The Howie Carr Radio Network
Attorney Mark Bederow on Adam Lally's Cross-Examination, Karen Read Upcoming Closing Arguments and More | 6.24.24 - 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." [MUSIC PLAYING] Live from the Aviva Tratria 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 stand up. Here's the millennial with the mic, Grace Curly. Welcome back, everyone, to the Grace Curly Show. We've got Bill Broussard joining us at 2.20, and we'll take all your car questions for him. But in the meantime, the defense has rested in the Karen Reed trial as we enter the ninth week of this case that has really enthralled people all across the nation, but especially here in Massachusetts and the New England area, tomorrow, each side will get one hour for their closing statements. I wanted to bring on attorney Mark Beterow to give us his impression of the testimony from today before it wrapped up. So we had three witnesses, Dr. Andrew Renschler, Dr. Daniel Wolf, and Dr. Frank Sheridan. Now, Renschler and Wolf are reconstruction experts. They work for ARCA. Sheridan is a pathologist. Attorney Mark Beterow, thank you for joining the show. Just give us first of all your overall impression of these witnesses, were they good witnesses, and what makes a good witness? Well, they were devastating to the prosecution's case, which was already on life support coming in today, and I would say at this point, it's flatlined. The problem they have is this, particularly the ARCA witnesses, doctors, Wolf and Renschler. They're not classic defense experts. They're independent experts. They were not paid for by the defense. They had no conferences with the defense. They weren't engaged by the defense. They were-- everybody knows they came from the FBI. The jury almost certainly knows that at this point, even though they're calling it just another agency. But these guys came in and showed the jury in direct contrast to the clumsy effort by the DA, what an expert witness does. And, of course, they're not biased, like Trooper Paul. They relied on science. They have degrees. And they just systematically deconstructed the entire premise of the prosecution's case, which was the car accident causing John O'Keefe's death. And they did it with science and math. And they did it in a way where even on cross-examination, frankly, the DA made it worse when trying to bring to these experts attention, what about the physical evidence? Would that impact anything? And the answer was no because the science speaks. That's what matters. It's science and math. It's scientific law. It couldn't have happened at 15 miles an hour. It certainly didn't happen at 25 miles an hour. In terms of the injuries to John O'Keefe, you heard from Renschler that certainly you're talking fractures and this and that. And you heard none of it. And the last byproduct, I believe, from those two guys' testimony, in particular, is in light of their dismissing the tail light pieces and the other physical evidence. That is probably going to lead the jury to think even more that evidence was planted if that evidence existed but could not have caused the damage that the DA is alleging. I mean, scientifically, the jury being told could not have happened. So how are there 45 tail light pieces there? Just the complete utter disaster for the DA, again. Yeah, one of the things you just brought up, there's actually two things that I want to hit on. They keep mentioning the outside agency. We know that's the FBI. You say that you think the jurors know. I don't want to make myself-- I'd like to get myself credit and think if I was on a jury that I would figure that out. But I mean, if it's called an outside agency, have they made it clear enough to these jurors that, listen, it's not the Commonwealth, it's not the defense, and made it so that they have to assume it's the FBI? Like, why are you so confident that these jurors are going to figure that out? Because there have been bread crumbs left throughout the course of the trial and there have been times where the FBI has slipped out through certain prosecution witnesses. I mean, one of them, who particularly comes to mind, I believe-- I mean, it feels like it was six months ago already at this point, but I believe it was Ryan Nagle, I think, was the witness who flat out said when he spoke to the FBI or testified in a federal grand jury, something along those lines. There might have even been another witness who said that. The jury, though, these are intelligent people, and my understanding is there's at least a lawyer or two on the jury. I don't think it would be a stretch to conclude, based on what was said in the courtroom, just what's happening. Another agency, which agency means government, it doesn't mean a private business, engage these people. I don't think it's a stretch to believe that the jurors can put two to two together and realize that something's going on, and that's without any regard to hopefully they're not following the news, because if they follow the news, which they shouldn't, they certainly would know what the FBI is, that they're looming in the background. The other thing that you brought up, Attorney Mark Betero, which I wanted to ask you about, was the cross-examination and Lally's questioning, because at times it feels like he's running out the clock, or he's-- I guess a better way to put it is he's looking for filler. It doesn't seem as though it's