Hi, guys, Welcome to another episode of Legally Vernette. I'll be your host today Emily Sempson with my co host Shane, Just Shane. We're going to first start off with a little update of Menindez because there's been a lot going on in the press with that. We also have a little update on Ruby Frankie, just because we like to all the cases that we've talked about. We definitely like to go back if there's been any changes in anything
and discuss that. And then all of you, not all of you, but a lot of you have been asking can you please do a breakdown of Karen Reid. So we will get into that and I assume that's going to be a lengthy conversation. So anyway, let's start with Menendez. First of all, there was a hearing on Friday, and this was not the actual resentencing hearing. This was the DA Aachman actually trying to withdrawal the DA's original bid for them to be recent. So does that make sense
to you? Do you understand what I'm trying.
Yeah, he's trying to take back the motion for plus for recensing.
Right, So the original motion was filed with the former DA who was more progressive and he felt like they should be resentenced and that they had served enough time. So now Hawkman is saying, wait a minute, we don't support it anymore. We have a new da, we have a new view on the whole thing. We don't want them to be allowed to go before the judge and
have a possible resentencing. So this hearing on Friday was basically the judge determining whether the resentencing hearing will go forward, and Judge Jessic after hearing both sides decided that the resentencing will go forward. So now it is scheduled for April seventeenth and eighteenth.
So on that day, yeah, should we learn should we learn anything? Or is it going to just be another continued date?
Okay, that is a great past.
What's going to take place on that day?
Right? So basically both sides are going to argue, and Hawkman is going to argue that their liars, that they lied about the abuse that they're in they should stay in prison. And then obviously the defense is going to argue that they've been at prison long enough, it's been thirty five years, they're supported by their family, and that they've been rehabilitated and that's the big thing with the resentencing. It's about rehabilitation.
So it's not about it's not about whether the punishment fit the crime. It's where are they now, right and have they kind of been rehabilitated, as you just said, to be able to go back out into society. So it's not a matter of was it too harsh of a punishment? View? Right?
Right?
Right?
Okay?
Yeah, And so as far as a decision, I asked Alex who is one of the Mendez's defense attorneys. She's been on the podcast before, and I said, is it possible that Judge Jessic makes a decision that day during the hearings or would he go back and take it under advisement and think about it and then issue a decision later. And she said that he's one of those judges that does make decisions from the bench, so it is possible that he could decide the resentencing fate on those days.
Oh wow, So wait when's it? What's the date.
April seventeenth and eighteenth?
Where you going to go?
If I could get an invite, I would go. Maybe I can make that happen. During the hearing, the prosecution presented graphic crime scene images, which sparked outrage from defense attorney Mark Gerragos. He accused the District Attorney's office of re traumatizing the Menindaz family for political purposes. So apparently, this presentation lasted nearly three hours, and prosecutors argued that the brothers still hunker down in their bunker of lies and deception, showing no this.
Is where well okay, but then why are they showing graphic images and stuff. They're just going for shock value to try to turn away people that think they should be released.
I think that the prosecution is focusing on the brendousness and the violence of the crime so that they can take away from whether they've been rehabilitated or not, Like we need to focus on how long they've been in prison, what they've done in prison, their prison record, and if they've been rehabilitated. But among the family that was at this hearing was Terry Burrell, who is the sister of Jose Menendez. She was speaking out for the first time
in decades. She usually doesn't speak. She's battling cancer. She says that that the Meninda's brothers, they are like the boys that I didn't have. She's battling colon cancer currently and said she's worried that she won't live long enough to see her nephew's freed. She tries to go and see them as much as she can, but it's hard because she lives in New Jersey and she's also eighty five.
But those are reasons to let them out either, right, well as an unfortunate scenario. But that's not a reason to let someone out because a relative of some sort may not live long enough to see them.
No, I don't think that's I don't think her age is something that should be taken into consideration. I think what they take into consideration is that all the remaining family members, I think there's like fourteen or something, all think that they should be released.
Right all she were just talking about how they were sharing the story of for finding cancer in her age and not being able to see them.
Well, basically I was talking about her because there was a TMC article that just came out recently that she had to be hospitalized after this hearing because of the shock of them showing graphic photos of the crime scene. And under Marcy's law, apparently you're supposed to be warned if there's going to be graphic crime scene images shown. There was no warning.
Okay, So again, her having colon cancer and her age has nothing to do with what the judge should take into consideration for resentencing.
No it's not. But I'm just telling you about her because she claims that the reason or the family claims that the reason that she ended up hospitalized was because the prosecution did not form than that they were going to show shocking crime scene, very graphic images of jose and Kitty. According to the Justice for Eric and Lyle coalition, this aunt, Terry Burult, was found unresponsive in her hotel room after attending the recent court hearing where graphic crime
scene images were shown without prior warning. So that's where we're at with men Indez. So obviously we will keep you updated on Menindez. They are going to have the actual resentencing hearings, so we will have to actually we will follow that and.
See you should go to the hearing. I could do a live podcast from the factual workhouse house.
Okay, I don't know if.
They would let me get on that, all right, we know how it goes.
That's like because they don't have anything else to do, all right, let's do a little update on the Ruby Frankie case. Jody Hildebrandt challenges the high profile child abuse conviction. This was an ABC article in twenty twenty three. Jody Hildebrandt pleaded guilty to four counts of aggravated child abuse alongside Ruby Frankie. Frankie both accepted plea deals and were
sentenced to up to thirty years in prison. At that time, Jody Hillebrant said one of the reasons she didn't want to go to trial was to protect the children from having to emotionally relive the trauma. I like how this woman was involved in amusing these children within her own home, right, So she clearly was a part of what was going on, and then all of a sudden, she's sensitive, She's sensitive to their needs and she doesn't want to abuse them any further.
She didn't want it to be public and she didn't want to be outed anymore than she was. Literally, you know, they're going to make a documentary on her. It was going to all this raw footage was going to be shown, right, so jokes on her and.
