April 23, 2024 • 46 mins
Boston Cop John O'Keefe and his girlfriend Karen Read go on a pub crawl before ending their the night at the home of a Boston cop friend of O'Keefe's at 12:45 am. 6 hours later, the body of John O'Keefe is found in the front yard of the house, covered in snow in blizzard conditions. He is wearing two shirts, jeans, socks and one shoe. Near his body on the snow are shards of glass and splotches of blood. On this episode of Body Bags, Joseph Scott Morgan will take an up close look at the injuries and find out what really happened to John O'Keefe. Dave Mack will breakdown the story that has divided Boston and together they will try to answer the question: Who Killed John O'Keefe?
.
Transcribed Highlights
00:01.10 Introduction, talk about weather conditions and murder
02:05.22 Discussion of Karen Read case
05:05.56 Talk about Media coverage
09:09.25 Discussion of forensics role in investigation
14:06.82 Talk about background of relationship
16:16.35 Breaking down timeline of events
19:50.94 Discussion of physical injuries
21:07.56 Talk about Blood Alcohol
25:20.82 Talk about leaving bar, going to house party
30:09.48 Talk about Text Messages, getting directions
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Body bags with Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
I have a lot of friends and neighbors down here
in the Deep South that aren't much of a fan
of cool weather. I guess that, you know, we you
get used to an environment, you grow up in it,
and you just kind of adjust. Certainly, the environment is
not going to adjust to you. It's uh, that's foolishness
to think that. If you know, if you're in England,
(00:41):
for instance, and your shock that it's raining, then you know,
shame on you. But I don't mind the cold so
much because it gets so very hot and oppressive down
here that I'm not going to be one to complain
when the temperatures dropped below freezing down in these parts.
(01:02):
But I got to tell you, there's cold and then
there's cold. And anytime you start to talk about the Northeast,
in particular New England of our country, those people live
in a completely different world and they have in fact
adjusted to their environment. And sometimes the environment will tell
the tale of any kind of case. And the case
(01:24):
that we're going to examine today, it is a case
that has somewhat been dictated by environment. We've heard a
lot about it. We've heard about snow. We've heard about
freezing temperatures, but most of all, we've heard about a
police officer who was found dead or seemingly deceased in
(01:46):
the snow and there was no obvious cause of death
in the immediate Today we're going to talk about the
death of John O'Keefe, Boston police officer. I'm Josephcott Morgan
and this is Body Bats. It's good to be back
(02:07):
with you, Dave. I've had people asking me to cover
this case and to talk about it. I've appeared on
a variety of news programming. I never quite have enough
time to go through it because the material is sons.
As a matter of fact, as we are actually recording this,
i'd just been on air with my friend Ashley Banfield
(02:29):
on News Nation covering this case actually last night, and
I thought, you know, I thought, Dave and I just
need to hop on the talk go ahead and just
kind of discuss it and see what we could come
up with, because I don't know. The Karen Reid case
now for loath these many months has been at the
top of the news. We keep hearing about it, and
(02:49):
it kind of comes and burst, you know, and the
case is about to go to trial or the trial
is starting, and I thought that we would just take
time to you know, kind of talk about it a
little bit and talk about some of the evidence that
we know of at this moment in time.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
You know, Joe.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
It's the story is complicated because of the term former
that gets put into this because when I see two
people out on out on the town having drinks, and
in this case, Karen Reid a professional woman at forty two,
John O'Keeffe is a forty seven year old Boston police officer,
and they meet on the town having drinks that night together,
(03:26):
going to a couple different places and have several drinks
and then go to a friend's house where the party
is going to continue. They arrive together at like twelve
forty five and Karen Reid goes home. John O'Keefe goes
into the party. The next morning, when Karen Reid realizes
that John O'Keeffe has not made at home as was planned,
(03:46):
she starts calling around trying to find Hey, does anybody
know where John is?
Speaker 1 (03:49):
He didn't come home.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
By five point thirty, She's panicked and a couple of
her friends come over and they start trying to find
John they retrace footsteps, They go back to the place
where she dropped him off at twelve four five, and
lo and behold, John O'Keeffe is in the driveway and
he might have been out there all night long, they
don't know, but they call nine one one, and by
the time the first responder gets there, John O'Keefe is
(04:12):
cold to the touch and he's not breathing.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Little after six in the morning. By seven fifty am,
John O'Keeffe is officially pronounced dead. Now here's where it
gets complicated. Were John O'Keeffe and Karen Reid dating, as
her mother said, were they it was their relationships in
a good spot or had they broken up? They were
(04:36):
former girlfriend boyfriend and the breakup was not a good one,
and it got worse when they drank many times.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
That goes to motivation of what your interest is in
a particular case. You know how you come down on
either side, and that's the beauty. I gotta hold forth
here for just a moment about forensics. I don't particularly
care as a forensic scientist if someone is brought to justice.
That's not our job in forensics to make sure that
(05:07):
someone is brought to justice. Contrary to what people says.
Matter of fact, it's kind of a lazy statement because
no one really knows what that means. That's for prosecutors
to deal with, maybe even the police to a certain degree.
But as a forensic scientist, there's enough out there, there's
enough stuff for us to do. We try to examine
the science that's there, and the prosecutor or the defense
(05:29):
can use that data any way that they want to,
particularly in the world of medical examiner, you try to
be as unbiased as possible. We don't, really, in bad
pun here, have a dog in the fight, you know,
we really don't, because if we if we start looking
at the first off, we're not going to be fair
whatever fair actually means, but we're not going to be
fair or unbiased is actually the better word. And we
(05:51):
cannot go in with, you know, these kind of conclusions
that we've already made our mind up because it's going
to cloud our judgment. But let's run down the list.
I just got to kind of throw this list out
to you. I was thinking about this and the types
of evidence that we know about at this point in
time from a forensic standpoint. Okay, they've talked about DNA.
(06:13):
So we've got DNA. We have got obviously forensic pathology
because we're talking about pretty severe head trauma here as
a matter of fact, market head trauma. I think personally,
there's going to be potentially hair and fiber evidence. We've
also got a lot of digital evidence. As it applies
(06:34):
in this case, you're going to have blood evidence, which
goes to trace to a certain degree. But you know
where blood and tissue are transferred onto something, either it'll
be present or there'll be an absence of it. And
just those points along that continuum alone is enough to
spend hours and hours trying to assess this case because
(06:58):
there's so much of it, very dense case that the
prosecution is bringing forward, but they've drawn their own conclusions
at this point, Tom, and that's okay, that's what prosecution does.
