just bled for all involved, but you know,
Speaker 8: you just bled that they have worked so hard.
Speaker 7: To try to prove her innocence. It was it was
Speaker 7: quite a moment.
Speaker 2: I thought, yeah, well, again, the burden of proof is
Speaker 2: not on them to prove her innocence. The burden of
Speaker 2: proof is on the prosecution to prove her guilt all
Speaker 2: the elements of the crime charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
Speaker 2: It's important to realize that that the burden of proof
Speaker 2: is on the government, and the government always has an
Speaker 2: advantage in these cases because most people want to want
Speaker 2: to believe what the government presents.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: So we'll see, it's it's going to be however it
Speaker 2: comes out. It's going to be interesting. I will say
Speaker 2: right now, I have no idea how it would come out.
Speaker 2: The only way that I think it comes out as
Speaker 2: a guilty at any level. Is if the jury somehow,
Speaker 2: out of all of the facts that are presented, comes
Speaker 2: to this conclusion that there there was a mistake made
Speaker 2: and she read the vehicle instead of going forwards, which
Speaker 2: she thought the car was in drive, it went backwards.
Speaker 8: I have none a quick question for you. Do you
Speaker 8: think that this case will ever see the lighter day
Speaker 8: in textbooks for all the lawyers to come.
Speaker 2: I doubt it, to be honest with you, because I mean,
Speaker 2: it could be taken up. But but well, these do
Speaker 2: these cases do come along at different times in their
Speaker 2: high profile cases. I can think of others in my
Speaker 2: career as a as a reporter. Uh, the the Louise
Speaker 2: Woodward case was a very interesting case. Do you remember
Speaker 2: that was the woman who was in nanny who was
Speaker 2: charged with killing one of the bab a child, a
Speaker 2: baby that was in her care. So you get those
Speaker 2: cases that are emotionally charged. I don't think the O. J.
Speaker 2: Simpson case would be in a textbook, because that's that's
Speaker 2: my thought. We'll see. I mean, there could be some
Speaker 2: criminal lawyer who might try to use the case in
Speaker 2: kind of a mood courts situation, I guess, but that's
Speaker 2: we'll see. Hey, Donad, thank you for what you do
Speaker 2: and thank you for listening to the show. Thank you
Speaker 2: so much. Thank you, don I appreciate that home good Thanks.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 2: I cliped that a little bit early. I apologize. Six
Speaker 2: one seven, two, five, four, ten thirty. We we got
Speaker 2: a couple of lines open if you'd like your choice.
Speaker 2: Six one seven nine three one ten thirty. I got
Speaker 2: Christine and Karen. And I'm glad to have some female
Speaker 2: voices on this because I think that, well, women may
Speaker 2: have a different perspective. I think that that it. I
Speaker 2: just think that that men and women might look at
Speaker 2: one of these cases differently. That's not to say all
Speaker 2: men and all women. But I'm interested with Karen has
Speaker 2: to say. I think I know where she's coming from,
Speaker 2: and I know where Christine is coming from. Uh, And
Speaker 2: I'm looking forward to hearing from both of them and
Speaker 2: maybe you if you want to call six one seven, two, five,
Speaker 2: four ten thirty. Six one seven, nine three one ten thirty,
Speaker 2: we'll be right back on Night Side.
Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Dan Ray Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 2: All right, let's get to the Phone's going to go
Speaker 2: to Christine in Denim. Christine, I know how you feel
Speaker 2: about this case. Tell us why go right ahead?
Speaker 9: Well, I was like that play game Prey today and
Speaker 9: we thought, we thought afterwards that everybody would be there
Speaker 9: after the court here, but nobody showed up. Everybody was
Speaker 9: saying this first time I heard this, that he had
Speaker 9: fight moks on his arms and his neck and prime
Speaker 9: mops on his arms and neck like he said that.
Speaker 9: They said the dog could have killed him with his
Speaker 9: bite on his neck, could have he could have been
Speaker 9: bitten so badly that he could have died instantly and
Speaker 9: been brought outside. I don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, uh, I guess that's another theory. Uh but yeah,
Speaker 2: I think it's that. It's a theory and uh uh,
Speaker 2: it's just it's a tragedy all around one. One person
Speaker 2: is dead, another person's life has been really uh in
Speaker 2: limbo on hold for three years. Even if she's acquitted,
Speaker 2: how does she recover? I don't know.
Speaker 9: I mean, I feel bad, so bad to his family
Speaker 9: and to her family. It's it's terrible for them to
Speaker 9: be going through all of this, you know. And that's
Speaker 9: you know what they were saying too. I never heard this,
Speaker 9: they were saying. I hate to say that they found
Speaker 9: a piece of hair on the tail light and that
Speaker 9: have belonged to his nephew.
Speaker 4: How can that be?
