The Howie Carr Radio Network
Attorney Mark Bederow on Trooper Joseph Paul's Trainwreck Testimony | 6.17.24 - The Grace Curley Show Hour 2
Today's podcast is brought to you by Howie's new book Paperboy. To order today, go to HowieCarShow.com and click on store. Live from the Aviva Trattaria studio, it's The Grace Curly Show. We've got to bring in a new voice, a young voice, a rising voice, Grace Curly. You can read Grace's work in the Boston Herald and the spectator. Especially Grace, Grace Standup. Here's the millennial with the mic, Grace Curly. If you want to try to understand how state trooper Joseph Paul's testimony is going today, I would suggest that you follow at Bettero Law. And the reason why is I'm going to read you some of these reactions. Without question, the worst expert you will ever see. There is zero credible physical evidence J.O.'s injuries were caused by KR's SUV. That's Karen Reed and John O'Keefe. None, not a Zippo. To call the state of the DA's case a train wreck is disrespectful to the term train wreck. Another tweet. "Usually the blood on the floor comes from the cross. I've never seen it result from direct. Lally and this witness are something else. Attorney Mark Bettero joins us now. And just so people can get an idea of what Mark is known for, he's a New York City criminal defense attorney. He previously served as a Manhattan assistant district attorney. Attorney Bettero, thank you so much for coming on the show. Please, before we get into some of the details here, give us your initial reaction to the testimony from state trooper Joseph Paul today thus far. The first thing for having me is far as the so-called expert testimony that you heard today. I've been doing this 25 years as a prosecutor and a defense attorney and I've never seen anything like this. It's the worst quote unquote expert I've ever seen. It's clear that he was not qualified to give the opinion. It's clear that whatever he was giving for an opinion was relying on other state troopers whose conduct, as you know, have been under attack for doing things they shouldn't have done. His bottom line conclusions didn't make much sense. They were inconsistent over a couple of days. And at one point, he even acknowledged that he didn't know something because he wasn't there, which is kind of an ironic thing for a so-called accident reconstruction expert to say to indicate, you know, how could I know if I wasn't there. So this is the guy the DA has called to tie it all together and supposedly convinced a jury that Karen Reid hit John O'Keefe with her car and caused his death. And if that's the best they've got without even getting to the fact that the defense has multiple accident reconstruction experts, you know, with PhDs who are hired by the federal government, not even retained by the defense who are going to contradict it. I don't see where this case can possibly be going, but to an acquittal. Yeah, Mark Bedoro, the attorney who's with us now, I wanted to ask you because every time there's a new witness in this case that's brought up to the jury, I'm always amazed at how each time I think, oh, this is something that Lally and the DA are not going to be able to work around. Like, for example, for a long time, I thought the biggest piece of evidence, the host long to dying cold, I thought, oh, that's, that's a killer for Lally and for the DA. And then you have, then you have something else that comes up and you think, how are they going to go around this Michael Proctor's text that come up. But as far as damaging to the state's case, do you think that this trooper, Joseph Paul, who I was kind of expecting to, you know, today to be a slow day, but are you trying to tell us that what he's doing right now on the stand is actually more damaging to the state's case? Than any of these witnesses prior? It could be because, again, their whole theory is predicated on her mowing down John O'Keefe. And there's been very little evidence of that and some of the evidence that already had been offered is troubling, such as 45 pieces of taillight found all over the place from a taillight that a credible police officer testified how to small crack in it. You know, that taillights generally today made a polycarbonate, don't even shatter at all. It took them several days to find this. So, yeah, they need something that would credibly and convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that this is even the way that John O'Keefe died. And then you, you bring in this guy who was awful just on his direct examination. I mean, even before Alan Jackson stood up to ask him a question, I think people watching this were cringing. I mean, just the guy was nervous, which is most witnesses get nervous, but most expert witnesses who have a strong confidence in their opinion aren't shaking like, I mean, this guy was shaking. He looked like he was going to throw up at some point just on his direct examination, and he did nothing to help the DA's case. He did a lot to hurt it. And what possible basis could there be for a jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt at this point that she hit him, especially when, at the very end, when you heard him try to say he hit him in the upper right arm, where there's no real injuries. The taillight stayed together, but then miraculously after he hit him, apparently his arm broke the taillight, which