But the defense is offering up alternative things. Oh and
by the way, did I mention we're talking about a
little bit of veterinary forensics as well, So that adds
(07:19):
another level. What a bizarre turn of events, you know,
relative to this dog, because that's something that we don't
typically encounter. I mean we do, and I have work
cases involving animals. But it's just that's just one more
thing that's kind of thrown into this gumbo, if you will,
and the pot continues to be stirred over and over
and over again.
Speaker 3 (07:39):
You know, Joe, you mentioned vet, Well, maybe we should
mention conspiracy theory. The prosecution claims Karen Reid got into
a drunken brawl with John O'Keeffe, and when he got
out of the car to go into a house party,
she was able to back over O'Kelly, leaving him to
die in a blizzard. Karen Reid's defense team is talking
about the injuries on O'Keeffe, and in particular his arm.
(08:00):
The defense claims O'Keeffe went into the house party after
Reid dropped him off, but something bad happened and O'Keefe
was beaten within an inch of his life and thrown outside.
And based on the scratches on O'Keefe's arm, the defense
says he had been scratched by a dog named Chloe
that was owned by the residence of the home where
the house party took place. The problem with comparing the
(08:22):
dog Chloe's claws to the scratches on O'Keefe's arm Chloe
was re homed to a family out of state after
the death of O'Keefe. Now, Karen Reid's defense deny she
killed O'Keefe. They claim she's being framed by people in
the suburban party house. But this is not some social
media theory. There's an official, ongoing federal probe of apostible
(08:45):
police cover up that has turned into a parallel investigation
to the murder. Reid's highest profile supporters believe that someone
in the house beat o'keef, badly dumped his body on
the snow covered lawn outside, and then framed Karen Reeve
for his murder. Their take is a complicated conspiracy that
involves the partygoers, Canton police, the state police, and the
(09:09):
DA's office. An autopsy report autopsy that was conducted by
the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner said, quote the
doctor opine that the extensive injuries to his head likely
rendered mister O'Keefe incapacitated. The doctor further opine that upon
viewing mister O'Keeffe's injuries and her examination of the body,
(09:29):
she observed no signs of mister O'Keeffe being involved in
any type of physical altercation or fight.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
The language is going to ebb and flow with not
just the peripherals that are surrounding a case, you know,
family members and people that take interest. It's going to
you know, that flow is going to change with the
media and the narrative that they put out there. But
I can tell you this in this particular case, when
(09:57):
this thing does come to trial, we have this parade
of forensic experts that are going to be on the stand.
Hopefully there will be a bit more clarity. Dave would
(10:25):
have I said before for us in forensics, and time
is the coin of the realm, as they say, it
is the currency in which we deal. People talk about
the science, and yes, that is important, but we have
to understand the progression of events as it applies to
the victim. And the victim here is a Boston Police
(10:47):
officer that has sustained massive head trauma and also, by
the way, has had elements of hypothermia as well, And
so we think about all that all involves time, and
I think that it's really important for us to try
to talk about that a little bit and see if
we can add some nuance to it and try to
(11:08):
understand what exactly went down.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I do you agree, it's it does matter. This timeline
spells out everything because there are a number of accusations
about the condition of the people involved at the time
that whatever happened happened. So here we go. Seven thirty
seven pm, January twenty eighth, twenty twenty two, O'Keefe is
(11:31):
seen on surveillance camera video arriving at cf McCarthy's in Campton.
C F McCarthy's, a bar slash restaurant. Okay eight fifty one.
Reid is seen on video arriving. So she arrives, you know,
thirty minutes he's there having a couple of cocktails. She arrives, well,
actually it's an hour and a half later, eight fifty one.
She rides okay eight fifty eight. Bartender hands Karen read
(11:52):
a glass containing clear liquid with a line in it
nine to fifteen, Seventeen minutes after the first one, bartender
hands read another glass five minut and it's after that
the bartender hands read another glass. Thirteen minutes after that one,
the bartender hands read another glass. At nine fifty seven,
the bartender hands read another glass and a shot glass
with clear liquid in it. At ten twenty two, the
(12:14):
bartender hands read another glass. Now we don't know exactly
what's in these glasses each time, but based on the
location that is taking place, based on you know, have
you ever needed to have glasses of water back to
back to back to back to back like that, and
unless you had just run a marathon.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
No, I have.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Had instances though, you know where I've been out vibing
in the evening and the next morning my body is
spreading after water y at that point, Tom, because it
dehydrates you to that point. But yeah, and you know,
you're talking about a bartender that makes their living selling drinks,
and he's going to take his time to pass a
(12:54):
drink you know, of water to her every single every
single time. Yeah, it's kind of that's a kind of.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
What appears to me, and it is with some experience
I speak in my opinion. She shows up at the
bar much later than o'keef hour and fifteen minutes almost,
or hour and twenty minutes almost, and so she gets there,
it's time to play catch up. Have you ever done
this when you're out drinking with print? I got to
catch up. So that's what it appears she's doing. Eight
(13:21):
fifty eight nine fifteen nine twenty nine thirty three, nine
fifty seven, and then it slows down. Okay, at in
that hour between eight fifty eight and nine fifty seven,
in fifty nine minutes, she has served one, two, three,
four five cocktails Anna shot. Then there's a twenty five
minute break before she gets another one at ten twenty two.
(13:43):
So now back to the bar the timeline ten forty
The video shows Read and O'Keefe leaving the bar. Read
is seen holding her latest drink in her right hand
as they exit ten fifty four. Fourteen minutes later, o'keefan
Reid are seen on video arriving at the Waterfall Bar
and grill and can together. I would like to know
(14:03):
what the timeline of drinks for O'Keefe would be back
at McCarthy's, to know the condition of both of them.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Yeah, I would. And look jumping ahead a wee bit
to the next morning. Reeve's blood is actually drawn at
Good Samaritan Medical Center and a forensic toxicologist you know
later talked about where her blood alcohol level would have
been prior to you know, when they took the blood.
(14:32):
Still at that point and this is you know, some
hours later, they were able to determine that her BA
was point zero seven to point zero eight at that
point in time, and you would have had a time
for alcohol to metabolize. The way this happens is as
the alcohol is beginning to burn off in the system,
(14:54):
you can go back and render an opinion a forensic
toxicologist can about what the blood alcohol level would have
been like earlier. So if you if you've gone this
period of time, you still have this amount of alcohol
in your system. Looking back in time, toxicologists came up
with the idea that perhaps when this all went down,
(15:19):
which is like twelve forty five am, her BA would
have been like zero point one point three two point
two nine and Dave. At that level, you're what some
people call knee walking drunk at that point in time
that it's hard to really keep your senses.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
And when we look at this in total, again we're
talking about Karen Reid's blood alcohol level and she is
with her boyfriend at the time, O'Keefe back to the bar. Okay,
they leave the bar. They're together, o'keefan Reid leave to
go to a house party. They call it a house party.
