In complex civil litigation involving multiple parties and causes of action, courts often consolidate cases to promote judicial economy and prevent inconsistent rulings. The Karen Reed case demonstrates this principle, with four separate civil cases pending in different courts (Plymouth County Superior Court, federal court, and others) all related to the same underlying events. Discovery deadlines serve as critical timelines that courts enforce to ensure cases progress efficiently, with Judge Gild Day actively pushing parties to meet these deadlines. The attorney explains that while these cases could theoretically be consolidated, the complexity of different causes of action and the fact that depositions have already begun makes consolidation challenging. This illustrates how civil litigation requires careful management of multiple procedural elements including discovery, venue, and case consolidation to ensure fair and efficient resolution.
Karen Read Civil, Proctor Texts with Attorney Andrew Myers
Added:Neon lights cutting through the night.
City streets they call out to the fight.
The skyline homes are alive never still.
Chasing dreams we run against the thrill.
Young hearts in a glow in a p of the street. We rise, we fall, where the shadows meet.
Underneath the lights, where the ones they'll talk about.
You're wild and free. Let it all scream out.
Yo, what's up jerks? Good afternoon.
Happy Wednesday. We've got uh a lot happening right now related to Karen Reed and also with Miles King and Rosemary. We got a lot to cover today.
I'm I'm looking to get right back into the news, the headlines. There's a lot happening. There's also a lot happening on the YouTube streets, the so-called drama. We're not going to touch any of that. We're just going to get back to work. Back to work, people. Especially the stuff that doesn't involve us. Thank God for once. I love you all. I want to thank all the people here. Law Talkers.
I love Money Mike. Money Mike is here.
I'm I'm feeling better. I had a headache yesterday. I told you all that. Remember that I'll I'm going to be live for a little while tonight. There's going to be a lot going on. We have a great guest. We have an attorney coming back to the show. somebody I like. He's got his own YouTube channel. He's uh been talking all about what we're going to talk about today. So, this is probably going to be like a a second lap for him, but it's it's kind of new for us. I want to hear his take on this because there's been a lot going on with Karen Reed and especially Michael Proctor and the town of Centon and uh like I said, Miles King and Rosemary and it just we had just had a hearing today. We're going to probably get into that a little later tonight as well. But let's bring up the guest, uh, attorney Andrew Meyers. He, like I said, he's also got his YouTube channel that we'll be promoting as well tonight. Uh, he's a local attorney. He's been on, I believe that, oh, he's had how we car on his show. I know that. Uh, so, and he's had some great guests. He's also has another attorney that's on his show often. Uh, and he's really been killing it. You see Betterero on there as well. Let's welcome attorney Andrew Meyers back to Young Jerks. How you doing, Andrew?
>> Hey, Mike. I'm well. How are you? I'm feeling good today. I'm feeling better.
I had a headache yesterday and it's a little cooler out. It's nicer. I I've been planting grass and it's finally coming up. Like I was at that point where I was almost ready to give up cuz you're not supposed to grow grass in June. But the landscape I know you like to grow grass.
>> I do. I like grow all kinds of grass.
I'm growing grass everywhere. All kinds of grass.
>> The best time to grow grass is in the fall when it cools down.
>> I know. That's what I'm saying. usually early spring or or fall. That's usually what I do. But the landscaper, we had a lot of, you know, bad spots and the neighbor was like, "We need to fill that in." So, he started planting seed. I'm like, "You're doing it now? I'll I'll water it." So, I just I've been watering it every day and finally it's coming through. So, I'm feeling good about it.
It's like, "Finally, like I you know, you know how it is. You get like 10 days in and you're like, "What's going on?"
And then all of a sudden, you see it coming through. You're like, "All right, it's coming through." So, I'm feeling good. The grass is growing.
>> Good. Good. Good for you. the important stuff. But anyways, let's talk about this Karen Reed stuff because you've been covering this and we've all been watching these hearings and we've seen that judge. What how do you want to break into this because there's a lot to cover. There's a lot of different tri like aspects of this suits and venues and it just goes on and on and on and on and uh you did prepare something for us.
So, let me know when you want to put that on the screen and maybe introduce yourself too to the audience that might not know before we even get into that.
Oh, I'm not as well known as you, but uh because you've been doing this for a long time. I've I've only been doing a podcast for uh three years now, a little bit more than three years, and we're struggling, but you know, there's a lot of competition. There are a lot of good attorneys out there and other attorneys, but there are a lot of good attorneys out there that are doing podcasts. What I find really interesting is that attorneys all over the country are covering Karen Reed. And I don't know, Mike, maybe you could give me some insight on this. Maybe I don't know whether it's because it's good for the numbers or is the Karen Reed trial uh or are all the Karen Reed associated matters just that outstanding in people's minds that we see attorneys from all over the country covering it on YouTube. Which do you think it is? Is it the numbers or is it because >> I think it's all of that. I mean, I think anytime I do, it's funny like I'll I you know, I do a lot of the political guests. I'll have the auditor on or whoever else I'll think it might draw numbers and people aren't as interested in that stuff and then anytime I touch Karen Reed >> that gets the numbers every single time.
It's funny like I had uh city councelor Ed Flynn on the show live show got no numbers. I repackaged one segment of it >> where he talked about Karen Reed and John O'Keefe. I put that video out. It got 15 times the amount of listeners that the live did just cuz it said Karen Reed in the title. So it's like everything Karen Reed. I think that is a big part of it. But I also think the police corruption part of it like that the scandalous you know DA and the the mystery of it. I think that's the other part is the mystery of it cuz people have been arguing this on all sides and some people don't know still some people are still it's it's a who done it in the end. So, I think there's a lot of elements and I think Karen Reed herself um being against the state and the DA, you know, being who she is and a younger attractive female, let's put it that way, who's a professional. She uh is almost like a lightning rod just because of who she is. Some people love her.
Some people dislike her strongly just because, you know, professional I'll say white woman, too. Some people don't like that aspect of it. They say you only care about this because she's a white woman, which there is something to that because, you know, a lot of times when there's an attractive white woman, people want to rescue. They think that, you know, and so there's an there's a lot of different aspects to this, let's say. And and not that I'm saying people shouldn't support Karen because she's a white woman. I clearly support Karen for a lot of reasons. I think she's innocent. That's why I support Karen. Uh that's my opinion. I'm allowed it. And the big thing is she was found not guilty. So this is like continuing to be almost like the OJ thing at this point.
Like people got even more interested in the civil trial because of what happened in the first trial. So I think it's like a never-ending story at this point.
>> No, I agree with you 100%. And I think I hit I think you hit the nail on the head. It doesn't matter whether you're writing a play or a novel or a true crime. It's the element of mystery. We do not know what happened to John O'Keefe. We know that the experts that came in from ARCA proved definitively, credibly, you know, without any doubt in my mind that Karen Reed's car did not hit John O'Keefe. And John O'Keeffe also additionally was not hit by a car. And the experts that the Commonwealth had were just atrocious. You had uh you had Joseph uh what was his last name? I forget now. I was I was looking at it this morning. The state cop that uh was really no expert, but he pretended that he was. Joseph Paul was just awful. And then you had the blue man group guys that, you know, put grease paint on the tail light and waved their arms around without any proof of substantial similarity to what they were doing and what might have happened to John O'Keefe. Uh, and then the other one lied on his resume and was fired. So >> I mean that that that too like the drama of that trial like the all that both of them and then the Sally port theverted Sally. I mean, there's stuff where we just we just dropped our jaw. We were just like, can you believe this? Can you like There was so many moments in the two trials. So, I I think >> so so if we know definitively that it was not Karen Reed that hit uh John O'Keefe, who did that element of mystery is the biggest thing, whether you're talking about a Shakespeare or a play or a sitcom, that's the element that people want. in other cases where you know you see that the person did pretty conclusively do the crime that they're charged but then there are other types of defenses whether it's mental health or you know a whole myriad of other defenses you know the Karen Reed case what happened to John O'Keefe why wasn't there a good investigation why didn't the police go into the house why didn't the police do a lot more why didn't they seal off the crime scene why didn't they put up police tape why didn't why aren't there any pictures of uh Mr. O'Keefe when they found him in the snow. Why did they use solo cups? There's just so many mysteries in this case, right? Why? And >> are are they going to do that now? It's probably too late. Many commenters feel that it's too late to do an investigation now because the trail is cold. But that element of mystery is is what it is. And Karen is a articulate woman. She's gone against all the advice that all attorneys always give every defense uh client. Don't talk. Don't go to the media. don't say anything, but she's been doing it and she's still doing it. So, it it's a standout case.
It is a standout case. And I think I think I think the case uh deserves the national attention that it's getting >> done it and just the story arc how it continues and the civil case and and you wonder like >> is it that like is it you know there was Star Wars, right? And then there was what was the next movie? Empire Strikes Back. Is this the Empire Strikes Back part of the movie? Like, is this when the Mc Alberts come back and win something? Uh, I mean, that's an element of this, too. People want to see what happens next. Who who's going to come out victorious in the civil side, which, uh, we definitely want to talk about tonight. I mean, you before we get there, I keep teasing that. We got a comment said, "Andrew streams are very good. You kind of um, >> thank you. downplayed your downplayed your YouTube. I have to say like I've noticed you're you're getting some views now. Like you you are actually pretty damn popular now. Have you noticed your views are going up? I noticed >> I'm I'm not I'm not where a lot of other people are. And Mike, to be really honest with you, I love it. When I first started doing it, that's not the reason I started doing it. I knew nothing at all about YouTube. I knew nothing at all about YouTube. I I simply blogged way back in the teens. I blogged because the guy that did my website say said that well Google doesn't like it if you just have a website and leave it there. So you've got to add new comment, new content. So I was blogging all through the 201s, you know, various legal topics. You name it, I did it. You know, car accidents, people don't know how to drive, distracted driving, drunk driving, what are the elements of damages if you're in an accident, you know wh why? My attorney says I have to have an expert. Why? What's So I did all that. But then despite the best information I was getting from my SEO expert towards the end of the teens, people don't read anymore, Mike.
>> Yeah, true. You you can't go into a store and buy a newspaper anymore. The grocery stores, but the old mom and pop stores don't handle them anymore because they get 10 papers, they can't sell nine of them, and they go back. So, >> so >> I'm an old I'm an old print writer. So, tell me about it. We used to write for Big Boston. No, no longer a publication.
>> I'm an old print reader. I would go to uh the store. I get the Herald. I get the Globe. I get the Post. I get the um the Washington p the Washington Post, which is crap now, but it was a great P.
I get the Phoenix. I'd get the Real Paper. I'd sit there and read them all.
I read them all. Read them all. Read them all. But anyhow, my point is that people don't read. So my blog articles were, you know, crap. So people said, "Well, do videos. do videos. So, I started doing I started doing uh videos along the lines of my civil practice.
People don't know how to drive in rotaries. Uh ballards can protect uh people. There was an accident down in Hingham where a guy drove right into an Apple store and killed somebody because there were no ballards. People didn't care. People didn't watch that. So, I on advice of a lot of people, people said do true crime. So, that's why I did it.
And I was about um six months into it and my co-host at the time, Laney, said, "Why don't you monetize this?" I said, "What? I didn't know you could get money for it." I was just I was only doing it to amp up my SEO for my website. Then Laney tells me, "Oh, you can I'm" I'm like, "What? You can make money doing this? Really? Seriously?"
>> I know.
I feel the same way because I started out as a I started out with MySpace >> like and then I had a blog and then I had a blog with some Google ads but that you like and then like you said I started writing I was a print writer for Dick Boston. Do you remember Dick Boston? It was like a smaller rival the Phoenix. Do you remember that?
>> You ever Phoenix and the Real Paper?
>> Yeah.
>> I remember the Phoenix and the Real Paper and I think a place that we both worked at a little bit. Um, WCAS.
>> Oh, yeah.
>> WCAS.
>> I didn't work there, but you did.
>> I thought you did. I thought you did briefly. Very briefly.
>> No. No. I've never actually worked in any real radio. Although, actually, how we car radio, so that's not true. But, uh, you know, I used to I used to help out on the only real radio I kind of did helping out. I did a lot of guest spots, but uh, WAF Bay Rock, I used to kind of help out with my girl. She she was, you know, the host of it. I I didn't really want to be a part of it because I don't want any nepotism or having her boss be around. But sometimes I'd drive her in or be her co-host on Christmas and [ __ ] like that when her other co-hosts wouldn't be there or if there was a Blizzard I'd be her driver and uh you know I'd help her pick out songs behind the scenes and direct some music to her sometimes, but that was pretty much it.