The petition which was filed on March twenty fourth, Hildebrett claims her guilty plea was unlawfully induced and that she did not fully understand what she was agreeing to. She writes, quote, I did not know my rights, and my attorney did not inform me of them. So on one side, she's saying, look, I just agreed to the because I didn't want to have the children testify. We didn't want to go to trial. But now I don't understand my rights and I didn't know that I was taking a plead deal.
Yeah, oh I forgot my defense is I'm an idiot.
I wasn't paying attention now because the judge asks the defendant directly those questions about the white the rights that they're.
Waiving, and if they know what.
They're entering, and they ask them, and that's the time that the defense or the defendant answers directly, not the attorney. The defendant answers directly to the judge, which is, you know, it's not often that the defendant is speaking directly to the judge, and in this case they are because.
They want to know. There's no one in between.
Us, between the judge and the defendant in making this decision, right, So don't they ask them? Like several things like do you know your rights? Do you know the penalty involved? Do you know that it can't be retracted?
Or whatever? I mean?
They ask them a handful of questions. Make sure like you know if you agree to this, you are doomed. Your fate lies in my hands, and I decide what you.
Will right now.
Her kids didn't know what they were in for? Did she ever think about that? They didn't know their rights?
What wasn't her kids? She Jody's the duck kids.
She's the She's the other piece of trash.
Yes, She's not the mom piece of trash. She's the the other piece of trash.
Yes.
She argues that her plea was not made knowingly and voluntarily, and it includes claims that her legal counsel was ineffective, and that prosecutors failed to properly notify her of the charges, and that she did not comprehend the consequences when so. Eric Clark, an attorney for Ruby Frankie, responded in a statement to ABC News saying that they were not shocked,
but weren't exactly expecting it either. He added, I'm super confident that the entry of her plea will hold up and that she won't be able to show that she knowingly and involuntarily did not enter it. I mean they have that mean sure they have. I mean they record the trials and they have the trial transcript. I'm sure the judge went through, like you said, and asked her all the questions. So we will see what happens with that.
The court will now the court will have to determine whether Hildebrand's rights were actually violated in the process, and if this could justify a do over of her case. I'm going to go with no. They're going to deny her emotion and she's going to spend a lot of time in prison. All right, let's move on to Karen Reid. I have done a lot of research on Karen Reid lately, and thank you so many of you. I get so
many dms on Karen Reid. It is a very controversial case, and as we discussed earlier, we did a very brief episode on Karen Reid. If you want to go back and listen to it, I would say it's more comedic because Shane knew nothing about the case, so all he does is tell me that she's guilty. I enough that she's guilty through the entire time, we did a very brief overview of just allegedly what happened that night. But now I'm excited that we're going to take.
A deep dive into Karen Reid, into her.
First trial, and into a lot of the controversial evidence. And I will tell you, I think this is such a hot button case because there really isn't a smoking gun. There isn't anything. There's not an Aha moment where you say, yes, it was definitely a cover up or yes, she definitely did it. I think you can look at all the evidence and you can weigh it and you can see
both sides. And that's where this is where this case has become so heated, because you have a very very tight line drawn in the sand or in the snow with this case. You've got people that are hardcore supporters that is a cover up and Karen Reid is innocent, and you have hardcore supporters that say she backed her suv into him and killed him that night. And so we're going.
To get into it.
Let's just go into a little summary of what happened. So if you want to watch, it's on Max. It's also on the Animal Planet. But it's called a body in the Snow the Trial of Karen Reid, and it explores the case through interviews with Karen Reid as well as her legal team. It also shows a lot of scenes of the war room. This is where they rented
some conference room or a hotel room or something. And it's really interesting because it shows the attorneys and Karen Reid actually discussing the case and witnesses and what they're going to ask. And you know, there was a lot of times when I was wondering to myself, is this docuseries helpful to Karen or is it detrimental? It shows a lot of her thoughts, It shows her conversations with her attorneys. It just makes me wonder is this helpful to her or is this detrimental to her?
Well? Is it Jeneraly's NACo's never helpful for the dependent to speak, right? I mean I.
Don't think so. I mean, here's my opin.
If you do a good job here and like, oh there are good liar. If you do a bad job, it's like, yeah, we knew she was lying.
I was tough. Yeah, I was just.
Interested thinking that her legal team and her really allowed them to put themselves out there and be judged by the public after this first trial, I will tell you my thoughts. I don't find Karen Reid very likable. But that doesn't mean that she's guilty. It just means that I don't find her very likable. So The Trial of Karen Reid explores a case through interviews with Karen Reid as well as her legal team, including her attorneys David Yanetti and Alan Jackson and Elizabeth little So. Those are
the three key attorneys for Karen Reid. The docu series progresses chronologically, starting with her arrest and district court arragnement, following by her indictment on second degree murder charges, and this was in June of twenty twenty two. It also covers her trial, which began in April of twenty twenty four. The series features previously unseen footage, including video of Reed's
arrests related to the murder charge. I will say during her arrest, I did think it was interesting that she was very she was very emphatic that she'd be allowed to change her clothes because she kept talking about how this is going to be on TV. And I was like, I can understand that you want to change your clothes.
You would do that you killed me, you would be still be getting glam and everything.
I'd be like, wait, you can't arrest me. I have so apparently when she was arrested.
Act if you were getting arrested in any situation, that'd probably be the team you'd call for.
CD's your one phone call.
Now re read to come over into your air so you look good for your mug shot.
Well if it's well, I know if I had a bunch.
Shot and you have not denied it once, you have agreed with everything I've said so far.
It is what it is, all right, let's talk about the prosecution and the defense. So, according to prosecutors, Karen Reid struck John O'Keeffe with her SUV while dropping him off at a fellow officers home in the early hours of January twenty ninth, of twenty twenty two. Now the officer is a sergeant and his name is Brian Albert. He is a key player in this case, so you need to remember his name. According to prosecutors, Karen Reid struck John O'Keeffe with her SUV while dropping him off
at a fellow officer's home. This is thirty four Fairview Reed's defense team has presented an alternative version of events. Basically, what the prosecution is saying is that O'Keeffe and Karen Reid and some friends went out drinking. They had a lot of drinks. I think she talks about in the docu series how many drinks she has.