quality over quantity at this point, and I thought a good example of that was when he was asking about the glass, what kind of glass it was. It was a very long kind of back and forth. As someone who's watched courtrooms before you've been in courtrooms, you watch trials go down. How bad of a performance was this for Lally today? Terrible. He's like a fish out of water flailing around, like you said, lobbing questions for the sake of lobbing questions. He's not particularly skilled at it. He doesn't really have the demeanor for it. But the problem, though, is really much more than how it's the cross-examination. The real problem is, why are they trying this case after they learned from the FBI, or the US Attorney, as it were, when these witnesses in their report was disclosed? I mean, they've known about this for months, at least before they started trying the case for a period of time. How the Norfolk DA's office believed that they were going to win a trial beyond a reasonable doubt where their theory of their case was a car accident, and the whole trooper Paul theory that it struck John O'Keefe in the shoulder, somehow broke the tail light, and he somehow bashed his head on the curb, and then bounced 20 feet to land in the middle of the lawn. How they thought that that made any sense knowing what these real experts-- I mean, anybody who watched this today could clearly see that these are top-level experts at everything, and they explained to the jury with the science and why it didn't make sense. So I mean, what is he supposed to do on cross-examination? There's no good way to cross-examine these witnesses, because they never should have been cross-examined, because there never should have been a trial knowing this. This is going to be a scandal when all is said and done, because it's almost unfathomable to believe that a prosecutor acting as, you know, in furtherance of justice, as a minister of justice, believed that there was a good faith basis to try this case with reasonable belief that they could prove, care and read, guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, just based on these archigies alone, because they just annihilate their entire premise of the case. I mean, the DA doesn't even have a rebuttal case, because how could you, right? They're not even going to challenge anything the defense has put on, because they can't call to Paul. He's a joke, especially after these guys testified. They're not-- they've just got nothing left to do, and I mean, if the defense witnesses were only these two guys, and they literally didn't cross-examine a single witness, a trial, and do anything, there would still be reasonable doubt, it's that bad. - My other question for you, Attorney Mark Bettero, is about the third-party culprit defense. Are these defenses typically this successful? Because something that's kind of blown my mind watching this trial is how very little of the information we're getting and the questioning has to actually do with care and read. A lot of it seems to be focused on the McCabe's, and the Alberts, and all of these other people. So as someone who's watched a lot of trials, and you've seen this stuff play out, is the third-party culprit defense usually this successful in a case? - Well, you know, there are times where it may work, there are times where it doesn't work, but I think what's unusual in this case is kind of what you just said, which is that the DA kind of fell for the cheese when the defense indicated it was going to use or attempt to use a third-party culprit, and it's as if the district attorney's office lost their minds and got more concerned about that than keeping their eye on the ball and actually trying to prove Cameron Reed's guilt, which they attempted to do feebly, maybe the last two or three days of the trial, but that blew up in their face as you saw today, and a little bit last week. But to spend the vast majority of the trial parading these witnesses from inside 34 Fairview Road and Canton to say, "I don't know anything," knowing that they were gonna get exposed on cross-examination about the butt dials, the weird text messages and certain other things, it really, it made no sense to me because if they didn't do that, make the defense call those witnesses. That becomes a much harder exercise. Now it's direct examination instead of cross-examination, which is a much harder thing to do. In particular, when you have a witness who doesn't necessarily wanna help you and may not necessarily be declared a hostile witness, so the way they tried this case is mind-boggling. The fact that they tried the case at all is just inconceivable. I can't fathom how after they got the federal materials, which released, I think, a lot of the phone evidence to the defense, but in particular, the accident reconstruction experts, how they thought that this was in any way, shape, or form a viable case with the burden of proof as high as it is. - Mark, what are you expecting tomorrow for these closing statements? Are they very important as far as moving the jurors? Or do you think the jurors probably have their minds made up? And also, how long, and this is the second part of the question, how long do you think it will take this jury to deliberate if you had to guess? - Well, I wouldn't wanna believe that any juror has their mind made up when they're not supposed to, but on the other hand, they're human beings and they're