The Howie Carr Radio Network
Attorney Mark Bederow on Karen Read Trial and Verdict Predictions | 6.25.24 - The Grace Curley Show Hour 3
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. But get a bring in a new voice, a young voice, a rising voice, Grace Curly. You can read Grace's work in the Boston Herald. Dr. Mark D. Stefano was back, along with his chief of surgery. Dr. Thomas Brand. Together, they form Northeast hair restoration and have pioneered a new groundbreaking procedure called Precision Folecular Extraction, or PFE. The PFE is becoming the gold standard in the most sought-after hair transplant procedure in all of New England. Imagine, no shaving, no scalpels, no stitches, no linear scarring while preserving the natural appearance. Live from the Aviva Trattaria Studio, it's the Grace Curly Show. But get a 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. Welcome back, everyone, to the Grace Curly Show. We're not going to waste any time here because our next guest is running tight on time attorney Mark Beterow joins the show now. We thank you very much, Mark Beterow is a New York City criminal defense attorney. He's been following the Caron Read trial very closely. So first up, Mark, give us your reactions to today's summations. What did you make of this? What did you make of Jackson's performance versus Lally? I know yesterday you said there was a huge difference here in talent. Did that present itself today? Absolutely, Jackson, excuse me, seemed to be very organized, very thematic. His tone in addressing jurors was riveting. He had a very clear theme about they want you to look away and went back to it saying don't look away, talking about all the various problems in the DA's case. I feel like he was given a big favor by the courtroom being packed with Ryan Albert, Jennifer McCabe and Colin Albert. I think that was a terrible misjudgment by somebody to allow him to criticize them as they're sitting right there. I think that's just terrible optics for the DA. And I think his argument was compelling. On the other hand, Lally's was, I mean, he got shut down by the judge, which is what does that tell you? He just rambles on to the point where she kept telling him and eventually just told him to sit down. But it started out actually not too bad, I thought, where he focused on, I guess, what his perceived strength of the case was these apparent admissions by Cameron Reed, although I think he clearly overstated that. But it clearly morphed into more gobbledygook incoherent, no real theory. He didn't address what the defense was. So he's talking about timelines of phone records in the grand scheme of things. He didn't address the elephant in the room, which are the ARCA witnesses. I mean, they can't win without that. And he just gave it very short shrift and said, well, maybe John O'Keefe's arm was tucked in and then that's what happened. So he, in essence, credited Trooper Paul and just dismissed the ARCA witnesses, which is prosecutorial suicide. I mean, I don't know how you expect to win when you don't even really address that. I also, I think he was, you know, misstated the evidence in certain part, which if the jury is aware of that given all the other stuff, with the inverted video and other things, I think might be a concern. He said that there was no DNA other than John O'Keefe on his close. That's entirely not true. The evidence was that John O'Keefe's blood was all over his pants and there were two other, I believe, male-profile DNAs in a mixture with that. Not enough to test a particular person, but the fact that there were three individuals in the same area of John O'Keefe's blood is pretty important. So I think his was just not very good. >> Yeah, and you know what stuck out to me, Mark, is I think if you had given nearly two hours, I think he would have really struggled to fill those two hours. I mean, he was quoting John Adams by the end of his one-hour closing argument. But on the flip side, I think if you gave Jackson five hours, he would still have plenty of examples of so much of the craziness of this case. And really, when he was going over it for the jurors, there were parts of it where I said, oh my God, I forgot about that part. I forgot about that part, I forgot that. And so just that difference where one guy is kind of trying to run out the clock and the other guy is trying to fit in all of the times where the police or the people involved went wrong, that has to say something to the jurors as well. >> I think it does, and also just a little thing. He spent all the time on these phone calls by Karen Reed, which really don't establish anything other than she was upset and kind of despondent about where her boyfriend was, and I thought Jackson handled that well. How anger turned into more anger because he's not coming out and how it eventually turns into concern. I thought he handled that real well. And loudly, in not addressing the key components that destroyed his case, he still found time to talk about a witness eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. And I mean, this is just silly. The other thing I thought he did very poorly was his attempted apology for proctor. If you're going to do that, I understand why you want to do that. You have to be