Speaker 2: I have no idea. You know, there's a lot of
Speaker 2: stuff you hear. Okay, okay, yeah, there's there's just a
Speaker 2: lot of stuff that you hear and you don't know
Speaker 2: where it's from. So the jury in these cases, they
Speaker 2: have to be uh that, they have to be careful
Speaker 2: in what they're exposed to, and hopefully they make their
Speaker 2: decision based upon what they heard.
Speaker 9: I hope, I hope they take their time with us.
Speaker 2: Well, that's what the judge told them to do. The
Speaker 2: judge said, don't rush a decision. We'll see. It could
Speaker 2: be a few it could be a good days.
Speaker 9: How come they work cats for the weekend? Like why
Speaker 9: they should have been kept? So they don't What if
Speaker 9: they go home and talk about it?
Speaker 2: I mean, well, they're they're they're told frequently in court
Speaker 2: in a case like this, not to discuss it with anyone,
Speaker 2: not to read newspaper stories, not to listen to talk
Speaker 2: radio shows, not to uh not to watch even television news.
Speaker 9: Uh so uh, everybody knows, I.
Speaker 2: Mean, but yours take their take their responsibility seriously. Thank goodness.
Speaker 2: Christine has always thank you so much, appreciate your calls
Speaker 2: and we will talk to thank Christine. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Thank you much. Have a great one. Let me go
Speaker 2: to Karen in Watertown. Karen, welcome back. How are you?
Speaker 10: Andrew well? Thonk you and you're well?
Speaker 3: Tour tickets Yep.
Speaker 2: I'm kind of a tough day, uh in the in
Speaker 2: the business here of I'm not good at migrating information
Speaker 2: from one computer to another computer. But that's the story
Speaker 2: that that I've shared with Rob in detail, but I'm
Speaker 2: not going to talk about that one.
Speaker 10: Probably I heard Alan Jackson his complete closing argument. I
Speaker 10: had to leave to go to work during prank Brennan's
Speaker 10: but I've got most of it, and that was both
Speaker 10: of both of them did a great job. And so
Speaker 10: I thought after Alan Jackson, I was like, oh my god, like,
Speaker 10: how to thank Brandon accounted this? And he did, And
Speaker 10: you said you weren't really like wrapped up in this
Speaker 10: I am.
Speaker 2: I don't know. We've talked before. Yeah, that's why That's
Speaker 2: why I'm so happy you go ahead.
Speaker 10: When Carol went to johnal Keith's mother, I mean emotional,
Speaker 10: she lost her son yep, and Karen Reid really self
Speaker 10: indicted her. She in tired herself when she agreed to
Speaker 10: all these interviews. I think that's probably going to be
Speaker 10: her undoing. Let me ask you, I'm not sure you know,
Speaker 10: really to.
Speaker 2: Ask you a question. Have have you changed your view
Speaker 2: during during the case. I thought, for some.
Speaker 10: Reason, I've been following this case from the very beginning
Speaker 10: when she was when Karen Reid was jailed, and I
Speaker 10: thought she probably an alcoholic blackout to around what you did.
Speaker 10: But Brennan didn't go there when because she start of uh,
Speaker 10: he started mentioning all the pup when she was mentioning
Speaker 10: all the possibilities about oh what maybe it was the
Speaker 10: snow plow, maybe.
Speaker 5: It was this, and.
Speaker 10: She was inconsistent and what she said.
Speaker 2: You you mentioned the closing arguments, and I now have
Speaker 2: a little bit of sound from each of them. I
Speaker 2: just want to play a little sound from both the
Speaker 2: prosecutor and the defense lawyer. Let me let me start
Speaker 2: off with the defense lawyer, Alan Jackson. Okay, So let's
Speaker 2: I'm trying to look at these very quickly here and
Speaker 2: see which one I want to I want to play
Speaker 2: and want it to be Okay, let's let's he's his emphasis. Obviously,
Speaker 2: as any good defense lawyer is on reasonable doubt, this
Speaker 2: has cut number four. Run Can you play four?
Speaker 11: Before we examine the evidence in the case, which we
Speaker 11: will do, we need to understand the very foundation of
Speaker 11: the entire system of justice in which we operate, the
Speaker 11: bedrock on which this entire system is built reasonable doubt.
Speaker 11: This isn't just a technical and it's not a slogan.
Speaker 11: It's a constitutional shield that protects the innocent and prevents
Speaker 11: the government from punishing without proof. The Commonwealth has the
Speaker 11: high burden to prove every single element of every single
Speaker 11: charge beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty.
Speaker 11: As I said, those powerful words are not just some
Speaker 11: legal jargon. They're your mandate, they're your obligation, they're your
Speaker 11: community's protection against injustice.
Speaker 2: So Dr Karen, that's just a snippet.
Speaker 10: County, Okay.
Speaker 2: I want you to react to that, and then I
Speaker 2: want to play one sound bye from Hank Brennan. Go ahead,
Speaker 2: you react to that's a pretty compelling argument that they
Speaker 2: can be made in any case, But on a case
Speaker 2: like this, where it's not a slam dunk, it becomes
Speaker 2: even more compelling your comment, So.