watching what's happening. And it's hard for me to believe that internally, at least among themselves, that they're not scratching their heads saying, why am I here? And what are we supposed to do? What is, there's no rational basis to find her guilty beyond the reasonable doubt. So, I don't wanna believe that they've made up their minds, but on some level, how could they not after today? I mean, and after they heard the DA's witness who was supposed to deliver the proof of the accident theory. How are, you know, they put forth Michael Proctor and his supervisor and these other guys who were just terrible, terrible witnesses and who I think were injured further by the, I mean, I don't wanna lose that point that the accident reconstruction guys actually damaged Proctor and the other cops even more because I think the jury's gonna be more inclined again to believe that evidence was planted. In light of it's complete lack of impact on the scientific conclusion. So, how long would the jury deliberate? I guess to me, it depends, do they want lunch or not? I just, you know, you never know. You don't know jurors or individuals. You don't know what's going on in their mind, but this one seems as pretty straightforward as it gets when you consider a reasonable doubt is the only issue. And as far as how much will the summations matter, I don't know that they're gonna matter because the evidence is what it is and there's nothing, I think, at this point that Lally is going to say, I mean, what is he gonna do? Say that Paul was a credible witness and you should disregard the experts, the architect witnesses. I mean, if you credit the archa witnesses, that's reasonable doubt. The other problem the DA has is the talent gap here is off the charts. I mean, you're gonna be listening to, you know, Alan Jackson for an hour who is very good. He speaks in plain English to jurors, has a very likable personality, is brilliant and is going to marshal the evidence presumably in a very effective manner. And that's gonna be followed by Lally, who is none of those things. And he also has the short straw of the facts in the case. So on top of his manner of delivery and relating to the jury, you know, he already has a credibility problem with the jury. I mean, do you think they don't remember the inverted video that he offered without explanation? - Right. - Do you think they don't remember the way he tried to defend Proctor and offer that pathetic excuse that he only did what he did because he was a homicide detective who was upset eight months after the homicide. So he said those things that he said about Karen Reed. I mean, I think he came off terrible in his handling of Proctor. So when you put this all together, I mean, it feels a little cringy what's gonna happen tomorrow with the summations because being Jackson is the far superior skilled lawyer and he also has the facts and law on his side. - Yeah, Mark Betero, we have to wrap here unfortunately, but I so appreciate your time. Follow him on Twitter at BeteroLaw. Also check out his website, BeteroLaw.com. He's a New York City criminal defense attorney, previously served as Manhattan assistant district attorney and we're honored to have him on the program. Thank you, Mark Betero. We'll talk to you soon, hopefully, maybe tomorrow even. So we'll talk to you then. In the meantime, we've got Bill Broussard coming up next. So get on the line now, 844-542. - You're listening to The Grace Curly Show. (dramatic music) - This is The Grace Curly Show. (dramatic music) Start your engines. (dramatic music) It's mechanic Monday with Grace Curly and Bill Broussard from JB AutoCare. - And man, did I like that '57 Ford chair light. (dramatic music) - Get your questions in for Bill now. 844-542-542. - That is right, everyone. Bill Broussard is here in person. The rumble cam viewers, you can check it out. I know he's got a fan base on the rumble cam. Bill, thanks for coming on. I'm gonna do the poll question really quick and then we're gonna grab the callers. Today's poll question is brought to you by Perfect Smiles. Don't be fooled by imposters with similar names. If you're unhappy with your smile, you need to visit Dr. Bruce Houghton in Nashua. Call 1-844-a-perfect-smile or visit perfectsmiles.com. 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, is who does RFK Junior's absence from the debate stage most benefit? Biden, Trump, or neither? - I think it benefits Trump because it hurts Biden. - 20% say it benefits Trump more, 53% say it benefits Biden more, 27% say neither. - Wow, very interesting breakdown. All right, Bill, so before we go to the callers and again, the number is 844-542-42. For all the cheap bastards out there, this is a really great way to get free advice about your car without having to pay big bucks. So take advantage of it. I wanted to ask you about this cyber attack. It affected parts of the US and Canada. It was a massive cyber attack. I'm reading now from auto blog. It says auto retailers and their customers across the US and Canada were dealing with the stress after CDK Global, a software provider to some 15,000 dealers, was way laid by debilitating cyber attacks. You brought up, this is not the first time it's happened, so you weren't that surprised by it. But how risky is this when so many of these cars are now operated by computers? - Yeah, a few years back, Chrysler had this problem where people hacked into