honest with Jerry, but you should look at Jerry in the eye. And what he was doing, he was reading literally and flipping the page while he was purportedly saying how offensive proctor's behavior was. I mean, just a complete disconnect in terms of looking at the jurors and saying it's okay that we all agree that proctor is just a terrible person unprofessional, but he doesn't connect just on a prosecutor to juror level. And part of the skill of being a trial lawyer is trying to lead the jury to where you want them to go and charisma helps. And you can see where the charisma was today. It was in the first dimension, not the second one. >> Yeah, I had mentioned this earlier to the listeners. I said a lot of times with these trials as you get older and you start to watch them. And you've known this for quite some time, but for people who aren't lawyers, you realize that a lot of the things you see on TV and in the movies, that it's not how it actually plays out in court. There's a lot of side bars. There's a lot of dead air. There's a lot of waiting time with the fan. But during the closing arguments, it does feel like a movie. And I thought Alan Jackson did a really great job of using that to his advantage and making it kind of splicing it up, making it quick, making it so he captured your attention and that's where Lally really struggled. >> Yeah, and I think what you basically saw was from Lally's perspective, a essential regurgitation of his opening statement. I mean, the worst thing you can do is tell a jury in a murder case like this with the problems that he has. Witness this said this, witness this said that. You have testimony from this person. You have, I mean, it just feels almost like he's mailing it in. There's just no ums there. There's nothing to grab the attention of the jury and explain to them and have a conversation with them. He was lecturing them where Jackson was having a conversation with the jury, leading them to where he wanted them to go. And Lally's just throwing up what his interpretation of the evidence is against the wall and hoping that they're going to absorb it. And I mean, if you said what was the theme of Lally's closing, I would say I don't know, I don't remember already. But if you said about Jackson's, I could tell you it was don't look away. And this is how you frame someone, the same way with the opening statement. What was their theme? Karen Reed was framed, you remember that kind of thing. What do you remember about Lally's opening? Basically the same as his summation. >> Yeah, and there was a build to Alan Jackson's. There was a progression that made sense to me. I didn't really understand the build of Lally's if there was any. The other thing I want to ask you before we let you go, attorney Mark Beterow. How strange did you find the moment? A lot of people are, you know, seizing on this. Where Lally brought up Karen Reed not taking her shoes off when she was at John O'Keebs home and implying that that means that she knew he was dead. So she didn't care that that would bother him, that she had her shoes on in the house, because he wasn't coming home. Obviously that would be objected to if it was during the actual testimony. But because it's the closing arguments, you get more leeway with that stuff. But even so, is that something that the jurors are going to be able to swallow this late on in the trial? >> No, and it's also the kind of thing where the concern I would have is that a juror would say, are you kidding me, he's telling us about this theory that because she didn't take her shoes off, she must have known this, that, and probably did it. But I'm not addressing, again, the elephant in the room, which are these incredible experts who just entirely dismantled his case yesterday. And he's talking about, well, Karen Reed didn't take her shoes off, that's important. I mean, this is bizarre a world on how to use the limited time you have in front of a jury that the judge gave them and he wasted it, I think, on side shows and just incoherent regurgitating facts that he thinks are important. But the jury is going to want to hear the big stuff. The jury wants to know, how are you showing me that this was a car accident? And his summation essentially just assumed it was a car accident or implied it was without really explaining it other than crediting certain things that some of the state police said, which were entirely exposed, as dare I say, it's scientifically impossible by credentialed experts. So I don't know what Lally was doing or how he thinks that this would be effective. You can't hide from the problems with your case, you have to address them. And he just kind of buried his head in the sand and wanted to wish away all of these bad facts and just talk about what he thinks are the credible facts. But any skilled advocate will always tell you whether it's trial, appeal, whatever, you can't ignore your opponent's strong arguments. You have to confront them and try to convince whomever why it's not persuasive. And he didn't really even try. >> Attorney Mark Bettero, I know you have another hit to attend to, so we will break here, but I just want to thank you and we'll have you on again, hopefully, and we really appreciate all your time, especially during this