So she volunteered that information.
Yes, Then after they go to two bars, they get invited to a house party at Brian Albert's home. And again, he's a sergeant in a police department. According to Karen in this docuseries, she doesn't really know him, and she doesn't know a lot of people there, so she doesn't know if they're welcome. So when they drive to the home, she stops outside the home and she tells John go
into the house and see if we're welcome there. And she waits in the car and she's like call me or text me, like let me know if I should come in.
That's weird.
This is where everything goes blurry and dark. And I don't understand why no one knows what happens within this like five weeks.
No people do know what happened. Well, why isn't.
Why exactly why is it not known that when allegedly she pulls up to the house and he gets out of the car to go inside the house. No one knows if he actually went into the house or if he got hit by her. And then we just know later that his body's found in the front yard, laying in the snow and he's dead. Why does there's no a house full of cops. There was Brian Higgins was there, who was an ATF agent, and there was Brian Albert,
who's a cop who owned the house. And I think those were the only two cops, and then there were some other There were some other women there, like Jen McCabe, who is another player in this, and then there were some other people, and I think there were some teenagers. But there was a party.
Whether did they look at fingerprints in the house or DNA in the house, We will.
Get to that, But I am just my mind is reeling that no one really knows what happened within that time frame. Karen Reid claims that she saw John entered the breezeway door. I think it's suspicious whether she actually saw him enter the house or not, because I don't believe that that was initially something that she said. I think that was something that she said later that she did see him enter the house.
Oh, like, I mean there were Initially she just said I dropped him off. I believe she dropped off and drove away. And now she's saying no, I saw him going right.
And now everyone within the house claims that he never entered the house. So here we are with these conflicting stories. So Reech's defense team has presented an alternative version of events. They suggest that O'Keefe entered the residents at thirty four Fairview Road where a gathering was taking place, and that he may have been assaulted inside the home, possibly even attacked by a dog, before ultimately being found unresponsive outside
in the snow. So the defense is claiming that this is a cover up, that John did enter the home, and that there was some type of altercation maybe between Brian Higgins, who was an ATF agent, and John O'Keefe, because previously there was some flirty sexy text going on between Brian Higgins, this ATF agent, and Karen Reid while
she was dating John O'Keefe. Oh my gosh. First of all, I had to watch the scene like the testimony of him reading all the texts between the two of them, and I was so uncomfortable.
Why was he reading them?
Because when he was on the stand, the defense attorney, when he was cross examining him, had him pull.
Up, had this check on this screen come from him.
They wanted him to be uncomfortable.
And it was so uncomfortable.
Do you like me? I like you? I think you're hot. I thought you were hot from Jump. I mean, first of all, it sounded so juvenile that these are like forty year olds.
Like Animel's text, Yah heard probably the same content.
It's like you're hot? Do you think I'm hot?
I think you're Wasn't there anything juicy in it?
No, that was it.
I was just like you look good.
Yeah, but it was really uncomfortable.
It just sounded I don't thought there'd be something more.
Oh you wanted, like like what did juicy juicy?
I mean, I guess they weren't that juicy. They were just embarrassed. I like you, I like you, I like you.
Yeah, I liked you from Jump. I don't even know what that What does that mean?
And she goes from jump Whim's jump and I don't know our totally sigma is that I.
Don't know it's jump.
I don't know anyway, all right, when I was a kid, it was just cool, awesome and like rat like were the slang words.
You didn't say that you liked a girl from jump? No, okay, so anyway I want to jumper. Yeah, I can't imagine that you said that. So here we have two competing theories of what actually happened that evening. So we have the prosecution claiming that Karen Reid was drunk, that she and John were fighting because they did have some texts earlier in the day where they were like not getting along, they were arguing with each other.
That she pulls up where they're texting just.
She's she's always like accusing him of like having affairs with other women, and I think they just had a tumultuous relationship.
Was there anything like relevant, like like and ready over and there was no smoking gun in front of someone's else, There.
Was nothing like that. So basically the prosecution is claiming that Karen Reid pulls up to thirty four fair View, this is around twelve thirty, that John gets out of the car, and that there was some argument or something going on between the two of them, and that Karen does a three point turn and within her doing that, she backs over him and that he ends up laying on the lawn dead.
She claims, Wait, she's drunk too, right.
She's drunk. He's drunk, She's drunk. He actually is carrying a cocktail glass with a drink in his hand as he's leaving the car like he brought it had a ROADI yeah, with him, and that glass is found at the scene around him, around the body. There's a cocktail glass broken at the scene.
Can I just say this is why drinking stupid? Sorry it is, no.
I mean, they have all these professionals that have no idea what's going on or covering it up or whatever, and someone's dead.
Stupid. Okay, but let's talk about it.
Let's just talk about the cocktail glass for a second, because I never actually put this together until I just said it. But if if, what the defense claims is that he was killed inside the house and then he was like drug out onto.
The lawn to make it look like hes for a next home.
They also take your cocktail glass too, he threw it out? Right, then, how is the cocktail glass that he was carrying now broken and around his body? Unless he carried the cocktail glass into the house, got in an altercation. Apparently the dog attacked him. Then they take him out onto the lawn and they're like, be sure to get the pieces of that cocktail glass and put those around the body so that when we lie and say that Karen reads.
Very sophisticated killers.
I mean, if there's just a lot.
Maybe he went in with the cocktail. They said you can't bring your own drinks or you're too drunk, and he said, not unmuch? Is you going to cry it for my.
Cold dead hands?
And there was a fight then ensued, and it resulted in him being dead outside.
With the cocktail.
I like, I'm sure we're barely touching the surface of this case, and you have already come up with alternative theories, so I'm trying to solve it, all right, So anyway, here we go. Let's get back to his injuries. And his injuries are very suspect as well. Now he has blunt force trauma to his head.
He also has cold and that could not have been from the car. Is that determined?
Well? I know that there was testimony from a medical examiner saying yes, it could be consistent. And then there's other people that were like, oh, it's not really consistent.