It might you know, when you gather together with adults
(15:57):
and you're having cocktails or whatever late at night at
I don't cannsidered that the house party like we do
when there's a bunch of young people that are just
raging at a house with the music blaring and everything else.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
I look at it, but I don't know if she'd
call it.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
They're having a party at somebody's house, so it's a
house party anyway, Hey out drink then.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
So they get there.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Now here's the catch, all right, there are text messages
from O'Keefe trying to get directions to this house party.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
What's the address?
Speaker 3 (16:21):
And I want to get this right because it has
everything to do with what she's being charged with now.
At twelve eleven am, the video shows O'Keefe carrying a
glass meeting up with Reid. The two walk together toward
Washington Street. O'Keefe sends a text message to a friend
at twelve fourteen am, saying where to. He receives a
(16:41):
text with an address on Fairview Road from the sister
of the homeowner. Twelve fifteen. A vehicle consistent with reads
SUV is seen on video traveling past Cantontown Library twelve seventeen.
Large black suv seen on video traveling past Temple Beth
Abraham toward the intersection of Washington and Denham Streets. You
(17:03):
and I have talked many times about video today. It's
amazing when somebody says I did XYZ. They can find
out if you're telling the truth, if you're in a
metropolitan area.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Oh my lord. Yeah. And you marry it up again
with the tom Lawn and it gives you an idea.
You know, between CCTV and on phones, it's almost impossible
to escape the view of you know, these cameras and
also what's pinging on.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
And so they're driving together trying to find this place.
Okeith gets the look confused, so they call to get
better directions to the house. At twelve thirty one, the
homeowner sister sends O'Keefe a text message just saying hello.
At twelve forty she sends another message saying, pull up
behind me. She's referencing her vehicle in the driveway at
the house. She said that she subsequently watched the black
(17:50):
suv move from its initial place where it had stopped
near the driveway, to the far left side of the property,
near a flagpole and a fire hydrant and where the
body was subsequently found. Picture this in your head for
just a minute of what we're talking about in terms
of where the car is, where she's being told to park.
Twelve forty five sends another message to O'Keefe. It's just
(18:11):
says low. She observes the black suv drive away. Twelve
forty five. She observes the black suv driving away.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Now.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Between one thirty am and two am, another guest at
the Fairview Road home gets the ride home and indicated
that she thought she saw something she described as a
dark object in the snow by the flagpole, but could
not determine what it was. Again, I want to go
back here real quick, Joe. Twelve forty am. Woman inside
(18:43):
the house is texting O'Keefe outside, and then twelve forty
five am sends another message, what as the black suv.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Is leaving right? All right?
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (18:55):
Five minute window there?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, I know exactly, and and every single minute in
this case counts. That's why I wanted to go over
this too.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
So we've got to pullin out now. At twelve forty five,
we've got some time between one thirty am and two am.
Somebody seeing a dark object in the dry in that spot,
I'd go to four fifty three am, the sister of
the Fairview Road owed her home, receives a call from
Karen Reid, who is looking for O'Keefe and instructed O'Keefe's
niece to place the call. She tells Reed that she
(19:25):
last saw O'Keefe at the Waterfall Bar and saw them
leave together. Five am, Karen Reid calls a second friend,
stating that O'Keefe did not come home and she was worried.
According to the prosecutors, Now, Reid also said, I wonder
if he's dead. It's snowing. He got hit by a plow.
We need to remind everyone, as you started off with
(19:46):
at the very beginning about the weather, blizzard conditions were existing.
That means freezing cold temperatures and a lot of snow, right.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Yeah, yep, And when you think about it, it would
be And here's to you know this. You know the
witness earlier that thought, you know that they saw something
dark in the yard adjacent to the flagpole. If you're
in these kind of I don't know if this would
be classified necessarily as a wide out, but when you
begin to talk about blizzard conditions, certainly to the less
(20:16):
educated among us, like myself, I would think that your
vision would be obscured greatly as well. You can't pick
out detail in that kind of environment, particularly at night.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
You didn't even think about that because it's dark as
a night. So maybe there's some lights outside, you got
the headlights of the car or what have you. But yeah,
the headlights of the car are getting all snow in them.
It's difficult to see ten feet in front of your
car anyway. All right, so here we are. It's five
point fifteen in the morning. All right, let me go
to five eleven because we have her comment at five
am about getting hit by a snowplow. A lot of
(20:46):
people will say that's somebody trying to set up an
alibi and a different story of what happened. Surveillance camera
eleven five to eleven AM Library surveillance video captures large
black suv turning on to Washington Street towards the waterfall
five point fifteen am. The same camera captures the suv
traveling in the opposite direction toward the temple five eighteen am.
(21:09):
A camera at the temple captures the suv passing five
thirty am. Reid and the friend arrive at the home
of the sister of the Fairview Road resident, where she
is described as hysterical. Karen Reid is One of the
women drove Reid back to O'Keefe's house, while the other
followed in her own vehicle. During that drive, she told
(21:31):
investigators that Karen Reid said, quote, could I have hit him?
Did I hit him? And told her about a cracked
tail light on the black suv. That's a lot of
info right there, Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Boy, it is. And you know the thing about it
is you've got all of these different perspectives on it
relative to what these eye and ear witnesses are providing.
And when during the course of this trial you're going
to have a bevy of people that are going to
come across this the stand that will offer testimony that
(22:06):
are going to get into this kind of granular detail
about time and where's that going to leave the jury
because it's very complex, and what gets lost in all
of this, I think is when you begin to consider,
at the heart of it, what's going on with this
man who is obviously missing. She's distressed over it. We
(22:30):
don't know what the interaction truly was, because you know,
you have no idea what was going on inside of
that vehicle where and what happened predating that, you know,
as far as fights that were going on, or was
there any kind of animosity here, anything that would have
driven one individual to try to end the life of
(22:51):
another individual with car. When we think about violent deaths
(23:13):
in America, I think most people their default position is
going to be firearms related deaths. And you know, the
most common type of violent death in America is related
to motor vehicle accidents. So in the medical legal world,
(23:35):
we work a lot of these cases, probably more so
than any anything else that we covered that's a violent event.
