Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, who led the investigation into the death of John O’Keefe, read texts he sent about Karen Read at her murder trial Monday.
NOTE: Proctor is due back in court Wednesday. Details and livestream here.
Testimony in the Karen Read murder trial resumed Monday with Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case, taking the stand.
Read is accused of striking John O'Keefe, her Boston police officer boyfriend, with her SUV and leaving him for dead in a snowbank in Canton, Massachusetts. The defendant has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and other charges. Her defense team argues that she has been framed by someone who beat O'Keefe to death inside the home and that the homeowner's relationship with local and state police tainted their investigation.
Proctor who is being investigated for a potential violation of department policy in connection with the Read case, took the stand around 11:15 a.m. following the regular morning recess. He began by testifying about his response to the scene where O'Keefe was found on the morning of Feb. 29, 2022.
Prior to the resumption of testimony Monday, a motions hearing was held, with prosecutors arguing that the defense team has withheld information on some of the witnesses they plan to call and seeking to exclude one of their witnesses altogether. Defense attorney David Yannetti shot back at the defense in a fiery argument in which he accused them of lying.
Watch the Karen Read trial live on nbcboston.com, NECN, NBC Boston streaming platforms (including Roku, Peacock and Samsung TV) and NBC10 Boston's YouTube page. Every night of the trial at 7 p.m., come back for analysis and more.
Email questions to canton.confidential@nbcuni.com.
One of the investigators on this case with the Massachusetts State Police returned to the stand Monday, with the defense continuing to cross-examine him. Much of the focus of Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik's testimony, at least under cross-examination, has been the video of Read's SUV when it was brought into the Canton Police Department to be examined.
The prosecution contends Read struck and killed O'Keefe with her SUV, breaking her passenger side taillight. The defense contends the taillight was broken when she backed into O'Keefe's vehicle in his driveway that morning, which was caught on Ring video.
The sallyport video has been scrutinized by the defense for being edited in such a way that it jumps from one moment in time to another, seemingly showing people appearing or disappearing throughout the video.
It's also inverted – as seen on the backwards number "4" on the garage bay door.
The defense hammered Bukhenik with questions on why it wasn't described as inverted during direct examination, and walking the jury back through that testimony so they reframe where the driver side is versus the passenger side.
He appears to be going towards the rear passenger side of the vehicle, although it does not appear, so because the video is inverted, a mirror image, that's where he's going," said Bukhenik.
The jury has Tuesday off; the Karen Read trial will continue Wednesday.
Fiery hearing before the start of testimony
Before the jury entered the courtroom on Monday morning, Judge Beverly Cannone held a brief hearing to allow the prosecution to argue a motion they had filed seeking to compel the defense to provide additional information on some of their upcoming witnesses and to exclude one defense witness altogether.
The defense said Dr. Marie Russell, an emergency medicine specialist from Los Angeles, should not be allowed to testify because they received notice only two weeks ago that she was going to testify and has received only a brief synopsis about what she is expected to testify about, leaving them insufficient time to prepare for cross examination. She is expected to testify about the possibility that injuries to O'Keefe's arm might have been caused by a dog.
But Yannettti took issue with the motion, as well as some of the assertions made by the defense.
He cited one "outrageous and false assertion," saying the defense claimed that he said at a hearing in February that the defense was not planning to argue that O'Keefe's injuries might have been consistent with a dog attack. He said all that he said was that they were not going to be discussing canine DNA.
"I was astounded to read that," Yannetti said. "First of all, it is false, it is a lie."
"My integrity has been attacked," he added. "I need to defend myself and my client... I ask you: Have they no shame?"
Cannone quickly shut down Yannetti when he tried to bring up the fact that prosecutors played the inverted surveillance video during last week's testimony.
She did not exclude Russell as a witness, but said she does want to have Russell and three other defense witnesses in court without jurors present later this week for a voir dire hearing to determine whether they will be allowed to testify and what they will be allowed to testify to before the jury. That hearing is expected to last a half day.
Is a mirror image video 'true and accurate'?
Bukhenik returned to the stand shortly after 9 a.m., where defense attorney Alan Jackson continued to cross examine him.
Jackson started by showing the surveillance video from the Canton Police Department sallyport, showing Read's SUV in the garage bay.