trial. You're a great resource for us. If anyone wants to follow Mark on Twitter, it's @betterolaw and it's betterolaw.com. We appreciate you coming on The Grace Curly Show and always letting us know your reactions to these things as they unfold. >> Sure, any time, thanks. >> Absolutely. Okay, we get back, I want your reactions here in The Grace Curly Show. What did you make of the closing arguments today? How do you think the jurors will deliberate in this case? And what do you think this is kind of my theme of the day? You know, Mark Bettero said, if you ask for a theme of lally's closing arguments, you couldn't come up with one. My theme of the day is out of everything we've heard, all the weeks we've been going through this, and we were going through this before it even went to trial. So forget nine weeks, we are 15, 16 weeks into this. What was the one piece of evidence that took you from, there's no way that it could be a giant cover up conspiracy theory. That's crazy to all of a sudden getting closer and closer and closer to being able to understand how this might have happened. Was it the dog? Was it the claw marks? Was it the house long to die and cold? Because what I'm trying to figure out is why each person I talk to has a different moment that they consider the smoking gun. They have a different moment that they can't explain away. And I want to know what yours is when we come back. Eight, four, four, five hundred, forty two, forty two, Judge Kannoni has wrapped up. She's given the jurors their instructions. They are deliberating. What are we at now? We're like an hour into 50 minutes, 50 minutes into juror watch. You know, when Trump's jurors were deliberating in that New York City hush money trial, they had a little count clock on the side. I really like that. I wish we could have one of those right now. I bet I can find one. I'll get a Karen Reed trial juror deliberation clock up soon. All right, everybody. We'll be right back with your call to eight, four, four, five hundred, forty two, forty two. This is the Grace Curly Show. Follow Grace on Twitter at g_curly. This is the Grace Curly Show. The President asked Ms. McCabe to Google how long to die in the polls. She did so at six, twenty three and six, twenty four in the morning. You have the testimony of Ms. Hyde and Mr. Witt. As to SQLite databases, P-list databases, knowledge seed databases, state DB tabs, as far as all of them. Also from Trooper Marina as well. Those are the words you're saying sounds at six, twenty three, six, twenty four in the morning and not at two, twenty seven and forty seconds from the morning. They were not deleted by users. That is not what deleted means. What does deleted mean? That would be my question. Can you explain that to us, sir? That was Lally and hearing him try to use those words like, "Oh, poor the PC database x, y." There's no way that, man, we've heard from, yeah, we did hear from your experts. We also heard from the other experts who, you know, have actual credentials and they negated everything your experts said and then you didn't really have any follow up to that. But sure, you know, really what Lally is trying to do here is he's trying to prove that it's like the curious case of the magical tail light, the curious case of the magical phone that jumps into the trash bag. It's all of these objects that came to life and had their own agendas during the last few years. It's very bizarre. We asked the callers what moment during this trial stood out to you. What piece of evidence did Jackson or United put forward that maybe changed the way you saw this or, you know, allowed them to gain more momentum in this case. Let's go to Dave. You're up next on the Grace Curly Show. What's going on, Dave? Yes. Hi. Thank you for taking my call. Yeah. For me, I thought the snowplow driver was very credible and very honest. He knows that street. That street is lit up more than what they've led to. There's a 20 mile per hour speed limit on that street. He did see a four-edge in front of the flagpole, a light colored four-edge at five o'clock in the morning to not report it. However, nobody looked into it. Everybody discredited the plot. You know, the prosecution tried to discredit the plow driver and he's the one who saw it. He's the one who saw nothing on the lawn and he saw the four-edge and I believe that the homeowner has relatives that own four-edges and none of that was looked into. And you know, that to me was kind of like, you know, that was the, you know, on top of that, the sneaker was founded five-thirty at night on Saturday, but they couldn't find it at nine o'clock in the morning after Mr. O'Keefe had been carried away with one sneaker on. Yeah. I'm really glad you brought up Lucky Lockeron, Dave, the snowplow driver because not only did we get so much feedback on Lucky as a witness and how just like you said, people found him credible, people found him likeable, which is important in a trial, you know, especially when you compare that to some of these state troopers who were combative, argumentative, they were contrarians, they were angry. To have someone like Lucky get up who's a hardworking guy who just seems to be wanting to tell the truth, I definitely think makes an impact and kind of echoes