The Howie Carr Radio Network
BREAKING: Karen Read Jurors Drop Major News to Defense Attorneys | 7.8.24 - The Grace Curley Show Hour 1
This podcast is brought to you by the Eden Pure Thunderstorm 3-Pack Special. Everyone loves the Thunderstorm. It doesn't take up any floor space, there are no filters to replace, and it's only one-third the cost of those bulky air purifiers. Take advantage of the Thunderstorm 3-Pack Special at edenpuredeals.com and use promo code Howey3. [MUSIC] Live from the Aviva Trataria Studio, it's The Grace Curly Show. We gotta 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. Well, you don't want too much Grace. Here's the millennial with the mic. Grace Curly, Grace Curly, Grace Curly, Grace Curly. Let's bring in the host of The Grace Curly Show, Grace Curly. You either have Grace or you, don't. Especially Grace, Grace, stand up. Grace Curly. [MUSIC] It's true. I'm back. Welcome to The Grace Curly Show. I am so excited to be here. I've had a week off to relax, decompress, and now I'm ready to go. I've had a lot of coffee today, Taylor, so everyone should get ready. There's tons to get to, there's tons of news. There's an update on the Karen Read trial, on the Karen Read case, and we're going to talk about it in just a minute. But before I get into any of that, I really want to start by giving a huge shout out. And thank you to some of our favorite sponsors and some of our friends who really made my trip to the Cape this week, a 10 out of 10. First of all, I want to start with Dave Henshey from the Nossa Beach Inn. I was able to stay in the sunrise cottage overlooking the ocean with my family. It was stellar. Everybody there, Dave, Jeff, Randy, the entire crew at NBI, they really go above and beyond. Pastries in the morning, coffee, walking trails. The beach is right on your front lawn. The fire pits, we grilled up some burgers and dogs. I had heard so much about the Nossa Beach Inn from Howie and from Jared, but it was even better than I had imagined, and that's because of the crew at the Nossa Beach Inn. So thank you, thank you, thank you to Dave Henshey for just a trip of a lifetime. And of course, I also want to thank Todd Berry from Moby Dix, rolled out the red carpet for us. I brought my whole family. It's such a great spot. It's quintessential Cape Cod. It's really great for families. It's a really fun time. And the meal was out of this world. We had well fleet oysters, fresh lobster, key lime pie, lobster bis, clam chowder, hot fudge sundaes. We were stuffed to the gills by the time we left. And everything is fresh, best quality, cooked to perfection, the service is outstanding. And they just have a wonderful group of people working there. And we met so many nice people, so many people who had actually bought gift cards from my show or from Howie show who I got to chat with. So just a wonderful time. So if you get a chance to check out either the Nossa Beach Inn or Moby Dix, I promise you you will not regret it has my stamp of approval. And it's also both places are just run by excellent people. And I would be remiss if I didn't mention big shout out and thank you to Taylor Cormier and Emma Foley and Matt for holding down the fort while I was gone, keeping the show running. I was able to listen to some of the podcasts on my way back stuck in Cape traffic yesterday. You did an excellent job. And boy, did you have plenty of material. That was my gift to you, Taylor. I just had a feeling. When I was charting out this vacation a long time ago, I thought I'm going to take off the week of July 4th because that is always a really hot news week. That's always a busy time of year. I'm kidding. Of course. I thought it was going to be dead. I thought there would be nothing to talk about. And you would have to. No, you picked a great week. You usually do. You picked great week. I do. But when you say great, you mean great for you. Oh, exactly. No, this is a selfish business. Yes. Every time you take a vacation, something or something's big happen. But then I think to myself, that's life. Like I can't not. I can't expect or try to pick my vacation. No, you can't come back. Like, oh, this is going on. I got to get back into the office now. No, because there's always going to be something. But you're right. It was even so. It was a crazy, crazy news week. And I actually, I was going to start today with the media's turnaround, you know, incredible shift on how they're now viewing Joe Biden. And I will get to that. But this is breaking news. And this is from NBC Boston. It says, after mistrial, Karen Reid moved to dismiss two charges, including murder. So her lawyers wrote in Monday, in today's filing, her lawyers wrote that they began receiving unsolicited communications from three of the 12 deliberating jurors, indicating in no uncertain terms that the jury had a firm 12 to zero agreement that misread was found not guilty of two of the three charges against her, including the charge of murder in the second degree. Now, when I was tuning into the grease curly show during my time off, I caught Taylor talking about the breaking news that the jury was, you know, hopelessly