Speaker 10: Go ahead about Adam Jackson's. Yeah, he was really convincing,
Speaker 10: and I thought, holy cow, how is Hank brand Gold
Speaker 10: you know, react to this?
Speaker 2: Okay, then let's do this. I just happened to have.
Speaker 2: I just happened to have. This was forty seven seconds.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to be fair. The Hank Brennan sound by
Speaker 2: his forty six seconds. So let's see. You can compare.
Speaker 2: You can respond to both of these. This is cut
Speaker 2: number nine. Rock the prosecutor in this case, Hank Brennan.
Speaker 12: We have inevitably, without any doubt, without any doubt, that
Speaker 12: on January twenty nine, twenty twenty two, miss Reid was
Speaker 12: with mister Keith and she got drunk. She drank, She
Speaker 12: was two to three times over the legal limit, and
Speaker 12: they went to a party and after party and they
Speaker 12: were fighting.
Speaker 13: They were fighting. It was a relationship and decline and you.
Speaker 12: Get out of the car. A had a brief window
Speaker 12: of life left.
Speaker 13: Oh when he got out and she drove away, she
Speaker 13: couldn't let it go. She get drunk, she hit him.
Speaker 13: She left them to die.
Speaker 2: It's that simple, Okay. I think that is the essence
Speaker 2: of both of these arguments when you cut away all
Speaker 2: of the specifics. I think that's essentially those are two
Speaker 2: good comparative sound bites. You listen to one, you think, oh,
Speaker 2: I tend to agree with the defense lawyer. Then you
Speaker 2: listen to the prosecutor, and maybe it pulls you over.
Speaker 2: What do you think that you're always going to do? Oh,
Speaker 2: you didn't expect me to ask me questions?
Speaker 10: Apparently, Dan, I'm just following this, like, really.
Speaker 2: Well, who better to ask?
Speaker 10: They're apparently a very young jury. You know, these are
Speaker 10: people who didn't know anything about this case beforehand, so
Speaker 10: they're not super well informed people. But apparently they're right.
Speaker 10: I have no idea.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's my position. I have no idea what the
Speaker 2: jury is going to do either, even though you you
Speaker 2: had the advantage over me, Karen that you listened to
Speaker 2: both trials, uh, And I just I hope the jury
Speaker 2: gets can resolve the issues, can come to an agreement
Speaker 2: either of a guilt on some charge or charges, or
Speaker 2: a complete innocence not guilty across the board. Because I
Speaker 2: don't think that most of us can stand a third
Speaker 2: trial in this case.
Speaker 10: We have to get on with the understand that and
Speaker 10: that's what I think is being lost. You know, there's
Speaker 10: this all this wearing pink and the whole you know,
Speaker 10: we said work Kiara read, she's attractive, particulate.
Speaker 14: She was a college she was a college for I'm
Speaker 14: going to sound really obnoxious, really bold, but if the
Speaker 14: defendant were black or hispanic, there would not be any
Speaker 14: of this going on.
Speaker 10: She's a white, attractive, wealthy woman.
Speaker 2: Well, she maybe may have been wealthy when she started,
Speaker 2: but I don't think she's wealthy now.
Speaker 3: No, I know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, so so so last comment, and I only
Speaker 2: have about thirty seconds left. I don't think you want
Speaker 2: to take a stab at it. But you listen to
Speaker 2: the closes. You tell me you follow the case twice,
Speaker 2: both both trials. You're you're you're still not convinced one
Speaker 2: way or the other. It sounds to me that's like
Speaker 2: what you're saying.
Speaker 10: You know what I'm gonna really candid. I told my
Speaker 10: boyfriend last night, I said, I have this manifestations vision
Speaker 10: that you've been taken away with handcuffs. Okay, and I'm
Speaker 10: going with that because I believe that is the most
Speaker 10: that we'll give the justice for John CU's Fanley Okay.
Speaker 2: We'll leave it at that. We'll see what happens. Karen
Speaker 2: is always great to hear your voice. It is drama,
Speaker 2: there's no doubt. Thanks Karen. Okay, good night. All right,
Speaker 2: so we end the week on a dramatic note. However, however,
Speaker 2: we have one more hour left and I want to
Speaker 2: take this next hour and I want to give you
Speaker 2: an opportunity to salute your favorite father who's either still
Speaker 2: with us or has passed on. And it can be
Speaker 2: a variety of people. Could be your father, could be
Speaker 2: your father in law, could be your grandfather, could be
Speaker 2: an uncle, but your favorite father. That's what we're going
Speaker 2: to talk about in the next hour, and we're going
Speaker 2: to kind of take the temperature down a little bit
Speaker 2: and finish the week and slide into the weekend. My
Speaker 2: name's Dan Ray. This is Nightside. You have the phone numbers,
Speaker 2: dial away coming back right after this