what you're saying. Jackson did hit on this, Taylor, forgive me, I'm trying to, we have so many cuts here. Do we have the cut of Jackson bringing up the fact that not only was Lucky Locker and a good witness, but that the prosecution would have never looked into this and Trooper Proctor specifically had no desire for anyone to know about Lucky Lockeron's testimony? I believe that is when he's mapping out the stages of the alleged cover up. It's a lengthy cut. Okay. Put me a little bit. So how does it cover up happen? How could that happen? Well, let's count the waves, shall we? Handpick your investigator. Make sure it's someone we know, someone on our side. Keep them close, offer them help, offer them a gift. Have secret friends and family meetings, get your story straight, delete your call history, make mysterious phone calls at 2.22 a.m., delete Google searches, monitor police activity, take rid of evidence, get rid of your dog, destroy your phones, destroy your SIM card. For the investigator, decide on a narrative early on, don't go to the crime scene, don't take witnesses in for questioning, question all the witnesses together, ignore witnesses who don't fit your narrative, allow friends and family to contact those same witnesses, don't record interviews, write vague and false police reports, omit witnesses names, omit witnesses interviews all together. Pause it right there. That is such an important point that last caller just brought up. This is a guy who was plowing the street the night you said this happened. You can't piece together any of this besides all the magical tale that you're finding and you don't go talk to that guy. You don't want that guy's story who was on the street the night this happened. That's just one other thing amongst many things that don't make sense about a way you'd handle a crime scene including Brian Albert not coming out of his house. And at a certain point when you hit like the 10th or 11th thing that makes you question the credibility of the people investigating this case, that is going to impact how the jurors see this and how they see Karen Reed's guilt or what I'm guessing is they're going to come back with an odd guilty. We'll be right back. We'll take more of your calls on this. There's a lot more to break down when we return. Live from the Aviva Thratria studio and one of that right arm, according to the Commonwealth's best and brightest trip of Paul, John absorbed the entirety of the collision, a whole collision with that three and a half ton SUV entirely with his right arm launching him some 30 feet. And amazingly, the arm suffered no break, no fracture and didn't even get a bruise. Welcome back to the Grace Curly show. That was Alan Jackson during the closing arguments today and Emma's going around now and she's asking us for a video she's making. I hope this isn't a spoiler, but you know, what piece of evidence in this case stood out to you the most. And that's my question for the callers. The number is 844-542 42 and it's funny because I've kind of moved, I don't want to say moved on because it's still fresh in my mind. But my number one piece of evidence that I couldn't explain away, that I couldn't talk myself out of was how long to die in cold, that Google search by Jen McCabe. And I still do go back to that, but I don't know if it was the timing of the witnesses, which I think was very beneficial for Karen Reed, but those three expert witnesses at the end and especially Dr. Marie Russell talking about John O'Keefe's body after he was according to the state hit by a car and how it does look like dog bites. It does look like scratch marks. It does look like something that would have, you'd have bruises if you got hit by a car. All that is pretty fresh in my mind and pretty recent and that's something now that I go back to. Yeah, I didn't need that to convince me. I think it was the preponderance of coincidences that led me to believe there's something that's not being told in full truth here. So I think that was enough reasonable doubt, like none of these witnesses were very forthcoming only with things that they had to be forthcoming with or wanted the police to know, did they step forward and say, "Here, I have this chain of text messages," and there was just so many missing calls, there was too much missing evidence in this, the entire trial, especially with the prosecution's witnesses. What clinched it for me, not really the how's long to die in the cold, I think that Google is irrefutable, but the timing of Karen Reed linking her phone, linking up with John O'Keefe's Wi-Fi at his house at 1236 on the morning of the 29th, when Jen McKay was saying, "Well, she was watching from like 1235 to 1250 Karen Reed sitting outside in front of the Albert home. She wasn't even there. She was back at John O'Keefe's house, calling him up, wondering where he was and clomping around his hardwood floors in her high heels. That's what was going on. She wasn't running over John O'Keefe. All the testimony with the car, the technical readouts, that's nice to have, but it doesn't give you a picture of what actually happened, because as has been said over and over, you can back up and see a reduction in speed by half a mile an hour if you just hit a patch of ice or bump