Trooper Michael Proctor reads his 'unprofessional and regrettable' texts on the stand in Karen Read trial (2024)

Crime

“These juvenile, unprofessional comments have zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation,” Proctor argued Monday.

By Abby Patkin

updated on June 10, 2024

On the stand Monday:

• Trooper Michael Proctor, Massachusetts State Police

Judge Beverly Cannone concluded Monday’s session just before 4 p.m. with Proctor under cross-examination by defense attorney Alan Jackson. The trial will resume Wednesday morning after a scheduled off-day Tuesday.

• Sgt. Nicholas Barros, Dighton Police Department
• Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik, Massachusetts State Police

4 p.m. update: Trooper Michael Proctor confirms he called Karen Read a ‘wack job c**t’ in texts with his friends

Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor confirmed he called Karen Read a “wack job c**t” and “retarded” and made light of her Crohn’s disease in texts sent to friends, family, and colleagues during his investigation into Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe’s death.

“I don’t have an explanation other than they’re regrettable and it’s something I’m not proud of, the language that I used,” he said of his texts.

On the stand, Proctor read through pages of messages exchanged with childhood friends in the hours and days after O’Keefe was found unresponsive on a fellow Boston police officer’s lawn in Canton. The recap below reflects some of those conversations, as they were read aloud in court.

“I’m sure the owner of the house will receive some s***,” one of Proctor’s friends wrote.

“Nope,” Proctor replied. “Homeowner is a Boston cop, too.”

Referring to Read and O’Keefe, he testified that he wrote in other texts, “She waffled him. I looked at his body at the hospital. He was banged up.” In another message, he added: “She hit him with her car.”

“She hot, at least?” one of Proctor’s friends asked at some point.

He said he replied, “She’s a wack job c***. Yes, she’s a babe. Weird Fall River accent, though. No ass.” He also testified that he said homeowner Brian Albert, by all accounts, had done nothing wrong.

Under questioning by prosecutor Adam Lally, who introduced the texts, Proctor acknowledged that his messages were “unprofessional and regrettable” and said he shouldn’t have sent them. In other texts, he said he called Read a “nutbag” and wrote, “she’s got a leaky balloon knot. Leaks poo,” in reference to Read’s chronic illness. Read was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease at age 25 and at one point used a colostomy bag, according to an April profile in The Boston Globe.

“Again, unprofessional comments I should not have made and that I’m not proud of,” Proctor said. However, he argued, “These juvenile, unprofessional comments have zero impact on the facts and the evidence and the integrity of this investigation.”

‘It was clear that Ms. Read had struck Mr. O’Keefe with her vehicle’

Lally pointed Proctor to text messages the trooper exchanged with his sister Courtney. Proctor previously testified that his sister is friendly with several of Brian Albert’s relatives, including witnesses Julie, Chris, and Colin Albert. Proctor also said he told three of his superiors about his acquaintance with the Albert family, though he maintained those personal relationships had “absolutely zero impact on this investigation.”

On Feb. 1, 2022, Proctor said his sister texted him, “I just saw Julie and she said when this is all over, she wants to get you a thank-you gift.”

“And I respond, ‘Get Elizabeth one,’” Proctor testified. “Elizabeth is my wife.”

He said his sister continued, “Because I guess her [Julie] and Chris were friends with John, and she’s so proud of you for leading this.” Proctor testified that neither he nor his wife asked for or received a gift.

He confirmed that in a separate text thread with his wife on June 9, 2022 — the day Read was indicted and arrested for O’Keefe’s death — he wrote that he was “waiting to lock this wack job up.”

Lally asked Proctor why he used the language he did in his texts about Read.

“We knew Mr. O’Keefe never went into Fairview Road,” Proctor said. “We knew there was one shoe at the scene, one shoe at the hospital. Based off Mr. O’Keefe’s injuries, Ms. Read’s statements when Sgt. [Yuriy] Bukhenik and I interviewed her, her broken taillight, … some taillight pieces found at the scene, the compelling evidence pointing directly at Ms. Read — that she struck Mr. O’Keefe with her vehicle — led me to make those comments.”

He added: “Like I said, they were not professional comments. But based on the day’s investigation, it was clear that Ms. Read had struck Mr. O’Keefe with her vehicle.”

