¶ Welcome back to Zone 7 with Crime Scene Investigator, Sheryl McCollum
Y'all better buckle up. I have not seen a case like this since Casey Anthony.
And let me explain.
I have four sisters, well educated women, diverse in their likes and dislikes. They've probably got about twelve degrees between them. A couple of them got a six year degree, one's got a PhD. They've got master's degrees, they've got rn degrees.
¶ Sheryl compares the Karen Read trial to the Casey Anthony trial
And I say that because these are logical people. But during the Casey Anthony trial, I had one sister that thought the mama straight up.
Killed that baby.
I had one that believed the baby drowned accidentally and they covered it up with grandpa's help. I had another one that believed the child got into some drugs and accidentally odeed. And I had another one that thought the baby died I somehow, maybe hitting her head or something, and her mama panicked and covered it up. And I thought, you know what, this is your jury.
These are all for mamas.
These are all for you know, middle of the road, middle America kind of people. And so I said on National TV what I thought was logical, and I did so confidently that Casey Anthony was going to walk out of that courtroom and The reason I said it was because if you could not tell me how.
That baby died, you don't have murder. People lost their minds.
I had more hate mail. Good ness. People were coming after me. How could I defend Casey Anthony? How could I believe? Listen now, I tried to be very clear and logical, but I'm gonna tell you right now before we get into tonight, it don't matter what you think,
¶ "It don't matter what you think or what you feel or what you believe. The only thing that matters is what you can prove."
or what you feel, or what you believe.
The only thing that matters is what you can prove.
Judge Ashley Wilcom, Joshua Schiffer, we got about forty years of the best there is. So Karen Reid, let's say answer one question for him. Between the three of us, we have walked into a courthouse thousands of times. What
¶ What is a buffer zone?
is a buffer zone?
Oh?
I think it's brilliant. I think this is brilliant maneuvering.
¶ Both Judge Ashley Wilcott and Joshua Schiffer weigh in
It's all brilliant maneuvering. Keep all those protesters that are for Karen Reid away from the courthouse, Judge, because that's going to bias this case and bias this jury. And they shouldn't be anywhere around here because that interest of a fair trial, says the state outweighs the freedom of speech standing on.
The courthouse steps. Josh, you weigh in, But I thought it was a.
Brilliant maneuver, I gotta say, And I'm a died in the wool civil libertarian. But the court has a necessary and important interest in securing and then protecting the integrity of the process. While freedom of speech needs to have an outlet, needs to have a spot, it has been demonstrated that this courthouse, for this case, cannot provide that to the litigans without some sort of governmental regulation. And
now then you see cops all over the place. Every time these Litigans walk in or out of the courthouse, there is a mob of people questioning them with some reasonable stuff, but then some really wild stuff, like there's been stuff in the media in this case that it's been unlike any other case we've ever seen.
I've never seen anything like it. I've never seen protesters like this. I've never seen such rabid folks on both sides.
Where they're just unyielding.
It's almost like logic doesn't matter, the law doesn't matter, the facts don't matter. It's just my opinion, my thought,
¶ "There's one woman, she has a shirt on that says 'free Karen Reed', but she's holding a poster that says 'justice for John O'Keefe'. I feel for her. I get it. It almost can't be both. -Sheryl Mac
my belief is going forward. But there's one woman she has a shirt on that says free Karen Reid, but she's holding a poster that says justice for John O'Keefe.
I feel for her.
I get it like it almost can't be both, Like you can't be that woman. You've got to pick a side. I bet you can't.
Go into a bar nowhere in that town that it's not separated.
If this defense theory is true, are they going to demand a prosecution of these witnesses?
Well, if the defense theory is true, I think at the end of the day, if they get an acquittal acquittal, they're going to run away. I would write that's a huge wind. If I were them, I would disappear and not demand a dang thing because guess what, I was successful. But I also have to suggest that when we're talking about Karen Reid's defense and what she's saying happened, we know from her prior interviews defendant's own words that she says she saw John o'kee walking up to the house.