deadlock that they said, listen, we can't come to a conclusion here. It's going to be a mistrial to hung jury. And I remember listening, Taylor, and you were trying to figure out what the numbers probably looked like. Like, were we dealing with most people? Was the majority of where the majority of the jurors on the side of there's no way she did this? Or what kind of dynamic are we looking at? And at the time when I was tuning in, you had no idea. You said, I'm guessing in the next couple of days, we'll find out more about how this was broken up, like how many people were on the fence? How many people were on the fence thinking she didn't do it versus she did? Now we find out that on the two major charges here, according to these jurors, they were all in agreement. Isn't that something that we should have known? Isn't that an important detail here? If I'm Karen Reed, I'm going, wait a second. So on the two things that everyone is focused on, whether or not I killed him, what this entire trial was based around, they were in agreement. I even think, Taylor, that during the part of this conversation where, you know, we heard from Judge Canoni and she's talking to the jurors and she's giving them these instructions, that that would have been part of the conversation. If you come to a unanimous decision on one count or another count, let us know that. Like there's no way Judge Canoni didn't know that there was only one charge that they were split on. So Alan Jackson brought this up in, I guess, a motion to the judge. And he was asking about the jury sheet that they had. Yeah, the form. And whether or not they could put a not guilty checkbox under the subsequent charges. And there was that back and forth. She said, no, this is how it's done in Massachusetts. Mr. Jackson. This is how it's always been done. I'm sorry, Ms. Jackson. I'm for real. I am for real. And so there was some confusion about that. I think eventually she acquiesced, but seems like there could have been some more detail in this, like you don't have to find them guilty of this one in order to find them. You know, well, okay, can I, can I add something in here? No, I'm still in charge of this show. You're on vacation. Sir, sir. Can you go back on the Cape, please? It took him 13 minutes and he sick of me. Can you imagine? No, but you know what I keep thinking of is when, and I know it's a different case. I know it's a different set of rules. I know it's a different person, but Trump in the New York City Hush money trial, remember how many roads that judge gave the jurors as far as different ways you could find Trump guilty if you wanted to? Someone described it. I think it was that maybe John Daniel Davidson just remember, he doesn't have to be guilty in order for him to be guilty. If you believe it, you can find a way. But someone described it. I think it was John Daniel Davidson and the Federalist as a, you know, build your own adventure kind of verdict, like whichever way you can find him. If you find him guilty this way and you find him guilty this way, we don't really care. So it can be three, three, three or, you know, it can be, I'm sorry, no, four, four, four. And that's, that's coming to my mind right now because this is even simpler. It's like, okay, so you all were in agreement on one and two. Let's hash out three, go back and figure out three because am I crazy here? Well, yes, the answer to that is yes, but is the charge that they were not able to come to an agreement on the drunk driving charge? I've not been updated on this. So whatever you have, that's, that's the truth. If that is what is holding this all up and everyone here knows that I am extremely passionate passionately anti-drowned driving, but if that's what they were focused on, well, number one as it does seem like everybody in can at that point, everybody involved in this thing was driving drunk. I think the most important charge in this point is manslaughter and whether or not you think she killed him. And if you guys came to a decision on those two things, why is that the one part of this story we didn't hear about? We heard enough about how hopelessly deadlocked this and that, the number, we'll come back to it. We'll discuss it. In the one o'clock and he is, he's been tweeting about this all morning. He's kind of in shock about this latest thing. This is something he put out today. He said, and tell me again about how the jury was tend to, to convict on all counts, which of course makes no sense. Always wait for real news such as sworn affidavits in legal filings and he said never a good thing for the prosecution when at least three of 12 jurors are all but volunteering to be witnesses in post trial hearing. I would agree. And then it brings part of this conversation to will the common wealth. They're saying they're going to. They're saying they're going to bring this to trial again. I cannot fathom why they would want to hear from Michael Proctor ever again, like as far as I'm concerned, I was hit a pre. I would say I had a, a biased opinion on the state police just cause of, you know, I worked for how he car and I've read a lot about the overtime