It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news radio.
Well, today the second trial got started for real. We've been listening for months about various motions to dismiss and
appeals on how the first trial ended. It was officially a hung jury, although some of the jurors claimed that they had agreed while seated as a jury that went all the way up to the US Supreme Court, went through the Court of Appeals here in Massachusetts, but to no avail, and so Karen Reid now faces a second trial for three charges, fully leave the scene of an accident, manslaughter,
and murdering the second degree. So a lot of people have opinions on this case, and I thought this is the night when we could really talk about this from whatever perspective you want fairness obviously, there are things that all of us can agree upon, whatever side of the divide you stand on, whether you're on the Karen Reid side or the prosecution side. We do know that a man and Boston police officer lost his life. So that is something that I think we as society need need
to figure out. And the way we figure that out is through jury trials and presentation of evidence in courtrooms. Again. This is a trial that has not only dominated the news here in New England, but once again is a national news story and in some respects an international news story. I know people in San Diego, California who listen to this program who are deeply invested in the trial. I
don't know what happened that that that January morning. I don't know anyone who's listening knows exactly what happened for sure. For certain, we all have opinions. I have an opinion, but I don't view my opinion as a fact. Today, the prosecutor and the one of the defense attorneys, Alan Jackson, begin with their presentation. Now, uh, the prosecutors a fellow named Hank Brennan. He's primarily a defense attorney, has made his reputation as a defense attorney and was brought in
as a special prosecutor. He was not involved in the first prosecution. He's brought in as a special prosecutor in this case. And he made his presentation and unfortunately, the audio I'm not sure if he was standing away from the microphones, but the audio is is difficult to hear. But I do want to play a little bit in fairness to him, the audio from Alan Jackson is much better.
This we're gonna first start off Rob. This again is the prosecutor, Hank Brennan, talking about Karen Reid's actions, in which she she discloses to mutual friend that she thinks John got hit her boyfriend, John O'Keefe got hit by a plow. Again. I wish the audio was better, So we'll just play this. This is cut twenty A. Please listen carefully, okay. Twenty eight Rob, she got.
Manslated, calls another purse, Kerry Roberts, a friend of John O'Keeffe. Some of those not friends with defendant, but they know because they helped raise the kids. When they interacted. She had nothing to do with the night before, wasn't at the bars, was home with her family. She calls her and says, I think John hit by a plow.
I think he said.
I'll start with that in.
Call hospitals. Hear her voice, man, and then he gives not a call on a bit of bank and he tells me the ban comes.
To my house.
I will help you most him and I I don't remember anything.
Okay. So that's the prosecutor. I want to play a little bit of the defense lawyer, Alan Jackson, who was the defense lawyer in the first case. He wanted the defense lawyers and he he has some some interesting comments here. He speaks about this case as definitively as he can that basically his argument in this case is made up out of whole cloth, and it was an effort to convict an innocent woman and to cover up the actual circumstances that led to the death of John O'Keefe. Let's start,
if we can, with cut number twenty seven. Please rob cut twenty seven. This is the defense attorney.
You will learn that John did not have a single injury consistent with being.
Hit by a car.
Let me say that again. The evidence will establish that John did not suffer a single injury on his body consistent with having been hit by a car, not one. You'll learn that John's torso, his ribs, his chest, his arms, his hips, his legs, his knees, his ankles, his feet, all of them. No broken bones, no fractures, no contusions, no torn ligaments, no internal injuries, not even a bruise.
Alan Jackson, he goes what essentially the argument that he wants to make is that John O'Keeffe went into the home where he was dropped off that night by Karen Reid, and that something happened inside the home, and that when John O'Keeffe was found, he had what looked like bite marks on his arm. So this is cut injury number twenty eight.
Please, Rob, we'll take one look at these injuries and you'll agree with doctor Lafasata. The evidence will show that these injuries are from an animal, like a large dog, like the large dog that was inside the Albert house that night. You'll learn that Brian Albert has actually admitted that his large dog, the family dog, is quote not good with strangers, and of course John, ever having been to the house before, was this.
Stranger that night.
You'll also learned that oddly, very oddly, after having their family pet for seven years, a short time after this incident, the Albert's got rid of that dog. They called it rehoming her, but she was gone.
And then the final SoundBite that I want to play from Alan Jackson, and again the audio on his presentation is clearer, so you'll understand his arguments pretty succinctly completely. This is his final comments to the jury today. Cut number thirty Robin.
