Canton Coverup Part 391: Turtleboy Interviews Karen Read Juror 

 

– Framed – Video for Full Background on Canton Cover-Up Story
– Donate to the Turtleboy Legal defense fund
– See all parts of the Canton Cover-Up Series
– Watch the Live Shows and Videos
– Join ”Justice for John O’Keefe and Karen Read” FB Group

Two weeks ago I received an email from someone claiming to be a juror in the Karen Read trial. I was immediately skeptical as there is no shortage of degenerates who would spend their days pretending to be a juror in order to feed me misinformation to see if I’d report it, in the hopes that it would damage my reputation. This juror said a couple things about clothing they were wearing and other context clues that helped identify them, but Paul O’Keefe and various McAlberts got to see the same jurors I did, so I wasn’t convinced yet. Luckily this alleged juror agreed to FaceTime me and when I answered the phone I was staring back at a face that I spent 10 weeks looking at. This juror agreed to speak with me under the condition of anonymity. They are very afraid of being doxxed and attacked by the anti-Karen Read mob, but wanted to share with me what they could, without giving up information that would make it easier to identify who they were.

I sent them a list of almost 40 questions, most of which they answered. However, the one thing most people want to know about is something they don’t feel comfortable talking about yet – specifics of juror deliberations. That may change as time passes, but for now I was able to ask what I could, and they answered they could.

 

1. Why did you decide to come forward and speak with Turtleboy, of all media outlets?

After the trial, I did a lot of catching up across multiple platforms and sources and realized the way news is reported has changed exponentially over the years, no longer coming from mainstream media alone. You’re a gritty and unshakable journalist despite being perceived as a bit rough around the edges. Above all, you seem to genuinely care about the truth. That was the driving force behind my decision.

2. Had you ever heard of this trial prior to being called for jury duty?

I’m sure I heard about it when it happened, but it seemed to be another story like any others you see on the news. I didn’t pay more attention to this than I did anything else.

3. When you got jury duty that day were you aware that the Read case was picking a jury?

I was aware they were picking the jury, but was still surprised when I was chosen from the hundreds of people they brought in during jury selection.

4. Where did you park and what time did you have to get there every day? 

We reported each day at 8:30 a.m. and took the bus to arrive for the 9:00 a.m. start time. I am not going to disclose the location. I assume this location may be used for upcoming trials, and it’s not fair to future jurors.

5. Did jurors have a chance to converse socially during the trial? What sort of things did you guys talk about? Did anyone ever discuss the case?

We never discussed the case. We spent a lot of time together during bus rides, lunch and breaks and tried to maintain some normalcy during this very different time in our lives. Our conversations were social, like you would have with anyone you spend time with, discussing how the weekend was, things we had going on outside of court, etc.

6. Did jurors see protesters assembling outside the court every day?

There were times we could hear them or catch a glimpse from the bus, but we couldn’t see everything going on outside.

7. How hard was it not to go home and read about this case? Did you have to just stay off the internet and not watch TV at all?

To be honest, it wasn’t that difficult.  I went into this completely impartial, and I felt my job as a juror was to ensure that Karen got a fair trial where only the facts and evidence were considered vs information from outside sources.  I took my job very seriously; Karen’s life was at stake, and she deserved the benefit of not having outside information or opinions cloud my judgment.

8. Were jurors made aware that I was kicked out of court for most McAlbert testimony? 

No. 

9. Were you made aware that jurors would not be receiving transcripts during deliberations and would have to rely on their notes?

Yes.  We were told at the beginning of the trial that no transcripts of testimony would be available, and we would need to rely on our notes during deliberations.

10. What did you think of John’s mother crying during the trial? Did it seem to influence you or any other jurors?

I felt immense empathy for both the O’Keefe & Read families.  The death of a loved one is not something anyone ever wants to go through, and their emotions throughout the trial were, at times, heartbreaking to see.  While I didn’t let this impact me when it came to the evidence being presented, I’d be lying if I said it didn’t affect me on a personal level both during and after the trial.  John lost his life.  A tragedy, regardless of what other events may or may not have taken place, and I often felt like that aspect was forgotten amid the trial.

11. What did you think of Judge Cannone? Do you feel like she was partial to the Commonwealth with her rulings or demeanor during testimony?

She was kind to us.  She always made a point to remind us to stand up and stretch during sidebars, she kept to the schedule for breaks & lunch like clockwork, and she reminded EVERYONE to keep their voices up so we could leave the AC on.. it got hot in the jury box!  Sitting in a chair listening to testimony all day is very different from real life; you need to be attentive to catch everything, and you can’t just get up and move around whenever you want to.  It sounds pretty silly unless you experience it, but it’s very different when you can’t just get up to get a snack, use the bathroom, take a brain break, or get some air anytime you want to.  Of course, when we asked for breaks there was never any pushback, but we were also cognizant of the need to keep things moving.