scandals and all that. But I wasn't down on the state police. Now hearing from Michael Proctor over the last couple of weeks, it has changed my opinion. I know that he doesn't represent all the, all the stateies. I get that. But the damage that this guy did with the balloon knot and the looking for nudes and all that stuff to put that on trial again to make people sit through that again. I can't understand it. I think my thinking if I were Michael Morrissey and I've got a few more pounds to gain if I were to be Michael Morrissey, I drop the second degree murder charge and just go straight for the manslaughter. Therefore, you don't have to bring in this entire narrative of Karen Reed had this vendetta against John O'Keefe and you just have to prove she was there. You just have to prove she was drunk and you just have to prove that she hit him with the car. That last part it's hard though. Listen, but the other stuff was so much more damaging to this whole trial. You can obliterate all of that. Well, that was the part I never really understood. Wait, can you pop in here for one sec, Howie? Come on the air. We're going to get him on here for one second. I have a question for Howie about this because you guys know I'm not a legal beagle and I'm coming fresh off a week of vacation, so I'm a little rusty here. Howie, they are saying we just got the documents, by the way, we just got the documents. We'll have them after the break. Okay. So what is the, what is the charge that was holding this whole thing up? It was a, it was the vehicular homicide charge. They got rid of two of the other ones and then, but they, they, they were apparently they said they were nine to three to convict her of involuntary manslaughter or whatever. It doesn't make any sense to, to even be convicted on that one, but I haven't even looked at the documents. I'm just having them. Okay. Because I was saying I wasn't sure. I thought it was, I thought it might be the drunk driving, but it's not the drunk driving thing. That's, that's, that it was the involuntary manslaughter or whatever they call it. But don't you think it's strange and I, I know comparing it to Trump and the, the hush money trial, which was such a kangaroo court and I'm sorry to all the kangaroos out there. I don't mean to insult you. But don't you think that when you look at that, where the judge is saying, Hey, there's all these different roads, you can get to guilty. And then you look at this and nothing could be done here to move this along. If the judge knew that on two of the major charges, they were all in agreement. Like it seems like that point someone can intervene and say, the big, the big charge was murder. You know, that's what was going to send her away for a long time. I mean, even involuntary manslaughter. I mean, look at that jail bird, Chris Matthews, Chris Chris Matthews, Chris Albert. He, I mean, he only got six months for running away from a, from a deadly accident. And there was no question. He hit somebody. This is a huge, huge bit of news and we're going to talk to Mark better about it because he's kind of in shock too. It seems like everything that until you're right, that's a screenshots. They've got these screenshots of what the jurors said. It's right in the documents. Well, we have to read the documents during the break. Okay. Once again, the timing of this, no one in the Karen Reed trial is timing this for the Grace Curly show. We will read this. We'll give you more information. 844-542 42 will take your calls as well. This is the Grace Curly show. You're listening to the Grace Curly show. This is the Grace Curly show. Welcome back everyone to the Grace Curly show. I'm going to do the poll question and then I'm going to read you some of the important text messages when it comes to this filing. 844-542-42 Eastern security is having their annual warehouse sales starting July 11th through July 14th featuring the largest savings of the year. Mention Grace and receive an additional 5% off those savings. Visit their site at easternsecuritysafe.com. That's easternsecuritysafe.com. Taylor, Quermiers on the board, Taylor, what is the poll question and what are the results thus far? This poll question which you can vote in at gracecurlyshow.com is when will Joe Biden drop out of the race within the week, within the month, or never, he's going to be the candidate? I'm going to say, oh and it really does depend on this week because things are going off the rails fast for Joe Biden. They've been trying so hard to pump him up and to carry water for him and to push him over the finish line and it's amazing how when all of these people back away and kind of just let him go on his own. He's in real trouble. Nobody's pulling the puppet strings or trying to make him look good and you can see that. Everything's coming apart of the seams. I'm still going to say though, I'm still going to say mostly because of the money situation and the Kamala Harris problem. I'll never forget I read an article that was titled, "How do you solve a problem like Kamala Harris?" And that is the million dollar question. So I'm going to say he's not going to drop out. Yeah, he's, he's our very own Effie and I'm going to say he's not going to drop out. He's going to be the candidate and it makes me happy Taylor because all of the people who have lied to us for four years and who've said how wonderful and socratic and sharp he is, guess what? You brought him to the dance. You got a boogie with him. You've got, you've got to get some punch and just get on that dance floor and deal with it. He's your problem now. 68% say never. He's going to be the candidate. 