She's the only witness so far. It's going to say that. The rest have said, oh no, nobody ever got out on car. So if that's her defense, does she have to testify because I think if she has to testify, the prosecution really might stand a chance because it may conclude there's no other reasonable explanation than she did it.
And her testifying this is going to Because I'm on the same page as you, I'm saying that she doesn't need to testify in this case given how strong the defense has been so far. Now we've still got several more witnesses, and I think Procter is the be all end all.
For the state's case, because if the state can't produced with Proctor, this case may look at a directed verdict.
Assuming Proctor presents enough strong evidence and there's been Look, there's been Prema faci eforts, not a lot, certainly not enough that we would say that's a good, well proven case, but there's been testimony. But I think that's what they're going to have to decide after the state's case is closed, because she getting on the stand, big exposure, huge exposure.
Well, let me ask the two of you this, what about John working with the Feds? What about the federal investigation? Again, to me, that's a layer on this thing. If you want to look at why would somebody have motive if you're fixing to blow up my whole career and my whole department and my ring of buddies. That's good all day. And if he just arrived at our house intoxicated and she pulled away, whatever happened to happen. And now we're just going to say she did it. She's going to
say we did it. And again I'll go back to casey Anthony, how did he die?
We don't know, we don't know.
We're not going to know.
Based on the evidence you have both.
This is the wildest case to me because you've got evidence supporting each theory. So whichever theory you want to believe, you can find some supporting evidence of. And that's really unusual. And I think the FEDS being involved is reflective of this poor investigation and something shady in the house and prosecutor that didn't start off well doing the right thing in the case, and all of that makes it all very messy.
And the FED stuff, I know, it's hard because we all know the case. And oh, if I was a FED, this is the part that I'd be interested. Remove that from your brain. You have no idea what the FEDS are thinking if there is someone that comes out of left field, because they have information you can't even conceive of. It's the FEDS. Sure, we've got some stuff that would make a lot of sense for them to investigate complaints. And let's be honest, this is Massachusetts. The FEDS have
been investigating Massachusetts law enforcement. It was literally like the first job was, Hey, go investigate the local police in Massachusetts. There are some corrupt ones. So it's not like this is shocking or unprecedented. This is a known thing and
¶ The role of federal investigations
that means that people have been investigated before, and that means that there's a whole community about Hey, FED, start knock and this is what you do, and there's us versus them mentality. Law enforcements not necessarily all friendly with each other. And we don't know whether this FED poking around is minor or if it's like you're talking about career ending and they can end your career in law enforcement by snapping their fingers.
Yeah, because people are saying that Brian Albert, Colin, Albert, Brian Higgins, who's an ATF agent, y'all all had motive, they're all corrupt.
Well, again, you cannot have the FEDS involved in any investigation to me without it cloud and what they're trying to do in that courthouse right now.
I agree with you, And you know, the other part of this for me is there's so many parts. I've said that eight times. But the other thing that I took note of is my sense listening to all of
¶ Analysis of John O'Keefe's relationships with his peers
the evidence presented by the state so far, I walk away with this feeling of I feel like John o'keeith was looking in from the outside, even though he was one of them. I don't get the impression that they liked him. They weren't grab assing with him at the bar. They weren't you know, it wasn't a video where we're all saying, oh, what were they doing at the bar together?
Well, they were kind of ignoring him if you just watch that video, and I don't you know, they didn't run out, according to their own testimony, when he's out there in the lawn and dying or dead. And so I feel like, for whatever reason, they don't like him, and Mac, I'll turn it back to you, because again, if a cop is not liked, there's something else there.
I cannot agree, and to me that cannot be overstated. So again to me, that goes to motive. Did they know that he was working with the Feds. It would almost appear that they knew he was working with the Feds. That's why they didn't fool with him. That's why he
¶ Pre and post-police funeral behavior
didn't go in the house. That's why they didn't go outside. And I'll tell you something else that I would like to see come out. Who planned, assisted, ran participated in the funeral? What did they do post? Y'all all know pre and post behavior. And you got a cops funeral that died on your front yard. You ought to be folding that flag, handing that to somebody.