He asked Bukhenik why he didn't mention during his testimony last week on two separate days that the video was inverted. Only when the defense began to cross examine him did he mention that it appeared the video was a mirror image.
Jackson asked if the video was an accurate depiction of what happened, given that is inverted.
Bukhenik maintained that the video is "true and accurate," as Jackson put it, even though it was a mirror image.
"If the jurors were actually standing where the camera is recording... the back of the vehicle would be on the right and the front of the vehicle would be on the left, but all activity is accurately depicted in the video... It's a mirror image," Bukhenik said.
Jackson also got Bukhenik to acknowledge that the time stamps for the sallyport video cover 17 minutes of time, but only just under six minutes of time is included on the recording.
"The video that was produced is what we got," Bukhenik said.
Jackson asked if there were obvious portions of the video where people seemed to appear out of nowhere
"It's not a smooth recording of the events... that is due to the triggering of the recording," Bukhenik said.
But he said he has seen other systems where recordings are triggered only by motion to time parameters to save on storage capacity.
Jackson showed a portion of the video where it showed a person appearing at the rear of Read's SUV, apparently out of nowhere.
Shortly after 9:30 a.m., Jackson introduced a flash drive into evidence and show its contents to the jury.
The flash drive contained another video of the sallyport, showing the correct, unmirrored image of investigators going over Read's SUV. He specifically zeroed in on a period of time that was missing from the video, saying that was the time when Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case, was examining the taillight on Read's vehicle.
During redirect, Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally asked Bukhenik if any of the video from the sallyport had been altered in any way. Bukhenik said it had not been changed.
Lally also had the entire 5 minute, 50 second video from the sallyport replayed, and then had Buhhenik confirm that it was time stamped after all of the other video evidence that jurors have seen to this point.
Bukhenik also testified that the video of the sallyport accurately depicted the actions that took place, other than it being inverted.
He also said neither he nor Proctor ever touched the rear quarter panel of the vehicle, where the taillight is located.
Bukhenik also explained why he initially stated that O'Keefe's injuries might have been as a result of a domestic assault instead of being hit by a vehicle.
"Up to that point we had learned that the defendant stated she had hit him. We had collected a broken glass. So based on the physical evidence and the statements made by the defendant to first responders at the scene at that point in time, I had communicated those facts to the medical examiner's office," he said.
But he also said at that point he had not yet been to the hospital to see O'Keefe's injuries, so he was relying entirely on information from police and firefighters at the scene. After going to the hospital and viewing O'Keefe's injuries, he said it he could tell that the broken glass was most likely not the weapon that was used to cause the injuries to the back of O'Keefe's head.
Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testifies
The second witness on Monday was Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros. He was working as the officer in charge from 8 a.m. to midnight on Feb. 29, 2022, and was told that a resident had called the police station on a 911 call saying he needed a ride to the hospital due to the snowstorm to meet his daughter, whose boyfriend had died.
Around 2:30 p.m. that day, Proctor called to say they were coming to Dighton to retrieve a vehicle involved in a homicide from the same address where the earlier 911 call had originated. He said he later learned that the home was the resident of Read's parents.
Barros responded to the Read home with Proctor and another state police trooper. He said he observed a black Lexus SUV in the driveway upon arriving at the home. He said he noticed damage to the right rear taillight. He said it wasn't completely damaged, but was cracked, with a piece of it missing. He also noticed a dent to the rear quarter of the vehicle.
He concluded his testimony at 11 a.m. The defense had no questions for him and the next witness will be called when court resumes around 11:40 a.m. after the morning recess.
Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor takes the stand
Proctor took the stand and began recounting his response to the scene of 34 Fairview Road on the day of O'Keefe's death. He said he and Bukhenik went to the home of Matthew and Jennifer McCabe and interviewed them there, along with Brian Albert. They then went to Good Samaritan Hospital in Brockton in an attempt to interview Read, but she had already been released several hours earlier.
He also testified about viewing O'Keefe's body, and examining the injuries he had suffered. He also spoke of several items of O'Keefe's clothing that were in the room, including one of his sneakers. He also retrieved O'Keefe's phone.
From the hospital, Proctor said they traveled to Read's parents' home in Dighton to speak with Read, who was at that location. He said Read's SUV was parked in the driveway when they arrived.