24% say he'll drop out within the month. 8% say within the week. Yeah. Now they're talking about, should he even finish off his term? Like that's how that's how much of a drastic 180 these people have done. They've gone from telling us that he could cure cancer and split the atom one day. So on Tuesday he's splitting the atom on Wednesday. We're not so sure he should even finish out the term. Huh? How does that happen? Let me say this way. The reason I've been on the road so much all over the country and while Trump is riding around in the golf cart, filling out his golf cart before golf cart before he even hits the ball. He's filling up his golf cart before he even hits the ball. Hmm. Okay. Like that later, but yeah, the drastic spin these people have done is pretty amazing. Yeah. I'm going to say he's still going to be the candidate and we'll talk more about that and the logistics that go into trying to switch candidates this late in the race. But I want to talk a little bit about what's happening here with Karen Reed. There's three things to keep in mind. Okay. There's informants see, jersey and intermediary see, try to keep those straight. On July 3rd, 2024, informants see, now this is Karen Reed's lawyers, informants see, contacted me to say that he/she personally knows juror see as they used to work together. Informancy and juror see also have a mutual friend that's going to be intermediary see who is a current coworker and a friend of juror see. So those are the three, I know it's kind of confusing, but those are the three people one time. So far makes more sense than the prosecution's entire case. Yeah, once we read the text messages that go on, you don't even have to really understand who the, you really only have to know juror see and the rest of it is people who know juror see and are letting the lawyers know what they've heard from juror see, but what juror see. Does this involve any ring cameras or kisses outside? No, but I think you're hot. I think you're hot. No, but Higgins does get brought up by juror see. We're going to talk about this. You know what it sounds like? It sounds like a children's book, juror see says that they saw something that they can't unsee. How will it end up? How could it be? We'll read you these text messages when we get back bombshell news from the Caron Marie case, you do not want to miss it. Live from the Aviva Trathria studio. All right. So, you Nettian Jackson, the two all star lawyers that made up Caron Reed's defense, they were both reached out to about this case by jurors and or by, you know, connections to jurors, and they have two affidavits from both of them, one each, and it says here on July 3rd, 2024, inform and see contacted me. Now this is United's motion. He says on July 3rd, 2024, inform and see contacted me to say that he slash she, let's for the sake of this say he, okay, because it's, we don't know, but let's just say he, I can't do the, they them, it's like, you know, tell you get this, when you go in and you're having a baby, they usually, they'll usually say to you, like, we're just going to say he even if you don't know that what the baby is, because we just can't do this whole like, he she, right, you got to pick one, pick one, pick a lane. So I'm going he on July 3rd, 2024, inform and see contacted me to say that he personally knows you, he personally knows Jersey as they work together, inform and see in Jersey also have a mutual friend, who now we're going to refer to as intermediaries, you need a whiteboard behind you. This is reminding me of those questions used to get in school, like the math questions, which I was terrible at, like the logic, oh, if you could drive 5,000 miles. All right, so here's some of the text, I'm just going to read you a couple. This is from the intermediary. The whole jury felt very intimidated by Higgins present at the end. I think you're hot. I think Higgins was because it says spelling error here. I think they meant to say the Alberts because as people probably recall, Colin Albert, his dad, Brian Albert, and his mom, right, Jen McCabe, is Jen, no, wait, no, not Jen McCabe. Jen McCabe was there, but is she Colin Albert's mom? I get no. Okay. Jen McCabe, Brian Albert, and Colin Albert were all there the last day. So I think when this person said, when intermediaries, he said Higgins, they meant the Alberts. Now, informants, he says, interesting, if it was no consideration for murder, too, shouldn't she have been acquitted? She being Karen Reed on that count? Yeah, she's a babe. We had fall river accident, though. And hung on the remaining charges goes back to the jury verdict slip that was all confusing. Intermediaries, he