Comment about looking for nudes on Read’s phone was a ‘distasteful joke,’ Proctor says

Lally also asked about messages Proctor exchanged with a fellow State Police trooper on April 28, 2022, regarding conversations with the medical examiner’s office. The medical examiner listed O’Keefe’s cause of death as “undetermined.”

“Of course it’s undetermined,” Proctor said he wrote. “She [Read] was a wack job.”

Proctor read more messages aloud from another group chat, where a fellow trooper sent a picture of one of Read’s lawyers, David Yannetti, on Aug. 17, 2022.

“Funny, I’m going through his retarded client’s phone. No nudes so far,” Proctor said he wrote. “I hate that man, I truly hate him.”

He confirmed Read was the client in question.

“Troopers in my office knew I was going through the phone that evening,” Proctor explained. “I was most interested in location data, text messages, Google searches. That was the update I gave the troopers in my office. It was a distasteful joke. I should have gave a proper update instead of that.”

He added that he wasn’t able to finish a thorough search of the phone because he came across privileged messages between Read and her attorney.

Jackson accuses Proctor of objectifying Read

Defense attorney Alan Jackson cut straight to the point as he began his cross-examination of Proctor.

“As an unbiased, objective investigator, the person that you were investigating, you referred to — to your bosses — as ‘retarded,’ correct?” he confirmed.

“Again, poor language on my part,” Proctor said.

“‘Poor language’ is one way to put it. ‘Completely offensive’ is another way to put it, right?” Jackson countered as Judge Beverly Cannone sustained an objection from prosecutors.

Pointing to Proctor’s comments about hating Yannetti, Jackson asked, “How do you feel about him now? He’s sitting right there.”

“I still don’t care for him, no,” Proctor replied.

Jackson turned his attention to Proctor’s text about looking for nude photos on Read’s phone.

“Have you ever looked for naked photos of a male suspect that you were investigating?” he asked.

“I don’t look for naked photos in anyone’s phones,” Proctor said.

“But you said you were looking for nudes of Ms. Read, correct?” Jackson pressed.

“Like I said Mr. Jackson, it was an inappropriate joke,” Proctor replied.

“Do you believe that your text messages were reflective of an objective investigator?” Jackson asked.

“I believe poor jokes and unprofessional language have no bearing on the integrity and the facts and physical evidence of this case,” Proctor asserted.

Jackson accused the trooper of objectifying Read, rather than objectively investigating her. Proctor maintained he did not go through Read’s photos.

Later, Proctor confirmed that none of his supervisors reprimanded him for his message about searching through Read’s phone. In fact, he said, Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik “liked” the text.

Jackson also suggested that Proctor made up his mind about Read’s guilt before diligently investigating the case.

“In other words, Trooper Proctor, you don’t get to pick a suspect and then try to find evidence to support your choice, right?” he asked.

“Correct,” Proctor replied.

“But in this case, that’s exactly what you did, isn’t it?” Jackson pressed.

“Absolutely not,” Proctor said.

Cannone ended Monday’s session after Proctor’s answer. After an off-day Tuesday, the trial is set to resume Wednesday morning with Proctor still under cross-examination.

1 p.m. update: Lead State Police investigator takes the stand for highly anticipated testimony

John O’Keefe’s missing sneaker was one of investigators’ first clues the victim might have been struck by a car, Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor testified.

Proctor, a lead investigator on the case, recalled heading to Good Samaritan Medical Center in Brockton on Jan. 29, 2022, to view O’Keefe’s body with State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik. He said the scrapes on O’Keefe’s right arm were the first thing he noticed.

“Both eyes were swollen and black and blue,” Proctor testified. “He had a cut on, I believe it was, his right nostril. Another smaller cut, I think it was on his left eye. Those were the injuries that kind of jumped out to me.”

He also said he noticed blood on the back of O’Keefe’s head.

As the troopers collected O’Keefe’s clothing from the hospital room, “One thing that had jumped out to both of us was [there was only] one sneaker,” Proctor recalled. Prosecutor Adam Lally asked Proctor about his prior experience investigating crashes involving motor vehicles and pedestrians.

“In those experiences, I’ve observed one, if not both pieces of footwear remained at the point of impact,” Proctor explained. O’Keefe’s missing shoe “revealed the potential of a vehicle strike,” he added.