And without fail, the underlying actual cause of death in
motor vehicle accidents is in fact blunt force trauma. And
(23:56):
of course, Dave, that's what we're dealing with with mister
O'Keeffe death here, is that this is what they have
come to conclude at this point that his death is
in fact massive blunt force trauma to his head and also, uh,
you know, he's got these peripheral injuries to his arms.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
And this case is going to turn on what the
autopsy says and what the physical evidence.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Says, yeah, yeah, and that is that is injury because
we're talking about sorry, yeah, no, no, no, no, The biggest,
the biggest thing that we're talking about is this. He's
got what they're describing as a two inch gash on
the back of Big Joe. That's a that is a
big gash. Yeah, two inches. And you and I both
(24:42):
have had babies, and you know how age.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
I have to point out to Joseph Scott Morgan and
I did not physically have children come out of our bodies.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
But you know, the the reality is is that when
you're you're raising kids, it's they will crack their heads
open and it's one of the most terrifying things in
the world as a parent because you see how much
blood there is. It does and you're thinking, oh my god,
my child.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
But you know, you will swear filmed bad. It is bad.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
But we have to consider something else that has been
noted about mister O'Keefe's remains when they were examined. He's
got bilateral black eyes, which you know we talked about before.
This is indicative of skull fracture. And I think that
he's got extensive skull fracturing. So here's one idea I
(25:40):
want to throw out to you to day. We talked
about the amount of blood that that is absent from
the scene. Some people have described it as little or
no blood, and again we have to also say that
this is during a snowstorm, so I don't know how
deep they dug because working a crime scene in the
snow is complete, depletely different than what most people have
(26:02):
ever envisioned. Based upon the fact that he has sustained
this trauma to his head. Remember the raccoon eyes. I
think that there's a fractured nose, as a fractured skull,
there's going to be a lot of internal bleeding here.
And as a matter of fact, when you have a
closed head injury, I've actually been present for autopsies and
(26:24):
have removed brains at autopsy where there's so much blood
contained within what we refer to it cranial vault that
sometimes it'll come pouring out and other times you'll see
these big coagulated masses that are focused on one side
of the brain, like if you've got if you think
about the back of his head where his head actually
(26:45):
impacted either a surface or was impacted by something else
in that little area which is posterior. I would expect
to see like this huge mass of blood that's probably
coagulated and resting over the surface of what we refer
to as the dura, which is the sack that the
brain is actually contained in, and that's called an epidural hemorrhage.
(27:07):
I would expect to see that. I'd also expect to
see probably some little vessels that are torn in the
brain itself, where you'll have bleeding within the sack and
maybe contained within the brain itself, which is what's referred
to as subarachnoid hemorrhage. So you're going to have this
huge mass of blood that has begun to leach out
(27:30):
the underlying probably floor, the skull has been fractured, and
they're going to talk a lot about this in the case,
this is a tremendous amount of trauma, and yes, this
can happen. I know that people wonder can this happen
from a single blow, particularly if you're talking about a
motor vehicle that's traveling at a sufficient rate to generate
(27:50):
the kind of energy, because this is a transfer of
energy where you have a car, which is what the
prosecution is stating, where a car literally strikes an individual.
Here's the problem. When we work, we're referred to as
pedestrian versus motor vehicle cases. That is, you've got a
person that is not contained within the structure of another
(28:14):
motor vehicle. They're just there, you know, as a person
standing outside of the vehicle, and they are struck. We
look for something called bumper marks, Dave, because most of
the time you're going to be struck either with the
rear of the vehicle and that bumper, or you'll be
struck in the ford area. Now, many times when you
(28:35):
get a presentation of bumper marks, it's going to look
like it'll have kind of a linear structure to it,
where if you think about the thighs of the knees
that somebody's just standing in the middle of the street,
you'll get this kind of bilinear because you've got the
margins of the bumper, and it creates a hemorrhage. It
also creates an abrasion. We're not seeing that here. We're
(28:58):
not seeing that, and so I really wonder if we
just kind of go with this idea that he was
backed up over which the prosecution is putting forward. His
posture is very important here because we're talking about cracktail,
like we're talking about an individual that has struck his head.
(29:18):
I really wonder, Dave, if they're going to discuss whether
or not he was standing or seated, and if he
has been drinking, there's a high probability that he could
have been seated or crouched behind this vehicle, and this
would explain the absence. They haven't talked about a bumper, Mark.
I haven't heard anything about that at this point, because
you have to have that point of contact where the
(29:40):
bumper is actually meeting up with the body with the
person and then generating enough energy to throw his head
back so that he impacts onto the ground. And that's
something that they're really going to dig into, I think,
And well.
Speaker 3 (29:53):
We've got a dead man and two different stories. The
prosecution claims that Karen he got into it an argument
with her boyfriend inside her black suv, her Lexus, in
the driveway and it became so violent that he gets
out of the car and she runs him over and
takes off the defenses, claiming that they were fine. They'd
gone out for drinks. He wanted to go to this
(30:15):
other party at a friend's house, and she dropped him
off there and went on about her merry way, and
apparently something bad went wrong in there, and a bunch
of cops all got together and decided, after beating him
up sufficiently, to take him out in the driveway and
leave him out there, and then framed Karen Reid for murder.
Those are the two different That's what we're going to
court on. Either either he was beaten up by his
(30:37):
friends and left out in a blizzard to die, or
he was run over by his now what they call
former girlfriend and left to die.
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
Well let's throw one one added little bonus in here too,
in this environment, in this house day and that's.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
To ask you, where does the dog fit into this? Joe?
Speaker 2 (31:01):
Yeah, Because what they're saying is there's this photo that's
floating about. The defense has presented in the proceedings where
we see this image of mister Keith's arm and Dave
those he's got these kind of straighted marks on his
arm and they're very kind of uniformed and linear, and
(31:22):
they they the defense is saying that this is evidence
of a dog attack. And Okay, I mean, I'll go
down that road with you. They're talking about potential puncture marks,
these sorts of things. And I have worked, and I
have a lot of friends that have worked dog attacks. Unfortunately,
I have had cases where children have been killed by dogs.
(31:43):
Hate those cases, but those injuries are very, very specific.
So here's what I'm going to be very interested in hearing.
I want to know if the defense in this particular
case is going to hire and the people do in
fact exists Dave Hire a veterinarian that specializes in forensics.
(32:10):
Because they can talk about the light mark of a dog. Now, now,
for whatever reason, this dog no longer exists. They say
that the what's the term that's so popular now the
animal was re holmed, And I've heard other people say
that the animal is no longer with us. And look,
(32:31):
you know that dog is gone and there's no way
that you're going to be able to get that dog.