>> But it's funny because everyone thinks I did radio because basically what I did was thing called EMF radio and on regular radio. It was streaming internet radio. It wasn't real radio >> but now I do hobby. So, and I have, like I said, I've been on on the radio a million times as a guest on other shows and things like that and have associations. I worked with a lot of people from BCN, FNX and AF specifically with uh booking shows. I used to do a lot of music and things like that. But, um, let's get back to this. Let's get because I want to talk about what you're doing. Number one, we got your link in the chat so people know our great Mont Sarah posted all your links. I want people to follow Andrew on YouTube and everywhere else she posted. Make sure you check that out pinned in the chat.
>> Thank you.
>> Uh we already have some questions. I mean, like I said, where do you want to start on this Karen Reed stuff? Cuz I I do have some questions people are posting. We're going to post some questions to you, but let's just get started where you want to where do you think we should jump off?
>> Well, I don't know. It's up to you.
There was there was a hearing this afternoon in the wrongful death case where Judge Gilde was giving them all a lot of grief and he's not happy that Colin Albert was deposed but not pursuant to the subpoena that came out initially. So there's that. And he he's holding people's feet to the fire. Well, he's in the I don't care if he's in the military. I want an answer. When can he appear? Well, he you know, we only talk to him once a week. Well, yeah, I need to know when he's going to appear. The discovery. he can probably appear in the fall. Well, the discovery deadline's in August 17th. So, that's pretty much how that hearing went. And the judge is very not happy. He there's two more additional hearings that he's now scheduled to find out what's going on with all of the parties, all of the depositions. He's not happy that there are several motions uh to compel uh regarding discovery. And we heard this afternoon that um Aaron Rosenberg said that there's yet another motion to compel and I think it was answers to interrogatories.
And why they keep bringing this stuff to Judge Gild Day, I'm not sure. They're just, you know, um they're they're just getting into these um figurative fisticuffs over so many issues like the Colin Albert deposition or non-deposition. and they they don't realize that judges had it and they really need to go down to Starbucks, have a latte, and work it all out.
Either that or go down in Brian Albert's basement and have a fight and fight it out. One or the other. They need to learn they need to learn how to resolve these things without, you know, running to um to um Judge Gild.
>> Judge Gild. Yeah, >> it seems like the judge has been frustrated. I didn't get to watch that yet today. I just saw it came out. I'm gonna I was trying to stream it ear like find where I could stream it. I couldn't find it there. I saw it like 2 minutes before we were starting. So, I'm going to definitely uh share that on our channel later. So, you know, we'll probably watch it later together. Um is a question that came up related to all that. Wait, what? True crime says, "Can we discuss the deposition avoidance of Proctor and Colin? What do you think about that? Is there anything to think about it or is it suspicious? Is it normal?"
>> Well, what do you say with respect to Proctor? He brought that lastm minute motion last Friday. His deposition had been scheduled last Monday and on a Friday, you know, Proctor's attorney filed the emergency motion, which I didn't think was proper at all. Um, no real emergency and it gave at least it the whole thing was impounded, so we don't know. But they cited two nebulous reasons, health reasons and um what was the other one? health reasons and um uh other concerns, but they weren't really very specific. I health reasons could be anything from a cold to being on death's doorstep. So, we don't know what that was all about, and that was really bad form. Um, in my own opinion, in the very end, you know, the judge heard the whole thing on a Monday morning at what, 8:45, 9:00, because they couldn't get their act together. He heard the thing at 9:00. uh they impounded uh the material, so we don't know exactly what it was. Uh and then the judge says, "Well, uh I'll get I don't see enough evidence to substantiate the emergency motion. I'll give you till 4:15 this afternoon." They came back at 4:15. Whatever report that's been impounded that um Proctor's attorney at that time presented, still didn't substantiate it. The judge says, "All right, I will not allow the emergency motion. I will uh end my stay of the subpoena. The deposition shall go forward tomorrow. In my opinion, the read people who I love in this particular instance blew it by not yes, we'll do it. No, we're not available.
What could be more important than um interviewing Proctor and setting him up because if he didn't appear, which it looked likely, he's in contempt of court. What could have been better for this case than holding Michael Proctor in contempt? I mean, we were we were hearing that Alan Jackson had a conflict that he had something else he had to do, scheduled a hearing. Would you do it without Jackson in that case? What would you have done?
>> Well, I know Jackson was was loaded verbar, but I mean, the other guys, I mean, I don't know. What could have been more important? Allan Jackson is obviously a great attorney, and I'm not going to say anything against the great Alan Jackson, but what could have been more important? Couldn't he have gotten somebody else to sit in for his other case? Or couldn't one of the Aaron Rosenberg is a fantastic attorney. He's on top of it all. Why couldn't he have done the first day of the deposition?
So, I think they blinked. I think they blinked. Um, but so that was that and then the whole Colin Albert thing.
Uh, you know, that was what Judge Gild was hearing this afternoon and he wasn't hearing this, uh, you know, that Albert, you know, went into boot camp. It's like, you know, this subpoena has been out there since what, Mike? I think February. And the the um Colin Albert people said, "Well, you're you're asking for too broad of a range of um documents. We can't get all of that."
So, they were going back and forth. But at one time uh when Rosenberg and Selixen were going and saying all right we're going to narrow the scope of all of this uh the um Proctor people just went silent for three weeks and then the whole thing was forced. They did a deposition without the Reed people and it's like that the judge wasn't hearing any of that. He said no when when is he going to appear for the subpoena that's outstanding? If a subpoena means anything it has to mean something. So the judge wasn't buying it and he I think rightly so. He wants to know when Colin Albert's going to sit for his deposition with all parties. I mean how sneaky to go behind everybody's back and hold a deposition without the read people there. How sneaky was that? You know sneakiness back and forth. I mean Karen too, but uh I don't blame Karen. you know, it's just it's part of the game that there is definitely like a almost like a chess match going on between back and forth like especially the way that you know Karen's team, you know, when when they filed the lawsuit, uh, you know, the atur the judge noted that and in a recent hearing and it's kind of been back and forth. You could see the games being played, but uh, where do you see this going though in the end? I mean, you have Do you want me to throw this up on the stage and you you have, uh, >> kind of scorecard?
>> Do you know what this was? This is my scorecard. There's uh four different civil cases and I've heard other people be confused about the four cases. I you know I've actually heard good good creators and good attorneys talk about one case and then talk about another. So we did a scorecard and I just updated it with respect to the state cases this afternoon. So you're getting this first before I put it on my channel, Mike. But so case one, >> case one, go back up a little bit. Go back up a little bit. There you go. Case one is the wrongful death suit in the Plymouth County Superior Court. Um the plaintiffs are Paul O'Keefe both individually and on behalf of uh John O'Keefe's estate and his mother Margaret O'Keefe uh individually and as the grandparent and guardian of Kaye Furbish. They brought the case. They're the plaintiffs. The defendants are Karen Reed, CF McCarthy's, and the Waterfall Bar and Grill. This was brought in the Plymouth County Superior Court. It's the wrongful death case. There's also um some uh claims for emotional distress.
It was filed, remember this, way back in August of 2024.
That's when it was originally filed.
Then of course Karen Reid got a limited protective order that she wouldn't have to do her deposition or other discovery.
And the thing that's biggest right now is that there's a discovery deadline only uh two months from today, August 17th. And that's why Judge Gilde is kind of, you know, pushing people. And according to the tracking order, uh I can explain what a tracking order is if anybody wants to know, but the tracking order in the court says final judgment's got to be, you know, by August 26 of 2027 whether it happens >> 14 months.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> So that's case one.
Case >> when they say final judgment, does does that mean it will be completely done by then or it will go to trial then?
>> No, that means that it's got to be done by then. But these tracking orders are like a guideline. They're a push back guideline. It's like, you know, uh, Mike, let's get together for lunch.
Yeah. Well, I'm busy this day. I'm all right. So, let's say, give me a buzz Monday of two weeks from now. It's a general kind of, but the courts, depending on who the regional administrators are at the time, do or don't enforce these things. And Judge Gilde >> obviously wants to push it.
>> He wants it done. He wants it done. So that's case.
>> Now we're going to page two, right? Page two.
>> There's case number. Case two is uh in the federal court. Uh this is Karen Reed. This is the case that she originally brought in Bristol, right?
And the defendants are >> Yeah. The defendants are Michael Proctor, Yuri Buchananic, and Brian Tully. all personally. And then what they called the house defendants, Brian Albert, Nicole Albert, Jennifer McCabe, Matthew McCabe, and Brian Higgins. And again, uh this is in the federal district court in Boston. What are the causes of action? uh malicious prosecution against Proctor Buchanan and Tully, supervisor liability under um section 1983, a civil rights action, uh conspiracy, the mass civil rights act, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. But the big thing is the malicious prosecution by Proctor Buchanan and Tully. And then the roles that the house defendants um played in that. That's case two. Case three.
>> Let me before we get to case two. Case three.
>> This one I know they're pushing. Am I correct? They're pushing to have this all dismissed.
>> The house defendants, right?
>> Yes, they are. I'm not up on that. I haven't I haven't read. What do you think about the chances of that getting dismissed? Is it is it like >> is it possible?
>> I don't think so because in mo there's two things. There's the uh antislap statute which I don't think that really fits. That's my opinion. I know other creators have have gone really into depth. I did one episode where we talked about the slap statute. I think that the I don't think that that really pertains here. I don't think the case law really >> I don't think I don't think anti-slap's going to help Karen Aiden or or the House defendants any of them because you know I I got sued last year or was it this year? I'm trying to remember but I got sued recently and I I won that but what I didn't win is the anti-slap and I thought we had a shot but anti-slap is very narrow. It has to be someone basically who's in office or who's like uh you know working for the governor you know some it has to be about a campaign too. It's like very narrow. I don't want to be like 100% specific on what it you know how narrow it is but it is narrow.
I thought I had a chance cuz the people suing me were funded by the city of Boston. So I thought I had a shot. But I I just think it's really hard to win an anti-slap. Unless, like I said, unless it's like Chris Albert, if you were talking about his campaign, then you could win an anti-slap. But otherwise, I don't see any any of these anti-slaps winning.
>> I don't either. I agree with you on that. And >> but they could win on the dismissal.
Doesn't mean they can't get it dismissed. Anti-slap just means they get money back. They get their funds back and it's a specific way to dismiss.
So, but then the fallback is on uh the general motion to dismiss. There's two grounds for the motion to dismiss. One is the slap and the other is just a a standard 12B6 motion to dismiss under the federal rules. But all a plaintiff has to do to withstand a motion to dismiss under rule 12b6 in the federal or Massachusetts courts. here were federal is um have enough facts that they state a plausible articulable claim. Does doesn't have to be true. Um that comes later under a motion to dismiss under rule 56. All they have to do is state a claim with sufficient alleged facts, sufficient aversions that they state a plausible, articulable case. And I think they do, especially since they amended the complaint and we did an episode on that going way deep.
So, no, I don't think that's going to be dismissed. You know, I don't have a crystal ball. I'm not a judge, but no, I think >> it seems it seemed like it would be too complicated to dismiss at that point, too, because like my case, the reason it got dismissed at that point, even though it's a state, not a federal, but the reason it got dismissed is because it was so clear-cut.
>> Like, I didn't make any statements of fact. Everything they I got sued for was either a question or an opinion, it was clear, and the judge saw that immediately. So, we didn't even have to argue the facts of it. I don't see how they can have something like that to get it dismissed quickly. So, yeah, I I I I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't know enough about it, but >> No, I think you're right. I thought it >> I think you're on the right track.
Absolutely, Mike. Um, case three is in the PL This is the other case that's in the Plymouth County Superior Court. This is the defamation case that was brought by the House defendants. Oh, they hate that word, don't they? They They've said they're the Commonwealth witnesses. But specifically the plaintiffs in the case are Jennifer McCabe, Brian Albert, Colin Albert, Brian Higgins, and this is the case they brought against Karen Reed and Aiden Carney. It's in the Plymouth County Superior Court. This is the one, interestingly, they brought it over in Barnstable. Now, don't you love hearing creators in other parts of the country say Barnstable?
>> Yeah, that's a >> like Hil They have tough time with Worista. They have a tough time with a lot of words that we use over here.
>> So, anyhow, it was brought in Barnstable, but the uh administrators of the court system quickly removed it back over to Plymouth where the other cases.