Proctor further noted that the Massachusetts State Police Special Emergency Response Team found a Nike sneaker matching O’Keefe’s outside 34 Fairview Road that day.

What the early investigation revealed

Proctor said he received a call from Bukhenik at about 6:48 a.m. on the 29th informing him that a man had been found injured in the snow outside a home in Canton. The incident was initially considered “a possible medical situation,” Proctor said.

He said he called around to Canton Police Lt. Michael Lank and acting Canton Fire Lt. Anthony Flematti to track down more information. According to Proctor, Flematti — who responded to 34 Fairview Road the morning of the 29th — “put a 10% chance of survival for Mr. O’Keefe.”

After digging a little deeper, “I contacted Sgt. Bukhenik, advised him that this sounds like it’s more than a medical situation,” Proctor recalled.

He testified that he’d never met O’Keefe or Karen Read prior to Jan. 29, 2022, nor had he known Kerry Roberts or Jennifer McCabe — two women who were with Read when she found O’Keefe in the snow that morning. Later on, he clarified that the only witnesses he knew prior to his investigation were Julie, Chris, and Colin Albert.

Chris’s brother, Brian Albert, owned 34 Fairview Road at the time.

Proctor explained that his sister was close with Julie Albert’s sister growing up and became friendly with the Alberts. However, he described himself as “acquaintances” with Julie and Chris Albert and their son Colin.

Throughout the course of their investigation into O’Keefe’s death, troopers spoke with witnesses individually, with the exception of Julie and Chris Albert, Proctor testified.

‘Sgt. Bukhenik and I never touched any part of that vehicle’

When he and Bukhenik arrived at Read’s parents’ home in Dighton to interview her, Proctor said he noticed damage to Read’s SUV. “The right rear taillight had large pieces missing from it,” he recalled.

After speaking with Read inside the home for about 30 to 40 minutes, the troopers took her cellphone into evidence and seized her SUV. Asked whether he had any contact with the car as it sat in Dighton or after it was brought to the Canton Police Department for processing, Proctor replied: “Sgt. Bukhenik and I never touched any part of that vehicle.”

Investigators processed Read’s SUV at the Canton police station on Feb. 1, 2022, and Proctor confirmed Read’s broken taillight was in the same condition between Jan. 29 and Feb. 1. “The only difference from the 29th to the first was snow and ice have melted from the taillight,” he added.

State Police Crime Lab forensic scientist Maureen Hartnett removed the taillight housing from Read’s SUV with help from a Canton police officer who owned an auto body shop, Proctor testified. He held aloft the taillight housing and pieces of plastic recovered from 34 Fairview Road for the jury.

Proctor confirmed he made multiple trips to Fairview Road to search for or collect evidence from the area where O’Keefe’s body was found, though he maintained he was never at the scene by himself.

He also said he and another trooper visited O’Keefe’s home to document the lack of damage to O’Keefe’s car. Jurors previously saw surveillance footage showing Read’s SUV reversing out of O’Keefe’s garage toward O’Keefe’s parked car at about 5:07 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022. The defense has suggested the two cars made contact — possibly accounting for Read’s broken taillight — but Proctor noted the surveillance video doesn’t show any pieces of broken plastic near O’Keefe’s car.

“I didn’t observe any significant damage, or any damage,” to O’Keefe’s car, he testified.

Digging deeper into the Ring surveillance video from O’Keefe’s driveway, Lally asked for information about which devices were able to access the footage.

“I wasn’t able to obtain an activity log of who was using the device, what device was accessing the system,” Proctor replied. “If someone logged in, I … was not provided any record of who was logging in or what day or time.”

He noted the Ring footage appeared to be missing certain clips of Read arriving at O’Keefe’s house and then showing her broken taillight to Roberts and McCabe later that morning.

“There’s a gap from approximately 11:45 p.m. on the 28th to about 5:07 a.m. on the 29th, when Ms. Read’s backing out,” he said. “It never has her pulling into the garage.”

Proctor testified that he asked Ring several times whether there was any record of deleted videos but was never able to obtain any footage from the moments in question.

10:45 a.m. update: Dighton police sgt. says Read’s taillight was cracked when he saw the vehicle outside her parents’ home

The right rear taillight on Karen Read’s SUV was cracked when law enforcement arrived at her parents’ home in Dighton to seize the vehicle the afternoon of Jan. 29, 2022, Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testified.

