Billy & Lisa in the Morning
Karen Read Trial Recap 6.25.24
OK, so the defense in the Karen Reed trial rested yesterday. Closing arguments will happen at nine o'clock this morning. The Karen Reed trial and the Catherine Loftus, our counselor at large, is in studio with us. And I got to tell you, counselor, Lisa Donovan came in very early this morning in a rage over yesterday's testimony saying, I have three questions. So Lisa, go. No, I didn't come in in a rage. I came in with, I can't believe I never thought about this scenario, which was what happened yesterday with the three witnesses that were brought in. But I do want to ask a question first. They were brought in and Alan Jackson told the jury that we did not pay for these witnesses. These witnesses never met with us. They never met with Lally. So what do you think the jury thinks that happened to these? How are these witnesses brought in? I think they have to, at this point, be realizing that there's something else going on. There's been, you know, allusion to it throughout the case. There was, I think it was actually Michael Proctor who mentioned it when he was reading through one of the, well, maybe the text messages. He said the word FBI. Also on the brother of one of Julie Nate, one of the girls inside the house said the feds. Yes, he did. So you think they've pieced together that this is where they came from? I think at least they're figuring out that, okay, there's something else is some sort of third party investigation hearing. You know, and to me, it goes both ways because you wonder, okay, the calm wall didn't hire these witnesses. The defense didn't hire these witnesses. Who did and why? But then I think as with everything else, it leads to more questions. But do you think it gave them more credibility? Yes, because anytime that a witness genuinely does not have a stake in the game, you know, there and I thought they had, obviously they were very good. They're very smart. They're highly educated. They're well prepared. They came off very, very well. But I do think, you know, I mean, they answered questions very frankly. You know, there were a couple of things that, you know, weren't terrible for the calm wall to help. You know, you could tell that they're just answering honestly. They're not really trying to help the defense or the calm wall. They would just answer in the questions as they found it. So they were good. So can the jury, when they go into their deliberations, can they ask where those witnesses came from or they will never be told? They'll never be told from the court. Okay. I mean, they'll find. I'm sure they'll talk to each other. Right. But then let's talk about Dr. Wolf who testified. He's like an accident reconstructionist. I thought he was the most credible person I've ever seen on the stand in my entire life. And his theory about the cocktail glass that John O'Keefe could have thrown the cocktail glass at the car. And that's what broke the tail light. It's, I mean, it's interesting. It definitely it makes sense that something like that could have happened. You know, we were talking a little bit about it this morning. And because I always wondered about how the glass could get to the back of, you know, how do you get shattered glass on the back of there? It seems. But then at the same time, then it also leads me to think if I'm throwing a cocktail glass, I would think the whole thing would shatter. And then how does it end up under his body? So for me, I think there are, it's almost like with this case, I get these little like inklings of like, Oh, this seems really likely implausible. And then I do have more questions that follow. But ultimately that goes to the strength of the car most case, right? Because we can't really, I mean, all of it is kind of theoretical. It was snowing out. He could have thrown the glass and slipped and fell on top of the glass. And it is that right? Yeah, absolutely. And I've got a quick question. Are witnesses typically paid? So any outside witnesses are paid. So anybody who's working for, you know, like the state police experts or anybody called by the Commonwealth, you know, they're they're salary employees for the state. But every other expert gets paid both by the Commonwealth and by the defense, whoever they retain is paid. Yes, it's very good money. Yeah, I mean, a lot of these people just be professional witnesses. Well, they I mean, they that's what these guys do. That's what, you know, they are professional. That's why a lot of those you find are retired. Yes. Yes. Yes. They just lie around the country and testify. And that's why a lot of the question often goes like you'll find that some witnesses always testify for the defense, you know, so you can go into that bias. They these witnesses actually have testified that they that's why I felt they were so credible. Yeah, both of the government in different cases as well as the defense. Wow. I don't think when the judge finally instructs this jury, I don't see the deliberations lasting more than five or 10 minutes. I really hope it's more than I mean, if I'm being totally honest, I think that we know we all have we all think this is like so clear, but we don't ever know what a jury that's one thing that I've learned as a lawyer is that you really never