At times, I did feel there was a level of professionalism that wasn’t being maintained and that the severity of the circumstances was not always at the forefront. It bothered me when there was an objection, and her response was, “I’ll let them have it.”  I think there was some bias against the defense, particularly Mr. Jackson.  But I also think there were times she was hard on Mr. Lally, particularly when it came to repeating questions about well-established things already made clear throughout prior testimony.  There were times I would glance over and wonder if she was paying attention, but to some extent, I can understand that it was hard to stay focused. I struggled with this myself, mainly if it was something we had already seen or heard eight times, like the weather report, the layout of the Waterfall bar, etc.

12. Was it hard to stay awake and focus during some of the Lally questioning of witnesses?

What, if anything, can I really say about this?  You were there.

13. What witnesses did you find most compelling?

The medical examiner.  I felt she was a straight shooter and gave her medical opinion based only on the facts.  There was no point where I felt her opinion had been influenced by either the Commonwealth or the defense to fit a theory being presented.

 

14. Who do you think was the most pointless witness?

Pointless? The 2 women that were in Aruba with John and Karen a few weeks prior to Jan 29th.

Unnecessary? John’s niece and nephew.  I didn’t see any reason why the children were brought into a courtroom to testify after all they had been through.  It could be that they wanted to be heard, but it felt wrong to have them on the stand with everyone watching.

 

15. Brian Albert, Brian Higgins, and Michael Proctor all greeted the jury and thanked them after their testimony. What did you think about that? 

These 3 men were a huge focal point of the trial, so while I wish I could have taken it as nothing more than a polite gesture, I did not.

16. Do you find Brian Albert’s story believable about not waking up to come outside?

I was very torn on this throughout the trial.  On one hand, I can understand being pretty drunk, going to bed late, and being deep asleep to the point where nothing wakes you up.  But I also find it hard to believe that a first responder’s instincts, which are engrained and become part of who they are over the course of their career, had this much commotion on his front lawn, and those instincts didn’t kick in at any point.

17. What did you think of Jennifer McCabe’s testimony?

I found Jennifer McCabe to be very combative, which was off-putting. Her demeanor made it difficult to process anything she was saying. Something felt off when she continued to ask to be reminded of statements, events, etc. with evidence of her prior accounts. It felt like she needed reminders of what she had previously said before she answered to keep from contradicting herself.

18. What did you think of Michael Proctor’s testimony?

Michael Proctor was mentioned every single day of this trial, so to say he was someone I was anxiously waiting to hear from would be an understatement.  I was obviously disappointed that an officer of the law behaved in a way that showed so little integrity and didn’t uphold their oath to protect and serve our community.

While I do not agree with a lot of his behavior when it came to the investigation and understand that said behavior was a critical part of the trial for the defense, I wish it hadn’t come down to reading texts in open court where he essentially dehumanized Karen.  None of that had anything to do with the core facts of the case, but it was a bit eye-opening to hear how investigations are discussed amongst some of our law enforcement.

There were many things that didn’t add up in his testimony, but that can be said for other witnesses as well. I felt it hurt the Commonwealth that the lead investigator wasn’t there to testify solely about the outcome of the investigation, but to testify about his actions throughout the investigation.

19. Did you find Colin Albert’s testimony believable? 

I found Colin to be purposely elusive when asked questions that he was prepared for.  But, when it came to the questions he was not prepared for, the cracks in his testimony started to show.  I think we can all agree that none of us has ever slipped on ice, while holding a solo cup, and broken our fall with just our knuckles.

20. Did you believe Colin Albert was inside Brian Albert’s house? 

I know that at some point, Colin Albert was in the house; that was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  But whether he was there past the time he stated is not as clear.  I do put weight on Ally McCabe seeming to slip up during the part of her testimony where she stated that Colin wasn’t in the house when John was. I could believe that is the truth, but that statement also put John in the house, which is something the Commonwealth has said did not happen.

21. Do you believe Katie McLaughlin’s testimony that Karen Read said, “I hit him” at the scene that morning?

I believe Katie McLaughlin believes she heard this, whether it be from her own memory or what she was reminded she heard.  However, I did find it hard to believe that of all the first responders on the scene that morning, she was the only one to hear that statement.  But at the same time, there was a lot of conflicting testimony from first responders of what they heard or saw that morning.  I didn’t put any more weight on this testimony than other testimony related to what people heard or saw that morning.

22. Did you believe Lucky Loughran’s testimony?

Lucky Loughran is a very likable man, as is his boss, Michael Trotta.  Lucky’s testimony appeared to be truthful; it didn’t seem he had an agenda but that he just wanted to share what he knew.

23. Did you feel deceived by the inverted Sally port video?

Yes, very much so. The prosecution’s emphasis on this video and its supposed significance in proving beyond a reasonable doubt that nobody was near the damaged taillight was a primary focus throughout the trial. It was a shock to find out that what I believed I was seeing and what I was actually seeing were not one and the same.

24. Did the jury have any idea about the federal investigation? If not, what did you think Ryan Nagel was talking about when he said he spoke to the feds? What did you think all the references to the “other proceedings” witnesses testified at, were in reference to?

Perhaps others caught on, but I honestly had no idea.  I missed Ryan Nagel mentioning the Feds during his testimony, and I assumed the other proceedings were another grand jury or something like that.  I had no reason to think there was something as big as a federal investigation going on outside of the trial.