Proctor also testified about how Read's SUV was towed to the Canton Police Department sallyport for further investigation. Asked by Lally if he had any contact with the rear taillight, he said he and Bukhenik "never touched that vehicle."
Lally played video of the SUV in the sallyport, then asked Proctor to display the vehicle's broken taillight in court.
Shown another picture of the taillight, Proctor said, "as you can see, large pieces of it are missing."
Proctor described subsequent trips to the scene, explaining, "as the snow started to melt, more evidence started to present itself."
He and another trooper also went to O'Keefe's home on Meadows Avenue to document some of what was there, and to look at Ring camera video showing the driveway, he said. Lally played that video, which was played previously in the trial as well, showing Read pulling out of her garage the morning O'Keefe's body was found, and coming close to and possibly coming into contact with O'Keefe's SUV.
Proctor said he wanted to document whether there was any damage to the SUV, and after watching the video be played, said there was no indication of snow coming off the vehicle when Read's SUV stopped next to it, nor, when Read's SUV puilled away, any "red pieces of taillight which would show up in contrast in the white snow."
As Read's SUV pulls away in the video, Proctor said, he was able to see inconsistent lighting — "there's a gap right there," he said.
Lally showed further images of O'Keefe's vehicle, which didn't have any damage.
Lally asked Proctor to display pieces of broken taillight that were found outside the Fairview Road in the following days, in the grass between the home's flagpole and the fire hydrant.
The motion-activated Ring camera at O'Keefe's home didn't have a recording of her returning home that night, Proctor noted. He inquired with Ring about whether a video might have been deleted, but never received video where he anticipated one might have been.
Cannone sustained an objection from the defense about what Proctor heard from Ring employees about any "digital footprint" that might have been left by a video that was deleted.
The prosecution's questioning turned to Proctor's relationship with some witnesses in the case — the defense has claimed, as they argued Read was framed, that the investigator is close with some members of the Albert family.
Proctor noted that Julie Albert, the wife of Chris Albert, is friends with his sister, Courtney, whom he is very close with.
"On occasion, they would be over at my sister's house or at my parents' backyard, Julie and Chris and their kid Colin, and I would happen to be there," Proctor said.
He grew up in Canton and graduated high school there, he testified, but didn't go to school with witnesses in the case, and said there was a large age gap between him and Chris and Julie Albert, and with Colin as well. He characterized them as acquaintances.
Proctor questioned about text messages involving Karen Read case
At that point, Cannone called for a lunch break. When Proctor returned, the line of questioning continued, delving into several conversations he had about the case as it developed.
"I explained the connection with my sister to the Albert family" to Bukhenik, his supervisor, and others at state police, Proctor said. He testified Monday that the connection had "absolutely zero impact on this investigation."
At Lally's prompting, Proctor read through a text conversation he had with a group of friends he'd known since childhood.
At Lally's prompting, Proctor read through a text conversation he had with a group of friends he'd known since childhood on the evening of Jan. 29, the day O'Keefe died. After some discussion, a friend wrote, "I'm sure the owner of the house will receive some s---."
Proctor responded, "Nope, homeowner is a Boston cop, too," and told his friend that Read "waffled" O'Keefe, whose body "was banged up" when he saw it at the hospital. When a friend asked if O'Keefe was beaten up, Proctor said, "Nope."
Proctor went on to explain, he testified, that Read and O'Keefe "arrived at the house together, got into an argument, she was driving and left" and added later, "there'll be some serious charges brought on the girl," explaining to the jury that he meant there was "compelling evidence" already that Read hit O'Keefe.
When a friend asked, "is she hot at least," Proctor replied, "from all accounts, he didn't do anything wrong. She's a wack-job," then spelled out a vulgar word for a woman.
Read's attorney objected and Cannone, after asking, "These are your words, Trooper Proctor," had him say the word, "c---," out loud.
Proctor continued, "she's a babe. Weird Fall River accent, though," and added a disparaging comment about her rear.
"Why would you text that?" Lally, the prosecutor, asked.
Proctor replied that it was "unprofessional and regrettable comments [that] are something I'm not proud of and I shouldn't have wrote in private or any type of setting."
Proctor also testified that he shared a picture of Read being walked out of the Milton state police barracks, and when someone asked if Read was "a smoke," he replied, "eh." He then made a disparaging remark about a medical condition suggesting incontinency.