And there's already just enormous scuttle butt about who was talking to who, when, where, When did friendships end? And again I'm I'm with Ashley. I feel that John O'Keefe was a little bit of an outsider looking in rumors that I trust make me believe that they obviously knew each other to a degree, and there might have been this minor bad blood, a misunderstanding something between a couple of different agencies. But I can't tell you whether that's
a little thing or a huge thing. And for all we know, this was a meeting later on in the night to you know, squash that beef from back in the day or something that's gone through my mind. John o'keefs just wandered through life, and this crew, somebody associated with them, the cousin, the brother whatever, has a beef with John o'keeth. Hey, he's coming over. Hey, we're just gonna prank and we're gonna ras him. We're gonna we're gonna town him because Towny's they got a little bit
of a cruel sense of humor. Every once in a while they may, you know, give a guy something to remember him by because he stepped in the wrong spot. And I don't know what's happened, because no one knows. And that gets back to the state's problem at the beginning. There's evidence for a lot of different things that means reasonable doubts everywhere, and.
The state keeps putting it out there. Josh, I feel like, again, the state is so busy. It's not as strategic here's the theory of our case, here's our evidence to support it, but rather throwing up in an out of order sequence of witnesses, which happens because witnesses are available at different times. But to me, it's like they're so busy defending the theories of the defense and trying to prove the elements of murder that they're getting into a mess to figure out what the heck happened.
The state wants to put forward a discrete, compact, straightforward case. This is what happened. That's how you prove a murder. What the states have done. And I don't know if it was up just a badly handled response or anticipation or what the state has ended up saying, Hey, here's our tight, concise story. The defense is going to bring up all these other things. Let's go talk about them
a lot. And it's like, no, dude, you got to take what the defense is going to throw at you and say, everybody, it's on the horizon, but it's garbage. To get rid of it and don't talk about it anymore. They're laboring these points, and that's calling attention to come on. Maybe that wasn't a big detail earlier, but now I'm going to pay attention to it because now I've seen conflicting evidence and impeachment.
I want y'all's opinion about this. I hadn't heard anybody
¶ Impact of Proctor's testimony
say this, and but here's how I feel Troop or Proctor is gonna mark firm in this thing to the point I don't think they can recover.
Because here's the deal.
If he went in that phone and he takes those people what he is alleged to have said, I'm looking for nudes. I hope she kills herself. It is not gonna matter what evidence he puts up. They won't forgive him.
I agree, I agree, And not only that, but then I get to the heart of this. When we talk about motive and maybe working for the FBI, I just feel like somewhere in motive there's some affairs going on, there's some activity that they're trying to protect. But come on, it's the oldest motive in the book, and it is involved.
And how many times have we seen a little cover up suddenly explode and turn into something huge? Because hey, listen, Ashley, I just need you to tell this one little teeny life. It's all good to be. Oh hold on, Mac, you're in the room too, Okay, So Mac, you come over here. Now you're in on this story. Oh Mac, what do you mean? You've got your cousin is coming, And it's just it keeps getting a little bit larger and a little bit larger, and you can't keep the life straight.
And then you got to make up a couple of new lives because man, they were not there, so we got to figure out where they were, and now we got to fit And then you can't control those lives. You can't control the story. And a good defense is going to show those discrepancies and inconsistencies as the reason
¶ Speculation on the defense's potential witnesses
that the state cannot prevent absolutely.
And I'll tell you for any young officers listening, if you have this situation, you arrest the weak link, meaning if it gets outside that circle, to that cousin, to that best friend from high school that you really hadn't talked with in six months.
You arrest the idiot.
You arrest the one that's going to be afraid, the one that's not used to you know.