As he began his shift at 8 a.m. that day, Barros said he learned that a Dighton resident — later identified as Read’s father — had called 911 earlier that morning for a ride to a hospital in Brockton “due to his daughter’s boyfriend passing away.”

He testified he received a call from Massachusetts State Police troopers assigned to the Norfolk District Attorney’s Office around 2:30 p.m. on the 29th, informing him they were coming to Dighton to retrieve a vehicle involved in a homicide. Barros said State Police Trooper Michael Proctor asked him to contact the police department’s contracted tow company to meet officers at Read’s parents’ home.

Barros confirmed he saw a black Lexus SUV sitting in the driveway upon his arrival.

“I saw that there was some damage to the right rear taillight,” he recalled. “To my best ability and recollection, that taillight was not completely damaged. It was cracked, and a piece was missing. But not completely damaged.”

He said he also saw a dent on the vehicle’s rear quarter panel, near the taillight.

The defense team did not cross-examine Barros.

10:35 a.m. update: Sgt. Bukhenik maintains he and Proctor ‘absolutely did not’ touch taillight area on Read’s SUV in the Canton police garage

Defense attorney Alan Jackson put the mirrored Canton Police Department sallyport garage footage under the microscope Monday as Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik’s testimony resumed.

Jackson revisited Bukhenik’s earlier statements on the video, which shows Karen Read’s SUV sitting in police custody the evening of Jan. 29, 2022. He confirmed that Bukhenik did not acknowledge the footage was inverted until prompted during cross-examination last week.

“Would you agree with me now, as you sit here, that this video as we’re looking at it is not a true and accurate depiction of what you viewed in that sallyport that night?” Jackson asked.

“I would not agree with you, no,” Bukhenik replied. He contended the video was accurate, just inverted. However, Bukhenik also acknowledged that the video is “not a smooth recording of the events” and skips around at points, with people popping suddenly into frame as the motion-triggered camera starts recording.

Jackson proceeded to play a non-inverted version of the sallyport video, showing the driver’s side of Read’s SUV. He also questioned Bukhenik about the much grainier footage from the other side of the garage, noting that the timestamp jumps about 42 minutes, from approximately 5:08 p.m. to 5:50 p.m. The damage to the passenger side of Read’s vehicle — specifically her broken taillight — has been a central focus during the trial.

“Is there any other video, other than this one, that would show the exact condition of that taillight as it pulled into the … sallyport, or is this the only one?” Jackson asked.

“That is the video that captures that timeframe,” Bukhenik replied. He confirmed the video does not show the roughly 42-minute period after Read’s car arrived at the garage.

On redirect examination, Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally asked Bukhenik whether the mirrored sallyport video had been modified before it was shown to the jury.

“There was no manipulation, alteration of the video between … when we received it from [the] Canton Police Department, when I played it, and when it was played for you,” Bukhenik testified.

At Lally’s prompting, he confirmed the sallyport video was captured after Read’s vehicle was caught on home surveillance footage at John O’Keefe’s house and at her parents’ home in Dighton. Bukhenik previously testified that surveillance video from O’Keefe’s driveway shows “a missing, damaged rear right taillight” on Read’s car shortly after 5 a.m. on the 29th.

“At any point in time that you were in the sallyport area of the Canton Police Department garage, did you or Trooper [Michael] Proctor ever go near, touch, manipulate the rear passenger side taillight area or the rear passenger side quarter panel of the defendant’s vehicle?” Lally asked.

“We absolutely did not,” Bukhenik replied.

Lally turned his attention to Bukhenik’s previous testimony about informing the medical examiner’s office that O’Keefe had possibly been involved in a domestic assault and might have been struck in the face with a co*cktail glass.

Bukhenik confirmed the conversation took place at about 10:41 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022 — before he’d gone to Good Samaritan Medical Center in Brockton to view O’Keefe’s body. He said he was simply coordinating with the medical examiner’s office as directed by law.

“Up to that point, we had learned that the defendant stated that she hit him,” he testified. “The Canton Police Department had collected a broken glass, so based on the physical evidence and the statements made by the defendant to the first responders at the scene at that point in time, I had communicated those facts to the medical examiner’s office. That way, they would document it but also be prepared to investigate the case with the most up to date information available.”