led to all the contusions on his arm. Friday, you were told the theory was he then hit the back of his head on the curb and somehow landed an extra, what appears to be 20 feet away or so. And today, you didn't even hear that. You just heard a bunch of guests were in reliance upon other state troopers, even where some of the evidence was recovered. And, you know, he told you Friday based on the pattern where the lights are, where the point of impact was, then Jackson pulled out a picture today of a piece of taillight by the fire hydrant, which was nowhere near what he had alleged on Friday and would have moved the whole location several feet away. And they would then have to account for John O'Keefe on a flow speed impact, somehow landing another several feet past it. It just was a complete mess. He had no understanding of any of the scientific terms that, you know, Jackson clearly knew more than him. I mean, I wouldn't you say Jackson was more qualified as an expert than this state trooper? Yeah, absolutely. And that actually brings me to my next question for you, which is, you just mentioned guesswork and some of the changing in the story here from the curb to the grass and, you know, how this story was evolving in real time as this witness was being cross examined by Alan Jackson. It led me to believe like that he just was woefully unprepared for this and you're an attorney. So when you have a witness and you're, you're really depending a lot of your case on this witness and you're really depending on them being strong. How often are you preparing them and going over the story? And this is what we're saying happened. And this is what the evidence leads us to believe and making sure they have this down pat. How odd is it, Mark bettero, for someone like an expert in this case to change their story while they're on the stand? Well, it's almost unheard of, but I mean, look, the reality is this is a pattern in this case. This prosecutor appears to have left virtually every witness unprepared and it appears obvious. But in a witness like this, where the entire case can can sink if they don't come off as credible, you prep them as often as it takes and it would appear that there was very little prep here. I mean, this whole thing with the keystrokes was just jaw on the floor remarkable on Friday on direct examination. The jury was told that based upon the key cycles, which is, you know, for lack of a better term, the car going on and off, whether the, you know, the engine. Moves or not, but turning the car on and off that they were able to track backwards from when they tested the car to link which key cycle would have been where Karen read allegedly killed him and it had to be when she was in reverse going at 24 miles an hour and all of that stuff. And then today, Jackson just methodically tore that apart. And anyone with with a lick of common sense can understand that they don't have the right key cycle based upon how the car would have had to have gotten to the position when the state police tested it, meaning if it was driven from Fairview Road and Canton to another place then to her parents home and then it had to be towed to turned on and then when it arrived in Canton had to be off and they couldn't even establish that. And then you saw on redirect something which was truly remarkable. So he then backed off and said, well, the, you know, the key cycles aren't the most important thing. They don't, it possibly could have been that, but mileage and odometer readings is more important. And it's only possible that turning the car on and off might have actually started another key cycle. I mean, this guy had no confidence in anything he was saying, anyone who could look at him could see it and jurors are not dumb people. If, if they look at him and say, if this guy has no confidence in what he's saying and he's real up, he's relying on other state troopers were already have problems with. Why are we crediting what he's saying? And it just, it's mind boggling how awful a so-called expert witness this guy was. You could ask any lawyer to a man and woman, they're going to tell you that this is as rock bottom as it can possibly get for a prosecutor. With his own expert, just kneecapping, whatever's left of the case. Yeah. And the other question or the other cut that I want to play for you, Mark Beterow, is this cut of Jackson when he brought up the cell phone and how John will keep cell phone got underneath him. This to me was just jaw dropping this response from Cooper Joseph Paul. Let's play this for attorney Mark Beterow. And then we'll get your reaction. This is cut 18. The cell phone was found under his torso under his body. What's your theory on how that cell phone ended up buying 30 feet. It just, it just did. Just did. And somehow as he landed. Tuck that cell phone underneath his body to land it on top. It just, it just did. That's best. The evidence at the scene. I can't. I didn't put the evidence there. So. Okay. Well, you didn't. All right. So, Joe, as I've told you before, lawyers cannot make comments. So disregard it. Mr. Jackson. Don't do it again. Your reaction to that back and forth attorney, Mark Beterow. Well, I mean, look, once again, the witness walked into this. I mean, his answer starts out with saying, I have no clue how any of this is. And remember, he said that all the evidence that