Uh, and this is the case for it's primarily defamation, but the other causes of action are civil conspiracy, emotional distress, aiding and abetting, uh, defamation, emotional distress, and the Massachusetts Unfair Trade Act, which I don't think is going anywhere, Mike, but you bring that because you can get your attorney's fees paid. It's >> unfair trade. How is I I'm weird. That's a weird one for me. Unfair trade act.
>> Well, I mean, they're saying that Mr. Carney has a business and they >> Well, okay. I could see it against Aiden, maybe cuz he has a business, but Karen doesn't have a business. Is it Is that part against Karen, too, or is that just against Aiden?
>> I forget whether they even brought it against Karen, but I'm telling you right now, I don't think it would sit against Karen, but the allegations are I'm not litigating it and I'm not stating any conclusions, but the allegation is that Mr. Kney has a business. Um he has multiple um platforms on which he puts out news and before the Karen Reed case he had a lot of stuff like the state police uh overtime scandal on a lot of issu other issues. So it's true that he does have a business and they're saying that he was engaged in unfair trade.
Whether it's a good claim or not, I'm not the judge. But you you bring a claim like this. I've brought claims like this in the past. You win some, you lose some. But if you win, you can automatically get double or triple damages. automatic and you also get attorneys fees and costs because in this country there are two rules the British rule and the American rule. Under the British rule, the winner gets their attorney's fees paid by the loser. Loser pays. So in in in the UK, the idea is that you don't want to bring a a case that you don't think you're going to win because if you lose, you're paying the other side's um legal fees. The American rule is that every >> I'd be a rich person right now and have all that money back.
>> The American rule is that all the parties pay their own legal fees and expenses unless there's some statute or other feeshifting device. That's what Mass General Law Chapter 93A is. It's a fee shifting device. Generally speaking, people bring it in the consumer arena.
You know, you you buy a car and it's a lemon and there's they're all that's a bad example because there's all other types of um car >> ripped off. If you get ripped off, you would use that unfair trade act.
>> MGL chapter 93A generally is used for consumers, but there is a specific section for um businesses and that's what they're bringing in. And this was filed very recently, April 16th of 2026.
Uh the discovery deadline is February 10th. It had been out three years, but when Judge Gilde was assigned this case, he truncated it down to February 10th of 2027, which Mike, that's not that far off. And then the ca the case closing is scheduled for March 17th of 2028. So, Judge, >> which is a while.
>> Yeah, >> that's a little while. That's a year and a half.
>> Yeah, but >> it's not that long in a case like this, though. But I know it's a year and a half. You know, I wonder you you mentioned the uh they don't like the house defendants. I've heard that um because it was mentioned on one of one of our shows of guests that one of their spokes people type people on Twitter got upset about it. But I wonder if they get upset about the house plaintiffs. Is that is that equally upsetting to them or is it just the house defendants?
Because now they're the plaintiffs. They they can be called the house plaintiffs.
Well, they um they um they like to be called the Commonwealth Witnesses only because people say in my channel, "Well, they didn't see anything. They didn't see what did they see?" Well, they're called that because they were uh called by the prosecutor, either Lai or Hank Brennan in either trial one or trial two. So, they just they like the they like the sound of that. So, that's case three. And >> that's a good point. Commonwealth. I could see why they like to be that that makes sense to me. Commonwealth witnesses because I mean that gives them protections, too. legal protections.
That's what their their whole thing is about. A lot of their PR, so it makes sense. Case four. Case four is uh is the very recent one. The very very very recent one that was originally intended to be in the other Karen Reed case that got removed to federal. They wanted to put it all together, but the House defendants removed it to federal. So, this is a standalone case. These things could all change. Mike, this is I just updated this today. Okay, I may have to update it again, but this is the case that Karen Reed brought against the town of King and the Mass State Police.
>> You say like howie says it.
Sorry, I got to laugh. Every time he does that, I just laugh.
>> I've been a Howie listener for since he went on air.
>> I remember when I remember when he uh was kind of trained by Jerry Williams.
Remember Jerry Williams?
>> Oh, yeah. Legend.
>> Am I showing my age? Anyhow, so this one was >> I'm old too. This was brought in the Bristol County Superior Court. It's still there at this time. Uh, and Karen Reed is bringing it against the town of Canton and the Mass State Police because of the causes of action of negligent hiring, supervision, and retention of Proctor and Sergeant Good and the rest.
Violation of civil rights, uh, both the state and federal um, section 1983.
Uh, and it's brought under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act. They had to go. You Mike, you can't, you know this, you can't just sue a city or a state uh without their permission. It's called the in Massachusetts, it's called the Massachusetts TOR Claims Act. And you have to go through a procedure called presentment, which means there's a format in which you need to present your claim to the executive director or the other person that is designated to take such claims. And then they have six months to either, you know, reject it or It's rare that they make a deal, but that's why it's there.
>> So, this was filed very recently on June 4th of 2026, just a few weeks ago. The discovery deadline is March 31st, 2027, uh, which gives them, you know, not a lot of time. And then the final judgment would be scheduled for June 5th of 2028.
So, I originally did this, I was going to do a short, um, but I'm giving it to you first. I have to update it a little bit more than we're going to do a short so people can use this as kind of a guideline because I've heard people confuse the the four cases.
>> Oh, it's easy. It's even if you know there's four, it's it's like which one are we talking about again? Even though if you know, you have to think about it.
You're like and especially a lot because a lot of them are under the same judge.
You know what I mean? So it's it's two of them.
>> It is confusing. Yeah. But you know >> judge >> Yeah. Yeah. It's funny though because I like that you did this for us because the big takeaway for me in my mind when I'm seeing it on paper is 2027 and 2028 we got two more years of this stuff basically if if it goes all the way if it I mean we don't know could get thrown out could get settled you never know but still it looks like we have two more years of this stuff upcoming next year and and the year after which is just wow I mean it just never ends. Um, >> you know, you say >> I'm I'm sorry. You say it could settle.
I don't see that. Like in this case looking at right now, um, Karen Reed versus the town of Canton and the Mass State Police. Um, >> I can't see them, you know, coming up with any amount of money that Cameron Reed is going to accept. I can't see that at all. I see that >> and I don't see them offering because I don't think they want to have that loss, especially publicly, the public relations of this for both sides. I don't think any of these people are going to want to settle. Um, you're right.
>> And with it with respect to Canton, you know a lot more than that because you cover their local meetings. I I don't Sometimes I watch you when you do that, but with respect to the Mass State Police, because I have handled litigation involving the Mass State Police. There is a whole procedure for even paying a dime. There's a whole internal procedure in which the attorney general's office has to write a whole report. You know, the the attorneys handling it, write a report. It goes up to the actual um attorney general. Then it goes over to the executive office of administration or some such horse, you know what, in Massachusetts. Then the controller of Massachusetts has to go through it. Uh and then it goes to the governor's office. So there's a whole procedure that's um employed if they want to settle a case. I did settle a case against the Mass State Police, but it was a car accident. Um I don't want to be I don't want to divert our attention away to the top. How much money? You can you say how much money you might have settled it for?
>> It was so long ago. It was so so so long ago. I I honestly don't remember. But what it was was my client was driving in one direction on Broadway in Methuan and the State Cruiser was driving in a different direction and made a Uturn to go to Dunkin Donuts. I swear to God those are the facts. I swear to God those are the facts. And um >> you think it's funny because they were going to get donuts.
>> It was a simple simple simple they were going to get donuts case and they didn't want to settle it. We went through the resentment and then we filed a >> a claim and in the end it resolved but they you know the attorney I talked to seemed like a reasonable person seemed like a really reasonable person but he had to go up and down this chain several times. So in a case like this I don't see it settling. I really I do I do not see it settling. Don't you think it would be interesting though for this to be on Mara Healey's desk? What do you think she'd do?
You might settle it just for it to go away, especially before the election.
But I mean, I don't know. I mean, this I think the state police don't want to settle it. That's the thing. I don't think that they want to they want to try to win this. I don't know. I agree. I agree. I I just I I can't see it settling. I I see it. I see I see them all going to court, which raises the question, as my co-host Yoli Medina said. Oh, you just said her name.
It's funny because this was one of the comments I have started here came up the several Yoli comments have come up tonight. Victorine, one of our mods here says, "Bring Yoli with you next time, Andrew." People like Yoli. We're seeing a lot of Yoli love in the chat. Put up your one if you like Yoli. She's I like her, too.
>> Well, she's from California. She's from California. Says, you know, we're we're in in the crucible here in Massachusetts, and we've been following this Massachusetts stuff for years. So the fact that there's corruption is just like to you and me it's just another day in Massachusetts. I'll speak for myself.
The fact that there's corruption that's been reported is just another day in but so she comes with a fresh view and she asks some really good questions that sometimes I can't really answer them without thinking about it a little bit.
Um but now I forget what I was going to say. Oh, her point is that is Massachusetts crazy? Are they going to try all four of these cases separately?
What if they have different outcomes?
Because Mike at the my next chart is my next chart is the causes of action and what is required to get to those causes of action. And at the center of all of them, Mike, wouldn't you agree, you don't have to, wouldn't you agree that at the center of every single cause of action is what happened to John O'Keefe on um February on January 28th, 2022? What happened? What happened to John O'Keefe? That's the nucleus of all of these cases.
>> That's why I'm doubtful like any of them will win. Like that's why I I feel like I feel like the house defendants don't what do you call them? The Commonwealth witnesses don't have a shot. I I feel like they don't because they can't. How are they going to prove that? I just I don't believe it. I don't believe they're going to be able to prove it. Maybe I'm wrong, but uh I think Karen's going to have trouble, too, because she's got to prove they did it, which is also very hard to do, I think. And I think maybe the best shot is Karen versus the town of Canton and the mass state police because obviously and the cops, you know, because they they obviously have issues. Proctor obviously has issues. So I think she has a shot on that stuff, but I don't I'm not so sure >> about the house plan or the witnesses, whatever we're calling those folks, the McCabes, the Alberts, right? The Some people call them the Mc Alberts. There's a reason people It's easy when you just call them Mc Alberts, but I know they don't like that. But just I think they're all going to have a hard time going against each other because of what you said. It's really hard to prove what actually happened.
>> But but what happens, Mike, what happens if they try all four of these cases that we just went through? What happens if they try all four of them >> and they come up with different >> I I'm glad you brought that up cuz I never thought of that. It's such a good point. What does happen? What happens if Karen wins and they win? It's like that is weird. That could be so bizarroal if that would happen. Like >> what if one what if one jury says that um okay no we we agree that um Karen didn't do it uh and another jury says oh we think Karen did it then what >> I know >> doesn't public opinion do >> doesn't that look terrible for the courts that they wasted all this time and energy so I did an episode where I'm just spitballing I'm just prognosticating I'm just I'm just thinking outside the box where I I'm thinking that at least the state cases could be um put together. There could be a joiner of the cases there. There could be uh trial of the actual facts of what happened that night and then bifurcate out the different causes of action. The defamation really might have nothing to do with the negligent infliction of emotional stress. the emotional uh infliction of emotional distress may have nothing to do with the negligent hiring and supervision. So try the issue of what happened you know that night and then bifurcate the trial uh for different juries or you know different uh courts to decide the rest of the causes of because it just seems illogical to >> almost too late to do that because they've started depositions or not. Do you think that they could do that now?
And who would do that? Would the judge do that or would one of the, >> you know, generally generally generally have to do it, >> generally speaking, it has to happen on motion because I've been involved in cases that were severed and stayed. Uh, but as we saw when the um defamation case was filed in Barnstable, as they call it, that was sent over to Plymouth.
the and we went through the statute on on my channel that the administrative uh justices have some discretion in that area. So again, I'm just spitballing, but I'm thinking that some of the administrative justices are thinking out loud, you know, how how can we why are we wasting all these judicial resources?
And that's that judicial economy is one of the things that's in that statute that gives the administrative justices some leeway to do it. So, it could either be on a motion or it could be the courts. Uh, but it just seems like a mess to me.
>> Do you think it would benefit Karen to do that? Do you think like Karen might be the one to ask for that or not?
>> That's hard to say, Mike.
>> Yeah, >> that's really hard to say. I don't know.
I don't know. Um, but um somehow these um these House defendants or as you said, what the Macau, whatever they want to call them, they're going to have to have a new expert. They're going to have to have a new extra because Joseph Paul, you know, seemed like a nice man, but he was a horrible witness. And the Blue Man group were awful.
Yeah, the other guy.
>> Yeah, >> it was really bad. I mean, that was just how much it costs. Um, >> we had a question about Aiden and uh Karen.