know what a jury is thinking what they're going to do. You know, they could be a lot of people you know, they go in. They basically take a straw poll, say, what do we all think? So if they're not unanimous right off the bat, then it depends on how far people are dug in. You might have, you know, 10 for not guilty and too fagility. And if you get one or two people who just hold out, hold out, hold out, it's not going to come back in five minutes. So you really need it to be unanimous. So how many potential outcomes are there from the jury? So she's charged with second degree murder. She's charged with manslaughter while operating under the influence. The judge said she's going to give her the instruction for the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter. What that means is that when you have a charge, if there's something that if there's a charge underneath it that does not require all of the same elements. So basically, manslaughter while DUI, you have to prove I think it's four or five elements and then involuntary manslaughter underneath. You basically just have to prove that she caused the she basically intended the conduct which caused the death, but not that she intended to him or anything like that. And then leave in the scene of serious bodily injury or death. So we have four potential. So it's either guilty, not guilty, right? Right. On all of them. I mean, so you could say guilty on, you know, say she got hooked on the involuntary manslaughter and the rest are not guilty or she gets not guilty on everything. I, you know, I think the, the only likely, I mean, I think it's probably going to be a non guilty because I think there's a lot of questions and anytime there's questions, the tag, the tie goes to the runner, you know, and that's, that's the defendant in a criminal case and the reasonable doubt instruction that the judge is going to read at the end is very, very protective of defendants rights and Massachusetts, basically, she's like the last thing she'll say to the jury is, you know, if you have to be, you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a moral certainty. And that's very high. Most people have a hard time getting there, especially when these are really serious charges. So it'll be interesting. And again, I have to wonder, let's say she's not guilty across the board. Where does she go? What does she do? I think there's going to be a lot of, you know, I think there's going to be a lot of press that comes from it. Obviously, we've talked about me books, documentaries. I do think there's going to be a lot of civil suits flying all, yeah, all, all over the place. I mean, there might be some from her towards go. I think there's probably going to be some from the O'Kee family. You know, there might be some from the Albert's and McCabe's. I wouldn't be surprised if everybody after this case is over stats, violence, civil lawsuits. So you don't think there'll be a mistrial? I think there's a small chance. You know, I would say probably, based on what the evidence is, I think there's a high probability of a knock guilty. But as, as I said, you really never know with the jury. And I do think there's a chance that there could be some holdouts who really feel strongly one way or the other. And all really, all it takes is one. All it takes is one. If one person says, I'm not going to change my mind, you know, I'm not going to switch. If you know, if you really think it's a juris, she's guilty, you know, and you know that you're the only ones people, people hold out. The talk backs are pouring in Justin. What do you want to start? Yeah, obviously, the jury will likely get the case this week. So Catherine, we have some jury questions if you can answer for us. I have a question for Catherine. When all the jurors first get in the room to deliberate, do they take a vote to see where they all stand? Or do they have to go over some of the material first? Like if they all get in there and they all say, not guilty, kind of verdicts come back in like 10 minutes, or do they have to spend some time when they're going over all the trial stuff? They generally take a vote right away when they get in. So theoretically, they could all get in their vote, not guilty. You know, they might wait it out a little bit. Sometimes what juries do if they come to a decision really quickly, they literally will say like, let's wait in here. We'll get lunch or we'll give it an hour or two just to, you know, what you and you have a family and a victim. I think jurors want to show that they've, you know, taken the time and effort to really think about it. But yes, it's 100% possible that they could come back right away. And again, the only victim is John O'Keefe, of course. Justin, go ahead. Good morning. My question is about the jury as far as if the members are not unanimous. There are one or two that are, you know, either for or against and they're not budging, you know, what, what does that mean then? Do they just continue to deliberate until they are unanimous? Yes, or it's a declarative mistrial. So what happens is we have an instruction, a jury instruction called the Tuyu Rodriguez instruction. It's a case that came down. It's been around for a while. What happens is if the basically a full person will send a note