up on a curve. That accelerator will still stay down the same percentage. I also, there's a couple of things you just said that I want to dissect, but one of them is that I'm always amazed that if you're near Main Street and there's any sort of accident, how far that sound travels and how it can sound like, even if you're in your neighborhood and something happens, it can sound like it's right next door. Usually when a car makes any sort of impact or screech, you hear it. That always stuck out to me that nobody heard this impact, that somebody was hit by a car and was dying on the front lawn and nobody discovered the body or heard the sound. It would have been easier to hear because snow is falling, snow absorbs all like a lot of ambient sound, so it really isolates what is going on in your immediate area who can hear it pretty clearly. But the thing you just said about the internet and that linking up at 1236, that was something that for me at least got a little lost in the actual testimony because you're so bombarded at one time with cell data and all of this technological jargon that we all don't follow and you're kind of trying to piece one and two together. But today, to your point Taylor, when you have Jackson who's able to take all of these things that maybe some of us tuned out for and phrase it in a way that we understand, I totally understand what that means. I link up to things all the time. I go back to, you know, sometimes in the summer, I'll go to visit someone on the Cape and I'll link up to their Wi-Fi that I haven't been at since last year and you go, "Oh, wow, my phone remembered. Look at that. It linked up." But you're right, that part of it during the actual testimony got lost on me. I was like, "Oh, this is just more, you know, Wi-Fi technological stuff." But it does confirm this timeline. She linked up with his Wi-Fi at 1236. That throws the entire timeline off. Yeah. To me that said, she said, "Fine, you want to be a dope, go in the house, sort out whatever you have to do with Brian Higgins." I don't think she was unaware of what was going on in the waterfall. She saw Brian Higgins getting pulled back by Brian Albert and him coaxing John O'Keefe to come over to the house. "Fine, you want to be a moron? This is what she wanted. This is what she wanted to happen. This big fuss over her, she wanted her man to fight for her. That's what this whole jealousy thing with texting Brian Higgins all about was. This was the final showdown." She dropped him off thinking that he could handle Brian Higgins. But I don't think that anybody expected what happened to happen. Now, the other part of it that I want to talk about, and we'll take your calls. It's 844-542-42 because I know everyone has different takeaways from this. But I've talked a lot today about how when you watch something in the movies, when you watch, you know, a murder or a trial or, you know, a law and order, anything like that, they obviously, for dramatic effect, they're shortening things. They're making things a lot spicier, a lot more interesting to watch. And oftentimes, in real life, it's not a movie. And one thing that the movies do in situations where you're dealing with a case like this is that by the end of it, you know what happened. Do you think Taylor, and this is a question for the audience as well, will we ever know what happened or will everyone, and I know it's a nationwide story, but let's all be honest with ourselves, this is definitely something that people in Massachusetts, people in the South Shore especially, are obsessed with more than anyone else in the country. Will we spend the rest of our lives just wondering? Or will somebody break? Will somebody, if the feds get involved, will somebody sing like a bird? What will happen after this? Because in the movies, towards the end of the movie, they go, "Hey, by the way, this is what happened. We'll piece it all together for you." In real life, it doesn't often work like that. In real life, there's a lot of cases that you just, they go unsolved. I think that if it were to happen, if this is something you've been saying around the community office, isn't like when the trial's over, somebody's going to step forward and say, "All right, you guys got it wrong. Here's what really happened." Nobody's going to say that. What I think may happen is that through this federal investigation that's been going on and could come to it very soon, as far as taking it to trial or charges being levied against somebody, there was a point in the Karen Reid trial when Brian Higgins was brought on the stand, and he was asked about his relationship with Brian Albert. I don't think too many people caught this, but he said they were good friends. I don't think that they're on the same level of friendliness that they had been on for some time. I think something had gotten fractured. I think that is where the feds are going to try to stick in a crowbar and say, "Look, we know that you know more than you've been saying. You can save yourself. You can throw the alberts under the bus. If you did it, whatever, but there are a lot of people complicit in what happened here. We want the full story. We want justice for Officer John O'Keefe and his family." You might get some leniency if you give