>> They're being tried. They're, you know, being being sued together. Does it make sense for either one of them >> to have it separated or not? Because this has come up a lot. People think uh they should try to separate them each other. Does it help them? Is there any reason they would want to do that or not want to do that?
>> Well, if they're attorneys, and I I understand there's a split at this point between them, but the um attorneys obviously are talking and you would think if it was to their benefit, they would have brought what's called under the rules a motion to sever and stay.
you know, in other words, a motion to sever. So, I don't know. It would seem, you know, they do they are very different as you pointed out earlier. I mean, Aiden has a uh has a business.
He's in the business to, you know, gather and produce and present news. And Karen is, you know, a a defendant who's been acquitted. And so, they have very different claims. But the nucleus of it all, again, the nucleus of it all goes all the way back to what happened on January 28th of uh 2022.
But also, how do you try the conspiracy case unless you put them both together?
So, I don't know, Mike. I don't know.
>> That's the thing I I I go back to that they are different in a way because you know like I think his defense could you know be I think they have that common defense where they're both going to say John O'Keefe wasn't killed by Karen Reed. I mean that that's their number one defense by far I think. But even beyond that, I think the secondary defense for Aiden is like I believe what Karen was telling me where Karen's gonna have a little bit of a different spin on it because, you know, she doesn't. So I I I think and I think she's going to maybe distance herself from Aiden. You know what I mean? Cuz like she's going to say, "I didn't mean him for him to go that far." You know what I mean? Like I don't know. I'm just thinking. I'm speculating. I'm just thinking. So, I think they do have like a common defense, but then they kind of have a little separation and it's not, you know, I'm not trying to like drive a wedge between them. I think there's already a little bit of a wedge obviously, but I just wonder what I wonder how their lawyers are going to handle this and and whether they should split. I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I just wonder about these things. It comes up a lot. People bring this up. They should split. I don't know if they should. I have no idea.
>> They could bifurcate the final stages of it. um try the essential facts of what did happen and their communications and then bifurcate uh the end of it. But hey, one of your um commenters says one of my commenters, Christy the painters daughter says, "This is going to get messy and I have to agree with her.
>> I have to agree with her." Um so yeah, I don't know what the answer to the question is. I'm sorry you stumped me.
>> I know. I It's just I bet they don't either. I bet they're sitting there going, "What should we do?" Cuz it will cost us less maybe. I don't know.
Especially Karen. I mean, she's got so many suits. But I mean, Aiden, too. He's I bet like a joint might help them maybe. I don't know. Uh, Valhalla Law says Karen does not have to prove the Mc Alberts killed Jon. I guess she doesn't, but isn't that kind of her defense in a way? Like, I don't know.
Maybe I'm wrong on that, but >> yeah, she's kind of the go >> she doesn't have to prove that anybody killed John, but she it it in to her favor to, you know, point out that it wasn't her and to have an expert point out that it wasn't her. I mean, if you have I I don't know if they're going to bring in the ARC experts again. I I don't see how they can't uh because it's a new case. It's a new day. It's a new jury. Um, I it it certainly is it certainly is good for her to prove that it wasn't her, whether she has to go so far as to prove that um um it was one of the house defendants. I don't think she does. I think your comment is correct.
>> And I got to say, Tracy, thank you for protecting me. Everything's a disclaimer on here with me. Everything's an opinion or a question. I'm not stating any facts.
>> These are all my opinions. I mean, I >> Please don't sue us.
>> Yeah, I read. We're trying to be careful. We try to be careful of factbased error, not push things.
>> I read all the documents and I attribute everything. You know, you're you're a former reporter. You you attribute.
>> I try. It's, you know, it's much the thing we talk about print.
>> The best thing about print is you had an editor and you had some time to look it over and even if you got it wrong, sometimes you could put a retraction or especially online, you could change it.
But like with this live stuff, like sometimes you you don't even think you're saying anything wrong. you just misstate something like it's like like when you call someone John and their name's Freddy and you know it, you know, you just kind of sometimes you have a brain fart and you just worried you're going to get sued for something stupid.
It's crazy. The live shows are more difficult.
>> I don't like doing lives. I don't I I did them for a while as you know. You helped me with one. You you were the guest on one of my lives and I I don't like them.
>> I love them and hate them.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, the great thing is you get them done quickly. It's like and there's a live audience. They can help you. I like that aspect of it. But that yeah, there's there's some risk to it, too.
Like things can go sour, things can go wrong, technicals could ruin it. There's so many issues when you have a live at the same time. But like anything else, it's good and bad. Um, >> you do you do it you do uh as we do, we record the episodes and then edit them.
You have the opportunity to, you know, go back >> mistakes out. Yeah. If you have a misstatement Yeah. So, you have that.
Like sometimes I'll say when I have Diana Daglio on the show, uh she's the auditor, but when I first knew her, she was the state senator. So a lot of times I'll be like, "Senator Daglio" and she's like, "Mike, auditor." I'm like, "Oh shit." She's like, "Call me Diane." You know, it's just like you just have those It happens. It happens a lot. But let's get back to this because we the questions are coming in tonight. I like this one. Um actually, where was that one? I lost it. God damn. Sorry. Excuse my language. Um, >> there you go.
>> There were a few. There's like so many good questions. I don't want to miss them here. Um, there was one about Aiden and Karen that I wanted to bring up and I can't find it.
>> Oh, I saw it a minute ago. Hang on.
Maybe I can go back and see it.
>> There's a few been a few, but I want to make sure it's the right one. But if you see one a good one because I think there's a lot of good questions in there that kind of haven't been asked. Um, >> oh, I know it was the Yianetti one cuz that that's a question that I see it come up with a lot of the anties, honestly.
>> And I just wonder what's really going on. And you're a lawyer. I know you don't want to bash on David Yianetti.
No, >> but I think you'd be fair with the answer. Like, what about somebody said, "What about Yianetti telling Karen?" No, no, telling Aiden, you know, go, you know, I don't know what he said, like, you know, good job or something like that. like does David Yianetti have anything to worry about is basically I guess the question.
>> First of all, I like David Yennetti a lot. Um he and I graduated from law school the same year he at Boston College and I at Suffach University. So we've been practicing law exactly the same amount of time. He in criminal I in civil. I have a lot of respect for the guy. I mean they'd have to nail down exactly what he said, you know. I mean um were they giving him information?
Yeah. I mean what happens to Yanetti who was telling Aiden Carney good job. Well, you know, so what?
That's my response to that. So what? Um that doesn't mean that Yianetti was writing the script he gave him.
>> And good job of what. I mean that that's the hard part to kind of define too.
Like even if there was a text that people could refer back to and say he's talking about what he just responded to, it's like I don't know. It could be the bigger picture. I mean, it's hard to know exactly what he's saying there, you know.
>> So, I guess that I guess the Correct me if I'm wrong. I really haven't followed that angle that closely.
>> Me, too. Me, too. But I know that there's a lot of heat behind it. That's why I kind of just I just wonder can lawyers kind of get in trouble for that stuff. Like if if he kind of, you know, gave him too much of a, you know, go do this stuff, >> is a lawyer get in trouble for that or is that just kind of defending your >> Well, was he telling him to go do this stuff or was he just giving him information? Back when I was a reporter, as you know, I was a reporter before I went to law school, people gave me information, but they had no control over what I did with that information. I had my sources. I had people that would call me and give me information. And some of them did not want to go on camera when I did the TV stuff. They would just call and give me information and I would go out and do a story and talk to other people. And so just because he told Aiden Carney a thing or two and when I was a TV reporter sometimes people would call me and say you did a good job. Sometimes they call me and tell me I did a job. So I don't I don't really you know under the first amendment where I don't see the liability for that. I really don't.
Freedom of association, freedom of speech. I mean, why why can't um people just give information about a case unless unless there's a gag order uh as there was in the Idaho 4 case, but there was never a gag order in this case.
>> Somebody said uh give it give him info about the Fed investigation. If if he did that, would that be like how big of a deal would that is that like a small little rule break or is that a big deal?
>> Well, who are we who are we who are we who are we accusing of lying on the stand? Um, Yianetti didn't >> That's a good point. That's a good point.
>> He never went on.
>> Let's just Let's just go Let's skip that part because I think that's an accusation I don't even want to look at.
But what if he did this one if he did give him info about the Fed investigation? Would that be really that big of a deal? I I mean I to me I don't think so. But I don't really because the feds gave it to him, right? I mean if it was that big of a deal, the feds wouldn't have given him the info, right?
I mean, >> I thought the feds gave it to, Correct me if I'm wrong. I thought the feds gave it to the nor to the Norfolk County District Attorney's Office, >> right?
>> Did they give it directly to Yianetti?
>> Well, I think I don't know. That's a good question. I don't know. I mean, I I did Yiani must Yeah, I mean, they must have got it from the DA's office. I don't know. But >> either way, this is a lot of speculation. And I think I think we kind of >> I think we got we >> Hey, we're the first ones I think we're the first ones to fairly kind of address that. I think like a lot of times both sides get so caught up and >> just, you know, they never do wrong or they're always wrong. And I think you and I can just be a little more fair on it and just kind of, you know, and we don't know all the details. That's the thing. We really don't know. Um, >> no.
>> And I think it's a lot of do about nothing in the end. I don't think the I don't think anything's gonna happen to David Yennetti. you?
>> No, I really don't. Good lawyer.
>> He'll he'll come up with he'll come up with a good uh defense for >> anything he did. And you know, whatever happened to the First Amendment? Why can't Why can't people talk to a reporter? I I don't get it. You know, so what?
>> So what I would say?
>> Yeah. And that's right. The feds did give info to both sides in the end.
That's exactly in the end they did.
>> Um I think they gave it to the DA's office obviously, too. So that's the other side. They gave both sides info.
Um, we have some other things I want to cover tonight, too. But, yeah, >> specifically with uh Karen Reed. Is there anything else you think we should kind of touch on before we >> I don't know. I thought you wanted to talk about I have two complaints that I brought. I thought you wanted to talk about the Miles King motion to dismiss.
>> I do. That was the one I want to spin to, but I probably want to talk about Proctor even before that in regards to the Karen Reed stuff.
>> All right. cuz you know Proctor has just become like a focus point uh with the text.
>> Does this does the Proctor text does that automatically make it that Karen's probably going to win >> a case? Do you think? Cuz I feel like it does. Like I feel like it >> some people say it means nothing. She has no case against the state. Do those texts really make it a slam dunk for Karen Civily or not? Am I >> There's never, you know, my clients always come to me and they say, "I was injured. It's a slam dunk. Well, how are you injured? Oh, I forget.
There's no slam dunk. I've never I've been practicing law for 30 years.
Listen, there's no slam dunk. There's usually, you know, details that people uh don't pay attention to. There's elements of damages that, you know, people forget causation. All that aside, it's not a slam dunk. But I'm looking at the complaint right now uh that was just brought uh June 4th uh in Bristol, the Karen Reed versus Mass State Police in town of Canton with uh as they say on the very first page, an insidious culture of bigotry and misogyny. So, you know, we've all read just the awful um texts, just the I've never seen anything like it. I really haven't. um you know the the racist homophobic you know anti I don't think I don't think Proctor liked anybody that wasn't you know that didn't look like himself. So you know and that's not that's not the story. The story is that it was so out there. It was so outrageous. He was just so you know bigoted, disgusting, not even the word for it that you can't be like that and people don't know that. So, it's an an insidious culture as the complaint says uh within the Massachusetts State Police. The whole the whole bunch of them had to have known. Yuri Buchananic, his supervisor, gave him positive reviews over and over and over again.
So, that is a fact. That is a that is a fact. Uh he couldn't get hired by the Boston police, so the Mass State Police hired him. So, the Massachusetts State Police either knew or should have known what a repugnant person that Mr. Proctor was. Now, as awful as all of that is, and it is awful, I'm not I'm not defending Proctor at all. Please don't misread me. How did that affect him on the job? Well, um I think that Rosemary Scapitio said it really well in her complaint in the um Miles King case because if you have that much animus and hatred that goes just to your very soul, my words, not hers, um how can you be objective? You've got this internal cognitive bias that every every time you see a person of color, you just see an animal in his mind. you see, you know, you just you treat them like they're um substandard people. I I didn't even show the the photographs on my on my channel.