I'm analyzing, I was told it was found that way by other troopers. And then when he makes the unfortunate and gratuitous comment that it was just there, I didn't put it there. Of course, any experienced smart on your feet, lawyer is going to take a little crack at Proctor and the other guys and make a snide comment that you might not have. Somebody else. And, you know, that's an objection. It gets sustained. It's a proper ruling by the judge in that regard. But the point is made just. That whole exchange is just it's impossible to believe for so many different reasons. He's basically saying, I don't know, even though he's supposed to be the reconstruction expert who's going to explain all of this. And then ultimately, he just says, you know, I didn't put it there. I don't know. Mark better. Is there any chance you can stay with us for one more segment? Sure. Awesome. All right. Stay right there because I have a few more questions for you. When we come back, we'll be speaking again with attorney Mark better. And I'm going to check the text lines. So if anyone has questions, they want to get in. I'd be happy to read them. If you use scented candles, cover up sprays or air fresheners for bad odors in your home, I've got good news and I got bad news. The bad news is you're not fooling anyone. Okay. Whatever the smell is, whether it's a dog smell, a tobacco smell, it's still there. The good news is you can stop trying to mask these smells and you can actually destroy them with the Eden pure thunderstorm. And the even better news is that the Eden pure thunderstorm three pack can help you with that in all different places. So if it's your kitchen, your basement, your car, your office, a lot of offices have these windows that don't open. I know we have that here and it's great to be able to eliminate smells and keep that air fresh, even if you can't open a window. So the thunderstorm starts working in seconds. It's not big. It's not bulky. I can actually hold it up for the rumble camp. It's very, very easy to use. You plug it into the wall. It works almost immediately. And there's no stress. Taylor, I know you have a cat and you actually use a thunderstorm for some of that. What is it? Kitty litter smell? Yeah, or whatever. Whatever she does down there, that kind of smell. I mean, you don't want to have a candle going in your basement where you're not attending to it all the time. So this is the best solution that there's ever been. The thunderstorm takes away those nasty, not only pet odors, but basement odors as well. It's an old house. You get basement smell. It's inevitable. But the thunderstorm gets rid of it completely. Absolutely. You don't want to go nose blind. You want to be able to tackle that smell head on. So get $200 off a three pack today. When you go to Edenpuredeals.com and use discount code GRACE3. That's Edenpuredeals.com. Don't forget discount code GRACE3. We will be right back with attorney Mark Bettero when we return. The Grace Curly Show will be right back. This is the Grace Curly Show. Welcome back to the Grace Curly Show. I'm speaking with attorney Mark Bettero, who has quite a following, by the way. When I put out on Twitter that we were having on the show, his super fans immediately started tweeting back that they would be tuning in. So welcome. If you're new to the Grace Curly Show, you can check out all of our podcasts at gracecurlyshow.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Now, attorney Mark Bettero, I wanted to play one more sound cut for you, which really stuck out to me. Obviously, there's so many to choose from today when it comes to Trooper Joseph Paul. But here's another one. It runs a little bit long, but I think it's worth playing. This is cut 19. Can I answer the question? It's what was told to me as evidence. Donna, I will. By the crime scene. Who told you? As crime scene, I was there and says this glass from the cup. When I did my initial inspection, that's what it was on from. That's not what you just said. You said that's what was told to me. Yeah, by crime scene. By crime scene. By while I was at my inspection. Wait, what? It was told to me, by the crime scene, when I was at my inspection, that the initial inspection. So what you meant by that's what was told to me is the crime scene talked to you? Yes. Crime scene, say anything else. I don't know what else you want me to say. Now, one thing that you said, Mark better, before I get your reaction to this, as you said, this is entirely the fact that all of this is coming down to this Trooper's expert testimony is entirely the fault of Norfolk DA, Mike Morrissey. I want your reaction to this. If it were you, if this was your case, if you were part of the state's team here and you knew that everything was riding on this guy, what would you do in this situation? Do you let him go out there and say he's speaking to the crime scene, or the crime scene is speaking to him? Well, the first disclaimer I have to give is that if I were a prosecutor and cast with this investigation, I wouldn't touch it with a 100-foot toll if I knew what they know. I mean, I just would not be the person to go in court and prosecute a case that they have to know they can't win. But I mean, ultimately, if they found somebody who they believe with a straight face has the evidence to prove guilt and they want to go forward and this is the