And you know if you could, if the dog is deceased,
was it incinerated or was the dog buried in somebody's
backyard or was it trash or you know what happened,
because you know the kind of the forensic scientist in me.
(32:52):
I would want to render down the dog's skull and
have a forensic veterinarian. Really take a look at these
teeth and if you could compare them to the injuries
that he has on his arm, But I don't really
see it. And look, all of this is this pales
in one area that I'm more curious about than inn.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
Please tell me it's about the car.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
We'll get to the car. But here's the thing that
no one seems to be talking about. And forensic investigations
are layered, okay, and in this case, I literally mean that,
because if you've got these insults to mister O'Keeffe's arm,
where's his clothing? Because the clothing is actually going to
(33:36):
be the tail of the tape, if you will. So
you're telling me, in blizzard conditions, even if this man
wore a jacket into the home, you're going to tell
me he stood around with his jacket on. Wouldn't there
be evidence of tears in the jacket, And tears that
are generated from the underside of a motor vehicle compared
(33:59):
to what an animal would do to a jacket, looks
completely different. Let's you say that he took his jacket
off in the house and he's or you telling me
he's walking around a t shirt in this weather, or
he doesn't have a sweater on or a long sleeved
shirt in this particular type of brutal weather. I think
that he probably would. Well, what's the status of the shirt?
(34:20):
Are there tears in the shirt? Did they look for
any kind of transfer of evidence that would be consistent
with two things here? And we're exploring both possibilities here.
Is there a potential that there could have been animal
hair or saliva on that shirt adjacent to the tears,
because what you're saying is that the defense is saying
(34:41):
that these are puncture wounds on the arm. They've talked
about puncture wounds and maybe they're scratches. Well, did the
dog leave behind any kind of evidence of that? And
if that's not the case, then if he was hit
by a car and his arm went up in a
defensive position, we talked about defensive wounds, okay, you know
(35:03):
with knife attacks and that sort of thing. If he
went up trying to you know, thwart this blow that
he saw coming, you would actually get road debris like
grease and grime. We see this all the time and
rollover injuries with cars that would transfer onto the clothing.
And it stands out I mean it's it's very visible
(35:25):
if the car actually went over his body. Now, if
it's just a straight on like strike, you know, where
his head or another portion of his body hits that
tail light that they say was fractured, and then he
slams into the ground. I would be very interested to see, well,
(35:45):
what evidence is there on the clothing relative to any
kind of road dirt, grime, grease, anything else that might
go as an indication the clothing is going to play
a big role in us. And to this point, I
haven't really heard anybody talking much about it.
Speaker 3 (35:58):
Yeah, I've seen you when we were talking about this.
I had to change a tire on the side of
the interstate a couple of weeks ago, and just dealing
with just the tire lug nuts and just this one,
I was filthy, and yeah, I didn't.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
Crawl up underneath.
Speaker 3 (36:13):
I've actually, you know, no gotten filthy from head to toe.
I couldn't even stop anywhere to wash off because I
was that dirty. I just wanted to, you know, bottom
line here, what condition are his clothes in and why
haven't we seen these yet? Because either he was beaten
by his fellow officers inside the house and drug out
and dropped in the driveway to die in a blizzard,
or his girlfriend got into a fight with him and
(36:34):
while he was maybe crouched behind the car been overthrown up.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
She backs over him hard enough, gets enough speed going
that she can hit him harder to break that tail light, which,
to be honest with you, Joe, not an easy feat
tail lights.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
And they don't break easy.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
Yeah, no, they don't. And it's high impact plastic. There's
a reason they're made that way, Dave, so that they
can you know, we can travel in our vehicles, you know,
through through the world that we that we dwell and
it's not going to come apart even with the slightest bump.
There's a reason it's called it's thicker than most plastics
(37:13):
that are out there. It's one of the reasons. That's
one of the things that makes it high impact plastic.
And they're talking about two separate lenses here. You've got
the kind of red color that's fractured, and you've also
got the clear lens that's fractured. I think that goes
to backup lights, uh, and that that lens is actually
both those are actually fractured. There it is claimed that
(37:36):
DNA from mister O'Keeffe is found in this collection of
of of fragments. Here's another piece to this that everyone
should be keeping their eye on in this particular case,
because we're going to have you're going to hear trace evidence.
Uh scientists, they're going to be getting up on the
(37:58):
stand and these people are or fantastic when it comes
to plastics and glass. They will restructure this thing and
they'll talk about points of impact. One of the things
that you see with fracturing of glass in particular, but
to a lesser degree with plastics, is you'll get this
kind of bullseye spiderweb pattern that kind of extends out
and it fractures in different ways. And they have ways
(38:20):
they measure all this and they can talk about velocity
and all that, and so we'll hear from those individuals here.
One other issue here as well is that there is
actual literal glass that they're saying came from a potential
fractured cocktail class that he may have had in his hand.
(38:43):
That this has been found around the area as well.
So you've got this dynamic of fracturing that's going on
not just with the victim, with his skull. But we've
got glass that he may or may not have been
holding in I don't know, like a high ball container
like you make a mixed drink in h And also
(39:04):
this lens that's coming into play here. So it's very
dense material when you think about think about just the
perspective of the impact event, because that's going to be
key because that goes to the narrative that the prosecution
is putting forward. Can you explain this in simple terms
(39:25):
to the jury so that they understand, Okay, this is
what happens when you back a car up and the
lens fractures upon impact. This is what you would expect
to see. And is that consistent with what they were seeing?
Speaker 3 (39:37):
It's what about autopsy, Joe?
Speaker 2 (39:41):
The autopsy itself will be.
Speaker 3 (39:45):
Again.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
I go back to this idea of the proper mark
are are you not yet? But in the universal sense,
the universal you are you? Are you saying that that
this distinct event involving his head with this nasty injury
(40:08):
that is a closed head injury, by the way, and
you got the fracturing with the blackened eyes and maybe
a fractured nose. You're saying that his head hits a
tail light, because again that has to be demonstrated at autopsy,
and they're going to ask the forensic pathologist, is this
consistent with a car backing into an individual, and can
(40:31):
you generate this kind of injury if if let's just
say that he's he's in and just go with me
here just for a moment, if he is in kind
of a croust or seated position and he kind of
raises up and is struck by this oncoming vehicle that
(40:56):
is backing over him, you would not you would see
some kind of a braided area on the on the
surface of the skin. Let's just say he's struck in
the front and we know that this this impact on
the back of his head, he had to have hit
a heart surface and was hit by something heavy to
generate this laceration. This is not a cut, This is
(41:19):
not an incized injury. This is a laceration. So you're
going to have the tissue bridging that we've talked about
before with unclean margins. It's essentially the skin ripping in
that two inch area and that's a sign of impact.