I know some people did. That's fine. But if if that's how he sees the world, he has this internal cognitive bias. So, how can he be and the same thing applied to the misogyny that he had to women? If he has all of those biases, how can he fairly, you know, be a a a searcher for the truth as an investigator is supposed to be? An investigator's job isn't to pin it on the girl or pin it on any one person. The investigator is a job has the job of being open-minded, looking at all of the evidence by the book, and just his his bias just, you know, he shouldn't have been in charge of that investigation. Does it mean it's an auto win for her? No, of course not. I think her own attorneys, you know, despite what they might say, and I don't know what they've said about this, no, it's not an auto win for her. Um, it's never an auto an auto win, but it sure as hell doesn't make the Massachusetts State Police look good. They should think about the possibility of possibly settling. But how do you put a number on that, Mike? How do you put a number on that? When we do personal injury litigation, it's very difficult to put a number on. I I would I would put a number at least minimum >> how much was Karen Reed making >> a year at Fidelity and and Bentley University times you know 25 years include some inflation that would be the minimum number you know and then some you know >> all the rest of it but yeah it would be a lot of money >> and what you're saying that's exactly what an economic expert does and I've used economic experts you exactly you nailed it uh part of it that's one element of the damage is And there'd be some economically, but there'd be some emotional harm and you know, all that other stuff. Yeah, that's the one you can't put a number on.
>> How do you put a number on that? I've said it before, I'll say it again. Um, in addition to losing her two great jobs and losing her car and losing everything. Here's a woman in her 40s that's living with her parents. Now, her parents are very nice people. I have nothing against the Reeds, but who in their 40s wants to, you know, lose their life and live with their par I loved my parents, but I didn't want to live with them after I was >> I couldn't do it in my 20s. I mean, that was I remember I had to move back for six months between a, you know, a lease and a job, and it just >> So, you can get an economic you can get an economic expert, and I've used them in cases to do exactly what you just said. What What's the economic loss? How much was she making as an adjunct professor? how much we is she making as a stock analyst and then that's not enough. You have to um prognosticate or think of a way to determine well where was she going? She was at one stage in her career. It's very likely she would have gotten promotions all of that and then run it out to her life expectancy then run out her all of her don't forget her benefits that would have occurred the pensions and sick days all the rest. So econ it's far beyond me. I'm not a mathematician, but economic experts can do all of this and put it to a number. Now that's fine, but as you pointed out, what about the emotional damage? What about losing your life? Really? I mean, you know, she's not the same person today as she would have been if she still had that beautiful house that she had and the life that she had. Uh so that's an intangible. So just I mean I don't just a lot of times lawyers you know you lock them in a room and and see if they can just come up with different evaluation techniques. Uh they'll argue the techniques but they'll often come up with the similar number.
>> $10 million.
>> Big number. Yeah it's going to be a big number.
>> $10 million. I don't know. I really don't know. That's just a number that's rattling around in my head without having done the run the number.
>> I'd say two I'd say two to 10. I think that's where it should be. I mean, easily I'd say at least 2 mill like you said on the uh on how much she could have earned. I guarantee you she would have earned at least two million if not more. I was listening to young >> I was listening to a financial guy on the radio. A good one. There's too many of them on the radio. I was listening to a good one on the radio the other day and he was he was chuckling at the fact that in the old days they said, "Oh, if you have a million dollars, you've made it." No. 2.5 2.8 >> depends on where you live. depends on where you live and what your cost of living is, but yeah, it's expensive.
>> Massachusetts is one of the more expensive states. So, >> look, I mean, I look at how much I spend on food now. Like, jeez, I spend probably as much food as uh what we used to spend on rent. You know what I mean?
Like, it's just funny like the the numbers though. I went to a bakery today, a nice little local place I'd never been to, you know, and uh I was like, "Oh, no. I don't know if I I ordered all this stuff and I'm like, I don't know if I have enough cash." And uh I I said, "Do you take cards?" And she's like, "Oh yeah, yeah, we take cards." And so I'm counting on my cash.
And then she gives me the number and I'm like, "Holy [ __ ] I have plenty of money." Like because it was like I expected it to be higher just cuz like you can never know what the price is going to be on stuff anymore. Just like >> usually it's double what you think. It's like oh you you you haven't. You're at the old prices was basically, you know, it's like it's wild. Wild.
>> I don't eat I don't eat red meat. I I I was a vegetarian for a while. I gave that up. But I I still don't eat red meat. I eat um I eat seafood and I eat poultry, but I don't eat red meat. So, a couple of weeks ago, my dog was really very very very ill. I thought I was going to lose her. She's 15 years old.
She had anoplasmosis and she didn't even eat for days. And so, we were racking our brains. So, I went I thought I'll I'll get a steak and I'll marinate it and bash it up with the marinator and I'll I'll make beef stew for the dog. I hadn't bought a I hadn't bought red meat for a year.
>> A steak is like $25 now.
>> Oh, it's crazy. Really?
>> I still buy steak and I just Yeah, I I go to Market Basket and it's just the prices are crazy now. Even though you know what's even crazy is is ground beef.
>> Ground beef used to, you know, you get like a $5 package and it' be huge. Now it's like like 10, 15, 20 bucks. You're like, >> "What the hell's going on?"
>> Everything's like >> ground beef. Yeah, ground beef, poultry, um you know, the stuff that's over in the fruit and vegetable department.
Everything is so expensive now. Gas is coming down a little bit, but you never know. So, yeah. So, you know, inflation factors into the economic analysis. Like I say, I've worked with economic experts that do all of that. They know how to project. They're basing it on what's happened in the last 10, 20 years, and they're saying that's going to go forward in the last in the next 10, 20 years. And I'm not a stock analyst like uh Karen Reed is or was, but you know, generally speaking, it does go up. It has terrible years, but it goes up. So, you can kind of guess what someone's uh financial situation is going to be if nothing bad happens to them. Uh but a lot of it's guesswork. So, that's I mean, I'm not saying that they should settle for anything, but I'm guessing I'm guessing $10 million. That's that's my guess. That's my educated guess, but I don't know.
>> That sounds reasonable considering how old she is, her, you know, her job status, and it sounds reasonable and all all the harm that was happening and some of the other settlements we've seen in the state. So, I mean, the only thing I think that she doesn't have going for her in this is that she didn't do 20 years in jail. Some of these guys did 20 years in jail and they get those big payouts, but she still had a lot. I mean, she's been >> under the gun. All all this pressure on her. She's worldwide known now. A lot of people love her, but some people, a small sliver, they don't like her. So, um, few other questions came up. This one right here says, uh, Sarah says, "I'd like to play devil's advocate because it focuses forces me to think differently. Can attorney Myers talk about how he might try to defend Proctor if he was your client?" Oh my god, what a question. Now, it's funny because in one of the hearings a few weeks ago, and I can't remember which one it was, um, they were going from attorney to attorney to attorney, and attorney Deani, who was representing him in that particular proceeding, and I'm thinking to myself, what the hell would I say?
What the hell would I say? And um, when he stood up, I'm like, oh, well, it wouldn't be that. I'll tell you that.
That's not what I would have said. Um but remember when um Michael Proctctor went through the appeals process to get his job back, there were going to be a series of hearings and they held one hearing and then there was going to be another hearing I believe in October and then that's when a lot of the phone records initially came out. We peeons out here in the public didn't see him, but the attorneys did. And right away, the labor union that was paying his attorney, attorney Donahghue, I think it was, um, >> like we're done. We're done.
>> Told him told him, >> "There are some things that are indefensible.
There are some things that we can't defend." And so, the attorney withdrew from the case and Proctor, you know, pulled back on his um his appeal to get his job back. and that was the end of it. So, I'm dodging the question because, you know, I'm a civil attorney.
I'm a sole practitioner. When I worked for a firm, I had to do pretty much everything that fell on my desk. If they threw a file on my desk and said, "Andrew, you're trying this case tomorrow morning in Boston Municipal Court," which happened, I did it. Now, I am a sole practitioner. I'm a civil attorney. I don't have to take cases that I don't want. And I don't the longer I've been practicing, the more selective I am. I don't know what I'd say. You stumped me. I don't know what I would say for Mr. Proctor. Uh, you know, and and and Mike, don't you think if I if I came up with anything, don't you think I'd be blasted both by your commenters and the others?
>> I mean, like you said, I think you said it best because I know a lawyer who represented him said it. Some things are just not defensible.
>> I think that's it. I think that's a perfect answer. Uh Karen D said, "Mass state police settled a huge lawsuit on discrimination against women and black officers. Uh I think she had a follow-up question about this too, or somebody did about whether uh some of these other cases like this one will come up in Karen's case. Can Karen bring those past cases of discrimination or the fact that Mass State Police settled a huge lawsuit recently like within the last year about women and black officers. Is that something that she can bring up?
Generally speaking, sup trial court decisions and settlements are not uh don't have mandatory authority in other cases. The only cases that have authority are cases that go up on appeal. Cases that go up to the Massachusetts Court of Appeal and to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Now you've got uh precedent. Um so no um that they've settled other cases certainly can be used in negotiations.
certainly can be used. You know, we attorneys talk all the time. What do you want, Mike? You're suing my client. What What does your client want? We'll offer you this. Hey, Mike, look at this other case that your uh commenter just uh talked about. Look at this other case.
Uh there is a whole series of books uh settlements and verdicts. Uh it's all online now, but I I used to use the books all the time that you know any case at all, this type of a case, it'll have a series of 10, 12, 20 other cases.
And we use those in mediations. We use them in arbitrations. We use them in negotiations, but they really don't have any. It's up to the jury. It's really up to the jury to decide.
Brother counsel brother counsel's brother counsel Simon threw out about 50 million. All right. You said two to 10.
I said >> is he here? Is he here? I didn't see him >> in your No, he's in your comments. He's in >> He is >> Valo. No, Valhallow. Your commenter Valow said, >> "Oh, there it is. Okay. Okay, I see it."
Um, >> it it's >> it's funny people are love I'm loving this too because you're >> you're very knowledgeable on this stuff beyond what we know and and people are loving this and I want to thank you so much. I mean we spent an hour and 12 minutes now uh just on the Karen Reed Civil I feel like we could continue to talk people continue to have questions but we do have some other stuff which is related which is related and I just want to start it with uh you mentioned it earlier.
>> I don't even want to put the words up.
Some of this stuff is so disgusting that it's like I get afraid to even put it on the screen honestly.
>> But we do have some of the uh the Rosemary Scarpitio filing uh for Mr. King >> and I'll just show this is a picture. I mean this is the type of stuff that that Michael Proctor had on his phone. Uh people can see the whole filing on Rosemary Scapitio's, you know, her attorney website. It's all there and it's again some of the most disgusting stuff and it's more new proctor texts. It's like we just keep getting more of this and more and more.
It just never ends and now they're talking about Snapchat. What did you think about her filing and what's going on with uh Mr. King? Is he going to get off? She's got a motion to dismiss on this. I'm looking at it and I'm saying I this, you know, Proctor stuff is horrible, but are they really gonna dismiss charges against a guy who might actually be guilty like of murder?
>> What's going on with this case? What do you think?
>> Well, rather than, you know, I rather than saying whether he's going to be found guilty or not guilty or whether the motion will be allowed or not be allowed, I mean, what are the factors that'll go into deciding that? I mean, it's it's a repulsive, you know, bunch of things that were said in the um complaint. I wouldn't even show them all. What I did, Mike, is I redacted.
Here's the page.
>> I'm just going to show this one. People want to see it. I'm I'm going to post a link and people can go look at it themselves. I don't want to get whacked on YouTube and I don't want to make people sick before they eat their dinner tonight cuz the stuff is just horrible.
I mean, and again, like you said, why while you're going over it, you got to cover stuff up. It just I think that picture says it all. I just do we need to see more? I mean >> I think I think the best quotes uh in the complaint were uh I think and I said this before were that the all these uh comments about you know people of color, women, you know, I don't know why he really had it out for people of of the Judeaic persuasion, but it just shows that there's an insidious culture of bigotry and misogyny that fostered such unlawful conduct. So, it's not it's not like I said before, it's not that he said these reprehensible things that would get us banned off of YouTube. You know, you can't say these things whether they whether they demonetize us or throw us off the platform or uh whether they do a thing called, you know, shadow banning. Um that's bad enough. The stuff that he said were just reprehensible, Mike. But the the really important thing beyond the stuff that he said and texted and there were some worse pictures than the one you showed in my mind which I I pulled the page out and threw it out. Um that it's just such a culture. I mean he was with the state police for what 13 years. You can't tell me that they didn't know that he was like that Buchananic his supervisor who you know gave him glowing reviews. How could he give him glowing reviews if he knew about that? So that's how he thinks. He thinks that people of color are not even to be taken seriously as human beings.