their computer system on the cars and would shut the car off. So they had to put an extra layer of protection in their computers, which was very strange. They never expected something like that to happen. So with this new technologies and these cars, you could these self-driving cars, it's like can someone hack into the car? They absolutely can. - And drive the car. - And drive your car. - Well, you're in it. - Yes. - And when that happened with, you said it was Chrysler, was that another country that was doing that? - No, it was just country. - It was just pranksters? - Yeah, it just punks. - So the danger if another country, I don't want to throw around accusations here, but like say, for example, if China hacked into all the cars here and decided to start self-driving them, that's really, really scary. - It's scary, yes. - And now, and it's also a problem for the dealerships because they have to be, at this point, handwriting paper contracts. - Yeah, so we do, our software is cloud-based, so I do have some handwritten repair orders on file. You know, in case it ever went down, you just handwriting, which a lot of the youngsters, like, they get crippled if their cell phone stuff's working. - They're like, what is this? What is this thing you call a pen? - All right, Bill Bursar has taken all your questions, 844-542, stay right there, we'll be right back. - Live from the Aviva Thratria studio. - Welcome back to the Grace Curly show, the cheap bastards heard my call to action and they are calling in for Bill Bursar. If you want to talk to Bill, our mechanic, it's Mechanic Monday and he's here, you can call 844-542. Taylor's also monitoring the text line, that's 617-213-1066. Start your text with the word Curly, so you are L-E-Y, and let's start off today with Grandpa Steve. What's going on, Grandpa Steve? - I've got a Volkswagen, 2020, and I've got a problem with the electric windows deciding to open up at oddball intervals, and when you try and put them, close them up, when it hits the top, it just goes all the way back down again. I've been to two dealerships, and they don't seem to have a clue as to what's going on. - Yeah, they could be a tricky one. Some of them have a feel safe, so if you get your hand in the window, it will feel that, the window will bounce down, so there's some kind of restriction going on, so whether it's the channel the window runs in, sometimes it'll just get dry, and you're gonna put some silicone in them, just spray a little silicone, or the actual mechanism that brings a window up and down, they call it the window run, or the regulator actually gets jammed, so there's something probably jamming in there and it's causing the window to kick back down, so yeah, some investigation needs to happen there, they just wanna replace parts, but you actually gotta think about this one. - 844-542, thank you for the call, Grandpa Steve, and before we go to the next caller, Bill, I do wanna ask, if people wanna visit you in person, where did they go? - Sure, we're at 291 Bridge Street, North Waymouth. - Perfect, all right, Jason, you're up next with Bill Broussard, what's your question, Jason? - Hey, so I work at a dealership, I want to explain the CDK Global hack, so it's not software that has anything to do with the operation of a car, that's like the software we use for customer data, when someone comes in to write to repair orders up, order parts, that's what CDK Global is, it's not really any sort of software that links to the car in any way. - Oh, but with, you don't have to worry about someone trying to drive you a car. - Oh, okay, but here's my question, so a very good point, Jason, when it happened to Chrysler, was it also just that, or Bill, was it the actual cars that they were hacking into? - So, is the actual software they were hacking into for the car itself? - So it is possible. - Yeah, so CDK, yeah, that's just the software for a dealership that controls it, say the service department, sales department, power department, so if you shut their information off, they're crippled on, you know, their information on cars, ordering parts. - Especially because of the car dealership, you have to fill out, I know this, and I bought my car, you have to fill out so much paperwork, so if you have to do that by hand, that's crazy. - Yeah, it's a lot of work, but you have to have redundancy 'cause if the computer goes down, you're out of work. - Well, it's good to know that there won't be anyone right now hacking into our cars because of the CDK cyber attack, again, for now. 844-500-4242, I actually had a question for you, Bill, before we go back to the callers, recently someone told me that I might have to get new brakes. My brakes are, you know, they're not holding up that well. And my question for you is, short of your brakes giving out while you're on the highway, are there signs that you should be aware of when you're driving that, hey, this isn't looking good, something's going on with my brakes, or do you really just have to find out when you go in for your inspection and when you get the whole car looked at, or are there little warning signs along the way? - So they do put little brake indicators on the brake pad, it's like wear sensors, and they'll get down the little metal tab where running against the road will make like a squealing sound. But other than that, just, you know, when you get the oil change, you get the brakes