to the judge that says, where it in impasse, we are deliberating, we've gone over everything. We can't come to a union in this decision. She'll bring them out. She basically says, you know, this case is in your hands. You, you 12 jurors are the best people to make a decision. You have all the evidence. Please try. Go back in. Look at everything else. Have more conversations. See if you can come to a union of since verdict because they ultimately, the courts really do not like mistrials, especially on cases of this significance. I mean, look how long we've been going. But I mean, mistrials do happen. If, if somebody says, you know, I'm not changing my mind, there's not really much you can do. Right. Wow. I know that Karen has a lot of supporters who come and sit outside the courthouse every day for the trial. I know I saw yesterday on social media that there was about 200 plus people outside supporting her. Does the jury see these people when they come in and out of the courthouse? Or do they, do they get blocked from seeing these people sitting outside? So they come in through the back. I'm sure that they knew them. I'm sure that they know they're out there. Obviously, there was a buffer zone that was set before the trial started. But I would be surprised if they have, you know, no idea that this people outside the courthouse and, you know, a lot of people, they're all from Norfolk County. They're all from that area. So especially because that courthouse is so old that you hear sirens going by like, I'm sure they're hearing every yes. Yeah. What happens with the jury once they've, you know, given their verdict? Do they just go home? Like, I mean, do, do the media, are then the media given their names or, or do they, can they call the media themselves? How does that work? Yeah. The media, you know, the jury's information is never released because many jurors don't want anything to do. Right. Which would never want to talk. So usually it's a couple of jurors who will either reach out or they'll make connections otherwise. And because some jurors really do want to talk and it is helpful sometimes to at when we get them after in the interviews to see, you know, what was happening behind the scenes or what everybody was thinking. But basically they just go back to normal life and probably they all be really enjoying the July 4th. Well, I'll bet that's a factor in the deliberations, right? They're probably saying, Hey, we've been here for so long. Can we at least have our fourth of July holidays? Absolutely. And that's why the judge was really trying to make sure that they got the verdict this week. Yeah. Because that is, it's always, you know, like when a jury gets the case on a Friday afternoon, they say, we don't want to come back on a Monday. Like, let's make the decision now. So there's always outside pressure. Yeah, we want to go to the beach. Hi guys, attorney Loftus. Here's a question that I've been wondering. So, Auntie Bev, judge Bev, seems like she's on the side of the prosecution. So she gets to choose the three jurors that are alternates. Does the judge typically watch the jurors and then decide which three she wants his alternates based on the reactions to the entire trial? So generally, you can go both ways. The judge can pick or oftentimes what they do is like put the jurors numbers in like a hat and have the clerk pick out. Usually in terms of the alternates are generally picked at random. The four person usually is somebody who the judge thinks is like paying attention will be good at kind of managing because the role of the four person is kind of to manage the jury once the deliberations start. They're the person who if there's any questions, they write their notes. Yes, basically like the mom. So the judges do do that sometimes to say like that one's been really paying attention and they're probably going to be good at managing the jury behind the scenes. Correct me if I'm wrong. There are no alternates involved going forward. I think it's just the 12 just be the 12. So that's that. I mean, can you imagine sitting on this whole I don't get to deliver it. No, so they'll wait. They'll stay. They have to stay. The alternates have to stay because so they they'll pick the 12 and then the other I think we're down to 15 or 16. The other three of four will just wait in another room because if something happened while they were deliberating, they have to take out the bad, you know, the jury that needs to leave someone and he'll stay over. Yeah. Yeah. So wait, but my question is do they talk more often than like the alternative, like the alternates, where they talk to press because they don't they don't have no bearing on that. So they I mean, after every after the verdict comes back, they can. Yes, they can. But obviously they can't talk to what the deliberations were, but they can talk to what everybody was kind of feeling while the testimony was coming in. Justin. Yeah, I did see I did catch um, Judge Bev drooling over Dr. Dan. That seems like everybody was literally everyone. Did anybody else notice that Dr. Dan doesn't have a wedding ring on? How has nobody put a ring on that yet? Yeah, Dr. Dan Wolf. It's telling you. No, there's an A. I sent a captain last time from TikTok of Judge Bev just like literally looked