So it's not one way.
No, no, But here's my question. If he has blunt forced trauma to his head and he's a tall guy two hundred pounds six to two or something like that, to me, yes, exact say build his shame. Yes, So how does he get blunt forced trauma to his head from an.
Suv if she backed Because I don't know this, but he could have if if she ran into him, he could have hit his head on the trunk.
He could have hit his head on the ground or on.
This or on the curve or something I guess. So you're saying she could have backed end to him and the force could have been so forceful that he flies backwards and he hits his head and then he gets played.
And it's like, well, does he have any other damage type of parts of his body?
Yes, So his arm, this is this is where the defense really comes in. His arm has a lot of like it looks like scratches and lacerations and puncture wounds. And now there was another person, an expert witness, that testified that those injuries were consistent with a dog.
With one arm or one arm on his.
Arm, just one arm. I believe it was his right arm.
Which is kind of if he's right handed, you'd be using as defense.
And you know, I looked at here's a picture of it if you want to look, and I'll tell you. I have three dogs and I've seen a dog bite and they do the teeth do puncture like.
It looks like he scratches from a dog.
He said, Well, they said it was. It was consistent. The expert witness that apparently was an expert in dog bites said that it looked like scratches and puncture wounds from like K ninety.
So so what was your point?
Well, my point is is that Brian Album, who lives at thirty four Fair of View, where apparently Karen Reid saw John O'Keeffe go into the house, owned a German shepherd named Chloe who apparently had a propensity to bite and was aggressive. And now we have John O'Keeffe in his front yard with a cocktail glass with wounds that looks similar to a dog attack on one arm. The dog was also rehomed after this happened. So I don't know, but Chloe does.
Not live with his protection.
Yes, Chloe is in the witness No, the dog witness protection programs.
I guess.
So there's that, So keep that in the back of your mind as we go through the evidence. Apparently, let's just do a little more detailed into his actual injuries. He had traumatic brain injury. O'Keefe had a skull fracture and brain bleed. He had facial injuries, cuts, bruises and abrations on his face, and he had rib fractures, multiple ribs to fractures.
Sounds like.
That.
Sounds like you got hit by a car. It's not like a dog attack.
Well, I think with the dog theory, it's that.
I mean, it is questionable why there's scratches like that.
But here's the thing with the dog theory, and I understand that they're saying that if he did the defense is claiming he entered the house and he got into altercation with the men, right, and that there was a fight the dog and the dog got involved because you know, Togo, we have a German shepherd. If I got in a fistfight with someone, my dog's gonna jump in. There's no doubt about that.
I don't know, I know, And so the dog is scared of trash cans.
What else is he scared of? Something else? Like all burglar has to do and come in our house is bring a trash can.
Well, it would have to be a run. He doesn't like the big trash cans, the street trash cans, he's not scared of, like wastebaskets.
Yeah, he's tough. He can handle the waist basket, he is.
Anyway, O'Keefe had bite marks and scratches on his arm, and there were lacerations on his head and body.
Well, this all sounds like reasonable doubt. Really, are you doubting that? I said there's doubt?
No, I agree with you.
I mean at the end, by the time we yes, I'm not saying she did or didn't do it. I'm saying it's all circumstantial. It seems to walk a very fine line. It's like on the fence, you could.
Go either way.
That's why this case. And so that's reasonable doubt. And if it's reasonable doubt, it's a legal standard. It's not a moral standard or a hunch or whether she did or didn't do it.
It's whether legally there's enough and there isn't enough so far, okay, So.
Crash reconstruction specialists previously testified in her first trial that O'Keefe's had injuries did not align with trauma typically seen in pedestrian vehicle collisions, and that the condition of Read's vehicle did not match the damage. More expect this.
Is not a typically seen Okay, well maybe this is a different situation.
Additionally, a retired er doctor and forensic pathologists who this is a person that was an expert in dog bites, testified for the defense, suggesting that some of them Keey's injuries, particularly those to his arm, were more consistent with a possible dog attack. Now, I will tell you, and in the trial they tested, they did DNA testing for dog dna and there was no dog DNA found, but they
found pig dna. Now, when they said that and I was watching and they said pig dna, the first thing I thought of was, well, dog treats are a lot of times pig ears and made of pig. So maybe the pig DNA came from the dog's mouth. But the dog, I don't know, I had a dog treat or something. I don't know. It's just there's no dog DNA found. There's pig dna.
That's unusual. There's there's no pigs in the vicinity, not that I have no, Well, I don't know. It was a pig farm near fair View Lane or whatever.
Thirty four fair of View.
You keep doing these people, you keep you want somebody to go out there.
And no, I just love the address because they say it over and over. It's all like what went down at thirty four fair View. Well, Brian Albert has told the house since then, and apparently yeah, and he rehomed his dog. He rehomed the dog, sold the house, and apparently he redid the basement floors right right after this incident as well. But apparently he had already redout the basement floors in twenty eighteen and then he redid the bastion.
Were there any suspicious deaths in twenty eighteen on this fair View lay, No suspicions.
You know that there might be redid the basement?
Well no, I think he originally redid the basement because the basement needed to be redone.
And then he read you're saying he already he just did it. Why is he doing it again? I was thinking, probably does it every time he killed someone in his house. No, Okay, I think he also rehome a dog in twenty eighteen.
Maybe, but he did redo the basement flooring in twenty eighteen, and then someone like a contractor came forward and said that he redid the basement flooring again in twenty twenty two after this incident occurred. And also one more thing, there was never any investigation done inside of this house. They did not do any fingerprinting. They did not look for any blood. They did not look for DNA that would have.
Answered a lot of questions one way or another, right, I mean, really the main they found no DNA of his in the house that would have said something, right, found some DNA depending on where it was, or fingerprints that would say something exactly.
But I'm telling you didn't.
Have ring footage. No, there's no ring footage out.
They have cameras on the four fair View that I don't know about, but there is no footage that I have seen anywhere. There is a lot of footage of Karen Reid pulling into John O'Keeffe's house. There's ring footage of her SUV at his home.