inspected, you know, we take measurements, we take pictures and the customer pictures. So those are the two, basically the only two ways. And then you kind of gauge it by mileage, you know, breaks my last 30 to 60,000 miles. So you start getting in the mileage range, you know, you want to keep an air out for that squeal, or you kind of want to get ahead of it too, you want to get them inspected from time to time. - You don't want to wait until they're-- - Metal to metal, and yeah, you got to step on the pedal when it hits the floor, you don't want to wait till that. - Yeah, okay, I believe-- - You've got to need your brakes to stop. - I believe you, Taylor, what's going on? You have a question? - So anytime I go to get an oil change, they always try to upsell you. This air filter is bad, that air filter. How big of a scam is that? Can I just take out an air filter and just rinse it off, shake it, and dry it off, and put it back in and it'll be okay? - I mean, it's not an expensive component, so you shouldn't rinse it off. I mean, you could shake it off and get a little more use out of it, but the particles are so fine, it's just, you know, air filters are 25 bucks, you know, and if you can do it yourself, great. - If you're talking to a cheap bastard like this-- - I was just gonna say, how cheap are you? - I'm cheap enough where I know I need the oil change. Here's how cheap I am. I didn't want to get new tires now. My wife made my car go in the shop today and get new tires, but I don't like to spend money-- - Yeah, sometimes you can be penny-wise and dollful, so some people, they don't like to maintain their car as, 'cause you don't get that instant gratification out of it. You just spendin' money. But then you have to replace the transmission at a hundred thousand miles, you're like, "Hey, what could I have done to prevent that?" It's like, "Well, you should have changed the transmission fluid." - Yeah, you know, Bill, there was another question that I had for you, and then I promise I will go right back to the callers, but last week, or not last week, it feels like last week, but you were in last month, and when we were talking about some new cars we're seeing on the road, I brought one up to you, and I can't remember the name, but I keep seeing it everywhere. It's like a square car, Rivia-- - Rivian. - Rivian. - Rivian. - Yeah. - Would you advise people who are in the market for a car, are there ways to get an idea of how great a car is or how difficult it's going to be down the line before it's on the market for a very long time, or is that something where you tell someone, "Hey, this is a really new car," and I know we pick on electric vehicles a lot, and that's not what I'm trying to do. - I'm just saying any new car in general, would you, as someone who's bought cars before, sold cars before, would you wait and see how it does in the market and see how it goes long-term before you buy one? - Absolutely. I always go for things at a time-tested, so I don't like to buy anything new. I did get, at least in my trucks, I have a Toyota truck, and it just happened to be my lease expired. They had a brand new Toyota truck that came out with a new engine and new for Toyota, and I just knew it wasn't a good idea, but I just lease 'em, so, but sure enough, Toyota had a problem with these new motors, the turbos, and the engine were going bad, and then you can be without your truck for six months. It's just not ever a good idea to buy anything new. Let them research, and they do their research in development, maybe a year or two, a few years, before they launch it to market, but let the consumer drive it for a while, let the work the bugs out before you get anything new technology. - Okay, okay, very good idea. Ron, you're up next with Bill Broussard from JB AutoCare. What's going on, Ron? - Hi, Grace. Yeah, great show. I just had a question here. I have a 2020 Mitsubishi Outland of Sport, and what it is, is I wanted to clear out the mileage, every so many thousand miles, the oil, it says service engine soon, it's a tool thing there, and the screen. And I went right by the book, you get in, you don't have a push button start, you don't touch anything there, and you just hit the info button until you get to the right screen, which is only like two or three screens, and it says push the button in once you get to that screen, holding it for a few seconds, and it will clear it out. I tried it many times, it didn't clear it out. Do you have an answer? - Yeah, some of those are really tricky, and every car maker is different, so a lot of times we just go right to YouTube and just watch how someone does it, and that's typically, you'll get your answer there. Unless there's something wrong with the reset button, but typically you'll get your answer there, 'cause the owner's manual could be a misprint, could be missing information, it's not always the answer book. - Yeah, I would agree, and this is a separate situation, but I had a dishwasher problem, and I couldn't figure out how to reset it, and it was like, hold these three buttons, then press rinse, and then hold that for 15 seconds. The whole machine will shut off, and I did find it on YouTube, like somebody in the world. It was the craziest thing, somebody in the world had this dishwasher from 10 years ago, and knew exactly what to do, so I just watched it and fixed it, so that's really good advice, Ron, and like we