So hah. You begin to go down this road and
you think about you think about how are they going
to translate that in this case so that the members
(41:42):
of the jury will be able to understand it.
Speaker 3 (41:43):
When everything's said and done. According to the Office of
the Medical Examiner, the doctor opined that extensive, extensive injuries
to his head likely rendered mister o'keef incapacitated. The doctor
further opined that upon viewing mister o'keef's injuries and her
exam emination of the body, she observed no signs of
mister O'Keeffe being involved in any type of physical altercation
(42:08):
or fight.
Speaker 2 (42:09):
Yeah, I've heard, I've heard some some say that there
was bruising on the hands. Uh, and you know, bruising
on the hands most of the time implies that you
could have been in a fight. I'll be curious as
to that assessment to see because again we go back
to this this friction that's placed on the skin. So
(42:32):
not only let's just say you have a bruise on
your hand after a fight and maybe you have underlying fractures, Well,
you have to have a point of impact relative to
that and the skin. This friction injury occurs with the abrasion,
you'll have correlating abrasions over this area that lead to
the bruising. Okay, the bruising comes about as fracturing of
(42:53):
the bone, you know, and you get this what they
call echemosis, you know, contusion that goes that leeches out
into the soft tissue. We'll see how that plays out
as well. I'm I'm interested in understanding his response. And
when I say his response, I mean mister O'Keefe's response
to whatever was going on in his environment at that
(43:16):
point in time. That brings it back to the arm.
If he was run over, say backed over. I hate
to say run over because with a runover injury, which
you get, actually there's a classification or category that we
talked about with bodies. They have what are called rollover injuries,
(43:39):
and these are fascinating because your body gets caught up
by the tires and it's kind of rolled under the vehicle.
So you'll get all these kind of weird, odd looking
braided areas where skin there's so much friction, the skin's
kind of getting twisted, you know, within the clothing. You'll
see transfer evidence off the undercarriage the car. That's typically
(44:01):
what you see where you have a rollover injury. But
what they're saying is the car apparently was used almost
like a battering ram. It wasn't like a traditional pedestrian
struck by an oncoming vehicle and then you know, kind
of a bump bump where the car goes over the body.
It's not what they're saying. What they're implying is that
(44:23):
the car was weaponized and that it was used almost
like a battering ram. So you this guy's behind the
car and you, you know, you slam it into reverse
or whatever, hit the gas on a snowy, snowy surface,
by the way, and you hit this guy and knock
him down, and then you drive off. Okay, So is
(44:46):
there going to be evidence of that? Did they? Were
they able to recover any kind of tire tracks off
of this as well, which again is kind of a
fascinating thing in this in this environment, again we're fighting
with blizzard like condition. Were they able to identify anything,
you know, with in snow in particular? And again, granted,
(45:07):
I'm an old Southern boy, so I have worked many
cases in snow. I've had a couple. But you know,
when these forensics people that are amazing up north and
they have to deal with snow and they're dealing with
tire tracks they have to put down to capture these
these impressions in the snow. They've actually got this kind
of spray on wax that they put on onto the
(45:30):
surface of the treads and they can lift it out.
It's a painstaking process. It's not like, you know, we
use like what's referred to as dental stone. You know,
if you have like a muddy track and you mix
this dental stone up and you pour it down on
top of the track and then it hardens, you know,
you lift it up and you can pick out all
the details. So to do this, to capture that kind
(45:54):
of evidence in the snow, you've got to really know
what you're doing. I would hope that they had looked,
at least photographed, you know, some evidence of tire tracks
in the snow, and do just anything. Would those tire
tracks approximate the wheelbase of this lexus that they're talking about.
(46:16):
So a lot to unpack, a lot to dig into.
But you know, when it's all sudden and done, the
people that are court observers here that watch true crime,
when they see everything laid out, it's going to be
(46:36):
certainly an education when it comes to the basic forensic principles.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks
Body bags with Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
I have a lot of friends and neighbors down here
in the Deep South that aren't much of a fan
of cool weather. I guess that, you know, we you
get used to an environment, you grow up in it,
and you just kind of adjust. Certainly, the environment is
not going to adjust to you. It's uh, that's foolishness
to think that. If you know, if you're in England,
(00:41):
for instance, and your shock that it's raining, then you know,
shame on you. But I don't mind the cold so
much because it gets so very hot and oppressive down
here that I'm not going to be one to complain
when the temperatures dropped below freezing down in these parts.
(01:02):
But I got to tell you, there's cold and then
there's cold. And anytime you start to talk about the Northeast,
in particular New England of our country, those people live
in a completely different world and they have in fact
adjusted to their environment. And sometimes the environment will tell
the tale of any kind of case. And the case
(01:24):
that we're going to examine today, it is a case
that has somewhat been dictated by environment. We've heard a
lot about it. We've heard about snow. We've heard about
freezing temperatures, but most of all, we've heard about a
police officer who was found dead or seemingly deceased in
(01:46):
the snow and there was no obvious cause of death
in the immediate Today we're going to talk about the
death of John O'Keefe, Boston police officer. I'm Josephcott Morgan
and this is Body Bats. It's good to be back
(02:07):
with you, Dave. I've had people asking me to cover
this case and to talk about it. I've appeared on
a variety of news programming. I never quite have enough
time to go through it because the material is sons.
As a matter of fact, as we are actually recording this,
i'd just been on air with my friend Ashley Banfield
(02:29):
on News Nation covering this case actually last night, and
I thought, you know, I thought, Dave and I just
need to hop on the talk go ahead and just
kind of discuss it and see what we could come
up with, because I don't know. The Karen Reid case
now for loath these many months has been at the
top of the news. We keep hearing about it, and
(02:49):
it kind of comes and burst, you know, and the
case is about to go to trial or the trial
is starting, and I thought that we would just take
time to you know, kind of talk about it a
little bit and talk about some of the evidence that
we know of at this moment in time.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
You know, Joe.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
It's the story is complicated because of the term former
that gets put into this because when I see two
people out on out on the town having drinks, and
in this case, Karen Reid a professional woman at forty two,
John O'Keeffe is a forty seven year old Boston police officer,
and they meet on the town having drinks that night together,
(03:26):
going to a couple different places and have several drinks
and then go to a friend's house where the party
is going to continue. They arrive together at like twelve
forty five and Karen Reid goes home. John O'Keefe goes
into the party. The next morning, when Karen Reid realizes
that John O'Keeffe has not made at home as was planned,
(03:46):
she starts calling around trying to find Hey, does anybody
know where John is?