Whose footage is that his?
At she goes after she drops him off, She goes to his house. The biggest question in this case, if you had to boil this case down to one question, it would be whether or not John O'Keeffe actually entered the house that night.
You're saying one question that, Yeah, you're right, that's a question that would then answer a lot of other questions, right, because their claim that he never came to the house, right, it would support her claim that he.
Did enter the house.
Right.
And then now it's kind of like the burden lightly speaking to burdens on them to explain what happened he went in the house.
Now telephone right, And as far as I know, I don't believe he had ever visited that home before. That was his first time being there. So I'm saying, why was that inside of this home not investigated? Why were fingerprints? Why did they not look for blood? Why did they not exactly? And that's the that's exactly, and that's the argument as to why this is a cover up and not just a basic hit and run. Let's get to the broken tail light. The broken tail light is another.
Thing that just like okay, the brooktail it's on her car.
Yeah, there's a lot with this bourbon tail light. I gotta break this down. Reed's defense team has offered an explanation for the damage to her sub's tail light, suggesting it may have occurred she accidentally backed into O'Keefe's vehicle while leaving to search for him on January twenty ninth, So after she leaves the scene, she goes to John
O'Keefe's house and goes to sleep at his house. She also calls him like fifty times or something and leaves voicemails screaming at him, calling him a pervert.
Which is a little well, I doesn't say why she leave voicemails that textes people on new voicemails so much more. But I guess she was so angry she'd wanted to scream at him.
But here's the thing. If she hit him and ran over him and then she goes to his house, was she and she's drunk? Did she? Was? She really like a criminal mastermind that she's like, now I'm going to call him fifty times and scream at him and call him a pervert.
She have any other phone?
Calls her text during this time like like do you still like me?
No, Tim Brian Higgins, not that I know of, But it's basically her leaving.
Lots of voicemails, single mouth, do you still like me? Like you she should say anything like that.
No, she didn't claim to be single yet. No, all right there, okay, So there's ring camera footage that shows Red hitting his vehicle and the same spot her headlight. Her tail light is broken. So there's ring footage that shows her backing her suv out and she backs her suv into John O'Keefe's suv. His sub's parked like this. She backs out and hits it like this, and you can see his car rocking.
I don't see contact.
It looks like there's contact made. You can see the car till a little bit his car, so.
It looks like it's his car rocking.
His car's rocking. So apparently she backs out of his garage. This is to go look for him because he does has.
To come home because he's and Yeah, so she calls him fifty times and yells and screens at him.
Yeah, and she's worried that he's not home.
Well, she calls and screams at him because she thinks she This is where her phone calls and her voicemails to him. I think are good evidence for the defense, even though the prosecutors like to use it to show that they have a volatile relationship. But if you look at the timing, she's calling him and leaving these crazy voicemails after he's already dead and he's in the yard. Apparently this is after she's driven away from from Brian
Albert's home. So if she's calling him and screaming at him and accusing him of having an affair with some woman inside the house and that's why he never came back out to me, that shows her men's reea that she thinks that he's inside the house having an affair with with a woman, and that's why he's not answering. I you know, I understand, I understand that. But her voicemails, I mean, if she's if.
She's usually those calls are more like he maybe, where.
Are you right? I saw you walk into Brian O'Keefe's house right now and you're not coming.
Yeah, you went to the side porche.
What's that call? Where are you right? But she's not. She's saying I and hate you, John, I hate you. You're a pervert? John? Are you effing that girl? John? So to me. It's just it's her mental state that she thinks he's inside the house having an affair with some woman, and that's why he's not responding to her.
Why would she drop him off at a house where she thinks he's gonna have an affair because he was supposed to.
Come back out and tell her if she was welcome to come in or not, and he never could wait she wait, I think she'll like wait in like five minutes.
It wasn't very long.
The timeline is very short from when she pulled up.
Well, the timeline that she no, I'll tell.
You there's a timeline because they have a cell phone data of his phone being at thirty four Fairview when they pull up, and.
Then that time's not really disputed.
Then right, No, I'll tell you. I actually, okay, here's the timeline. It's this is very short. Twelve twenty four. She arrives at thirty four Fairview twelve thirty six. Karen reads her phone connects to John O'Keefe's WiFi. John O'Keefe is, that's his house. So she drops him off at twelve twenty four and she's back at his house by twelve thirty six. I can't do math. But that's not a
very long time. What is that called minutes? So there's only a twelve minute time period between the times she drops him off and that she arrives back at his house. She arrives at his house at twelve thirty six. At twelve thirty seven, she sent to her first crazy voicemail saying, John, I effing hate you. So this timeframe of her dropping him off, thinking he goes in the house, and then allegedly running over him, and then driving back to his
house is twelve minutes. So it's a really short time period. Anyway, Let's get back to the tail light. So the defense claims that she backed into his car. That's where her tail light was damaged. The thing is there were forty something pieces of tail light found around his body, but the tail light pieces were found during a second search, not the initial search.
Yeah, after the first search when they sprinkled some tight Okay, so.
Let's go free size. They're like, come back in search.
So they find his body on the lawn at six o'clock in the morning and the police come and they use a snow blower to clear away the snow because there was a blizzard.
That night.
This is another problem is the weather that night. So as they're blowing away the snow and they're recovering the body, there's no tail light pieces found none. Then a search team goes back hours later after her car has been confiscated by police and taken into police custody. Then when a second search team goes back to search the yard and the crime area, they find forty something pieces of
tail light. So basically you have to think, Okay, when they found his body originally in the snow at six o'clock.
In the morning, provided I didn't find it the first time.
The beau of the snow, but they had a snowblower and they were blowing.
There's forty pieces and they didn't find one, not one, not one.
But when they go back and search later they find forty something pieces.
I'd say air on the side of caution and put them on jail.
Everybody, just everyone involved.
You're all crooked one way or another.
Yeah, But let me ask you because.
You're I mean, I'm saying that lightly. Of course, I don't mean that.
Sort of You've been in a lot of car crashes.