The one who stumbled in either yes, I who was just catching a ride, the guy who's stuff was in the back, but he doesn't know that guy. You get that person because when you put them in the squeeze, they're the ones that have the most to lose and the least to care about.
But in this case, which is that person because a lot of these people that have testified that we're inside that house, I would say every one of them fits that descriptions. They sounded on the stand, some of them like just a little bit of a bozo that didn't you know? On cross within said I don't know, I don't remember. You didn't hear anything. No, I was asleep. You didn't wake up till the next morning. No, I was asleep. No I didn't go outside. I think you could put all of them in that basket.
Well, let me ask y'all this. Both of y'all have seen both sides of many cases. And if you were the prosecutor, what are you pushing the hardest? And if you're the defense attorney, what are you push in the hardest.
If it's me and I'm that prosecutor, I'm going to push at the end of the day, I think this is a case where, yet again the closing argument is going to make or break it for the state, and I think they have got to bring it together with their theory of the case. This is the evidence that shows the only reasonable explanation she ran over him, period.
All the rest of this stuff you can't believe. And here's why you can't believe it, because at the end of the day, the defense has no proof, no proof that anything happened to John O'Keefe inside that house.
I'm not often in the position where I really would encourage the state to double or even triple down on telling the tight story and almost be rude to the defense. But this defense has been so active and so aggressive and so engaging. The state needs to really start putting
up megaffects. So it is getting down and dirty and telling the jury ignore the noise, ignore the distraction, ignore everything that the defense is building, trying to pick apart the personalities of these people, because we have a simple case here. We have a boyfriend and girlfriend having fighting, having drinking. She drops him off and he's dead where she drops him off. The police officers and first responders in the house never hear him. Come in, Ladies and gentlemen,
that's because she ran him over. They can talk about
all this other stuff. And you've all seen the enormous amount of creativity that's gone into showing that this was a conspiracy and there's a cover up, and this involves hundreds a bit or you can believe the straightforward story that they were really angry and Karen Reid ran him over in a drunken rage because the more the state engages with the defense and the defense, they're giving life to a corpse that is conspiracy theory, that is cover up.
They're bringing the zombie of cover up to life. Every time they talk about and if I'm the defense, I ain't got much to improve on. You're doing real life, pretty good loibles here and there. I hate it when he ends the question every time with isn't that correct? Isn't that.
Bombers your terrible trial skills?
Yeah? Yeah, yeah, yeah, learn a couple of other words. Other than that, I've got to give thumbs up. They have built a cover up that is now threatening to take over the defensive theory.
And then you come down to it, if there's an acquittal. I don't know what this jury is going to do. None of us do. But if there's an acquittal, will they try her again? And I think they would. I don't know, Josh. I think the state would.
But you know, I know that the cops are really angry about it. I don't know how the DA's office is. Like. Lally is a little bit of a mystery, kind of an enigma to me because he doesn't seem to be into this case. But maybe that's just the way he is. I've not met a single lawyer who said that they were impressed by or engaged with his opening, but he has been effective at getting the evidence out. I just don't know how much he likes this case.
Yeah, it didn't to me. There's no energy, so I feel like it's one they didn't want to have to try. But that's just I don't know, you know, maybe his personality.
He could be also getting other information or no other stuff that we don't know, like if he knows that Procter is halfway through a giant investigation for the FEDS, or there's a whole other case, or who knows, and that would obviously impact his willingness to push boundaries, you know, go to the edge of the envelope and really push hard to win the case. Man, if you know that there's a bunch of bad stuff going on with some of these people in the background, at may not be
the spot to stick your neck out. And he's certainly not sticking his neck out as a prosecutor.
Well, this is going to be the case, I think for him, no matter what diner or bar or restaurant or family re union, he wants into This is going to be what he's forced to talk about. And it's never going to be hey, great job. It's always going to be hey, don't you think you could have done this? Or don't you think this happened? Or why did you do this? I think it's going to be a constant just thorn in his side.