By the end of this trial, you'll conclude that Karen Reid is not guilty of hitting John O'Keefe with her SUV. There was no collision. She's the victim of a botched and biased and corrupted investigation that was never about the truth, folks, it was about preserving loyalty. You'll find that this case is the very definition of reasonable doubt. And at the end of this trial, we'll ask you to return the only verdicts, all three of them, that are consistent with
the evidence, the science, the truth, and justice. Not guilty, not guilty, not guilty.
Now, the prosecutor, Hank Brennan has in his arsenal in this retrial statements that Karen Reid made during some television interviews she made voluntarily, which in the last hour Phil Tracy was alluding to, which were not available because she made these comments between trial the ending of trial one in the beginning of trial number two. So it's going to be an interesting trial. And I would like to know if there's anywhere else anyone out there tonight who
does not have an opinion on this. If you want to express your opinion, you are more than welcome. But if there's anyone out there tonight who is either so confused that you do not have an opinion as to what happened, or or if you have an opinion either way. Six seven, two, five, four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three one ten thirty. This has been just an extraordinary trial to follow. It is now national and international news. I have no idea how this is trial is going
to come out. I know many of you are convinced that it's going to come out one way or the other. If you have had that conviction, you like to join the conversation. Great. As the trial goes on, I'm sure we are going to continue to follow the resus else on a daily basis, and that there will be uh developments uh and and surprises uh and uh and witnesses that uh that that may pull you back and forth. But let's start with a relatively clean slate tonight and
see what my listeners think. Six one seven, two, four ten thirty, six one seven, nine three ten thirty. This is nightside and we're not trying the case. But man, I'll tell you this is I cannot I cannot remember a case in New England that drew as much interest as this one, and and I'd love to talk about it with you back on Nightside right after this.
It's night Side with Boston's News Radio.
All right, the only line that is open is six, one, seven, nine, ten thirty. We have a guest coming up at ten o'clock, so don't don't be shy if you want to jump on board and talk about this. We will close this part of the conversation up at by ten. So some people, I think Rob has told me'd like to wait until like ten of the hours so they get the last word in. Well, you won't get in with the last word tonight. Let me go to Grant and Belmont. Greg
you're a next your first this hour night Side. Thanks for getting us going, Grant, go right ahead.
Thanks for having the conversation.
Dan.
It's great to be back with you.
Dan.
This trial has captivated America. But what I noticed today was two things. One Karen Reid was down to about twenty five supporters, and two, Hank Brennan is a different prosecutor than Adam Lally, and I thought he presented a case with no notes that a jury could buy.
Well, I have a lot of faith in Hank Brennan's ability as a lawyer. I thought Jackson did a great job as well. Well. I will tell you the audio levels that I have to deal with tonight. I can play a little bit more of the Hank Brennan presentation, but to be honest with you, the audio is not nearly as it should be. Let me play one more SoundBite here from from the prosecutor in the case, and let me Rob just trying to be fair here, but it is much tougher to listen to. I want you
to react to it for me, grant. This is cut number twenty three. Rob.
I simply asked you to follow the evidence, follow the signs, follow the day, ignore speculation and surmise conjecture. Stay true to the evidence.
It will lead you through the truth.
That on Ganoid twenty nine twenty twenty two are very prosecuted. And was angry and arguing about the relationship up with John O'Keefe. And after the fight was over, she left, but she brought the fight back hand the.
Form of her SUV.
She clipped him and fell backwards.
He broke his head.
And then this man who helped a lifetime of help was left help the fascinata in the dance moving into the truth and it defends all words from everything he looted.
What I didn't understand about that, Grant, was he he implied that they had had an argument, uh, and that she brought the argument back to him, I guess by backing into him or clipping him with the SUV. It was a little vague from I wanted to know more with much more specificity, you know, if he felt that, you know, she had put the car in. My thought is that the car might have been inadvertently in reverse and she went to you know, to drive away quickly
and inadvertently backed up. But maybe he did not want to make that concession because that could take away that that would that would leave her open to manslaughter, but would take away theoretically that the the secondary murdered murder.
Yeah, Dan, absolutely, And I can give you a little context there, which is that Karen was cheating on John in the relationship.
So please do me a favor as long if this evidence look you know again, please don't do that to me. Okay, if evidence has been put in in the case, I have no idea what your source on that is, Grant. Uh. And therefore, as the judge here on nights side, I'm going to not allow that.
In go ahead, Well, I promise you it's in the evidentiary record, Dan, I would when.
