Fired investigator Michael Proctor to loom over retrial as jury selection begins

Karen Read, the Massachusetts woman whose sensational murder trial ended with a hung jury last year, is set to return to court this week as prosecutors again try to convict her in the 2022 killing of her boyfriend, a veteran Boston police officer.

But the lead investigator in the case, Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, was fired last month over allegations that he had disparaged Read and shared confidential investigative details, and legal experts say that Proctor will likely loom over the proceedings when they get underway Tuesday.

“I suspect that Michael Proctor — and the state police investigation in general — will be the elephant in the courtroom throughout the trial,” said Daniel Medwed, a professor of law and criminal justice at Northeastern University in Boston.

“At the time of his original testimony, he still had a job to rein him in,” said Stara Roemer, a former Dallas County prosecutor who is now a criminal defense lawyer in Texas. “Now that he no longer has that job, who knows what could come out of his mouth.”

“This is a case that was already on the edge,” said criminal defense lawyer and NBC News legal analyst Danny Cevallos. “You’ve now deleted the lead investigator.”

Proctor led the investigation into the Jan. 29, 2022, death of John O’Keefe, who was found unresponsive in the yard of a then-Boston police sergeant in Canton, south of Boston. During the first trial, Norfolk County Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally alleged that Read — furious over her deteriorating relationship with O’Keefe — drunkenly backed her Lexus SUV into him and left him for dead outside the sergeant’s home.

Read was charged with second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter while driving under the influence and leaving the scene of a collision causing death.

She denies the allegations, and at her 2024 trial, her defense team alleged that she was the victim of an elaborate conspiracy that involved other law enforcement officers. Her lawyers alleged that O’Keefe was fatally beaten during an afterparty at the home of Brian Albert, and that he and others who were at the gathering framed Read for the killing. (Albert was not charged with any crimes, and he testified that O’Keefe never came inside his home.)

The defense accused Proctor of manipulating evidence and leading a biased investigation.

They pointed to text messages he sent to friends, relatives and supervisors in which he used offensive and vulgar language to describe Read. In one message to his sister, Proctor said he hoped Read died by suicide. 

The defense also pointed to Proctor’s undisclosed ties to Albert and his family, and to investigative details Proctor shared with his sister, who was close friends with Albert’s sister-in-law.

In testimony, Proctor acknowledged that his comments were unprofessional and “dehumanized” Read. He admitted to discussing the case with his sister, but said he made her aware only of “newsworthy stuff.” 

Proctor testified that his conduct did not compromise the integrity of the investigation.

After a jury failed to reach a verdict and a judge declared a mistrial, the Massachusetts State Police suspended Proctor without pay and launched an internal affairs investigation into allegations raised at trial that the agency described as “serious misconduct.”

Proctor was dishonorably discharged in March after a state police trial board found that he had violated agency rules when he sent derogatory messages and shared sensitive and confidential details with non-law enforcement personnel.

The board also found that Proctor drank alcohol while on duty and drove his cruiser afterward.

Proctor has not publicly commented on his termination, but his family said they were “truly disappointed” with the board’s decision, which they said “unfairly exploits and scapegoats one of their own, a trooper with a 12-year unblemished record.”

It’s unclear what role Proctor will play in the second trial. He’s included on a possible witness list that Read’s attorneys filed earlier this year, and he will likely be used to bolster the same defense the lawyers made last year, said Medwed, of Northeastern.

“The defense, as in the first trial, will likely emphasize the shoddiness of the investigation to try to create reasonable doubt, and Proctor’s dismissal will help that effort,” he said.

Hank Brennan, the special prosecutor appointed to retry the case, may not need the former trooper’s testimony about the investigation, said Romer, the former prosecutor. Brennan can likely establish those facts through other investigators, she said. 

Brennan could argue that Proctor’s termination could confuse or mislead the jury and should be excluded from trial, Romer said. In her view, the wiser approach would be to address the issues surrounding Proctor head-on.

“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,” said Romer, referring to the prosecution’s direct examination. “If it comes out on cross-examination, it’ll seem like the state was hiding something.”

But Cevallos, the legal analyst, said that calling Proctor could be tricky for the prosecution.

“He’s lost everything,” Cevallos said. “Think he’ll be willing to help?”

If subpoenaed, Cevallos said, Proctor may come across as a reluctant witness — someone who doesn’t refuse to testify but provides the kinds of answers that defense attorneys often hear when questioning law enforcement officers.

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

To Romer, the trajectory of Read’s case is highly unusual. To have the lead investigator in a criminal case fired between trials just doesn’t happen, she said. But, the most unusual thing is that the public knows anything at all about Proctor’s “unprofessional” comments, she said.

“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.”