The trooper referred to that comment as as "unprofessional" and not something he's proud of, but added, "these juvenile unprofessional comments have zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation."
Lally turned to more texts with Proctor's sister, Courtney, whom he told about finding someone "frozen to death on a front lawn this morning," and that when he interviewed Jen McCabe, she said she knew Courtney.
Proctor's sister was incredulous, then noted that McCabe's sister was "married to Brian Albert." The trooper told the jury that it was an "overall innocent conversation."
Later on, Proctor's sister asked if the Canton situation involved a homicide, to which Proctor responded, "Don't say a word to anyone."
"Of course not," his sister replied.
He went to say of the death, "at the very least it's suspicious," and told his sister that "Julie and Chris [Albert] were at the bar with the victim and girlfiend, gotta interview them."
Lally brought up a text message that his sister sent later on, after talking to Julie Albert: "When this is all over, she wants to get you a thank you gift."
Proctor replied, "Get Elizabeth one," referring to his wife. The trooper told the jury that his wife had been stuck taking care of their two kids for 10 nights, and added, "I never received a gift, I never asked for a gift, my wife never received a gift, my wife never asked for a gift."
Lally turned to conversations with his wife, in which he again referred to Read as a "whack job," this time after she was indicted by a Norfolk County grand jury.
Proctor reiterated that they were "unprofessional messages I should not have sent. I don't have an explanation other than they're regrettable and I shouldn't have."
Lally returned to the texts with the friend group, asking about the language he used and the time frame he used them in.
Proctor said it was 16-18 hours after O'Keefe died, having established "Mr. O'Keefe never went into [the home at] Fairview Road, we knew there was one shoe at the scene, one shoe at the hospital" and other evidence, like taillight pieces at the scene, that pointed to Read's responsibility for killing O'Keefe.
"Based on the day's investigation, it was clear that Ms. Read had struck Mr. O'Keefe with her vehicle," Proctor said.
Lally had Proctor go through several text threads involving colleagues, one of whom the trooper described as a buddy with whom he hangs out outside of work.
Proctor described the friend busting his chops about a conference call with the medical examiner and doctor, who hadn't determined O'Keefe's death as a homicide
Later on, Proctor refers to Read again as a "whack job" in a text with another trooper, who replied, "Dear God, wtf, what the hell is inconclusive about the whole thing?" — a reference to the medical examiner's office finding O'Keefe's manner of death to be undetermined.
In another thread involving that trooper and a different one, Proctor said he made "a regrettable comment .. about Ms. Read's medical condition."
Later, on a June day when Read was being processed at a state police barracks, Proctor's friend on the force said, "f--- her, b----," in reaction to a statement she made claiming that O'Keefe was killed by the Alberts.
In a different thread, Proctor made a comment about Yannetti, writing, after having to stop processing Read's phone upon finding protected communication between her and her attorney, that he was going through "his r------- client's phone. No nudes so far. I hate that man, I truly hate him."
The comment was "a distasteful joke," Proctor explained, adding later that he was not looking for nude pictures but "location data text communications … more evidence contained within the phone."
The start of Michael Proctor's cross-examination
Jackson honed in on a set of text messages between Proctor and his supervisors, including Bukhenik. In that text message thread, Proctor referred to Karen Read as “retarded” when he mentioned he was going through her phone.
He also referred to Yannetti, the defense attorney, writing, “I hate that man, I truly hate him.”
In one message in particular, Proctor wrote that he was searching for nudes in Read’s phone. When asked why he would do that, Proctor described the text as an “inappropriate joke” and denied finding any inappropriate photographs of Read.
“Did you believe that your conduct was a misuse of your authority and power as you were going through her phone in August of 2022?” Jackson asked.
“No, I had a warrant signed by a district clerk a Stoughton district clerk to go through Ms. Read’s phone. I don’t think it was an abuse of power. I had every right to go through that phone,” Proctor said.
“Did the warrant say anything about nudes of my client?” Jackson followed up. While Lally attempted to object, the judge had Proctor answer the question.
“No, your honor.”
Jackson went on to question Proctor on his objectivity and bias as an investigator.
Court ended at 4 p.m., with the jury not due back until Wednesday.