And so now here he is investigating a man of color charged with murder. Now Mr. King is absolutely without any question, you know, under the Sixth Amendment and our Massachusetts Declaration of Rights entitled to the presumption of innocence and he's entitled to a fair trial. But was he given a fair investigation is the question. are even the charges against him. Whether he did it or not, he he was entitled to a fair investigation. So now if the investigator himself has tainted that much, you know, that's the question for the court. Are they going to are they going to dei dismiss the charges? In my mind, they should. In my mind, it just it goes to the core of what the Commonwealth was throwing at Mr. King. Um whether that's right or whether that's wrong. Um, but how can they how can they try this case?
How how can the Commonwealth try? They certainly can't put Proctor on the stand. They didn't put him on the stand in the second Karen Reed trial.
So, they're going to have to rely on the other um the other um investigators.
Although, as it was pointed out in uh Rosemary Scapitio's incredible motion, Proctor was the primary investigator. He investigated what uh at least uh eight 10 or more of the witnesses.
Um, and so I I don't see how they can try the case. I really don't see how they can try the case. Will the judge dismiss the case? It's a close call, Mike. It's really a close call. I I can't say. I really can't. But it it it could go either way.
>> Wow. Wow.
>> It could go either way.
>> Scary to think that someone who might have done a martyr will get away with it because Proctor's so bad.
>> Well, I think >> but again, how can you trust How can you trust that the guy did it if it's Proctor? I mean, that's the problem. I mean, I guess that also leads to all these other guys, too. Or and ladies, whoever. I mean, if you if you've been convicted and Proctor was the primary detective on your on your trial, you you got to be writing the appeal right now, right? I mean, how many cases do you think might get appealed? Well, we ran an internal I know there was a letter that got some play elsewhere uh that uh committee for public council services, which is our public defender uh agency here in Massachusetts. They sent a letter both to the um Norfol County District Attorney's Office and also to um uh the state police. You're right.
State police saying we want a list of all the cases that Proctor handled, even ones that are over now. Uh we want a list of all of them. We're going to re But we got a hold of an internal document that CPCS actually uh sent out to all of their attorneys. Every single one across the Commonwealth. We want you to go back into your files and any case in which Michael Proctctor or Shawn Good were involved. We want you to write a motion compelling the production of the materials that we're talking about here.
And that's big. I think that's big. So the CPCS is a huge agency. A lot of attorneys work for them and they handle all of the cases in which uh you know the people accused of crimes uh can't afford their own attorney. anytime you go to court and you can't afford an attorney, that's the agency that provides the um attorney for you. So, that's big. It reminds me of the Annie Duke Duke controversy. Remember that? I And I couldn't remember I couldn't remember how many cases were reversed because >> I think it I think if I remember correctly, it was tens of thousands, but I thought it was like 20 30,000 type. I mean, it was a huge number.
>> Yeah, it was.
>> And it wasn't just her either. There was so like a couple other, you know, at least one other maybe two. There was a few of them. in that.
>> Yeah.
>> So, yeah. I mean, I don't think it's going to be that many for him. I mean, you know, but it could be a number. It could be hundreds, I bet.
>> Yeah. Cuz she was in the state police crime lab. She was in the state police crime lab.
>> Proctor and good, you know, had their little corner of the state. Although, Norfolk County is a big county. It's a pretty big county. It stretches from Brooklyn all the way down to uh doesn't it stretch all the way down to the Rhode Island border? I mean, >> yeah. And it's also goes west, too. even further west that Medway area. It's like pretty goes pretty far out actually.
Yeah, it's it is a big district. That's the thing. I'm trying to look at the DA's race and it's like hard to get a a feel for who's winning because it's such a diverse district.
>> I can see this as being as big as Annie Duke and and I forget the name of the woman out in Western Massachusetts uh who also had her issues and that caused a lot of cases to be reversed. But um I can see it being as big. But now question for you. Netflix did a fantastic uh documentary, How to Fix a Drug Scandal.
>> Yeah.
>> How would how could Netflix or anyone do a documentary about this with all the language that you and I have both read in these uh in these complaints? How could they >> Well, I think they can get away with it because it's a streaming, right? I mean, it's like HBO. You can you can kind of, you know, I guess they self censor a bit, but I mean, it's it's like kind of HBO. It's like, you know, it's not ABC, CBS or uh radio who have to worry about the >> some of this language though. I mean, you know, >> Yeah, I know. Even for HBO, it might be too much, right? I mean, it is >> it's so bad. You wanted to you'd have to you'd have to have like a trigger warning on it. this this program is extremely you know and then probably have like a a little ticker on the bottom like where I'm asking for money right now and say this this material is extremely they give warnings throughout it I think that's what they'd probably have to do yeah Natalie I want to thank I'm going to go through all the super chats tonight but uh thank you Natalie I'll do that in a few minutes I want to thank you so much because I just uh put this one up because I agree 100% why we're talking about this is very pertinent that you sent that super chat. Got another Proctor question. This is a good one from Sarah.
A different Sarah this time. Sarah 925 and Sarah with an H says, "Will Proctor be indicted? Could he ever be charged with something? Would he ever be indicted on anything?" What do you think? I mean, seems like he might have done some crimes with this stuff, but I mean, what's the line? When does it become criminal? What What type of charges could he actually be indicted if he ever is? Well, first of all, Michael Morsey is not going to indict him. So, we have to wait until after the election as as you know full well because you've had some of the candidates on Mars is not running for reelection and there are some candidates of uh different lines of thinking that are running for it. So, will they do it or not? I mean, I think that Proctor committed the crime of, you know, dereliction of duty when he said, "Well, there was an accident, but it was a black person, so let him die." I mean that's that's you know that's clearly you know a dereliction of his duty.
That's an indictable offense I would think. Um and there were others. I mean sadly just being a jerk is not is not a crime. Being being prejudiced is not a crime. But to the extent that he didn't do his job and he neglected his job, I don't I don't see him being indicted.
But I hope I'm wrong.
>> Yeah. Maybe if Judah Perkins or Adam Dish win. I think uh it's I mean I think e either both of them I think if they get in office they'll be investigating all this stuff uh independently probably like a task force type deal but yeah you bring up that that that was the one that really bucked me I think the most even beyond all the racial epitats and the kind of rap the rapy stuff bothered me too but >> yeah yeah >> the the the f you know he's a first responder and he's talking about yeah don't rush >> don't rush they're black people based and spin color. I mean, that is >> even as a joke.
>> Even as a even if you take that as he was just joking. He He's not serious.
>> What's funny about that? I don't get it.
I like >> it should be anti It should be the anti- thesis of what like a public servant is.
You know what I mean? Like you shouldn't even >> like that that should never be a joke with somebody who's >> No, >> I don't know. It just >> messed up. I'm not watching you or other YouTubers. And I I do watch a lot of YouTube, but but I'm not watching you guys or or listening to music. I'm watching comedy. There's a lot of good comedy um uh on YouTube. And I like to laugh. I have a I have a good sense of humor. Um um what's her first name?
Pavitzki. Ellen Pavitzki. She's funny as hell. She just >> I I need some of that then. I'm gonna have to look her up.
>> She's She's middleaged. She makes fun of herself. Um and um she just she does really good standup. Uh and um sometimes she'll go back and have bring her parents in and she'll talk about her upbringing and try and blame them and they say no.
>> Oh, I love that.
>> Her name is Esther Pavitzki and she is funny as hell and I just But there are others. I don't like the late night crap that's on TV because they get political.
I don't like politics at all. I stay away from politics. You're smarter than me because you've had >> too mostly. I mean, I I cover a little local stuff, but it's like >> the national stuff is just so toxic.
It's just >> But >> you're not you're not convincing anybody on either side.
>> So, so the my point was I love to laugh and but no, it wasn't funny. Don't tell me Don't tell me it was funny. It's not funny at all. I mean, >> there's no funny.
>> My father told me my father told me >> that's got to be his excuse. That's got to be his excuse, though. It was just a joke.
>> There's some things you don't you don't laugh about. Like you know when you go in the airport you don't joke about certain things would I'm not even going to say it but he told me that when I was >> like I'd say I'd say like a couple things I would never joke about is the Holocaust >> slavery of course those are like two things I would just especially as a white guy like you know or you know I might joke about a little bit about the potato famine because I'm Irish, you know what I mean? Like like my girlfriend's always like you know look at the way you eat, you know, cuz I'm always eating. I'm always I'm like, "Honey, it's because of the potato famine." I'm always like, "It's in my genes. Like, if we we if we don't eat today, you never know. There might not be any food tomorrow." That That might be the only joke I give, but >> there's nothing that Proctor said that was funny. I think we could stipulate to that. None none of it was funny.
>> I just said the worst thing I'll ever say, that potato famine. It's because I'm Irish, >> you know. I feel like we suffer, too.
The other thing is, I've said this on my channel, I'll repeat it, uh maybe more intelligently than I did on my own channel, but Mike, when I got out of high school, um I uh was going to be rebellious and I wasn't going to go to college. So, I worked on a loading dock for a year, loading and unloading tractor trailer trucks. And you know, you you develop a certain language. You you learn how to drop an F-bomb about eight times in one sentence.
>> I I was a team. That's a funny we we have that in common. So, you know, we have a lot in common, but anyhow, so you know how >> I worked at the warehouse, too, with the fork trucks.
>> Oh, I knew how to drive a forklift.
>> We were beer delivery. So, there you go.
Go.
>> I worked in a warehouse.
>> You know the language in the warehouse.
I'll do this.
>> I worked in a warehouse that supplied contractors and we shipped stuff and received stuff and I kid right out of high school wants to be respected by these people and a lot of them are really nice people, but they are as profane as profane gets. I never heard anything like this. And I've worked out in a gym my entire adult life. I know it doesn't look it, but I've worked out in the gym. I've been in the locker rooms my entire adult. I've heard nothing like this.
>> This is the >> nothing either.
>> Nothing. Nothing. Nothing at all. Like not not even comp.
>> I know. I got to say I probably got a lot of education from the team too.
There was one guy that we used to drive like cuz we you know we'd work a four uh 10-hour work week and then the fifth day if you wanted to work inside the warehouse you could do breakage. So I used to work the fifth day in the warehouse with the fork trucks. But the other four days I'd be on the truck with a driver doing all the heavy work.
They'd throw the cases to us. We'd wheel them in or the cases. We'd be in a hole.
They'd throw the the kegs down to us.
We'd roll them over. So, you know, we're kind of the the muscle, you know, especially I was I was in college.
>> How much of this did you get to drink?
>> Uh it's funny on Fridays every once in a while they give you a free case if you're 21 plus. But uh that was pretty much it. Like before I had been there, like every place used to give someone a a drink. Like every time you'd make a delivery, you get a free drink. But that was like 5 years before I got there.
They stopped it. Like when you the out the guys who used to deliver the beer apparently used to be shitfaced in the early se late 70s, early 80s, but somewhere that stopped when SAD came along, all that stuff stopped and everyone got tested. So there was no drinking on the job, but they give you like a free case on Fridays.
>> There you go. And some guys would steal beer every once in a while. You'd hear about it, but you know, whatever. It was just you'd be around that stuff all day.
You'd just get sick of it. Once in a while on a really hot day, you might break one and just sneak one. Like you just that happened a few times with a few guys. But basically what I was going to say is uh you know those guys definitely would teach you a thing or two. But there was one guy I would be in the trucks with and all he would do all day is beep the horn at ladies and he'd say like the craziest [ __ ] to them. Like you would be like so horrified. You'd be like but you couldn't say anything cuz the guy like he was doing you kind like when the when you're the helper with the driver you kind of like you're subservient almost to the driver. So he it would just be like all day I'd just be like is he going to beep at this lady again? Like this is just embarrassing.
Like he'd say the I can't even repeat it.
>> No, I know what you're talking about.
But >> we'd all laugh and sometimes it would work. I'd be like, "Are you [ __ ] me? This lady likes it. We finally found one that likes it." Like it was just funny cuz most of them be like, "Get away from me, dude." Yeah. No, my only point was that, you know, spending the time that I did on the loading dock and then in college I would go back summers and work there and, you know, all these uh years uh in the in the locker rooms. No, I never heard anything that even approached this kind of stuff. I mean, usually they're they're Monday morning quarterbacking the game, you know. Usually they're talking about sports or they're talking about their kids. They went to the the basketball game at the high school.
That's what I hear. That's what I I you know, I really, you know, you hear a little bit of of spicy conversation, but I've never heard anything like I've I've read in these uh in these complaints we're talking about in the uh or the motion in the Miles King case or the complaint in the uh new civil case. Uh it's just it's all >> says, "I didn't hear that stuff."