witness that they have, the first question is why can't they do better than an unqualified state trooper that took three courses and somehow became anointed the expert who's going to solve this problem, particularly where they know what's waiting in the defense case, which are experts hired by the FBI with PhDs and work for an accident reconstruction firm and are real classic experts in that regard who I think very significantly are not even paid for by the defense. I mean, when the jury learns that these experts were not engaged by them, that's going to just be unbelievable. But when you hear as a prosecutor that his whole reconstruction is based upon the premise of accepting various facts which were told to him by other police officers, including officers who had hearsay themselves. I mean, if you heard what he said, he was told by this one Gallagher from the Canton Police Department about where John O'Keefe was and where this is and whatnot, and that that was a witness who also didn't have any firsthand knowledge. He didn't see any photographs of the scene. So everything is just predicated on what other police officers told him and it appears that some of that information was either inaccurate or incomplete. You know that there was a tail light piece by the flagpole. He apparently had the wrong location of where John O'Keefe's body was, which is something that's very significant. He didn't do an actual reconstruction. I mean, what did he do? He drove the car in reverse and the Canton Police Department parking lot a couple of days later. So how you would put this guy on as an expert and have him basically say that his opinion is based in large part on what police officers told him, including that this was a car hitting a pedestrian, which is the biggest no-no of all. I mean, if you want him to recreate an accident, you want him to go in without the confirmation bias that was brought out. You want him to follow the evidence wherever it leads, find what you can. And instead, he's being told what happened. Attorney Mark Betro, if anyone wants to follow Mark, you can on Twitter @betrolaw. Hopefully we can have you on again soon. We'll continue this discussion when we come back. Thank you, Mark. I appreciate it. [Music] Welcome back, everyone, to the Grace Curly Show. I have -- I'm in a group chat. Which, if you're in a group chat out there, always be aware of what people are texting. This is for all the young guys out there. I don't know what you all text. If this state trooper group chat is any sort of window into what's going on, beware of the group chats. Because even if you don't do anything wrong, there might be someone in your group chat who's under investigation at some point, or who's involved in a trial. And then all of a sudden, all of those funny -- and I'm using air quotes -- text that you said are now visible for everyone to say. Is this an admission? Do you think you'd be canceled if somebody saw any of your group chats? No. You know this about me, Taylor. At this point, we worked together a long time. I'm a very paranoid person. I would never text anything. I don't even text -- That's about work stuff. But even personal stuff, you're not going to put that in writing. Like gossip, you mean? Anything. No. I've worked for Howie Car for 10 years. I have learned the old adage of don't write when you can talk, don't talk when you can wink, don't wink when you can not, that whole thing. I mean, not a lot stuck with me over the years, but I think that one has. What about you? Are you getting nervous? Is this a little projection? No, I'm not nervous, but I'd definitely be canceled. Oh, you would. Absolutely. Not for me. I wouldn't cancel you. No, no. But somebody out there would. Yeah, so the group chat that I'm in, though, it's my sister, and it's a couple of my cousins, and one of my cousins just got into this trial, like this weekend. That's a tough game of ketchup. It's a little exhausting. I won't lie to you. She's like, "What about the dog?" I'm like, "I can't go back. I can't act like this is my first time here." Yes, the dog. It's one of those things where -- What are we going to do? You're going to start like every day with the 51st dates kind of video, just catching people up on the trial and what's happened so far. This is your life. Because guess what? When I used to have Turtle Boy on, this was before the trial even started. This was when the case was really picking up. Every single time I would say to him, "Don't forget, we've got to start from the beginning. There's people out there." I'd give him this little lecture. "There's people out there, Turtle Boy, who don't know all the characters. We have to make it so they understand." And he'd go, "Yeah, yeah, I know, I know." And he would. He'd come on, and he'd play ball, and he'd go through everyone at all again, and then at the end, we'd add in a little bit of the new stuff for people who had been caught up. I've left that behind. At this point, it's like you're either following it or you're not. I can't walk everyone through it from the beginning. I'm not even that much of an expert in it. Although, you know what? If we're using Trooper Joseph Paul's definition of expert, I guess maybe you could say, "I am an expert" in the Caron Retrial. But I don't try to walk everyone through it at this point. Now, what I will say is that Mark Bedoro brought