us that story. Exactly. Exactly. Keep your pension. That's a biggie, right? But, but Taylor, what you just said is something we see all the time in cases, and they don't even have to be as big a case or as high as stakes. Anytime there's, for example, a couple that's brought into a case. Think of Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis. When you have that tension in, people start fighting. People get really irritated. People start blaming each other. "Well, I've gone through all this crap, and I lost my job, and I lost this, and I can't go into any restaurant in town without being harassed. It is your fault. People do start to turn on each other, and I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet, but I think maybe a lot of people decide, "We'll get through the trial. We'll see how this all goes." And I agree with you. I think there might be, there might be some cracks in the foundation. They could turn and go to the Alberts as well, saying, "Look, Brian Higgins, he's setting up. He could throw you under the bus. You might want to do that to him first." Yeah. Then it becomes when he's going to turn first. Exactly. I don't think they can be as stone-faced up to the feds as they have into the locals. We'll find out. The other part of this that I just want to talk about really quickly. Maybe the feds have found Chloe. Well, that's Chloe, really. We need to know what happened to Chloe, and that was really what first caught my eye with this whole thing. When you think about the protesters, there were so many people there today. Turtle Boy said a thousand. I can't do a fact check on that right now. When I looked at it this morning, there were hundreds of people, but listen to me, I sound like Daniel Dale, but one of the first things that caught my eye about all these protesters, a lot of them had signs, "Free Chloe. Where's Chloe?" We want to know about Chloe, and I started going, "Why am I driving through to see my brother to go to his house? I keep seeing all these people with signs, talking about somebody named Chloe." That's when I started figuring out what this case was all about. Taylor, I do want to mention though that Lally bringing in John Adams at the end, I can just picture John Adams saying to himself, "Please exclude me from this narrative," which I never asked to be a part of. Don't drag me into this. Invoking the forefathers in almost any argument, it's pretty much guaranteed I roll. Yeah, he's rolling in his grave. He's like, "Can you not bring me into this canton craziness?" 844-500-42-42. That was something that Jesus said. Oh, yeah. He didn't go Jesus. That would have been a real, like, "Wow." But you know what? Something I do want to kind of circle back to is we had on Turtle Boy today, and he was talking about how I asked him for his reaction that Jen McCabe, Brian Albert, and Colin Albert were all there today, even though at times, Turtle Boy hasn't been allowed in the courtroom when they're testifying because of witness intimidation, according to Judge Canoni. He's too intimidating to these people, but they were fine being there today, and he pointed out that the O'Kee family brought them there, and to show the jurors, like, "We're not buying what Karen Reid's defense is selling. We are on the side of the people that are, you know, part of this third-party culprit defense." And I will say, I've seen Turtle Boy commenting on John O'Keeves' parents and their reactions to things and how they're taking this information. I give them a total pass, like, I do not judge those people. They lost their son, and they seem to have gone through a lot of tragedy in their lives, and I don't think you can judge people who are trying their best to deal with losing their son, and probably don't know what to believe and earn so much pain. So while I don't have a lot of sympathy for the McAlberts as a whole, I think the O'Keeves are, I separate them from this group, because I think they're dealing with a lot, and they're trying to find justice for their son, which, and also it's really hard, and I've always found this with true crime. We've covered true crime before. It's always hard when something becomes so sensationalized, and something is really so fascinating, and you almost hate to say it like that, because what ends up happening is a lot of it becomes larger than life, a lot of it becomes tabloid fodder, the media's talking about it, I'm talking about it, and it can veer into people using it as entertainment, and you forget, these are people who lost their son. This is a guy who died. This is a real tragedy, and so I never want to lose sight of that when we talk about this, that I am not judging those people for siding with Jenn McCabe or siding with any of those. I understand they want justice for their son, they're horrified at what happened, and I'm sure it's been hell on Earth going through this and seeing these photos and reliving all of this pain. So, as much as we talk about this, it's easy to get carried away. It's not lost on me what an atrocity this is, and hopefully, for that family, at some point, as we were just discussing, hopefully, there will be justice of some kind. We will find out more. And from what we can see, you know, we're on the outside looking in, and