>> Even with the drivers who are team says, "I never heard the stuff Proctor did."
Proctor, you think for like a a professional outfit like the Mass State Police, you would never hear that kind of language in text. just it's so shocking.
Really is >> beyond the pale and especially in a state like Massachusetts which I've always contested this but it has the reputation anyhow of being an open-minded progressive liberal state and you know this goes against all of that you know and my commenters I don't know about your commenters but my commenters said how come the governor's been so quiet about all of this? How come the governor said nothing? She said nothing at all. And my answer is because and you probably don't want to get into this but my answer is because she and Yeah, her uh one of her buddies is Michael Morrisy. They attended the Democratic National Convention together.
They're buddies. They're political.
>> I would go even further than that. I think you're right. I think I think you're right on that. I think part of it is the politics. She's friends with Morrisy, right?
>> But I think it's also like a lot of people that get in power. I had Chris Ferrron, a journalist on the other day.
He noted this that a lot of times whether it's, you know, the governor or city councelor or uh Senate President, they become friends with the police. You know, if if you're a city council, you become friends with the police chief and you become friends with the local police. And when you're the when you're the governor specifically, you know, I used to drive by Charlie Baker's house. He lives pretty close to me. It's certain route that everyone goes by. You'd see every time you run drive by Charlie Baker's house, we'd know if he was home or not. You know why? The state police at Mark C would be in front of his house. They'd be guarding him.
>> So that's why they become friends with these folks. And and I think Mara even has uh some history of even dating some of the uh female state police. So there you go. Like Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So there you go. Like that's how deep it goes.
Like these think about it. If you're surrounded by state police every day working, >> you're going to become friendly with state police. I mean it just this is the nature of the job. So I think there's a lot of um friendliness and she where did she come from? She was the attorney general before she was governor.
Attorney general's like basically the top prosecutor in the state.
>> Top law the whole state.
>> She's law enforcement and she's friendly with law enforcement because this is who she partners up with the state police and like you said Morrisy. You know how how many Democratic conventions have they hung out at? How many fundraisers?
>> All the more though, wouldn't you think that she would want to like clean house when stuff like this comes up? Wouldn't she want to get those people out of there and defend her good law enforcement people? I was in a conversation with a uh a higherup in the Lawrence Police Department. I I was trying to get some documents and it it wasn't going the way I wanted it to go.
So, we're actually talking we're actually talking we're talking about this very subject and he says, "Andy, we're doing because of the Karen Reed case, you know, it's re it's reprehensible. It's it's just we we can't believe what's happening. But because of that case, we're furious with the way it was handled down in Norfolk County. And we are changing some of our crime scene investigation techniques and policies and procedures because of that case. Are we happy about it? No. But we feel we have to do it to maintain our level of professionalism. Now, have there been issues with that police department? Yes, there have. But at least I've heard this from other cops.
I've represented a fair number of cops because my accountant many many many many years ago was uh was uh the accountant for a union in an area that I'll remain kind of vague about. uh but he represented a lot of uh law enforcement and so he would recommend law enforcement to me and over the years I've gotten to know a fair number of law enforcement who have had like little legal things nothing awful that raises to the level of of this subject we're talking about and the ones I'm still in touch with they stop me in the grocery store and say can you believe what happened down there in Norfolk County can you believe that and they they're horrified you know there are a lot of very good professional people in law enforcement and I know I always get negative comments when I talk about this and >> no I hear the same thing. I talked to a lot of retired guys, but even guys on the force, some guys I went to school with and they they a lot of them are horrified by this. A lot, you know, I think a lot of cops want to clean up the profession, but they >> are silenced unfortunately because they there's a thin blue line obviously and and it's really if you say anything, you're out, you know. So, >> yeah, it's not good. It's just >> then that's why a lot of them secretly will, you know, give me the at a boy.
They're like, "Mike, I like what you're doing actually. You're helping us. Thank you. Um, and probably what you do too. I mean, yeah, when you talk to these guys, I think you're right, too. Like, it's it's interesting she hasn't do done it, you know, done anything or said anything. I think another aspect with Mara Healey, it's kind of like do nothing, say nothing because the mainstream media and even the Globe, they're not investigating her. They're taking it easy on her. They allow her to be kind of like the Dunkin Donuts governor, you know? It's all PR. It's all like, oh, this week is the World Cup. We're going to dress up and do a video and you know, uh, next week we're doing a Dunkin Donuts commercial with Kim Driscoll and we're going to pretend we're Matt Damon and Metaflack. Oh, it's so funny. Uh, this week, uh, Celtics are in the playoffs. I'm going to shoot a basketball. Hey, you know, I used to play basketball. I'm Mara Healey. I'm a pretty good basketball. I could throw.
She can. She's a good basketball player.
But I think that's it. I think that's the other part of it. It's like she has it like so good that she doesn't want to rock the boat by bringing anything up because it might cut, you know, maybe the Boston Globe might actually do their job on this. Like I don't know. I think the a lot of the media has been defanged and I think some of it Chris Fer was on the other day. He talked about the pay walls. It's like a lot of these big newspapers, you mentioned some of them tonight, Washington Post, Boston Globe, New York Times, they're all behind pay walls. Yeah.
>> So that means only rich people are reading them now. It used to be easy to buy a 35 cent newspaper. I used to buy them every day. But who the hell wants to have 15 subscriptions today? A lot of people don't and we just we're not even seeing the news anymore. So it feels like that's maybe why she doesn't say anything. Uh why screw up what she has right now? Nobody's putting any pressure on her. Uh sometimes she gets a little uh push back because of how much money she spent on the undou undocumented people, you know, but mostly she just like I'm just going to I'm going to I'm going to not cause any waves. I'm going to get reelected and and go on our way.
I I think that's a big part of it, too.
>> Going to the days and you'll remember this, I'm pretty sure. Gone are the days when Ed King was governor and they would excoriate him in the press because he took all of his buddies over to was it Deanie's lobster house and they actually got pictures of him, you know, sitting there with his buddies eating lobster.
Do you remember that or am I >> I remember Ed King got a scandal, but I didn't remember what it was. All I remember about Ed King is I was like, is is he on Nixon? Is that what he is? like what's going like I don't remember exactly what happened was and I keep thinking he was a Republican for some reason but he was a Democrat, right?
>> He must have been a Democrat.
>> Yes, he was Democrat. There was another Ed King that was a Republican that ran against him in the early primaries. But no, you're right.
>> Oh, maybe that's what I was thinking of.
>> They hated him. They couldn't stand him.
They just they, you know, and they But you're right. There's no >> He's a former governor of Massachusetts in the 70s if I remember. Like probably mid70s.
>> Late 70s.
>> 778. Yeah. because I was in the newsroom of WCGY when he was elected. So that was the late '7s.
>> October uh uh 25th, 1977, King announced that he would seek the Democratic nomination for governor. So that's when he ran.
>> Yeah. So >> and one of the things he wanted to do is raise the age to 21. Oh, so he changed my life. Actually, all the older kids were like, we used to drink with our teachers and we we were the kids that had age 21. Uh that's funny. I I really don't want I really don't want to go down that road, but yeah. Is that >> how old we are? You know, it's funny because uh Sarah said earlier that we both we were both only 35, so we're not that old. Actually, >> we're both 35.
>> Yeah, that's that's according to Sarah.
She's very nice to us. She likes us a lot. We're only 35.
>> All right. All right. Okay. You have some good uh you have some good commenters here and so maybe >> Yeah, the ladies love us over here. We we have some good ladies.
>> Maybe I should go back to doing lives. I don't know. I just don't like it. Yeah, come do them here.
>> I cuz I think I've enjoyed this and the audience has enjoyed it. Everyone said we're a good duo. I I think this has been fun. Like we're we're like we have so much in common. Every almost everything you say except you're a lawyer and I'm not. But like a lot of things you say I'm like I did that too.
I I did a fork truck. It's so funny.
>> Oh yeah. The funny thing about it now we like both like how we both like you know reading newspapers back in the day. The Phoenix.
>> But you get to sit in for Grace. I love Grace. I listen to Grace almost every day and you sat in for her while she was out on her maternity leave and that was, you know, that was pretty hot. That was a pretty cool thing to do.
>> But I'm not as good as Grace. Grace is I love Grace. Grace, you do a great job.
>> She's a good friend now. And uh yeah, we I I'll hopefully be on there Friday.
Last Friday I canled. I was like was I was too overwhelmed and sometimes I just can't do it. But she uh usually do that every Friday as a guest with her and I enjoy it. Uh yeah, we we I've enjoyed having you on the show tonight. It's been great.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate.
>> There was another thing I want to ask you about because in July, uh the Clancy uh I forgot her name. Uh Lindsay Clancy.
>> Lindsay Clancy. Yeah.
>> The mom who killed the children is going to be coming uh to trial in July expected.
>> And that one just it crushes me. And I just wonder about should the state be trying somebody like her? It's obvious that she didn't want to kill her kid. something happened in her head, postpartum craziness.
What do you think about a case like that? And and how hard will it be to actually get a conviction? Will it be I mean, is it going to be cut and dry because she did it, but she's also got something wrong in the head? Like, what do you think about that case up?
>> Well, I kind of took my I kind of took my eye off of that case partially because it's just such an awful case. I mean, you know, >> it is, isn't it? Um, wasn't there wasn't there talk of her uh taking an insanity defense and she didn't want to do that? I I I'm not up to date on that case. I'll have to be really honest with you. I've got to I've got to spruce up on that because, you know, you're right. It's coming up for trial in May. I I I don't know. I'll be honest.
>> There's one that did Did you like Cuz I remember there's been other cases in the past, even the big one. Like there was one one woman who drove her car into the water. Uh, I believe she was convicted, >> killed her kids.
>> I mean, it seems like a lot of times these women do go to jail for these these types of uh >> situations. Do Do you think that's like like something that could change here?
Because I feel like a lot of people do get and feel bad for this lady and I I do.
>> It's all in the It's all on the facts really. All these there's no general statement. Like somebody in your comment section just mentioned Adam Montgomery.
I heard some other people on another YouTube channel talking about, oh, on these kinds of cases when the only witness is, you know, a paid, you know, is somebody that has something to gain.
And it's like, you can't talk about a category of cases. The Montgomery case was a horrible, horrible, horrible case.
And I don't mean to change the subject, but you can't like categorize them. I I'm one of the few people that in the Montgomery case, I disagree with what the New Hampshire Supreme Court, which licenses me in New Hampshire, by the way, I disagree with the ruling, but we're allowed to say things like that.
So, I don't know about the Lindsey Clancy case. I mean, if someone can snap like that and and, you know, cause the deaths of all three of her children, is that somebody that should be back out? I don't know. It's a social question. It's a horrible question, but it would be really dependent on the facts. I mean, again, I haven't been following it as closely as I have. What What What was she undergoing? Hadn't they just changed one of her prescriptions? Um, shouldn't she have been under closer supervision?
her her husband just went out to run an errand or two. Uh, and should that have have happened? Did he know better?
Should he have, you know, not um gone out? Could he have ordered this stuff?
Uh, whatever it was. Um, I don't know.
There's just too many questions. These cases are >> I'm glad you said it depends on the details. That's why every all these cases are so different. It depends on the the details and what's actually heard in court, too. I mean, that's the other part of it, right?
>> Right. Yeah. The DAs always hold their cards close to the vest. And um I thought, correct me if I'm wrong, I thought at one time there was a proposal for her to take a plea and then she would spend the rest of her time in an institution. Am I wrong about that?
>> I thought so too, but apparently like I saw something today that said it was going forward in July. So I was like, "Wow, >> sounds like a tough case. Sounds like a really tough case >> to defend.
>> I feel bad." And and the husband is defending her, which is kind of unusual.
It shows how much he, you know, obviously did care about her, does care about her.
>> Yeah. Just a horrible a horrible set of circumstances.
>> I feel bad for them all. I just do. It's hard.
>> Yeah. A lot of crazy cases in Massachusetts right now.
>> Yeah.
>> So, some some people suggest this might be something wrong with the water. I don't think so because look at we have like some of the most highly educated people. We we do very well on standardized testing and all that. So, I don't think it's anything to do with the water.
>> No, no, I don't either.
>> We are one of the most successful places in the world. Actually, too much success. That's one of the reasons it's so expensive here. Um, any final thoughts tonight? Anything else that we didn't discuss that we're supposed to discuss or anything else that you want to mention?