Namely with you as the driver.
Yes, here's my question. If she backed into him and hit him with the tail light, wouldn't break into forty something pieces.
I feel like that that you've backed into my car.
There were no tail eye pieces, just a lot of damage to my car.
Right, But I followed by Emily running the house screaming at me that it was my fault.
I parked a car. It was, yeah, excuse me for parking in the driveway, Emily anyway, she says. Then you say I.
Didn't see your car really because you have you have beepers and cameras and mirrors and.
The sun shining on my car and you didn't see it.
Okay, back to Karen Reid.
You're like, I didn't die that day. If I died that day would be very questionable. Did she back into him? What was the motive?
Okay again, I'm just asking do you think if you backed into someone and you hit them, would your tail light have forty pieces different broken pieces? To me, that seems like over like. I just I don't feel like a tail light breaks into that many pieces, just like you.
No, I when you said forty that didn't sound realistic.
It doesn't sound realistic at all.
If she did it was this freaking tail.
Well, and how that's like a tail light explode. Now you know when it sounds that many.
Pieces And I certainly don't know this, but just as the lad person, this is what it sounds like.
They took a tail light, smashed it with a hammer.
Yes, that's what, and then carried it over and sprinkled it around. They did snap the tail light or or bust it. They smashed it with a hammer and then used all the pieces and threw it there.
That's what it feels like.
Many days apart was the first, not finding the tail light to the time they fell it was. It was the same day.
So basically they found his body at six am. So the police come, they mark off a crime scene. They used the snowblower. They found blood at the scene. They put the blood in solo cups. You know those red solo cups. That's what they put the blood evidence in. They and they put that inside a grocery bag.
It's funny that the house of Drunks had a bunch of solo sandy.
No, it was the cops. I don't know what they got the solo cups. I mean, maybe they got it from the neighbors.
As police issued solo cups tump aware right solo cups.
So during that initial finding him and taking him in the ambulance and using the snowblower on the scene, there are no tail light pieces found the.
Cocktail body cams on these cops that arrived the seed.
I'm guessing not but no, Oh, but there is.
There's car camp. There's a car cam where you can see Karen Reid running around screaming John John John Police stash camp. Yeah, the police stash camp. There's because she's the one who actually finds the body. So apparently she wakes up at like four thirty or five or something in the morning and he still hasn't come home. So she's freaking out. She calls Jen McCabe.
Why is she freaking out though she knew she thought he was sleeping with someone.
Because he's so I don't know if you will come home. I'm going to freak out.
But if you're accusing me of sleeping with someone and you're sending me fifty messages that I'm sleeping with someone, then I'll come home and it's like, yeah, because I'm seeking with someone like that would be your mindset, wouldn't be like you still have to come home.
Well, but he has kids at home. I mean, he didn't come home.
The whole thing's weird.
I don't know he did. So he doesn't come home, and she wakes up and she's at his house and she realizes that he hasn't come home. She calls Jen McCabe, who is in the house that night, and then she calls another woman I don't remember her name, and the three of them get to a car early in the morning and drive around looking for John, and then Karen spots his body and the yard and that's what they call an ambulance.
They called where was the body relative to the house and where she's supposedly dropped him off?
If you face the house, it's a big front yard and there's a driveway to the right. His body was found all the way to the very left of the yard, in front of a flagpole, so like as far left on the boundary as you could go.
All right, terrible investigations, Well, yeah.
I mean that's part of the that's part of the defense is that not only was the investigation terrible, but it does look like a cover up.
There's a lot of really yeah, but it sure does look like one right.
Initial searches by the Camp Police Department did not yield any tail like pieces around the Albert's front lawn. This is when they first found the body. However, a subsequent investigation led by the Massachusetts State Police uncovered approximately six to seven fragments of red and clear plastic in the snow near the scene. Later reports and defense arguments have to just said that up to forty seven pieces were
eventually recovered in the snow. So again, I just the tail light just bothers me, It bothers me.
Did they say whether the tail light matched the vehicle?
Yeah?
They did say, okay, so he correct tail light? Okay, and then her tail light? Did it if they puzzled, pieced it back together, did it match up? Did they do anything like that?
Yeah they did.
They also claim, wait, so I did match her tail ight. Yes, it's her tail light. The question is is her tail light found in the yard because she hit John O'Keefe at such a high velocity that her tail light exploded into forty seven different pieces, or is her tail light found in the snow because the police confiscated her vehicle saw that there was a little bit of damage to her tail light.
Yeah, and then use that as.
A cover up, busted the tail light and then when they went back to search, dropped it into the scene and then said, oh, look what I found over here. I found pieces of tail light. The problem though, is that pieces of the tail light were also found in his clothing, like.
Small fragments in his pockets, not in his.
Pockets, like and it's like his shirt.
He got it, like he got hit.
So I don't know if they were smart.
So here's the thing, so you know, there's more evidence, it's just more confusing, yes, exactly.
So it's like, okay, let's say they did break up his tail light, because there is there is police footage of her car within the sally port at the police department, and you could see people walking around in her car. So there's opportunity, right, there's opportunity for someone to mess with her tail light. They have it on video. It
shows the lead investigator, Michael Proctor, behind the car. They also when they when they handed over the videos of her car in the car port at the police station, they inverted the video.
She's guilty of something.
I mean, she was a druns driving and then dropped him off drunk and then called and screamed him.
You're angry because she screams at him.
If you can starr to be killed, Well, yeah, it's.
A trigger for me. I don't know where it comes from.
During the trial testimony, so they had a crash data expert from the Massachusetts State Police. He described information or treat from Karen Reid's SUV. According to his analysis, the vehicle had been shifted into reverse and reached the speed of just over twenty four miles per hour before slowing down abruptly with noticeable movement of the steering wheel. This expert suggested that this information that they were treated from her car could be consistent with a pedestrian being struck
and placed the event around twelve forty five am. However, if you remember the timeline that I gave you, it would not have happened around twelve forty five because she was already back to John O'Keefe's house by that time and had already left out for.
Leads to more questions, Right, nothing gets answered.