up a good point about the fact that this Trooper Joseph Paul is taking all of his instructions on how to reconstruct this crash or reconstruct this crime scene from other troopers who we now know a lot of these troopers are not very credible or trustworthy people. Thank you, Michael Proctor. Thank you, Trooper Buchanan. So, I wanted to play this cut because I think this is what he was referring to about Trooper Gallagher. This is cut 20. Every other item you marked based on a distance from where you were told Jonathan's body came dressed, right? Yes. And that was by Lieutenant Gallagher just wanting to get the round saying it's about here. Correct. Yeah, so remember that thing they use in court sometimes the fruit of the poison tree? Like you can't use evidence if it was obtained in the wrong way or obtained by a source that, you know, can't be credible. This entire case is like the fruit of the poison forest. Every single tree in this case has been poisoned in one way or another. Whether they're in a group chat calling Karen read the C word or if they just have no idea what they're talking about, there's not one person that the state has brought up. I would say, and Taylor, if you disagree, feel free, now's your chance. I would say their strongest witness has been the cell phone lady. And I didn't find her to be particularly brilliant, but compared to this guy, she's like Einstein. I have to think. Yeah, she knows a lot about stuff that people shouldn't know a lot about, I guess. And that was her strength. I don't think she was probably the strongest, but I'd have to think about that. I was mostly surprised by Joseph Paul. First of all, two first names, which is not his fault. No, but don't they say you should never trust somebody with two first names. I've heard that before. They say that. Yeah. That's something I've heard. But the other part of it too is that he wasn't really speaking in full sentences. I understand speaking fast when you get nervous. He really, like really, he was really all over the map. And it was, it was very strange, but we will go back to the start of that breed. I want to read you, though, just so you can get, so you can get an idea of what is going on. Every time I come back to this group chat, there's 25 messages from people who are saying all these different people who are just now catching up in this group chat on Karen Reed. Basically, this woman Karen Reed is accused of killing her boyfriend by backing into him drunk, but people think it wasn't her and that it was possibly other police officers and they're doing this whole cover up. It's like, I'm about to say to these people unsubscribe. Take me off this chat. You're too far back. And I welcome you. I welcome you to this world, but you got some work to do. You've got some homework. It can't be done on your time. Extra credit. Leave me out of this. I wanted to mention, and we're going to get into Donald Trump and the inroads that he's making with black voters. It's something to behold. And I just saw earlier today that James Clyburn, Democrat James Clyburn from South Carolina. He's disparaging Trump and saying that, you know, if you believe these polls, he has a bridge he can sell you. And I want to play some sound from CNN about that. And I also want to play some sound from black business owners who are praising Donald Trump over the weekend. But before we get to any of that, I got one more thing to tell you here. Did you see that Hillary Clinton was at the Tony Awards? I saw that the Tonys were on yesterday. And sometimes on a rare occasion, if I see it on my TV guide, I'll tune in. After all, I am a thespian. I love the theater. I love to see some of the performances. But I just had a feeling like my spidey sense was tingling last night. I said, I don't want to watch this. I don't think I think it's going to get political. They brought out Hillary Clinton because she has this play. It's called Suffs. It's about the suffragettes. That's the name. I don't even like the name. If I didn't know what it was about, I still wouldn't like the name Suffs. When I think of Suff and then Hillary Clinton, you know, my mind goes to insufferable. That's what I first thought it was. But no, it's about the suffragettes. And it hasn't been doing that well as far as getting actual asses in the seats. But it's had rave reviews, Taylor. So the critics love it. Regular people don't want to go see it. But the critics think it's something else. The people that were paid to sit there loved it. Yes. They give it a 10 out of 10. So Hillary Clinton shows up to this thing as she always does in a calf tan. Doesn't matter where she is. She always looks like she's about to go on a yacht with Jack Bezos. I called it a bedazzled moo moo. I don't know who. Maybe it's because she used to get so much grief for the pantsuits. I'm not a fashion plate. You all know that. Okay. I don't claim to be. But I do think that calf tans or moo moo should be worn only on boats and only on rare occasions. Certainly not in an award show. Doesn't seem appropriate to me. But hey, that's just my two cents. Now, Hillary Clinton gets on stage and this is what she says. Cut one. I have stood on a lot of stages, but this is very special. And I know a little bit about how hard it is to make change. So I'm extremely proud of this original American musical. I don't understand the