25. Do you feel deceived not being told about the feds?

I don’t think I would use the word deceived, but I would say misled.  Looking back, not knowing the entire scope of what was happening and not having what seemed to be crucial information likely hindered my ability to see the whole picture.  If I had known the full scope, the ARCA witnesses would have made more sense, the things I thought were important may not have been where I focused my attention, and I may have looked at some witness testimony differently.

26. How could anyone on that jury think that Karen Read hit John with her car after hearing from the ARCCA guys?

I can only speak for myself, but you have to understand that we were not told where these witnesses came from.  There was a lot of conflicting testimony throughout the trial, specifically regarding IT and accident reconstruction “experts.” I understood that neither the Commonwealth nor the Defense hired them, but I had no idea where they came from.  For all I knew, they were two very smart and well-educated people who read about the case online and decided to analyze what happened.  I found them credible, but there were things they weren’t aware of that I thought were important, and I couldn’t understand why they were testifying when they didn’t seem to have all the information. The positioning of their presence and the information they had been provided to analyze was strange, no doubt, but being hired by the FBI or any other agency never crossed my mind. 

27. How did you feel about Brian Albert being in court for closing deliberations?

I felt it was inappropriate. He was a key witness and a major focal point during the trial, so I don’t think he should have been allowed in the courtroom at any time other than during his testimony. This goes for Jennifer McCabe and Colin Albert as well.

28. Did you feel that a “not guilty” verdict for Karen on the manslaughter charge implied that the McAlberts were somehow responsible?

This is a tough one to answer.  Human nature is to want to be Perry Mason and solve the case, and I wasn’t exempt from that.  I had times during the trial where I would think, if this isn’t what happened, then what did happen?  As the weeks went on, I realized that my job wasn’t to solve the case, but to focus on the one possibility that was being presented to me.  So no, I didn’t feel that a not-guilty verdict for Karen implied that any of the Albert’s or McCabe’s were responsible.  Having been back in the real world for some time now, I see that it’s very likely the public would have perceived it precisely that way, though.

29. How long did the jury take to reach a unanimous not guilty verdict on the murder charge? What was discussed during deliberations that made some jurors change their vote from not guilty to guilty for manslaughter? 

Given that motions on counts 1 and 3 remain outstanding, I don’t believe anyone should discuss this at this time. Anything related to deliberations and their outcome should be kept inside the courtroom.

30. Now that you’ve had time to research the case post trial, what have been some of the most surprising things to learn about?

The amount of people who are invested in this case.  I went into this not knowing what a following it had and how much it had taken over social media, podcasts, etc.  The federal investigation was also a huge surprise, a lot of things made more sense after learning that.

31. Do you think Chloe is alive?

I hope so!

 

Questions not answered:

Would you ever consider coming forward and using your real name? If not, why not?

• Juror won’t commit to that. 

Are you in contact with other jurors in the case?

• Juror doesn’t want to talk about other jurors at this time. 

Do you know why the juror in red was eliminated?

• Juror doesn’t want to talk about other jurors at this time. 

What sort of questions did Lally and the defense ask you during the voir dire?

• Juror is worried this will lead to identifiable information. 

Did your friends and family know you were a juror? Did they ask you about it? How hard was it to keep your identity a secret?

• Juror is worried this will lead to identifiable information. 

Did you understand the Jen McCabe Google search testimony from the 3 witnesses? Which did you find more compelling and why?

Do you believe Karen Read killed John O’Keefe with her car?

• Juror is worried this will lead to identifiable information. 

Has this case changed your attitude and trust towards police?

 

My top takeways:

1. Jurors clearly had no idea that the most important witnesses in the case, the ARCCA experts, were hired by the FBI. Many believed they were hired by Karen Read’s insurance company. The defense should fight harder before trial 2 to oppose MIL preventing disclosure of the federal investigation during trial.
2. Juror completely missed Ryan Nagel accidentally mentioning he spoke with the Feds. Not sure what would’ve happened if Yannetti had asked him to expound on that. Why shouldn’t witnesses be able to tell the jury who they spoke with about the case? This goes for Lucky Loughran, who was also questioned by the Feds long before State Police interviewed him.
3. The medical examiner was supposed to be a strong witness for the Commonwealth, but ended up being a strong witness for the defense.
4. The juror clearly felt intimidated by Brian Higgins, Brian Albert, and Michael Proctor, all of whom are cops who addressed them directly. Defense should file a motion to prevent witnesses from speaking to the jury like this and sitting in on closing statements.
5. Considering the Sullivan sisters and the kids were ONLY called as witnesses to prove that Karen had motive to murder John O’Keefe, and that the vote on murder was 12-0, it wasn’t surprising that the juror found them the least relevant witnesses. Will the Commonwealth be dumb enough to waste their time with them in trial 2?
6. The fact that this juror reached out to me of all media members, and was the first juror to actually talk about their experiences as a juror (as opposed to the vote count), speaks volumes about how I am perceived by the general public, and should help me with my bogus “witness intimidation” charges.