says, she should have been acquitted. I agree. Yes, the remaining charges were what they were hung on. And the instruction paper was very confusing. Jameson and Ginger. Not according to Judge Kannoni, she says, is how he always doing Mr. Jackson. I was tired and I needed to think about it. It's always how we do it. Nothing to worry about. And then she did acquiesce. She did change it. There were some sort of change that Jackson was okay with. I don't think he was thrilled with it, but he said, that's fine. Everyone is happy at the hillside. Informancy says, what a great experience for him, her. Then they start talking about what it wouldn't experience it was for the jury. Informancy says that's the way it should be. If they all agreed on no for murder two, here's an important part, ready? If they all agreed on no for murder two, they should make that clear to the DA and the court. It's basically a case of double jeopardy if she is retried on that charge. I do think, and I don't know if this is how it's always done in Massachusetts, because I never underestimate the craziness of the Commonwealth. If I'm Karen Reid and I find out that on two of the major charges, they were all in agreement that I didn't do it, I would say, can't we count those for this round? Can we get those on the record, please? Can we circle back on the other stuff, maybe? It's a weird thing, and then here is, this is from the defending Karen Reid's motion to dismiss. The other two are affidavits, this is the motion to dismiss. This is the important part, which how he highlighted for me. The defense respectfully submits that the jury's unanimous agreement precludes reprosecution of misread on counts one and three and mandates dismissal of those charges. Now, to the extent the court believes further factual development is required, the defense respectfully requests that a post verdict inquiry be held on the issue and that the court authorized defense counsel to seek additional proof from the jurors regarding they're having unanimously acquitted the defendant of two of the three charges against her prior to indicating to the court that they could not reach a verdict on the third charge alone. There's a few questions I have, and this is, I'm throwing this out, we're going to ask Mark Betterow about it. He's an attorney, he's been on the show many times over the past couple of months talking about the Karen Reid case with us, but I'm also going to ask this to the callers. I don't understand the strategy from the Commonwealth. They've obviously been embarrassed beyond anyone's wildest imagination. This has been such an important display of corruption and filth and bad judgment and immaturity and everything out of the sun. To me, they would have wanted this situation to come to light as well because yes, it's embarrassing that do you put together your best case and that you couldn't, you couldn't get a conviction and she gets off not guilty. That's embarrassing, I guess, for Morrissey, but is it any more embarrassing than having to redo this entire thing and bring out all of these losers to talk about how much they were drinking and how they were looking for nude photos and calling people to see word and talking about balloon knots? Aren't you embarrassed? Don't you look at this and say, even if, okay, let's just play this game, Judge Kenone says, hey, wait, I got to put on my Kenone voice. I was tired and I needed to think about it. The jurors have come to a unanimous decision on two of the charges. They cannot come to a decision on the third charge. We will be, uh, we will be circling back to that charge later on. I don't know all the legal terms, but let's say the jurors say not guilty on two of the main ones. If I'm Morrissey, I'm thinking to myself, thank God this thing's coming to an end because Morrissey can always say, and you know he would do this, Taylor. We know this from the video he put out about Turtle Boy. He can always spin it and say, we did all we could. It's unfortunate that because of online conspiracy theories and, you know, evil little bloggers in the blogosphere and the interwebs that we couldn't get the conviction we wanted. Okay, but that it is what it is. You and Howie with the meatball and the, and the body shaming. It's not here. Not here. Not here. This is a safe space. We don't want to body shame people, but wouldn't you think that would be the best case scenario for him is just to say, we tried, we tried, and by the way, because I understand the, the other argument, which is people saying, John O'Keefe's dead and there's so much craziness and it's like a soap opera with this case that it's easy. And I try to avoid coming off like I'm, I'm not taking it seriously because I understand that O'Keefe's lost their son and that's horrible. And that part of it makes people go, they have to retry it. They have to get to the bottom of this, but they're not going to, they're not going to, at least by trying to convict someone who you can't even prove hit some hit John O'Keefe with her car. I don't understand how going through this circus brings anyone more closure, brings anyone more answers, hearing