desire Hillary Clinton's desire to constantly remind people that she is a loser. She's the serpent who gods the gates of hell. To me, if you lose in such a big way and she's lost multiple times, but when she lost to Donald Trump, it was particularly pathetic because she didn't campaign in Wisconsin. She was so unlikable. She constantly talks about how horrible Trump is. Well, if he's, if he's horrible and you lost to him, what does it say about you? It was a colossal failure. And yet every time she shows up somewhere, she always opens with like, remember me. I lost to Donald Trump. We remember no one has forgotten because you talk about it all the time and saying, look at me. Listen to me. You read your acceptance speech that you never got to give. You go on podcast. You go to all these summits and you discuss it over and over and over again. I don't know why at the Tonys you need to open with like, ha ha, because I lost the election. We remember. You don't need to keep telling us about it. She also had this to say, can I get cut to? And of course it is about some American originals, the suffragists who fought so valiantly for so long to give women in our country the right to vote. It's almost impossible to think about what a challenge that was. But now it's an election year. And we need to be reminded about how important it is to vote. So please welcome the company of songs. Do you think he was going to sing or say he was going to go into song? I would have loved that. Hey, it's me. She actually probably wouldn't have a terrible belt. Like Ursula from. She's got that. She's got a little bit of our unfortunate souls. Yeah, she's got a distinct voice. It's very gravely and distinct. I just, this actually brings me to another topic because I was thinking about Joe Biden. He's doing this. He's doing these fundraisers and his fundraiser this weekend was like Jack Black and George Clooney and Julia Roberts. And it's a conversation that comes up every few years whenever there's an election and the celebrities come out and they make the cringy videos and they tell you to go vote how important it is and how your life is going to be miserable if you don't vote for the candidate they want. Without ever explaining, you know, why the candidate that they convinced you to vote for the last time has done such a crappy job thus far. But it brings me to my question, which is do celebrity endorsements make any difference? I really, I don't see the point of it, especially for the celebrity. Now, here's an example, Jack Black. I like Jack Black. I like some of the movies he's in. He always seems like a pretty affable character. He was campaigning for Biden this weekend. Am I, does that mean I'll never watch Jack Black again? No. But it definitely, like for me, it kind of makes me, ugh, you too, like you're lecturing, you're preaching to me as well. So for me, the celebrities have a lot to lose from these endorsements. I don't know how many hearts and minds are being changed. Like, is anyone sitting at home going, "I wasn't going to vote." But then Jack Black told me that he's voting for Joe Biden. And if Jack Black's voting for Joe Biden, then so am I. Does that happen? Are there people out there who are that, you know, willy-nilly that they're basing their vote over which celebrity? I will say this though. I change how I feel about celebrity endorsements depending on who they're endorsing. It's the same with polls. It's like, if a celebrity endorses Trump, I think, "Wow, good for him. That's brave. It takes some guts, man. Good for you voicing your opinion. And if a celebrity endorses Biden, I'm like, "Oh, shut up. Nobody cares. Go back to acting, De Niro." I just think either way, it just ends up taking your whole personality. Like, that just changes the trajectory of your career. Right, because the people who agree with your politics are, they'll like you and they'll say, "Oh, yeah, I agree." But the people who don't agree with your politics are never going to see you in the same way. But now you feel that you're so self-important. You have to say something about everything now, every time that there's an opportunity. And now the reporters that cover you are open to ask you questions about that. It's a good point. Once you open the door, it's like the rock. Now, the rock is saying that he's not going to endorse Joe Biden. And that's obvious because he endorsed him the last time. So that means that you're not voting for him. Or you're not supporting him, I think. If you're not willing to endorse him the second time around, it's like, "What's changed?" Or he learned his lesson about endorsing somebody. Yeah, it's just, and they keep saying, "Oh, if Taylor Swift were to endorse Joe Biden, that would make a difference." I'm like, "I don't know. What?" The people, I was talking to Matt Gagnon today on WGAN, and he said, "The people who are going to vote for Joe Biden are going to vote for him." And Taylor Swift telling her audience, "They're probably voting for him anyway." So where does it move the needle? I don't know. You know what is something I never thought I'd say? I can't wait for my next dentist appointment. I actually just had a dentist appointment very recently at Perfect Smiles. The team at Perfect Smiles is, they're just the best in the business. Right when you walk in, Melissa at the front desk is amazing. She's the