Speaker 1 (03:49):
He didn't come home.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
By five point thirty, She's panicked and a couple of
her friends come over and they start trying to find
John they retrace footsteps, They go back to the place
where she dropped him off at twelve four five, and
lo and behold, John O'Keeffe is in the driveway and
he might have been out there all night long, they
don't know, but they call nine one one, and by
the time the first responder gets there, John O'Keefe is
(04:12):
cold to the touch and he's not breathing.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Little after six in the morning. By seven fifty am,
John O'Keeffe is officially pronounced dead. Now here's where it
gets complicated. Were John O'Keeffe and Karen Reid dating, as
her mother said, were they it was their relationships in
a good spot or had they broken up? They were
(04:36):
former girlfriend boyfriend and the breakup was not a good one,
and it got worse when they drank many times.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
That goes to motivation of what your interest is in
a particular case. You know how you come down on
either side, and that's the beauty. I gotta hold forth
here for just a moment about forensics. I don't particularly
care as a forensic scientist if someone is brought to justice.
That's not our job in forensics to make sure that
(05:07):
someone is brought to justice. Contrary to what people says.
Matter of fact, it's kind of a lazy statement because
no one really knows what that means. That's for prosecutors
to deal with, maybe even the police to a certain degree.
But as a forensic scientist, there's enough out there, there's
enough stuff for us to do. We try to examine
the science that's there, and the prosecutor or the defense
(05:29):
can use that data any way that they want to,
particularly in the world of medical examiner, you try to
be as unbiased as possible. We don't, really, in bad
pun here, have a dog in the fight, you know,
we really don't, because if we if we start looking
at the first off, we're not going to be fair
whatever fair actually means, but we're not going to be
fair or unbiased is actually the better word. And we
(05:51):
cannot go in with, you know, these kind of conclusions
that we've already made our mind up because it's going
to cloud our judgment. But let's run down the list.
I just got to kind of throw this list out
to you. I was thinking about this and the types
of evidence that we know about at this point in
time from a forensic standpoint. Okay, they've talked about DNA.
(06:13):
So we've got DNA. We have got obviously forensic pathology
because we're talking about pretty severe head trauma here as
a matter of fact, market head trauma. I think personally,
there's going to be potentially hair and fiber evidence. We've
also got a lot of digital evidence. As it applies
(06:34):
in this case, you're going to have blood evidence, which
goes to trace to a certain degree. But you know
where blood and tissue are transferred onto something, either it'll
be present or there'll be an absence of it. And
just those points along that continuum alone is enough to
spend hours and hours trying to assess this case because
(06:58):
there's so much of it, very dense case that the
prosecution is bringing forward, but they've drawn their own conclusions
at this point, Tom, and that's okay, that's what prosecution does.
But the defense is offering up alternative things. Oh and
by the way, did I mention we're talking about a
little bit of veterinary forensics as well, So that adds
(07:19):
another level. What a bizarre turn of events, you know,
relative to this dog, because that's something that we don't
typically encounter. I mean we do, and I have work
cases involving animals. But it's just that's just one more
thing that's kind of thrown into this gumbo, if you will,
and the pot continues to be stirred over and over
and over again.
Speaker 3 (07:39):
You know, Joe, you mentioned vet, Well, maybe we should
mention conspiracy theory. The prosecution claims Karen Reid got into
a drunken brawl with John O'Keeffe, and when he got
out of the car to go into a house party,
she was able to back over O'Kelly, leaving him to
die in a blizzard. Karen Reid's defense team is talking
about the injuries on O'Keeffe, and in particular his arm.
(08:00):
The defense claims O'Keeffe went into the house party after
Reid dropped him off, but something bad happened and O'Keefe
was beaten within an inch of his life and thrown outside.
And based on the scratches on O'Keefe's arm, the defense
says he had been scratched by a dog named Chloe
that was owned by the residence of the home where
the house party took place. The problem with comparing the
(08:22):
dog Chloe's claws to the scratches on O'Keefe's arm Chloe
was re homed to a family out of state after
the death of O'Keefe. Now, Karen Reid's defense deny she
killed O'Keefe. They claim she's being framed by people in
the suburban party house. But this is not some social
media theory. There's an official, ongoing federal probe of apostible
(08:45):
police cover up that has turned into a parallel investigation
to the murder. Reid's highest profile supporters believe that someone
in the house beat o'keef, badly dumped his body on
the snow covered lawn outside, and then framed Karen Reeve
for his murder. Their take is a complicated conspiracy that
involves the partygoers, Canton police, the state police, and the
(09:09):
DA's office. An autopsy report autopsy that was conducted by
the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner said, quote the
doctor opine that the extensive injuries to his head likely
rendered mister O'Keefe incapacitated. The doctor further opine that upon
viewing mister O'Keeffe's injuries and her examination of the body,
(09:29):
she observed no signs of mister O'Keeffe being involved in
any type of physical altercation or fight.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
The language is going to ebb and flow with not
just the peripherals that are surrounding a case, you know,
family members and people that take interest. It's going to
you know, that flow is going to change with the
media and the narrative that they put out there. But
I can tell you this in this particular case, when
(09:57):
this thing does come to trial, we have this parade
of forensic experts that are going to be on the stand.
Hopefully there will be a bit more clarity. Dave would
(10:25):
have I said before for us in forensics, and time
is the coin of the realm, as they say, it
is the currency in which we deal. People talk about
the science, and yes, that is important, but we have
to understand the progression of events as it applies to
the victim. And the victim here is a Boston Police
(10:47):
officer that has sustained massive head trauma and also, by
the way, has had elements of hypothermia as well, And
so we think about all that all involves time, and
I think that it's really important for us to try
to talk about that a little bit and see if
we can add some nuance to it and try to
(11:08):
understand what exactly went down.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I do you agree, it's it does matter. This timeline
spells out everything because there are a number of accusations
about the condition of the people involved at the time
that whatever happened happened. So here we go. Seven thirty
seven pm, January twenty eighth, twenty twenty two, O'Keefe is
(11:31):
seen on surveillance camera video arriving at cf McCarthy's in Campton.
C F McCarthy's, a bar slash restaurant. Okay eight fifty one.
Reid is seen on video arriving. So she arrives, you know,
thirty minutes he's there having a couple of cocktails. She arrives, well,
actually it's an hour and a half later, eight fifty one.