Especially because it's divisive. This is a divisive case no matter what the outcome is. You've got an entire half of followers saying that's the wrong outcome. So there's no good answer, so to speak from that perspective.
And what Judge Ashley is also saying is this is the kind of case that gets people unelected or elected. Yeah, because yes, this is what everybody cares about. This is what man. People are showing up in drugs. Someone's going to want a job change because of this.
Listen.
People are invested in this thing that don't live anywhere near Massachusetts.
Yeah, it's a big one. We get a lot of viewers watching the some Court TV a lot. Oh, I'm sure.
And this is going to be something that I think law schools are going to study. I can tell you some crime scene people need to.
Take a look. When you start talking about red solo cups and.
Flowers and contact wlame we get Mac brand leaf blowers. Come on, you are lay out on the monetization Listen.
I've already been in talks with home depots.
That's it. But you could really do a whole course on evidence collection in this case, legal skills, trial skills. You can do courses on this.
Case, Yes, and I think that that should happen. Just like Ojay, we learned a lot. I mean, this is a learning case if I've ever seen one. And again, when you have, like Josh was saying, when you have a police officer dead, you would think everything is done as perfectly as you can, and that is not what we're seeing.
¶ "If you want to recast it, this is cops lying against cops about cops" -Joshua Schiffer
I think this is an impact case because of the way that law enforcement's integrity is the central issue. Because really, if you want to recast it, this is cops line against cops about cops. You know, you got cops saying that this happened, versus cops saying that this happened. He got a dead cop in the middle, and then you've got a media firestorm like it's just man, We've seen giant trials. Heck, Trump's going on, and this is like anything we've ever seen, and I won't be.
Surprised to see legislative action because this has upset people all up and down the spectrum on everything from jury harassment, which is a big issue right now, all the way through pre.
Trial coverage, and how local media interacts with law enforcement, because you've now got local media and national media basically calling Boston law enforcement a bunch of liars and certainly insulting their professional abilities.
Well, cops line about cops about cops would be a great title of the Movie's sad and it's asinine, and it's crazy, and it's all of those things.
And it's also the reason we can't quit watching it.
You know why else because the Alberts. The Alberts are the Murdochs. Like the Murdochs are in South Carolina, you now have law enforcement Alberts. I think in that community that is the family.
And not only that, I've seen engagement with my law enforcement people on this case. This case hits law enforcement, court system prosecutors very hard to consider compared to so many of the other cases we follow, because this really does have the fundamental lifestyle of what it is to be a cop in their personal life and that's not a really deeply explored issue, and it's a sensitive one.
Anything else that y'all want to be sure we mention or highlight or say, y'all were flawless act.
And this is what we do. And it actually knows how much I love her, like we could.
We could do this forever. And next time you'll see me sitting next to them as we eat dinner and talk to you because we do that a lot.
And this is awesome.
Yeah, I know, And every time I see it, I feel like y'all are both cheeked on me.
But that's okay.
I had the whole church. We got lots of time. It's about to be. It's going to be fantastic.
No, we have to make that happen. I'm absolutely there, no question about it. Got to make that happen. I'm going to end Zone seven the way that I always do with a quote. The jury needed someone to tell them exactly how Kaylee died.
Piecing it together.
From circumstantial evidence was not good enough for them. They wanted the answers on a silver platter. We didn't have the evidence to serve it that way. It's not just the verdict that tells me this, but all also the manner in which they reached it, the fact they didn't request any materials to review, the fact they didn't have any questions for the judge if the statements that the foremen and the jury made.
To the media are true.
Ten of the twelve jurors felt that ninety minutes of deliberation was sufficient to fully weigh and consider and reject four weeks worth of testimony that we on the prosecution used to establish that this was first degree murdered. The rest of the thirteenth hours of deliberation had been spent trying to convince the two holdout jurors of the decision. Jeff Ashton, I'm Cheryl McCollum, and this is on seven