from Michael Proctor go through his text yet again. And I would think that Morrissey and the other people in the Commonwealth, the other people at the DA's office who are trying this thing would look at this verdict and say, just give us, you know, even if it's not what we want, just don't make us do this again. Don't make us show up to this. I wonder if there's any recourse for the trial now that this has come out, that the jurors have made their decision. Like this isn't just a mistrial. This is gross incompetence. This is a miscarriage of justice. They came to a verdict. And that wasn't reported to the judge or the judge knew and she didn't. That's the question. That's the way you just, that what you just said right there. She said at the, at the end of the trial, she said, jurors, I want to meet with you separately in my chambers or in the jury room. So she didn't meet with them afterwards. So what was said during that meeting? If I, if I was a betting woman, which I'm not, but if I was, I would say she knew. I'm saying, I think she knew. And she told them not to talk about the case afterwards, because this is the same lady who, and Mark better. I thought that was weird. And that, and that's something I'm also going to ask him about. This is the same judge who said, don't take a straw poll right away. Like it always seemed like the advice she was giving to these jurors, the instructions were pretty unprecedented. And we have had people in Massachusetts call up and say, I sat in a jury, they did ask us not to take a straw poll. There's people who can be intimidated by that or feel like they, they won't share their opinion, whatever. Defense attorneys put that in so they can build more hours. Yeah. But I just, I don't understand why, if she knew this, I don't, I, there's no situation where I don't think she knew this information. She's talking to them on the side going, what's the, that would be my question. If I'm the judge and she's tired, she didn't want to be there. She was getting antsy for her vacation. I would look at these people and I would say, what's the hold up? Walk me through where the problem is. And then they say, well, we're, we're all on board for one and two. We're just kind of held up on three. All right. Is it the verdict form? Is it, you know, what do you, who's, who's, and just figure it out? And I think they can do that. I don't know a lot about the, the court systems, but based off how I've seen these Trump trials go down, they can kind of do whatever they want. They, they can, the, the judges have a lot of leeway with telling people, you do this, you do that, you figure this out. So I think she knew. And I think you're right. I think she was hoping that these jurors wouldn't tell anyone, which is another dumb move, because once you get out of there, you've been, you've been a hold up for however many weeks, like nine weeks, and it's the biggest case going and you could finally turn on the news and you see all these people who are livid that how could they, I was listening to you, Taylor, when I was on my way down to the Cape and you're going, this is an outrage. Yeah. This should have been not guilty. There's no question. And I thought, who is this man is doing such an excellent job. He's so fired up, but I'm sure some of the jurors, Taylor, to that point, are just getting back to the real world. They're hearing all this stuff and they're going, whoa, everyone's so mad at us, but we did say not guilty, like we did come to a conclusion on two of them. That just wasn't reported. So if she was banking on these jurors, not, not mentioning it to anyone, that didn't do the case. So it was second degree murder, they acquitted her of and what else? It says here that voted to acquit her of, I should say, no consideration for murder to manslaughter started polling at six, six, then ended deadlock at four. No, eight. Yes. He, she was very consistent. So this is the intermediary talking about the juror was very consistent in the fact that they could only consider things that were admitted into evidence. Ultimately, he voted no because the cause of death was twofold of hypothermia and head injury of which he was convinced the vehicle did not cause a role still crazy. To me, murder to and manslaughter, in this case, though they're different punishments and different degrees of, of, of, of death, still, if you vote no on murder to, you got to vote no on manslaughter. You can't prove that she killed him with intent. You can't prove that she killed him at all. That's the part of this that I'm confused by as well because the key words are reasonable doubt. They were so much, like you don't have to prove, you don't have to, you don't have to say, well, there's no way she did it because I, I know for a fact that so and so did it, like the third party culprit, you don't have to prove that. They don't have to prove that. The whole point of it is not to try to convince you that the Alberts did something or Brian Higgins did something. It's to show you that there's a way, there's a road, there's a possibility that something else could have occurred and in this case, it's like