Karen Read murder case: Fired investigator Michael Proctor to loom over retrial as jury selection begins

Karen Read Retrial: Investigator’s Dismissal Casts Shadow Over New Proceedings

The Karen Read murder trial, a high-profile case that captivated public attention and ended in a hung jury last year, is set to resume this week. Prosecutors will once again attempt to secure a conviction against Read for the 2022 death of her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, a veteran Boston police officer.

However, the investigation is now under scrutiny following the dismissal of its lead investigator, Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor. Proctor was terminated last month amid allegations of making disparaging remarks about Read and improperly sharing sensitive investigative details. Legal experts suggest Proctor’s conduct will likely be a central issue when the retrial begins on Tuesday.

Proctor’s Conduct Under Scrutiny

Daniel Medwed, a law and criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston, stated, “I suspect that Michael Proctor — and the state police investigation in general — will be the elephant in the courtroom throughout the trial.” This suggests Proctor’s actions will heavily influence the proceedings.

Stara Roemer, a former Dallas County prosecutor and current criminal defense lawyer in Texas, noted the change in circumstances regarding Proctor. “At the time of his original testimony, he still had a job to rein him in,” Roemer stated. “Now that he no longer has that job, who knows what could come out of his mouth,” raising concerns about Proctor’s potential testimony.

Danny Cevallos, a criminal defense lawyer and NBC News legal analyst, emphasized the precarious nature of the case. “This is a case that was already on the edge,” Cevallos commented. “You’ve now deleted the lead investigator,” highlighting the significant impact of Proctor’s dismissal.

Details of the Alleged Crime

Proctor spearheaded the investigation into the death of John O’Keefe on January 29, 2022. O’Keefe was discovered unresponsive on the property of a Boston police sergeant in Canton, located south of Boston. During the initial trial, Norfolk County Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally asserted that Read, allegedly enraged by the decline of her relationship with O’Keefe, intentionally struck him with her Lexus SUV and left him to die outside the sergeant’s residence.

Read faces charges of second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while driving under the influence, and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death.

Defense Alleges Conspiracy

Read maintains her innocence and, during her 2024 trial, her defense team argued that she was the victim of an elaborate conspiracy implicating other law enforcement officials. Her legal representatives contended that O’Keefe was fatally assaulted during an after-party at the home of Brian Albert and that Albert and others present at the gathering framed Read for the death. (Brian Albert was not charged with any offense and testified that O’Keefe never entered his home.)

The defense team accused Proctor of evidence manipulation and leading a biased investigation, arguing that his conduct compromised the integrity of the case.

Proctor’s Text Messages and Ties

Defense attorneys highlighted text messages sent by Proctor to acquaintances, family members, and superiors containing offensive and vulgar remarks directed at Read. In one message to his sister, Proctor reportedly expressed hope that Read would commit suicide.

Furthermore, the defense pointed to Proctor’s undisclosed connections to Albert and Albert’s family, as well as investigative details Proctor shared with his sister, who had close ties to Albert’s sister-in-law.

Proctor’s Testimony and Dismissal

During his testimony, Proctor admitted that his comments were unprofessional and “dehumanized” Read. He acknowledged discussing the case with his sister but claimed he only shared “newsworthy stuff.”

Proctor testified that his behavior did not compromise the impartiality of the investigation.

Following the first trial’s mistrial declaration due to a hung jury, the Massachusetts State Police suspended Proctor without pay and initiated an internal affairs investigation into the allegations of “serious misconduct” raised during the trial.

Proctor was dishonorably discharged in March after a state police trial board determined he violated agency regulations by sending derogatory messages and sharing sensitive and private information with individuals outside of law enforcement.

The board also concluded Proctor consumed alcohol while on duty and subsequently operated his police vehicle.

Proctor has not issued a public statement regarding his dismissal. However, his family expressed “true disappointment” with the board’s decision, asserting it “unfairly exploits and scapegoats one of their own, a trooper with a 12-year unblemished record.”

Impact on the Retrial

Proctor’s role in the upcoming retrial remains uncertain. He appears on a potential witness list filed by Read’s attorneys earlier this year, and legal experts anticipate his dismissal will be used to reinforce the defense strategy from the previous trial, according to Medwed of Northeastern University.

“The defense, as in the first trial, will likely emphasize the inadequacy of the investigation to try to create reasonable doubt, and Proctor’s termination will aid that effort,” Medwed explained.

Prosecution Strategy

Hank Brennan, the special prosecutor appointed to retry the case, might not require the former trooper’s testimony concerning the investigation, suggested Romer, the former prosecutor. Brennan could likely establish the necessary facts through alternative investigators, she added.

Romer indicated Brennan might argue that Proctor’s termination could confuse or mislead the jury and should be excluded from the trial. However, she believes a more prudent approach would be to directly address the issues surrounding Proctor.

“The smart move for someone like Brennan in this situation is to get it all out on direct because it is much more powerful in front of a jury in terms of questioning that person’s credibility,” Romer explained, referring to the prosecution’s direct examination. “If it comes out on cross-examination, it’ll seem like the state was hiding something,” implying transparency is key.

Potential Reluctant Witness

However, Cevallos, the legal analyst, cautioned that calling Proctor could present challenges for the prosecution.

“He’s lost everything,” Cevallos observed. “Think he’ll be willing to help?” questioning Proctor’s willingness to cooperate.

Cevallos suggested that if subpoenaed, Proctor might appear as a reluctant witness, providing minimal answers often encountered by defense attorneys when questioning law enforcement.

“With the government, they’re very helpful,” he stated. “When I do it, they lapse into, ‘yes, no, yes, no.’ That’s the way the game is played,” highlighting the potential for uncooperative testimony.

Unusual Case Trajectory

Romer characterized the trajectory of Read’s case as highly atypical. She noted that the dismissal of the lead investigator in a criminal case between trials is exceptionally rare. Furthermore, she emphasized the unusual public awareness of Proctor’s “unprofessional” remarks.

“Stuff like this happens all the time,” she said. “If you’ve ever had a conversation with a police officer, they talk about their cases and reveal information that they shouldn’t. It’s just, normally people don’t see it,” suggesting such behavior is more common than publicly perceived, but rarely exposed to this degree.