The Search for Unbiased Jurors Has Begun.

Tuesday Briefing: Jury selection is officially in progress today, and Judge Cannone makes last minute rulings before the Karen Read retrial begins.

Holy moly…

We made it, guys.

Jury selection is underway.

This time around, Judge Cannone ordered a higher quantity of potential jury candidates for the retrial due to the heightened and emotionally-heated public exposure of the case. Having enough people in order to filter out those with any bias, etc. is a greater challenge since the trial is being held locally.

The length of time for the selection process to take is currently unknown at this point.

---

ON THE DOCKET:

⭐️Defense’s motion to dismiss due to Egregious Government Misconduct is DENIED by the judge. Karen Read’s defense team failed to meet the standards of proof that misconduct occurred in her case. If you missed my brief summary on the arguments around this, you can find it HERE.

It also didn’t do the defense any favors that the federal investigation they boasted about to the public for two years came to an end with zero indictments and zero signs of corruption found.

⭐️Commonwealth's motion to appoint court stenographer, prevent identification of jurors and impound juror names during trial is APPROVED. Extra protection of juror’s identities are put into place. Last trial, a pro-Karen journalist who also sat in the courtroom, described the appearance of several jurors. This eventually led to one of them being doxxed online by the public.

⭐️A non-deliberating juror from Karen’s first trial is hired by defense attorney, David Yannetti’s office, and she has officially joined Karen Read’s team. Karen has a panel of high-powered attorneys from across the country, so adding a fairly unseasoned lawyer (who does not practice criminal law at all) is a seemingly odd move. As we know, the defense team has been very vocal in the media, and the attorneys were recently gagged to protect the potential jury pool from being tainted by a one-sided, curated narrative.

With that said…

This former juror/attorney (who Alan Jackson concedes in the Vanity Fair article showed signs of sympathy towards the defendant during the first trial — however, others would argue that the word is more appropriately known as favoritism) released quite the timely public statement criticizing the Commonwealth right before she was added to the team and was subjected to the gag order. It appears this was another last minute loophole the defense found to continue their unrelenting efforts to try this case in the court of public opinion, thus potentially tainting the jury pool.

⭐️Commonwealth’s motion to have access to any inculpatory statements during a very specific, limited timeframe when Karen communicated with her attorney, Yannetti, is DENIED. During an interview Karen waived her attorney-client privilege when speaking about what she said to her attorney, and his response. Despite this, the judge denied the motion because she said it would be inappropriate.

⭐️Commonwealth’s motion to exclude Michael Easter (a retired FBI agent) who the defense wants to testify to the quality of the police investigation was APPROVED. Having an agent unrelated to the case to critique a police investigation on the stand has never occurred in the history of Massachusetts court. Cross-examining officers and witnesses is and has been sufficient for the jury to evaluate whether things were done appropriately.

⭐️Commonwealth’s motion for a buffer zone, as well as an extension in certain perimeter areas is APPROVED. This is in an effort to keep the jurors further away from any outside influence during the trial.

⭐️Defense’s motion for a third party defense was both DENIED and APPROVED. Defense is seeking to point the finger at three witnesses (Colin Albert, Brian Albert, and Brian Higgins) as the actual culprits of John O’Keefe’s death. The judge denied the defense permission to accuse the young adult, Colin Albert, as a culprit, but has chosen to allow both Brian Albert and Brian Higgins to be pointed at if the evidence develops in that direction. The defense cannot, however, mention the third party culprit theory in opening statements.

(Despite the defense being told this same thing last trial, they proceeded to mention the third party culprit defense in their opening statement anyway.)

Here’s an excerpt from Judge Cannone’s ruling…

“As to Brian Albert and Brian Higgins, the defendant's proffer is barely sufficient, and the history of the first trial casts doubt on the seriousness of the claim. However, to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial, and in recognition of the fact that the defendant has no burden to prove anything under our law, the court will take the same incremental approach as it did the first trial: defense counsel are ordered not to mention potential third-party culprits in opening statements, but counsel will be allowed to develop the evidence at trial if possible, and counsel may seek an appropriate instruction, if warranted, after the evidence is concluded.”

---

A Note to My Readers❤️

I’ve had quite a few people pledge a monthly membership over the last year, and I’m unable to respond back to each one personally. Or at least — I haven’t figured out how to. 😬

I want to make sure I send my gratitude for those kind gestures and offers of support. The messages have been so encouraging.

A while back, I made a vow not to monetize my substack while I cover this trial. This case has been used and abused for financial purposes and notoriety from many conspiracy-minded and self-seeking YouTubers and content creators, so I have opted to avoid gaining any financial benefit in my efforts to honor the victim, John O’Keefe.

This is not in an effort to be valiant or self-righteous.

It’s just what my heart is telling me to do.

Thank you so much for all the love. Let’s keep our hope in John receiving the justice he deserves. Xo