we get a grand scope of things, the McCabe's and the Albert's are master manipulators from what we've been able to see. And from the get-go, they were already with John O'Keefe's parents even before they got to the hospital to see John's body, unfortunately, and they were feeding them the beginnings of this story and this narrative. In their most vulnerable moments. Exactly. Exactly. So, it's something to keep in mind as we talk about this, but I just want to make that clear because I see all this stuff on Twitter, and I see, and I see the TikToks of people making jokes about Judge Canoni, and I understand it. I understand this is going to be made into movies, and I totally get that, but I think it's important to always acknowledge a guy lost his life here. A young man, John O'Keefe is dead, and his family is grappling with that, and that is an awful thing. And so, even if we don't get justice when it comes to this trial, I hope at some point we do find out what happens so that those people can take a little bit of solace and at least knowing what happened to their son. 844-542-42, when we come back, we're going to talk to Howie Carr, he's got a very exciting guest coming up on his show, even if the guest didn't know my name, which we'll talk about after the break. Don't go anywhere. The Grace Curly Show comes back right after this commercial. Today's poll question is brought to you by Calertrend, do what Jared did lose weight in a healthy way with Calertrend's high-quality collagen protein, specially formulated with digestive enzymes to help your body absorb the collagen protein to its fullest potential. Save 50% on a 30-day supply at GraceCurlyShow.com and click store. Taylor, what is the poll question and what are the results this far? Today's poll question, which you can vote in at GraceCurlyShow.com, is what will be the verdict in the Caron Read trial, guilty, not guilty, or hung jury? I'm going to say not guilty. 89% say not guilty, 7% say hung jury, 4% say guilty. And I'll have more videos posted at GraceCurlyShow.com once my show wraps. I do have the video of Caron Read entering the courthouse today and the crowds around her. Hundreds of people got a video from a WBC reporter, so you can check that out at GraceCurlyShow.com. Now I'm joined by Howie Carr, who has a very exciting show today. Give us the rundown. What is this guest that you are so thrilled to have on for the first time? Sean McDonough, not the son of Will McDonough, the sports caster. This guy, he was a DEA agent. He's originally from Dorchester, Mattapan. He went to Kent High School, and then he was a DEA cop, and now he lives in Naples, Florida, and he's got a... He's really funny. And he's really good on the Caron Read trial. Do we have the cut? I just want to mention this. He was singing Howie's praises today. He must have spent like 30 minutes talking about Howie, the Bulger's, how much he loves Howie. I did get a shout out as well. Take a listen to this. He's got a team of people that will watch out for stuff that he probably... Hey, he's got this girl, I don't know with the lady, but... Oh lady, I know a lady with high heel shoes, and socks and pantyhose are pretty lady. That's me. I'm the lady, Howie. But he loves you. He loves your work. So what are you guys going to break down? I think I'm going to ask him about the... He's positive that the Feds are coming in behind this. And I was out on the book path walking Roscoe last night, and a lady came up to me and said, "Can I walk with you?" She was walking the other way. She said, "Can I walk with you for a while?" She said, "Sure." And she said, "I just want to ask you, I know she's going to get off, but are they going to get morsey and those crooked cops who tried to frame her?" And I'm not as confident as Sean McDonough. No, I'm not either. I like to think of myself as an optimist, but I mean, I'm a realist too, and I don't know if... But then I get... I have to... I don't know if they'll get fired or anything, but don't you think they might resign and shame? Well, Proctor's gone, I think. Yeah. And maybe Sergeant Yuri, and just for agreeing with him, but how can morsey run for reelection, especially with this birchmore thing hanging over him now? The birchmore case is awful, and it's not going to get as much attention as this Karen Reid thing, because Karen Reid, there were so many layers to it, but this is a really stomach-turning story about these three Stoughton cops that groomed and abused this young girl allegedly. Right. And they never... And they asked him for it when they wanted to find out who the father of the child was after she quote unquote killed herself, which the forensic doctor now says didn't happen. She was murdered. She was strangled. And they asked for...they asked this cop for his DNA sample, and he said no. And apparently they never bothered to take a DNA sample from her body or the unborn baby's body, or if they did, they never processed it. And she started... I mean, it's the same cops. It's the same cops. She started interning there when she was 13 years old. Yeah. Really a horrible story. Kill herself in Kenton, so it was investigated by the Kenton cops. Howie Carr's coming up next with Sean McDonough, don't miss it. Back tomorrow. [SCREAMS]