When it when it when it appears during this trial. When it when it is in the record in this trial. And someone wants to bring it up, that's okay. But I do not want it to be brought up. You know, I I followed the didn't follow it as closely as you did. I know that there was some jealousies and all of that. I just I'm not going to go there, Grant, because it's it's it's not fair to my audience.
But that's there, Dan.
And I'll just conclude by saying, I think what Brennan was saying was the two were in an argument. Karen Reid's blood alcohol was point one three to two point two nine, and there's data showing the car collided with John. That's enough for a conviction.
Okay, So you you believe in the conviction again. I you know again, I know that there were folks I know who you are, and I know that there are folks out there who followed this case very closely, which you know I admire. But until it comes in in evidence in the second trial, the trial that Hank Brennan is going to put on. I don't want it on my show, so we'll just well let it go with that. I appreciate your call and feel free to call again. Thanks,
Thanks Gren, Thanks Jan, have a great night. Let me keep rolling. You're going to go to John and Kingston. John Welcome. How are you sir?
How you doing Dan?
I'm doing fine. Trying to control trying to control this a quoted public opinion.
This whole thing, Like what I know, everyone gets behind all this. What was his toxicology and what did he actually die of? Was it blunt force trauma? Was he in the bag with the drugs in the system. It seems odd that someone going to back into him he falls over and just doesn't get up from the snow.
Well again, I I don't know, and I'm interested to see what the you know, what what trial? What the trial is? What what evidence comes in at the trial? Okay, that's that's the only thing the jury is supposed to hear. I don't know if this jury is a questioned I don't believe. I haven't heard anything that it has that it has been sequestered. So you know, let's you know, let's see what happens as we go. I don't know.
I don't know the first trial was there was it a system? Was he you know?
I don't know that that a so called blood blood back of blood alcohol content was done on Reid or other on John O'Keeffe. This video that I saw, they were both apparently drinking at a bar. And if they drink it at a bar, I assume they it includes alcohol. There was no suggestion that either one of them were just drinking you know, Lime Ricky's or something like that, if anybody remembers Lime Ricky's. But no, it's uh, something happened.
What we know is that one individual is dead. Someone's dead, and the prosecution obviously believes that Karen Reid was the cause of his death. Uh. The the defense is trying to make the argument that O'Keeffe winning the house, some sort of a fight ensued and he was attacked by
individuals and or a dog. But my question has always been, and I don't know if if you want to react to this, my question has always been, if he was killed in the house and there were a bunch of other people there, including police officers, would someone turn around and say, I got a great idea, let's get him out of the house and put plant him on the front lawn.
I get it, But what was his actual cause of death? Was it like blunt for sir?
Uh? Well, there will be autopsy results. I don't know, and if someone you know again, I'm sure that there'll be medical officials on the stand. Uh, medical experts.
I don't get. I'll get the whole. However, one's all infatuated by it, you know. Yeah, well that people get behind.
You know, yeah, I mean, well, obviously there's a lot of people out there who are convinced that she's being framed. And then there's a lot of people out there who convince it was her vehicle. They buy the prosecution case that her vehicle backed into him, either inadvertently or intentionally. And I don't know, I don't know that that there's there's gonna be no videotape which is going to prove to us. You know, a jury will come back with
a decision, But there's no videotape. It wasn't like there was a camera uh trained on the front of the house that night, and we can look at the camera and we can see what happened.
Mixed bag for the jury again.
You know, I'm kind of thinking that as well. I think that the jurors might say, we we need to come back with some decision here and maybe again, but they.
Will we don't really, we can't tell either way. So therefore, yeah, you know, figure it out. I don't know.
I don't know that they I don't know that we're gonna get a second hung jury. That's I I kind.
Of think of guarantee if there is one, they'll definitely pull the jury this time.
Right, Yeah, I would say, I would think. I think I think you're right on that. John. Thank you very much for your call. As always, I appreciated, have a great talk again. Thanks. Okay, here comes the news a couple of minutes late, but I didn't want a short change, John, so we'll be back on night side. I have one line which John just vacated six one, seven, two five four, ten thirty, and I have one line at six one seven, nine three one ten thirty. Uh. This is a it's
a big case. It's been a case that's going on a long time. I haven't figured it out. Maybe you have. We'll be back on nightside after this.
It's Nightside with w Boston's news Radio.