No. Reid's defense seemed challenged his conclusions, questioning his qualifications and highlighting that he does not hold an advance certificate and crash reconstruction. He also was terrible on the sand. It's hard to take someone seriously when they're so nervous
that they can't answer the questions very well. So the defense argues that if O'Keefe had been hit by a vehicle moving in reverse at approximately twenty four miles per hour, which that's fast, right, twenty four miles per hour backwards, yes, his.
Box, like in a residential area, you punched the gas pedal and that starts to get to twenty four miles an hour. That in that short period of time, there's not like a lot of roadway.
But again, I don't feel like if she pulled up to the house and she's sitting on the side of the house and he goes into the house and then she drives on.
You know, you know what, it does None of this matters, you know why, because this all leads to doubt.
We're not you're never going to figure it out with this much crap and this all we're sitting here. Every piece of evidence that you brought up, yeah, just leads to more questions, no conclusions, not even viable conclusions, right, So it's really just every piece of evidence has a reasonable doubt.
Yes, That's why I think this this trial because she's she's almost done there, almost does This is her second trial. This is her second trial. It should start any day now because I think they have sixteen juror seated right now. What happened on the first trial, it was a mistrial.
Yeah, but do we know do we know how many people voted or anything like that.
So when the jury came back, they basically said, we cannot reach a decision, and where it's deadlocked, there's there's no way we're both sides. I guess it was eight thought that she should be charged with vehicular manslaughter and four didn't think so. But I guess they said that they were so deadlocked in their positions that there was no way that anybody was going to, you know, move one way or the other. So that's why it was
a hung jury. The three charges against her were, now I don't even remember, vehicular are you listening to.
Second degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, and driving without it with a broken tailing.
No, that was not the third one. The third one is leaving the scene.
Leaving the scene, yea with a broken tailor with.
A broken tailing? Yes, Okay, let's get into a little more evidence. It's going to NYU as well. So Jen McCabe was one of the women that was inside the house that evening. So apparently they they confiscated Jen McCabe's phone. They did the whole data extraction, and the defense claims that at two I think it was two twenty seven am that Jen McCabe did a search, a Google search how long to die in cold?
This is a twenty seven I'd like to find out what your Google searches are.
I need to get some data extracted from your phone. Life expectancy of fifty year old half Persian, none, the dreams, bigels every day.
That's what your search is going to say.
Never google that before ever. So Jen McCabe told the assistant, well, that's.
The experts tell me what you search.
Okay. So Jen McCabe told the assistant District Attorney Adam Lawley, that she left an Internet tab open after finishing her basketball related Google searches earlier on the twenty ninth. I used to always leave my tab open and my kids would yell at me, she added. She further testified that she used the same tab later that morning would read frantically asked her to look up hypothermia.
So here's the was what time was this search?
This is where again you're gonna say, there's more questions.
Yes, because she did. She doesn't dispute that she did google how long to die in the cold, But the problem is the defense.
She can't and it was Claire's day, so of course she didn't dispute it, right.
But there's a dispute as to when she did it. The defense claims that according to what they extracted from her phone, that she made this Google search at two twenty seven in the morning, which would be apparently like after he.
Was not not as a normal time that someone would normally search for when how long it takes for someone to die in the snow? Right?
Usually that's done after brucast she right.
She claims that she made the search at six something in the morning.
After his body found Like as a result of the scene, she's like, oh my gosh.
Right, how long does it take to die in the hole?
Because that's what I would do if I find someone dead, I'd be like, oh, let me let me determine.
Right, That's the stupidest thing.
That still doesn't make sense, So someone's dead, Well it man, it's probably nerve wrecking and worrisome, and there's cops everywhere, and then she's gonna all a sudden start to investigate.
Whatever it is.
She claims that she was looking at up because I guess Karen Reid was because it was chaotic and she was saying that he died of hypothermia, and so she was googling how long did the office.
That's not normal behavior to search something that sophisticated or that detailed when there's a crime scene going on.
Right, and I don't understand the dies she searched it she did that search as part of the cover up.
That would be my guess, Like, yeah, but let's say he died in the coal Okay, let me hold on.
Let me google and see how long it takes to die in the cold.
So you think she did it at two twenty seven am in the morning after something nefarious happened in the house and he'd got in a fight and someone hit him over the head and then he died and the.
Dog attacked him, and that's a possibility.
And you're saying she was like they all had some cover up where they were like, let's drag his body out into the yard and make it look like he died of hypothermia, and she googled how how long to die in the cold? Yeah, that's a possibility, because the defense claims that, according to the data that was extracted from her phone, she googled this atuo twenty seven in the morning. I don't understand how there's a discrepancy in the time. Why is it just not clear what time she googled it?
If we have such yeah, I've been so digital, right, right, If there's.
Such a digital footprint on everything we do.
They probably even know where she her phone was at the time that she made.
Right, So why is that Why is that up for debate whether she googled it at two twenty seven or whether she googled it at six point thirty in the morning after the fact, because clearly, if she googled it, googled it after he was dead.
Even though it's weird, one expert says at one time and another expert says another time, Yeah, it's stay in the same time zone. Maybe that's what it is. Maybe one man say Pacific Standard time. No one says, no, it's Eastern.
Well, I feel like you should reach out to Alan Jackson and ask if you can be on the defense team. I could, Yeah, I think you should. All right, so there we go. That's another piece of evidence that it's like again, it's like the same with the tail light. It's like it's like the tail light, but the tail.
Light the same results more questions, the more we have the Google search, and it's like, oh, well, if it was at twenty seven, that's pretty shady.
But if it's at six am after the body's sound, then okay, that kind of makes sense, kind of all right. There's also testimony that people heard Karen Reid say I hit him, I hit him, I hit him.
Because that's normal behavior for someone that runs over their boyfriend.
Jennifer McCabe testified that Karen Reid allegedly repeated the phrase I hit him after a paramedic asked what happened to John O'Keeffe. This is after the body is found in and the paramedics are on scene. There's several first responders who also testified and echoed the same claim that they heard her say I hit him. Defense attorney Alan Jackson noted that the statement wasn't recorded in official reports or on any scene footage. So again here we go. Again.