the, the tentacles of all the different ways things could have gone down is so far reaching. I don't know how you look at it and don't think that maybe there's a way that there's some seed of doubt in your mind going, there's a possibility she didn't do this. All possibilities eight, four, four, five hundred, forty two, forty two. We'll come back. I didn't even plan on talking about this, but every day something new breaks with this case and it will be interesting to see how Morrissey handles this, how Judge Canoni handles it. And maybe this is just the way things are done in Massachusetts. Maybe that's what we're going to find out. We'll be right back. Your cousin from Boston. Hi, it's Toby from Cape Gun Works. I'm taking all your firearm and self-defense questions every Tuesday. Join Grace and me for 2 a Tuesday, Tuesdays at 2 p.m. This is the Grace Curly Show. When you think about how much everybody's been talking about, the Karen Readtrow and how you can't really go to a restaurant in Massachusetts without overhearing someone bring up one of those keywords, you know, Chloe, tail light, Karen, really there. There's so many things that you turn, then you turn around, you go, you're talking about the, you talking about the case? Yeah. Okay. Auntie Bev is eating next to me. It's really a, it's, it's really the, it's like water bubbler conversation and everyone is doing it. And so you have to imagine that these jurors who have been told not to go on their phones, not to go on their computers, not to watch TV, not to, you know, that when they get out of there, they are itching to talk to people. And once you start to figure out that everyone's livid, and again, I, I said this earlier, I said, you shouldn't make your decision based off the fact that the court of public opinion is not going to like what you're going to do. But if you made the decision and then everyone's up in arms, you turn on your radio and Taylor Cormier screaming at you through the, through the speakers and how could you come to this stupid decision and you're sitting in your car going, but wait a second, we, we didn't come to that decision. We actually came to two pretty same decisions. Yeah. Why didn't you call the show? They should have called their two busy calling you Nettie and Jackson, Paul, you're up next on the Grace Curly show. Go ahead, Paul. Hi. Good afternoon. You know, you really have to fault the jury foreman in the judge somewhat on this problem. I don't see why the jury foreman didn't send the judge a note and say we're in unanimous agreement on two of the three we're deadlocked on one and why she didn't bring the tool forward that they were in total agreement on forward and let them appeal the third one that they were deadlocked on. But Paul, don't you think there's a possibility that the jury foreperson did tell the judge hey, where unanimous on two of them and we're kind of hung up on one? Don't you think it's possible that the judge knew that and didn't really act accordingly? Well, I've been listening to your show and watching this on my tablet daily. And there was no mention of that I heard about it seemed to be like a package deal with deadlocked. I didn't hear anything about two out of three or one out of three. If that happened, then I take those comments back. No, no, Paul, you're on the money about that. I didn't hear anything either when we were watching the back and forth between, you know, hey, we're hopelessly deadlocked and then the judge, you know, sent in the back and all this. But what I think the key part of this, which Taylor did bring up in the last segment, which is why he filled in for me for the week, he did a great job. Maybe a little too good. Maybe I don't like it anymore. He's coming up with too many good points. But one thing Taylor said was there were a lot of sidebars and the judge, right? The judge can only did say, let me talk to the jurors and did she talk to them individually tailored? Did she talk to them as a group? I think as a group after the trial. So we don't know what was said behind closed doors. Do you want to hear the note? Yeah. All right. So Jaz, I am in receipt of your note. Judge canoni, despite our commitment to the duty entrusted to us, we find ourselves deeply divided by fundamental differences in our opinions and state of mind. The divergence in our views are not rooted in a lack of understanding or effort, but deeply held convictions that each of us carry ultimately leading to a point where consensus is unattainable. We recognize the weight of this admission and the implications it holds. No, Paul's right. You could have been. Yeah. You really did not tell her some important details in that. That could have been a great time to say, it did feel like something where maybe they got, they got a, you know, how you can fill out like a resume or something and it will give you a template first. JPT. It feels like something that was pre-written, not saying it was, just saying that's what it feels like. We'll talk to Mark Beterow in the next segment. We've got a lot of questions for him and you can text yours into 617-213-1066. We'll be right back. (upbeat music)