said, it's free advice, which is the best advice. - Who takes the time to make these videos? - I know, but God bless them, really, they're saving all of us. Susan, you're up next with Bill Broussard, go ahead, Susan. - Yes, hi, up, Bill, we have a 2015 Nissan Rogue, and the transmission died quite some time ago, it's been about six months ago, to make payments on the car. I just wanted to know if there was any recourse, because I've done some research, and they did say that there are all kinds of problems with the transmissions with the Nissan Rogue. So do you think, if I contact a Nissan, they'd be able to do anything, because it's so expensive to have it replaced, it's almost not worth it. - Yeah, it's possible, you know, when you mentioned Nissan Rogue, it's very, we've done a lot of those, very common. You know, I've had transmissions, brand new ones, we installed, you know, they're bad. You know, they get those CVT transmissions, it was newest style. They just had a lot of problems, but yeah, I would definitely contact Nissan and see if there's a solution for you. - Now she said it was a 2015, how long? - Nine years old now. - Yeah, do you think that they'll honor that, 'cause some, like, Hyundai is really good with, you know, that 100,000 mile warranty on their motors, and they've extended it, 'cause they've had a lot of problems, keyer and Hyundai's, on some of the extended 125, even more, some of them lifetime in the vehicle, 'cause they know they've had problems. - Yeah, and it's always worth a shot. Like on the off chance that they say, "Yeah, sure, we'd love to help you." - Yeah, 'cause they want your business again. So some of the manufacturers are good by stepping up to the plate, Toyota's really good like that. So it's worth a phone call, it's free. I also wanted to ask you before we wrap up here, Bill. Did you hear about the electric vehicles? I just said, we weren't gonna, you know, crap on electric vehicles, and again, not trying to do that. - New technology. - But now I'm hearing that because of the heat waves we've been having recently, that a lot of them lose like 30% of their power based off of the heat. That seems like something, and how we pointed out, you know, they're tough when it's cold out, they have a tough time, and they have a tough time when it's hot out, is this something that you've heard that electric vehicle manufacturers are working on, or are they just expecting people to deal with this problem? - Yeah, I'm sure technology would get better over time, but as of now, it's like when it's colder out, the battery won't last as long. Now when it's hot out, battery won't last so long. If you're telling a boat, it won't last so long, they had a problem with the Ford Lightning. It only lasted like 50 miles when they were trying to tow a boat. So, you know, that was a big wrinkle in their operation. - I'll say. - Yeah. - All right, Bill. Bill Broussard, we thank you so much. People know again where they can call you and where they can find you at JB AutoCare. - Yeah, we're at 291 Bridge Street in North Wameth in at 71-331-6068. - Awesome, thank you very much. If you use scented candles, cover-up sprays, or air fresheners for bad odors in your home, well, you should stop. You're not fooling anyone. All you're doing is adding more harmful odors to your home. I was talking to my sister-in-law this weekend, and she said sometimes when she cooks in the house, and then she'll light a candle. If the candle is chocolate-flavored, or one of those really sweet odors, she said then it becomes this really weird, like, potpourri of smell. - Cocomitlo. - Yeah, just awful. And I said, you really shouldn't be using candles. You should get a need and pure thunderstorm, or you should get a three pack, because it's gonna get rid of the odor. You don't have to keep replacing it every time the candle runs out, and you don't have to use air filters. Plus, if you're someone who doesn't cook, but you have a pet in the house, it's great for that, gets rid of those odors, it's great for musty basements, it's great for offices where the windows are closed. There are so many reasons to get yourself a thunderstorm. Place a thunderstorm in your bedroom, your family room, your kitchen, or your basement. They even make great gifts. Get $200 off a three pack today for whole home protection. Visit eatimpurideals.com and use discount code GRACE3. That's eatimpurideals.com. Discount code GRACE3. We'll be right back. - Follow GRACE on Twitter @g_curly. (upbeat music) - This is the GRACE Curly Show. (upbeat music) - Somebody on the text line said I know his name is Dr. Daniel Wolfe, but he's clearly a total fox. That was one of the witnesses today in the Caron retrial. We broke it all down with Mark Bedero. We'll have that hour posted for you very shortly. Also at gracecurlyshow.com, you can see the video of Caroline Levitt, great friend of the Grace Curly Show, getting booted off the air. Casey Hunt, the anchor or the host at CNN, couldn't handle the heat. She couldn't handle the truth, so she cut off Caroline Levitt. And I love how Caroline said, you know, I just assumed I was still on the air, so I kept going. I know how Caroline always has her facts in order and how she can go on a rant if she wants to. I would love to know how long she kept talking before somebody just said, hey, it's over. You're not in the air anymore. Great, great cut and really fun to have