8:55 a.m. update: Prosecution, defense go head to head over expert witnesses

Prosecutors accused Karen Read’s lawyers of dealing in bad faith Monday, asserting that the defense team’s delayed disclosure of expert witness materials was “intended to ambush the commonwealth and conduct a trial by surprise.”

The defense only provided notice of all its experts on April 15, a day before jury selection was set to begin in Read’s trial, Assistant District Attorney Laura McLaughlin told Judge Beverly Cannone during a brief hearing Monday morning without jurors present.

According to McLaughlin, prosecutors filed a motion for reciprocal discovery during jury impanelment, and the defense was ordered to produce documentation for expert opinion testimony within a week. Now, eight weeks into Read’s trial, “the commonwealth has not received any intended expert opinions, … any written reports, opinions, or anything that those experts have based their opinions on,” McLaughlin alleged.

“Essentially, the defendant’s strategic decisions not to retain their own expert, but rather rely on the U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation, does not alleviate them or relieve them from the Rule 14 obligations,” she argued, citing the federal probe of Read’s case.

McLaughlin argued to exclude one particular defense expert, Dr. Marie Russell, because the prosecution did not receive notice of Russell’s background or expected testimony until late May.

Speaking for Read’s camp, defense attorney David Yannetti labeled some of the prosecution’s assertions “outrageous and false.” Pointing to prosecutors’ written motion, Yannetti took particular exception to the allegation that he previously indicated the defense would not argue that John O’Keefe was attacked by a dog.

“I was astounded to read that for two reasons,” Yannetti said. “First of all, it is false. It is a lie. Second, the commonwealth has knowingly lied about something where it’s easily verifiable that they lied.”

He clarified that he was answering a question about outstanding DNA tests, rather than waiving the defense team’s claims of a possible dog attack.

Cannone noted that the defense has not complied with its Rule 14 pretrial discovery obligations.

“We can’t, your honor. We can’t,” Yannetti countered, pointing to the constraints of the federal investigation.

“So you can’t, but you haven’t,” Cannone replied. She said the experts will likely need to be brought in for voir dire, or preliminary questioning without the jury present.

“It looks like at least a day of voir dire hearings here,” the judge said.

The audio for the livestream broadcast cut out for the last few minutes of the hearing, leaving the outcome immediately unclear.

Livestream via NBC10 Boston.

Jurors in the Karen Read murder trial are slated to hear additional testimony from a Massachusetts State Police sergeant who faced the third degree over the search for evidence on Fairview Road and the inexplicably mirrored surveillance footage from the Canton Police Department’s sallyport garage.

State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik returns to the stand Monday after testifying two days last week and walking jurors through the initial investigation into Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe’s death.

Read, 44, of Mansfield, is accused of deliberately backing her SUV into O’Keefe — her boyfriend of two years — while dropping him off at a house party in Canton after midnight on Jan. 29, 2022. Prosecutors allege Read was driving drunk following a night out at two local bars, and Bukhenik testified Thursday that surveillance footage from the bars “shows nine drinks being consumed by the defendant” in the hours before she drove O’Keefe over to the afterparty at 34 Fairview Road.

Read’s lawyers have a different theory. According to the defense, O’Keefe entered 34 Fairview Road on the 29th and was beaten and possibly attacked by homeowner Brian Albert’s dog, a German shepherd. Read, they say, was framed.

Jurors last week heard a brief audio clip of Read blaming others for O’Keefe’s death while speaking with Bukhenik following her indictment and arrest on June 9, 2022.

“You’re aware he was beaten up by Brian and Colin Albert? I mean, we’re all in on the same joke, right?” Read says in the clip. “My taillight is cracked, and John … was pulverized.”

Parts of Bukhenik’s testimony have raised questions among those following the trial online, including the flipped surveillance footage jurors saw of Read’s SUV sitting in the Canton police station’s sallyport after the vehicle was seized by State Police. Bukhenik did not confirm the footage was mirrored until prompted by defense attorney Alan Jackson on cross-examination.

“I do not know why it is inverted, but that’s the way it was collected and presented from Canton police,” Bukhenik testified.

Court will convene earlier than usual Monday, with lawyers on both sides set to argue a motion from prosecutors to compel reciprocal discovery on some of its expert witnesses and block testimony from one defense expert, Dr. Marie Russell.