like she was hungry. Yeah. She was like, Oh, when he walked in to go, Oh my God, the comments are lined where you don't belong. Oh, you got to give him that hook. There's nothing sacred on this show. Let's go to Steve on the phone. Steve, you have a question for the counselor? Yes, counselor. Aside from relying on a book deal, how does Carrey get her money back for the million dollars she spent? If she found not guilty? She likely doesn't. I mean, that's that's did she spend a million dollars? Like how much do you think it cost her? I would bet that I would be generally we have flat fees. You know, if a case is this big, I would think that trial at least got trial alone, aside from the pretrial litigation, probably four or $500,000. I mean, you think about the not it's not just you have three attorneys, you have the AV guy, you have, you know, a stay every night at the Omni C port dinners. I mean, literally everything, the airfare back and forth. So that really adds up. I wouldn't be surprised if there's, you know, back-end deals with her attorneys about, you know, royalty rights or things like that, if any movies or anything comes. But they also had, you know, the GoFundMe's and I mean, defense like this costs real money. I would have thought well over a million dollars. Well, I think probably total, but in terms of, you know, because they're they've been involved for a year and a half, two years pretrial. But so usually there's like a price for a pretrial and then trial, you know. Well, I heard it. Jackson's like $1800 an hour. But I feel like I mean, he's probably working out a deal with her because I mean, you know, he's from LA. He definitely has probably other, you know, thought process about how to go with this case. Let's go to Carolyn next. Carolyn, you're on with the Councilor. Do you have a question? Hi, good morning. I'm kind of backpedaling. I'm sorry for that. But I'm stuck on the Apple Watch information when they were going over that. Is there a reason that they didn't ask what was John O'Keefe's heart rate information around the time of whatever did happen to him? And wouldn't they show a significant heart rate jump when he was if and when he was involved in a fight and then a significant drop in heart rate when he wasn't doing so well? So my assumption when we don't hear evidence or ask questions that we thought, you know, you would think these logical questions to ask is that we don't have that. And it's not like he had an Apple Watch on. So I don't know. I'm not super familiar with Apple Health because I don't use it. So I don't know how accurately it, you know, reflects somebody's heart rate or things like that. My guess is that we don't have that information. That's why it wasn't asked. All right, Justin, talk back. Let's get to the actual verdict. And once that is read. So you were just talking about how she could get charged with four different counts. What if she gets not guilty on accounts by guilty on like leaving the scene of a bodily injury? What would her handle TV? Would it be jail time and for how long? So, you know, that's a good question. I have to look back. I don't know what if there's a mandatory minimum on the vehicular, on the manslaughter DUI, there's a minimum mandatory of five years. I don't know that there's a minimum minimum mandatory on the leaving the scene. But you know, it'd be interesting because also you have to prove with leaving the scene, you have to prove that she knew he was there. He was in distress. So they all kind of had the same basic set of elements, which goes to knowledge. And I think that's the uphill battle for the Commonwealth. I think it's clear. No one really knew much that night. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, the big really the big elephant in the room that both sides have kind of minimized is the level of intoxication that we're right. We're really relying on and right all drunk people who are the then timeline and then no one was sober. No, no witnesses. So nobody was sober. No, even the people that like Ryan Nagle who can pick a sister up, he was out drinking all night like nobody was sober that night. Right. And so it's hard to really rely on those recitations. Yeah. Boy, that was a big drink and nice. Whoa. And they're back at the bars now. Justin, what have you got? We'll do one more here. I think you have answered this before, Catherine, but people that are listening for the first time. If Karen Reed gets off as not guilty, is it possible that the Commonwealth will investigate other potential people? We've had this before. This question. Now, my my position is they think she did it. No, once a knock knock, they don't consider it not guilty in a declaration of innocence. They just say that we didn't prove the case. So I think this is it. All right. There you go. We talked about Karen Reed as we always do on the Billie and Lisa morning show. Note my objection is where they can find you. Counselor on social. That's right. And so today, closing arguments, I think kickoff at nine o'clock close in arguments. Will they get the case as early as today? Yes, they'll get it probably this afternoon after she reads the jury instructions, which is everybody buckle up because it's boring. She's literally just so we'll talk to you tomorrow.