Thanks shre You know it's interesting. The only only person who really, I guess, knows what happened for certain is Karen Reid. And if she really believes, as I apparently think she does, that she's innocent, that she did nothing to hurt John O'Keefe, Boy, what an experience this has been for her. And who knows where the jury where the jury will come out in a few weeks from now. If if she's if she in her in her soul knows that that she did, in a moment of anger,
do something that she now regrets. What a burden that is it. I mean, we all make mistakes in life, but this is a huge mistake in some form of fashion, and it's up to the courts, in twelve jurors to figure it out. And that is something to think of the next time that you get real angry. I guess as I have, and as I think most of us have at some point, Alex and millis Alex next on nights, I go ahead.
Guilty or.
Oh you're still there?
He yeah, I am. Were you on some sort of device or something?
Oh no, I got distracted. I'm sorry, what do you mean?
Okay, you you sounded off microphone. I wasn't sure if you were on some sort of different device.
Oh no, no, no it was it was something going on in the other room, and I wasn't sure. So anyway, what I'm offering you, I.
Don't understand that. But that's okay. You were talking but we weren't able to hear you.
Well, so go ahead, okay, okay, I jumped the gun. So aren't they able to extract data from the SUV?
Because yeah, that's that is something that the prosecution. That is something that the prosecution has implied that they have, and that sort of forensics could be very important in this trial, depending upon what that data says.
Obviously, right and fast forward. So, if she is found out guilty or if there is a hung jury, the money that she's raised the legal defense fund, and if she becomes very wealthy because of this, will she be obligated to pay that back? Do you think?
No? No? First of all, I think that whatever money has been raised for her, her legal firepower will more than eat up that money. These are not inexpensive lawyers who are representing her. And even if there's some money left over if if she's able to spend it, meaning if she gets in guilty verdict, I think she certainly would deserve some time off to resurrect your life. Yeah, interesting question.
Yeah, they say, you know, they make you make your bed and you lie in it. But I mean, you know, I don't know. She's an never She's supposed to be a very intelligent woman. I'm not trying to. I'm not trying to.
You know, she is an intelligent woman. She she taught I believe, was it accounting or something like that at Babson if I'm not mistaken of one of the Yeah, so yeah, clearly she's an intelligent woman. But intelligent people sometimes do stupid things.
Yeah, how do you get yourself involved with these things?
You know?
Or certain people?
I don't get it, well, Alex. Intelligent people have been known to do stupid things, and people who are under the influence of alcohol sometimes exercise poor judgment. And sometimes when you mix in emotions, they say, you know, a fine line, a thin line between love and hate. I mean, look, you know, it's I think you're experienced enough to be able to understand what I'm saying.
I know, thanks, thank.
Yeah, Yeah, I think yeah, the nuns gave you probably if you talk by nuns. I gave you good advice to avoid occasions of sin. I got you. Thanks Alex, Doc deal later. Have a great night, Gail and Siduate. Gail, thank you for that lovely magazine that you sent me with all sorts of chocolate recipes.
Oh you're welcome.
Dan. Just reading it, just just reading it, I put on I think three pounds. I never only teasing.
I know, I know what you mean. I went through it myself. I thought, oh my lord, oh my lordy. So when I saw it, I thought, I go.
I send this to Dan.
Thank you, thank you very much.
You're welcome. So Dan, I have followed the case a little bit, not entirely. And the one thing that keeps making me think, you know, I keep wondering about is how John O'Keefe got outside and why was he outside? So he goes into the Albert's house. It's clearly evident that he was attacked by the Albert's dog, which I believe was the German shepherd. And when you get attacked by a dog like that, it's pretty traumatic. So he goes outside somehow, and Alan Jackson even said there was
no bodily injury to him whatsoever. So Alan Jackson needs to get hold of that autopsy report. The autopsy report, it's going to explain everything that I think. There's a possibility maybe he had a heart attack or aneurysm, and then he's left out in the snow, he you know, falls back and guys of hypothermia, which adds to it. I mean, I'm just I think that autopsy report is gonna is going to explain plenty.
Well, that's true, But then the question is, let's assume that he did go into the house. Make that assumption for a moment, and let's assume that you're right that the dog bit him or jumped at him, and maybe, you know, the normal reaction of a dog owner is to try to pull the dog off. I mean, that's
what normally would happen. And let's assume everybody's had a few drinks and he's mad, I'm going to get the hell out of here, and he walks outside and he let's assume, you know, he has some sort of stroke or whatever you want to you know, aneurysm, whatever, right, right, Why would then the people who were in the house, even if they didn't have the good sense to go out and check and make sure. And when you walk when he walked away, I mean, wouldn't someone say, hey,
where you're going? You know, you need a ride somewhere? I mean, assuming that there was no hostility, right, and why would they not have at least said, yeah, he came in the house and our dog attacked him. It's not our fault that the dog is very protective. No, they they all testified he never came in the house.