Caroline on, especially on a busy day like today. Now joining me is Howard Lauren's car. And I was just talking to attorney Mark Bedero about the Caron retrial, about his thoughts on today's testimony from these expert witnesses. But one thing I wanted to ask you about how, he was turtle boys running in Canton this weekend, a lot of contentious back and forth, these people that are part of the McAlbert clan, they still haven't learned to just keep going on and not giving him attention. They engage with him and they get very angry. Yeah, it's not a very good example of street intimidation. You know, I used to say it with Whitey Bulger. He would just stare at me. Just stare. Never say anything. You know, there are a number of reasons you don't talk out on the street. I mean, in the old days it would be, 'cause the cops could later say, yeah, I recognize his voice 'cause I heard him out on the street threatening Fat Beni, you know? But now, now there's so many more reasons not to, and they all come in your hand. Yeah, yeah. Some phones. And you don't grab this cellphone from someone when they have it in their hand. Right. It's just, you know, they say there's no power in the written word, but Jill Daniels remembered every single insult that the turtle boy threw at her last Valentine's Day, 'cause I went back and I looked, and I saw, she remembered everything. Colin is saying that she had a leather face, and her face looked like a piece of aluminum after you wrapped a poloni sandwich in it for lunch, and all these terrible things. Howie, what's the, 'cause this is always a question and a jeopardy, and I always almost get it right. What is the poem that you always talk about, about if you can keep a cool head? Yeah, it's if by Rudyard Kipling. If you can keep your head when all about are losing theirs, then you will be a man, my son. Nobody in Canton can do that. They have not mastered that yet. I mean, there's so many things they haven't mastered. They haven't mastered being good street thugs either. Well, the other part of this Howie that I wanted to ask you about, which I was gonna ask Mark Beterow, we ran out of time, have you noticed that the anti-Karen Reed people on social media, the only thing I can compare it to? Because keep in mind, Mark Beterow, right? He's a criminal defense attorney in New York. He's commenting on this case, and he's really amazed at the incompetence by Lally at the fact that the commonwealth-- Well, isn't everybody? Yeah, and so he's just explaining how he feels on Twitter. He's being met with these people who are telling him, you're not a real lawyer, you have no credibility. The thing is that they can't argue the facts anymore, so they're just attacking the bearers of the bad news. It's, again, it's human nature, right? It's Rosen Krantz and Guildenstern all over again. It's reminding me of Trump's derangement syndrome. Like, you're looking at people and you're going, how are we seeing two different things? I see people on social media going, Lally is crushing this. Good luck to Karen Reed's defense at trying to come back from this one. And I'm thinking to myself, are we watching the same trial? Right, right. I think it's, you know, people have forgotten about this trial, the Dreyfus trial in France. Yeah, explain that to people. Yeah, where there was this Jewish guy who, he was in the French army and someone was giving secrets to the Germans and they decided to frame him, even though he had nothing to do with it. And they even found out who did it. And they still kept prosecuting him because they figured it was better for their political goals. They sent him to Devil's Island for five years. Totally, and they knew he was innocent. Yeah. I mean, but again, I mean, it's just that the country was so divided into camps. It's, I mean, it's not totally analogous, but it's somewhat analogous. Yeah, it's like you have tunnel vision and you just don't want to believe anything else. Howie, I did want to ask you your reaction to Caroline Levitt because we've talked a lot about the enemies list. I would argue that getting kicked off CNN is a real career boost, not that she needs one, but I mean, that cut, I was thinking to myself. It's a resume enhancer, as Rush used to say. She should send Casey Hunt a bouquet of flowers and say, "Thanks so much." 'Cause I bet they got fundraising off of it, too. Oh, yeah. Yeah, there's a, yeah. I mean, and everything she said was true. That's the thing. You know, and you know, the thing is, it's not just her. It's not just Jake Tapper. I mean, it's also Dana Bash. I mean, her husband was one of the 52 phony balonies who signed the email or the letter saying it was Russian disinformation, Hunter's laptop. And I mean, like, you know, he was a counterintelligence expert. He was just a hack that was put in by Obama to, you know, implement the communist goals. And the other story that I can't wait to get Howie's reaction on, but he's gonna have to do it on his own show is the seven years it took the fact checkers at Snopes to finally debunk the very fine people hoax, which keep in mind was one of the several reasons Joe Biden said he ran for president. Go to grace curly show.com to see that video of Caroline Levitt getting booted off the air from CNN. And you can also check out our podcast. They'll be up shortly. I'll see you all tomorrow. Don't forget to tune into Howie show coming up next. (upbeat music)