>> Well, I think I think I think that the Massachusetts courts have to do something in terms of not having four different cases out there. I think they and I I did an episode on this uh where I showed my um earlier um cheat sheet or um scorecard about all these cases and I don't think they can keep going down these four different paths. Um I think at some point there has to be some consolidation of at least the facts of what happened uh to John O'Keefe that night and what happened with Karen Reed that night. think, you know, to try all four of those cases in four different courts. I don't think it's a good day for the court. I think um Judge Gild Day is a highly respected judge, but I don't know why he's in such a hurry. I I think he shuts down uh if you watch the uh hearings uh the ones on Zoom or the ones in court. Uh and there was one today. Um I think he shuts the the the attorneys down a little bit too much. Um, I've been practicing law for 30 years and I think I've had good experiences in front of Massachusetts judges. I don't think I've seen the kind of shutting them down uh so quickly as I've seen in this case and I I don't think it's a good look. I really don't uh where the case was only filed in 2004.
Mike, I have cases that are older than that. Um I don't I don't I I don't think that there should be such a hurry. I know that he wants to get through it pretty quickly, but um I don't I don't think it's a good look. I guess that's that's all I can really say about it.
But, you know, as a closing thought, um Rosemary Scapichio is a fantastic attorney and the way she wrote that motion is incredible and it's a horrible day for the Commonwealth. I can't believe there hasn't been more publicity nationwide. I can't believe it. You know, the ro the Rodney King thing was huge. That was huge. And this is at Lawrence >> getting nothing.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> True. True.
>> So, those are my closing thoughts.
>> Oh, I I really appreciate you being here. And Andrew Meyers, check out check you out on YouTube. Tell everyone where they can follow you. Social media, all that. Well, basically YouTube, it's uh it's uh um the channel name, and we've had fights about changing it, but now that I've been doing it that long, I hate to change it, but it comes under law offices of Andrew D. Meyers. That's my YouTube channel, Law Offices of Andrew D. Meyers, and the name of it is about the law. But if you go into YouTube and just type in >> um Law Offices of Andrew D. Meers, it'll come up. you know, we probably >> we we have it we yeah, we do have that pinned in the YouTube chat, too. So, people can find it right there. And I hope they follow you if they haven't already. I know a lot of people already following you. And uh you're also on Twitter, I'm sure, on Facebook, are you?
Or any other social media places?
>> Uh you know, I'm not I told you how I got into this and we're still kind of fumbling around, but yes, I have a woman I have a Tik Tok channel. I have somebody that does it for me. I've I don't know anything about Tik Tok, but I have a woman that takes my episodes and chops them down and reposts them as shorts on YouTube, but also on my Tik Tok channel. I don't know what else she does. You know, my summer >> I need a lady like that. I need a I've spent so much time uploading and oh, >> you're lucky you you got all these ladies helping you, Andrew.
>> This this summer I Well, it's not like you're alleging. Uh and I have two interns this summer. One of them is a marketing student. Uh, and uh, so this summer maybe they're going to address these things you're talking about and maybe I'll bring it all up to speed.
>> It's awesome. You're killing it. I love it. You you're you're doing really well on YouTube.
>> You did the live with me tonight. People want you back on the live here.
>> We really appreciate you. Andrew Myers, attorney Andrew Myers. Let's give him a big round of applause in the chat.
>> Thank you, Mike. Good to see you again.
>> Thank you so much.
>> Love talking.
>> Have a great great rest of your week, Andrew.
>> You, too. Take care, Mike. Be well.
>> Uh, that was Andrew Myers. I really enjoy having him on the show. It's fun.
That was fun. That went by quickly, too.
That was an hour and 49 minutes. I feel like we just went We just went off. That was good. That was fun. Someone says it pays to know people.
Yeah, he does have a good channel on YouTube. Make sure you follow Andrew and Yoli.
Yeah, I like them. They're they're they've had me on as a guest. I think um I think the first time I was on solo with Andrew. I think the second or third time I was with both of them. I I enjoyed it as a guest. I don't usually like to be a guest, honestly. But again, it was fun with them. I think it was pre-recorded. I'm not sure. Maybe it was live. But uh I had fun with him tonight.
This was good. It's what we needed too.
Just get get in back into the Karen Reed stuff. Uh, I just want to read some of the super chats tonight. There's also, like I said, the Karen Reed hearing happened today. I missed it. I was trying to get it. I couldn't find it.
And then right before I started the show, it turned out someone did get it.
So, I'm, you know what I'm going to do right now is I'm going to wrap up the show tonight. And then I'm just going to come back with another stream. We're just going to stream the Karen Reed Herring and maybe watch it together because I never got to watch it today.
But let me thank everyone because there's been a lot of super chats today.
Law Talkers, thank you so much. I love Money Mike. I love that. Thank you, Sarah. One of our best mods here. Oh, thank you. I'm going to get some Meatloaf. Oh, my man. My man JFK showed up. He said, "Match the energy." My guy Mikey JFK has been getting a lot of crap lately. Let him be. I have no issues.
So, some one of the trolls was coming at me like, "Are you Mike must be upset about JFK?" No. No. Never. I love JFK. I hope people just give give give them some space you know not every you know he's been a lightning rod he think they got a lot of [ __ ] like I have too but sometimes you just sometimes you just need a break lawy 25 matchy matchy and also I think there's a lot to what JFK says too I agree with a lot of what he was saying like in in a you know I don't know if I'm going to go as far as he does but there's a lot of facts to that like you got to think long term and about what's good for Karen too and all of us. And Natalie Diana, maybe I'll talk more about that in the future. Natalie Diana 67 says, "Match me." Uh Merllo 1958 says, "Over match." Thank you so much.
Uh Law Talkers as well. Thank you so much. Let's get this goal. We did get the goal. That was the great thing.
While we weren't even acknowledging the uh super chats, we made the goal tonight. Thank you so much.
Oh, you know what? I had started this one, Karen. I'm sorry I didn't ask it. I did ask some of your other questions tonight. I didn't mean to get back to that. It's funny some sometimes I I star some of these comments and questions and then I forget to get back to them.
Um I want to recognize this one. Christy Painter's daughter, she was here tonight. She said, "Sorry, bailed out for a few. Checked out our weather forecast here in central Illinois. storm is still about an hour or so away. Heard there is going to be some really strong bad weather in some of the central part of the country. I hope everyone's safe.
Make sure you're uh in a safe place.
Check your weather reports tonight.
I I hope I hope you are safe, Christie.
We're thinking of you. Natalie, uh thank you so much. We did post that earlier.
Thank you for being here. One of our great mods always here. Averil, thank you for being a a member. And uh Shannon loves Connecticut says, "I haven't been around in a while, but I still support Mike Crawford and love everyone in the chat." Well, you picked a good show to be come back on, Shannon.
It's good to see you back.
Nicole RM67.
Thanks. Thanks for all you do, Mike.
Always great content and guest. Yes, I try to do my best. Tonight did live up to the hype. It was a good show.
Yeah, that's what I and that's the thing. Jumping Jack Flax, I've been thinking a lot, you know, especially after Jeff K said what he did the other day and I was listening and I was like, yeah, and I've had this conversation with myself back and forth, back and forth.
Like one day I feel like I just don't want to, you know, I just I want to get back to business and then other days I'm like, f that. But I think I'm there. I I I think this is what I want to get back to this, you know, and this is one of those types of shows that I enjoy doing and and I'm going to continue to try to do shows like this is just do my best do my best shows, my best content and I'll leave Twitter on Twitter. Sometimes I may say something on Twitter, but you know, it is what it is. And mostly I think I need to stay off Twitter again.
I've been saying that for a while. It's hard to do.
Yeah, there's a new there's a new filing, too. There's so much happening today.
So much.
Oh, you did. You posted I didn't know she had her own YouTube channel. Wow, she has a YouTube channel, too. Yeah, she is. She is smart. I like her a lot.
I'll have to check out her YouTube channel. Uh, Vic, can you send me that YouTube channel in our private chat because I want to check it out. I want to make sure I'm subscribing to her.
Um, what else did I want to say? I felt like I had something else to say, too. Oh, BB BB Egano, dude said 20 and says in the Ozarks, a tornado warning. Good stuff.
Oh, Christ. You're down there. Be safe, bro. Get to uh, you know, a safe spot like the cellar or something. I don't know. What do you do in a tornado? You lock it down. You get in, you hide in the tub. I hope you're all right. Be safe.
Make sure you check the weather radars.
You got those weather radars. You know what's coming when it's coming.
Um, what else? Oh, you know what? I just want to check the vent. I'm going to set it up right now. We're going to we're going to come back.
We're going to come back and do a new stream.
and we're just gonna replay the Karen Reed hearing that I didn't get to see today because I because I missed it. I want to watch it with everybody.
All right, I think we're all caught up.
I think we're all caught up on super chats. I think we're all caught up on uh thanking everyone. I want to thank all of our moderators. I want to thank Andrew Myers, attorney Andrew Myers for following uh for being here tonight, for being a great guest. Make sure you follow him on the social media, especially his YouTube channel, which we do have pinned in the chat. Anyone who watches on the replay, I will also uh pin his YouTube channel in the comments.
A top comment on our YouTube channel on our on the YouTube uh replay. Excuse me.
Getting a little ahead of myself. Um anything else? Yeah, you know what I'm going to do? Let me set up the stream.
It's going to take me a second here.
Gonna take me a second to set up the stream again.
and we're going to watch the carrot hearing.
Let's see if we can do that right now.
Hold on one second.
Live stream and then I'll what I'll do is I'll redirect us all. So we'll pretty much go over there. Karen Reed civil hearing.
All right.
I'm going to schedule that for 7:35, which would be like 5 minutes, but I'm pretty much going to start it pretty quickly.
Take me a second here. I'm almost there.
Doing things on the fly.
only Eevee. I'm set I'm setting up the new stream.
I wish I had time to do this earlier, but I didn't know this was coming out today. I I thought we were going to have to wait till probably tomorrow, but it came out like pretty much found it as soon as I went live tonight.
So, what we're going to do is we're just going to come back in just a couple minutes. We're going to replay what what happened today in court that I didn't get to watch and hopefully we all watch it together. If you want to stick around, stay with us.
Again, the uh stream right now will redirect to the Karen hearing from earlier today.
And I'm just getting that set up. It's almost ready to go.
Give me another second here. Hopefully, no one's leaving me.
We got the subs on.
You know what? I want to change the Can I do that, too? No, it's too late.
I think we're good.
All right, I got the redirect on.
Uh, any other comments before I go?
Snack break. Yeah, it's a snack break.
Oh, I love the Northshore crew. Thank you, Robert. Good to see you, bro. Yeah, give the stream a hype if you can on the way out. Make sure you give it a like.
Subscribe if you haven't.
Yes, I hope Andrew does come back soon.
I'm sure he will. Uh, be safe everybody, especially if you're in the Midwest, Chicago, Illinois area apparently.
I want to thank everyone for watching and again I'm I'm going to come right back with a new stream. We're going to watch what happened today in court.
Let me see if I can get it up real quick because I want to I don't want to miss it. We're going to we're going to go immediately to it. Let me just get uh YouTube back up quickly.
Give me another second here.
Yeah, we got a live motion error. It's like 29 minutes earlier today. And I love this. This is like not a Zoom hearing for once.
This is just straight up court action close-ups.
So, this is going to be fun to watch.
So, I'll be back in a few minutes. Thank you everybody. Thank you all the super chats and we'll be back with a new stream to watch uh what happened today in court with Karen Reed.
Seeing a
Related Videos
JAMIA BA LLB 2026 Offline Mock Interview | Final Interview Round Preparation
MLSLAWACADEMY
104 views•2026-06-16
6/15/26 Lively v. Wayfarer - Full Settlement Agreement is now public
littlegirlattorney
11K views•2026-06-15
HOA Demolished My Yacht for “Unauthorized Docking” — Too Bad I Own the Entire Marina!
Pro-RevengeStories
423 views•2026-06-15
JACKSON KIHARA'S SECRET DEAL: The Deal That Brought Out Jackson Kihara From Jail | LifeLens TV
LifeLens254
5K views•2026-06-14
Guelph's New Renoviction By-Law Explained.
CallCodyRE
807 views•2026-06-14
SCOTUS Rules 9-0 on Gun Rights for Marijuana Users
TheReloadSite
164 views•2026-06-18
A Family Tradition of Federal Time
LoneWolfUsul
603 views•2026-06-14
YouTuber Alexander Zabel Jr arrested again near Nancy Guthrie’s home amid investigation disruption
StarBuzzHD
136 views•2026-06-15