Albert's testified he did not. John o'keef did not go in the house.
I believe and again I believe that the police report that Proctor put together, uh suggested that that that he never had gone in the house. I don't think there's any evidence. Look, if there was any evidence that he went in the house, if there was any evidence that he went in the house, why is Karen Reid on trial?
Right, Well, we cannot go by what Proctor said in his report because he's not credible enough. You know, he would say that the boogeyman exists. We have to, like I think, we have to take Proctor out of the picture because in order for the only well, what we know is that he had bite marks from an animal from a dog on his arm. Alan Jackson said that, so somehow John o'keef came into contact with the Albert's dog and so ended up outside. So that's where it's
that's where the question is. And I think that I really think that that that oh god, what's it called again? The report? The oh, I forgot the name of the report.
Autopsy autopsy, Jackson is saying. Jackson said he had no other injuries. Okay, So so let's assume that he was Let's let's keep it simple. Well, let's let's let's let's say that he's that she drives off, doesn't hit him, and he's so drunk, hypothetically that he falls down in the snow. Okay, And and let's assume that you know, maybe you know, he just fell in the snow, and there could be any animal out there at night that could be out there, could be a fox or whatever.
But let's assume why would the why would the the Alberts or whomever was in that house. Someone should have should have gone on the record and said, look, never came in the house. I mean, if they have nothing to hide, okay. And I'm not saying that they did anything. But you would think that at some point, well, I'm saying that at some point Proctor would have would have,
you know, filed the report. I don't know all the specifics of the case, but but you would you think it's either he got hit by the car or he went in the house and something bad happened and he got put out in the lawn. I think those are the two options. Would you agree?
Well, I'm not sure if I can, because the Alberts could be lying. They could be lying just to stay out of it.
No, but I'm saying there's only no what I'm saying, there's only whoa. But but if he never came in the house and and the police found someone dead on by lawn tomorrow morning, I would be out there and saying, what the hell's going on?
Pretend?
So let's pretend that John o'keef did not go in the Elbert's house, and somehow the dog was outside. He gets attacked by the dog, German shepherd, big dog, you know, heavy bite, the heavy bite, uh pressure, that's going to leave a mark on your arm. So he gets the he gets the bite marks from the dog which is probably outside, and then somehow in some maybe drunken, stupidor he falls and that's when he's that's how he gets outside. Well he's outside anyway, and that's how he ends up
on the snow. But I really think that autopsy report is going to tell everything.
Well, let's let us hope, let us hope. Gail always great to talk to me here. Thank you so much. You've you've maybe confused some people and confused me a little bit, but but you've you've raised really good questions and I really do appreciate. Let's focus on the autopsy report. Uh, maybe I'll do a little research on that and try to find out what was entered during in the first trial. In that, Okay, well on the.
Second ten how old was John Keith? Was he in his forties?
I think somewhere in that. I'm just.
Like, once you get if he was like forty five and above, you know, once you get past forty five, anything can happen. So I'm listening. It's a possibility he could have had a heart attack on aneurysm, and and you know, yeah, it.
Comes back to injury, back to the autopsy. Certainly it was a sudden death. There should be an autopsy and we'll try to figure out what that says. I gotta run, Gail. I thank you so much. We'll talk soon. Okay, you're gonna join us on Sunday at.
The brunch or no, I'm sorry, I can't.
Okay, no problem, no problem, gonna have a big crowd anyway, Thanks Gail, talk to you soon. Quick break here on Nightside, coming right back.
You're on night Side with Dan Ray on Boston's news radio.
Okay, back to the phones to go. We're gonna try to get everybody in the lake callers. I don't think you're gonna make it. Let me go to Paul in Dorchester. Paul next on Nightside.
Go ahead, Hey Dan, can you tell me the investigators ever enter the premises the of the home?
Yes?
Or no?
My recollect And again I'm not an expert in this case. Is that Proctor, Michael Proctor never went into the house. Okay, now as an investigator.
Okay, that's okay, that's one thing. Now, how did all the cell phones get disposed of? They was destroyed? They were okay, whatever happened was the dog Chloe? How do you get me.
When I guess the phrase they used that Chloe was rehomed. I don't know if Chloe is alive today. I don't know if Chloe has gone on to that big dog pound in the sky. I really don't know.