sweetest person. She's going to take care of you. She's going to make sure you're all set. And then you get in there and you meet Lori, the dental hygienist, or you meet Dr. Houghton or Dr. Tamu. Everybody there is so passionate about what they do. And they are so committed to giving you exactly what you want. So whether that means a teeth cleaning and just, you know, a little tweak here and there, or if you want an entire smile transformation, they can make it happen. The state-of-the-art equipment and the dedicated experts at Perfect Smiles will deliver the smile of your dreams. And here's what I think is the most important part. There's plenty of people who are talented. There's plenty of people who are nice when it comes to dentistry. But what really makes Perfect Smiles unique is that they listen to you. They understand what you're worried about, what your goals are, what you're hoping to get out of the experience. And then they make it happen. Then they're going to create a plan around that and they're going to deliver the smile that you've always wanted. They're the best and it's really easy to put yourself last to keep bumping things off and saying, "I'll call next week or I'll call next month or I'll call next year." No, no, no, no. Just take the first step. All you have to do is call, talk to them. You'll understand why I'm such a big fan. And you don't want to trust just anyone with your smile. It's way too important. I've always felt that way. That's why I'm so happy I found the team at Perfect Smiles. And if you want to check them out, go to PerfectSmiles.com. They're located off of Route 3 in Nashua. It's very easy to get to. That's PerfectSmiles.com. PerfectSmiles.com. Change your smile. Change your life. We'll be right back. You sure got nice teeth, Jack Black? You're listening to The Grace Curly Show. This is The Grace Curly Show. Today's poll question is brought to you by J.J. Manning Auctioneers. Whether residential, commercial, or land, J.J. Manning can get your property sold now. To learn more, contact Charlie Gill at 800-521-0111 or go to J.J. Manning.com. With over 16,000 sales in satisfied clients, you can be the next one. Taylor, what is the poll question and what are the results thus far? Today's poll question, which you can vote in at gracecurlyshow.com, has the Karen Read trial made you lose faith in the Massachusetts State Police? Yes, no, or I never had any to begin with. I'm going to say, yes, I had a little. When they come up and yell at you at the airport, I always look at them, "Oh, okay, here comes a statey. I gotta listen to what they're saying. They're pounding on my windshield." Now it's kind of like I will look at them a little bit, and I gotta share some of all of them. Pounding on your windshield and saying those scratches came from a murder scene. Now I'm going to look at them and be like, "You're really yelling at me? Your reputation's already taking a hit. Be a little bit nicer. I won't actually say that, but I'll think it. I'll think it really loud." Approach my car with more humility, please. Yes. Where's your humility after everything you've gone through? I'm going to say, yes, I have lost a little bit of faith. 44% say they've lost faith. 5% say no, they're still holding strong. 50% say they never had any to begin with. Did you hear who is running for Jerry Nadler's congressional seat in 2026? It's a ways away, but I just want you to be prepared. Hit me. Michael Cohen is claiming that he's going to run for Jerry Nadler's congressional seat. I thought for sure. His bid turns out as successful as Michael Avenatti's for president. This is a detailed interview with New York Magazine. This is what he said about Jerry Nadler. He said, "We thank him for his service, but it's enough already." In response, Nadler referred to Cohen as a con man. In his interview, the former Trump attorney also claimed that both he and Trump only made eye contact once during the trial and that Trump frequently had his eyes closed. He said, "It's crazy. I would say for my very first day, I'm not joking now. 90% of the time that I was on the stand, he was sleeping." Well, I shouldn't say sleeping. He was with his eyes closed and slumped over. Here's the crazy bleep. The jury can see him. They are watching him. Now, if I was a juror and the defendant is so disinterested in his own case, I'd be upset. This is a man who admitted on the stand to stealing thousands of dollars from a vindictive billionaire. You don't think he wouldn't be afraid to steal money from the taxpayers? Yeah, I don't know how much of a shot he has, especially because Jerry Nadler has been around for 6,000 years in Congress. I think he's got it pretty much down pat. But it looks like Michael Cohen maybe knows that the TikTok fundraising off of this Trump trial might be coming to an end soon. So he's making a plan B for himself. Now, the other story that I wanted to add in here while we have a few seconds is a Texas political candidate, this is from Red State, has been arrested on charges of sending fake hate messages to himself on social media. Terrell Patel, the Democratic candidate, was arrested by Texas Rangers. He was impersonating a supporter of the person running against him and sending himself derogatory comments. Sad. Truly pathetic. When you can't even get real hate nowadays, we'll be right back. (upbeat music)