We have people claiming that she screamed I hit him, I hit him. However, there's no actual footage of her saying it, and there's nothing written in any report. So you're going to tell me if cops are on scene and first responders are on scene and she's saying I hit him, that nobody writes that down. Yeah, but they're going to testify after the.
Fact that on the first responders heard like only the like the cops didn't.
Hear it or anything, but the cop.
I mean, if it's a conspiracy, though, the cops should have heard it. But maybe the conspiracy wasn't fully put together yet because this is early the next morning. Maybe so far it's only the cops in the house and the people in the house that.
And there's too much doubt.
Then there's the snowplowd driver. A local snowplow driver, Brian Lafran, told the court he did not notice anything unusual on the lawn outside thirty four Fairview Road when he cleared the area in the early hours of January twenty ninth, twenty twenty two. This is a point that the prosecution and later challenge like.
I mean, like he could have seen a body. He could have seen like the cocktail glass someone.
Well, he's saying that I think he went into work to plow that night because there was a blizzard or like two fifteen am. I think that's when he clocked in or whatever.
Nothing.
And he's saying after he got his vehicle at two fifteen and he drives down Fairview, it's very well lit at that he said, he constantly looks around because he has to observe other cars, people, animals, dogs, Right, it makes snowplow. Yeah, he doesn't want to hit anyone, right.
It's not like a garbage truck where they're just focusing on the bins.
Like, he has to make sure he's not plowing over people, dead people, right, and so crime scenes. Right.
So he's testifying that he was very aware that when he plowed the streets and when he went past thirty four fair View, that there was no body at that time, which means Karen Reid couldn't have hit him because if she hit him, he would have been there already because she hit sometimes.
Because the argument is she hit him basically when she dropped him off.
At twelve twenty five, or whatever. So if she hit him, his body would have been in the front.
Yard, was in the yard and the yard. So here's but he doesn't plowing the guard.
Nobody drove by the house and the body was in the yard by the street. So he's saying, I drove by this house.
Not buried in snow or anything.
I mean, maybe maybe it was covered in snow, but I still feel like you would have noticed a large man in a yard. So he claims he did not see anything like that. Let's hear some other things that I really took away that I thought was really interesting. There was a lot of butt dialing going on that night between the people and the house, and a ledge butt dialing. So Brian Albert owns the home, and again
he's a sergeant in the Boston Police Department. Before I get into the butt dialing, there's one other thing I thought was really strange. There was a crime scene in front of Brian albert house at six o'clock in the morning. He is a cop, and he never left his house. He never went out to see what was going on.
I mean during the investigation. Yeah, like as if you had no interest in it.
I don't know, I'm just saying at six o'clock in the morning, it's his house, there's a dead body found on his lawn. There's a bevy of police and ambulances, and Karen Reid's running around screaming, and there's two other women there, and he's he's a cop, he's a police officer, and he's just inside chilling in his house. He never goes outside and asks what's going on? You're gonna tell me that's not odd behavior, that's a very odd behavior.
I mean, I'm not a cop, but if there's a dead body of my front lawn, I'm gonna go outside and see what's going on.
Yeah, yes, what are his Google surgeons? That's what I want to know. And what is he texting during this time?
Well, I don't know about text said, but Doda, sorry, I wanted to establish them again that the homeowner is a police officer, and that there was a crime scene in his lawn, and that he never went outside and asked what was going on or what was happening. I think that's odd behavior.
That is very odd behavior.
Also, there's some butt dialing going on between him, Brian Albert and Brian Higgins, who is the ATF agent who's the one that had the text exchanged with Karen read about you're hot, I'm hot, We're hot from John, all that kind of stuff.
So it is the story that there's phone calls between the parties and they're saying, no, is this accidental dialing?
Right, So there's there's a one second call from Brian Albert to Brian Higgins at two twenty two am. Also remember that apparently Jen McCabe is googling how long to Die in the Snow at two twenty.
Seven, possibly at two twenty seven, So there's a lot of phone activity at two twenty seven, so they're all awake, right.
There's then there is a twenty two second call from Agent Higgins back to Brian Albert.
I'm guessing there's no text between these parties. It's all butt dialing.
Butt dialing, yeh. Then Jed McCabe, the one who did the Google search, placed seven calls to O'Keefe's phone between twelve twenty nine and twelve fifty and seven of those calls are unaccounted for. She claims maybe like she put her phone in her back pocket and her phone just kept dialing John O'Keeffe over and over and over.
Then and then it also did a Google search, yes.
By itself, but the defense claims obviously. Here's my thought is if she's calling his phone over and over, is she looking for his phone because something happened in the house. They need to get the body into the yard, and maybe they need to locate his phone and put his phone with the body. They can't leave his phone in the house. I don't know. That's just me thinking, what's going on with all this butt dialing? Why is everybody calling each other? Why is she calling John O'Keefe's phone.
All right, So anyway, that is a lot of the crazy evidence in this case.
So it's your verdict.
I'm telling you I don't have a verdict.
And then that's then not guilty.
Yeah, I would say if I were sitting on the jury and I was presented with all this evidence from the first trial, I would say not guilty because to me, there is enough reasonable doubt that I could not convict this woman and send her to the present.
So by a legal standard, we agree not guilty by all the evidence.
That we've gone over. Now, what do you really think happened?
What do I really think happened? Yeah? I here's what I'm going to say. The most plausible thing that could have happened that night is that she's drunk. He's drunk. He gets out of the car, he's got a drink in his hand. They're fighting. Maybe she puts it in reverse and she backs over him and she doesn't mean to at twenty four miles an hour, at twenty four miles an hour, and then she drives away and doesn't know that she done, and he dies in the snow.
But anyway, that was a pretty deep dive into Karen Reaid. I know there's a lot of other issues that we could discuss. If you guys have comments or questions or other things that you would like us to talk about, please feel free to damn me. And again, thanks for listening. We appreciate you.
Thank you.