The courtroom on Wednesday buzzed with tension as defense attorneys for Karen Read, a Boston woman accused of killing her boyfriend, challenged the integrity of the lead investigator in the case. In a stern cross-examination, they unveiled a series of disparaging text messages Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor had written about Read during the investigation. Furthermore, they questioned his impartiality, as Proctor admitted to being friends with several key witnesses.
This gripping courtroom drama unfolded amidst the backdrop of a Boston winter, where in January 2022, the lifeless body of police officer John O’Keefe was discovered outside the premises of a house party.
The prosecution maintains that Read, after a night of drinking, dropped O’Keefe off at the residence of a fellow officer, and in the process of executing a three-point turn, struck him with her vehicle before leaving the scene.
But the defense team has painted a very different picture. They contend that Read has been wrongfully accused and have called into question the validity of law enforcement’s investigation. The unearthing of the unsavory text exchanges could indeed cast doubt on Proctor’s credibility, possibly detracting from the weight of the evidence discovered by him and his fellow troopers.
During the fiery interrogation session, defense attorney Alan Jackson put Proctor on the hot seat. “Before you ever went into the house, only having interviewed three folks, you had this case nice and wrapped up didn’t you?” he asked.
Proctor defended his stance, correlating his early texts to what was discovered in the early stages of the investigation, such as O’Keefe’s injuries, statements by witnesses, an interview with Read, and physical evidence including a shoe and fragments of plastic clear and red.
The prosecution is deducting – and arguing fervently – that these fragments belong to a broken taillight from Read’s SUV, sustaining damage as a result of the alleged hit. Despite admitting to the jury that he had sent derisive text messages about Read, including an inappropriate joke about her phone search and expressing, in strong language, his negative feelings towards her, Proctor insisted that these actions had not colored the investigation in any way.
As the trial entered its seventh week, Read continues to plead not guilty to the charges of second-degree murder in the death of O’Keefe. Some observers believe that Proctor’s testimony could adversely affect the prosecution’s case.
Meanwhile, her defense has woven a different narrative. They say O’Keefe was physically assaulted inside the house, bitten by a family dog, and subsequently left outside. The nature and quality of the investigation, they argue, has been undermined due to the relationship between the investigators and law enforcement officers present at the house party.
Intriguingly, Proctor confirmed during his testimony that he is friends with Officer Brian Albert, the host of the fateful party, and his brother. Yet he maintained that this never compromised the integrity of his professional obligations.
More unsettling details followed: Proctor and Kevin Albert, fellow police officer, were drinking companions. Despite the Canton Police Department officially removing itself from the investigation due to the Alberts’ involvement, Jackson revealed that Proctor had been in contact with Kevin about coordinating witness interviews – a move that raised eyebrows among legal experts.
As legal professor Daniel Medwed has notes, the very purpose of a state-appointed investigator is to ensure an impartial, independent investigation, free from local prejudices or influences. This case’s trial heats up with the friendly ties between Proctor and the Albert family, the rash text messages and apparent zeal to assign culpability, potentially threatening to erode the fabric of objective criminal investigation.