I bet, I bet Chloe had a new bright smile, at least I was. I was would not be funny he came in with a human smile, you know, I guess I think the dog disappeared? Now did they not sell that at home? And also they refurnished the floor of.
That I read stuff like that, But I read stuff like that, but again I don't have I haven't followed this trial as closely as I as I would like. I'm hoping people like you either ask questions or provide information. That's that's the injury tonight.
The injury seem inconsistent with getting backed into buy a car. If you get bumped by a car, you may get a bump in like one spot and fell got in his head. But like the woman was saying, I don't see how the puncture wounds were there from from that? How and also how the in the in the tail light they had it backwards in the auto shopped them and and and the dog disappeared. That's what gets me, Man how can you get rid of your dog after eight years?
Yeah, that's true. I don't I don't quite understand, Paul, I got a bunch of others. Isn't going to try to get a couple more in at least? Okay? Thanks man, We ready to smiled. You raised the questions. You raised the questions, and it raised them.
Well.
Thank you, John and hanover John next on nightside, A little tight on time, Go ahead.
John, Hey, Dan, good evening.
I was a witness at a trial once in Quincy District Court. I was the only witness and vendant was a buddy of mine, and I'll tell you twenty years later.
He was innocent.
But someone in the case knew the district attorney of someone in their office, so they brought someone in from Middlesex to prosecute, and it was our governor more heally at the time this kid got convicted. It forever shook my faith in our judicial system, because I know he wasna Yeah what.
Was he convicted of? Without you don't give me much information about you know, his name or anything, but what what was he? What was he charged with?
Uh?
It was the charge was domestic He was my roommate.
Uh.
We had a mutual friend.
She came all over.
I thought she was I thought I was getting lucky. It turned out to be a setup.
It was his ex girlfriend and he came home and she beat him up a little bit, and he picked her up and put her outside the door and then just stared me down, you know, And it was just it's one of those things.
She was assumed. Did she not testify? You were a witness? Did she not testify?
No, she didn't. She she called it in like a couple of days later, her father called us and gave us a heads up. My roommate and her were both kind of, I don't want to say disturbed, but they had some emotional problems in high school.
That's how they met.
Uh was your roommate and was your roommate male or female?
He was a male and she was a female.
So so if how did they get how did they get the evidence in? If she didn't testify.
It was a statement that they brought forth. But the whole point was they brought me forth as a witness, the only one. And I was indifferent because I had thrown him out because he owed me money for rent at that point, because it was a months later, and the way more heally conducted herself was like she was trying to sell a story to the jewelry and she didn't really care what I had to say at all, And it just I was founded.
But it certainly, it certainly doesn't sound like it was something that should make the judicial system proud. John. Interesting, interesting, a little off topic, but very interesting. Thank you so much. Yeah, have a good night, you too. Mixed up last one of the hour, Chuck and Plymouth. Chuck, I got about a minute for you, would you Lake?
Thank of my call. You know, I think Alan Jackson's done a great job of mutting the waters with with the Snell phones being destroyed and the floor being redone in the house being sold. But people need to follow the facts. So many people are like, oh my god, she has to be innocent because Procer lick through her phone for nudes.
What a rude jerk.
If they follow the facts, they could figure it out what I think happened in this case. If if he in anyway o'keith entered that house, and how did he get out if they dragged him outside he was dead. Don't you think he'd leave a plow from two guys carrying a man outside of the house. I think he got hit by the car, hit his head on the ground, and then I think a snowplow goosed him up on the sidewalk, and that's where he died, on the sidewalk,
after a plow goosted him up there. But if the bottom line is this, like you said, either somebody went in the house, he went in the house and got beat or you hit on the car. And even you said, you said it best she wouldn't be on trial if he went in the house. How can all those people in the house keep a secret for this long? No, that one that one giving anything saying that, Oh my god, I just saw that.
That's that's that's a strong argument. And what do you plan? I don't know, you know it just neither story. Really, there's nothing that's clear cut here. So let's let's hope the evidence is presented more effectively by both sides. Hey, Chuck, I appreciate.
Thanks man.
Okay, thank you, Chock. That's it. We're going to talk about tariffs. Unfortunately, those of you who are still on the line, I told you Paul earlier, you're not going to get on because we got the ten o'clock news. Back on night Side, We're going to talk about tariffs with a Boston University business professor from their business school. He's a really good we'll we'll introduce you to him right after this