She rides okay eight fifty eight. Bartender hands Karen read
(11:52):
a glass containing clear liquid with a line in it
nine to fifteen, Seventeen minutes after the first one, bartender
hands read another glass five minut and it's after that
the bartender hands read another glass. Thirteen minutes after that one,
the bartender hands read another glass. At nine fifty seven,
the bartender hands read another glass and a shot glass
with clear liquid in it. At ten twenty two, the
(12:14):
bartender hands read another glass. Now we don't know exactly
what's in these glasses each time, but based on the
location that is taking place, based on you know, have
you ever needed to have glasses of water back to
back to back to back to back like that, and
unless you had just run a marathon.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
No, I have.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Had instances though, you know where I've been out vibing
in the evening and the next morning my body is
spreading after water y at that point, Tom, because it
dehydrates you to that point. But yeah, and you know,
you're talking about a bartender that makes their living selling drinks,
and he's going to take his time to pass a
(12:54):
drink you know, of water to her every single every
single time. Yeah, it's kind of that's a kind of.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
What appears to me, and it is with some experience
I speak in my opinion. She shows up at the
bar much later than o'keef hour and fifteen minutes almost,
or hour and twenty minutes almost, and so she gets there,
it's time to play catch up. Have you ever done
this when you're out drinking with print? I got to
catch up. So that's what it appears she's doing. Eight
(13:21):
fifty eight nine fifteen nine twenty nine thirty three, nine
fifty seven, and then it slows down. Okay, at in
that hour between eight fifty eight and nine fifty seven,
in fifty nine minutes, she has served one, two, three,
four five cocktails Anna shot. Then there's a twenty five
minute break before she gets another one at ten twenty two.
(13:43):
So now back to the bar the timeline ten forty
The video shows Read and O'Keefe leaving the bar. Read
is seen holding her latest drink in her right hand
as they exit ten fifty four. Fourteen minutes later, o'keefan
Reid are seen on video arriving at the Waterfall Bar
and grill and can together. I would like to know
(14:03):
what the timeline of drinks for O'Keefe would be back
at McCarthy's, to know the condition of both of them.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Yeah, I would. And look jumping ahead a wee bit
to the next morning. Reeve's blood is actually drawn at
Good Samaritan Medical Center and a forensic toxicologist you know
later talked about where her blood alcohol level would have
been prior to you know, when they took the blood.
(14:32):
Still at that point and this is you know, some
hours later, they were able to determine that her BA
was point zero seven to point zero eight at that
point in time, and you would have had a time
for alcohol to metabolize. The way this happens is as
the alcohol is beginning to burn off in the system,
(14:54):
you can go back and render an opinion a forensic
toxicologist can about what the blood alcohol level would have
been like earlier. So if you if you've gone this
period of time, you still have this amount of alcohol
in your system. Looking back in time, toxicologists came up
with the idea that perhaps when this all went down,
(15:19):
which is like twelve forty five am, her BA would
have been like zero point one point three two point
two nine and Dave. At that level, you're what some
people call knee walking drunk at that point in time
that it's hard to really keep your senses.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
And when we look at this in total, again we're
talking about Karen Reid's blood alcohol level and she is
with her boyfriend at the time, O'Keefe back to the bar. Okay,
they leave the bar. They're together, o'keefan Reid leave to
go to a house party. They call it a house party.
It might you know, when you gather together with adults
(15:57):
and you're having cocktails or whatever late at night at
I don't cannsidered that the house party like we do
when there's a bunch of young people that are just
raging at a house with the music blaring and everything else.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
I look at it, but I don't know if she'd
call it.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
They're having a party at somebody's house, so it's a
house party anyway, Hey out drink then.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
So they get there.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Now here's the catch, all right, there are text messages
from O'Keefe trying to get directions to this house party.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
What's the address?
Speaker 3 (16:21):
And I want to get this right because it has
everything to do with what she's being charged with now.
At twelve eleven am, the video shows O'Keefe carrying a
glass meeting up with Reid. The two walk together toward
Washington Street. O'Keefe sends a text message to a friend
at twelve fourteen am, saying where to. He receives a
(16:41):
text with an address on Fairview Road from the sister
of the homeowner. Twelve fifteen. A vehicle consistent with reads
SUV is seen on video traveling past Cantontown Library twelve seventeen.
Large black suv seen on video traveling past Temple Beth
Abraham toward the intersection of Washington and Denham Streets. You
(17:03):
and I have talked many times about video today. It's
amazing when somebody says I did XYZ. They can find
out if you're telling the truth, if you're in a
metropolitan area.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Oh my lord. Yeah. And you marry it up again
with the tom Lawn and it gives you an idea.
You know, between CCTV and on phones, it's almost impossible
to escape the view of you know, these cameras and
also what's pinging on.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
And so they're driving together trying to find this place.
Okeith gets the look confused, so they call to get
better directions to the house. At twelve thirty one, the
homeowner sister sends O'Keefe a text message just saying hello.
At twelve forty she sends another message saying, pull up
behind me. She's referencing her vehicle in the driveway at
the house. She said that she subsequently watched the black
(17:50):
suv move from its initial place where it had stopped
near the driveway, to the far left side of the property,
near a flagpole and a fire hydrant and where the
body was subsequently found. Picture this in your head for
just a minute of what we're talking about in terms
of where the car is, where she's being told to park.
Twelve forty five sends another message to O'Keefe. It's just
(18:11):
says low. She observes the black suv drive away. Twelve
forty five. She observes the black suv driving away.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Now.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Between one thirty am and two am, another guest at
the Fairview Road home gets the ride home and indicated
that she thought she saw something she described as a
dark object in the snow by the flagpole, but could
not determine what it was. Again, I want to go
back here real quick, Joe. Twelve forty am. Woman inside
(18:43):
the house is texting O'Keefe outside, and then twelve forty
five am sends another message, what as the black suv.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Is leaving right? All right?
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (18:55):
Five minute window there?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, I know exactly, and and every single minute in
this case counts. That's why I wanted to go over
this too.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
So we've got to pullin out now. At twelve forty five,
we've got some time between one thirty am and two am.
Somebody seeing a dark object in the dry in that spot,
I'd go to four fifty three am, the sister of
the Fairview Road owed her home, receives a call from
Karen Reid, who is looking for O'Keefe and instructed O'Keefe's
niece to place the call. She tells Reed that she
(19:25):
last saw O'Keefe at the Waterfall Bar and saw them
leave together. Five am, Karen Reid calls a second friend,
stating that O'Keefe did not come home and she was worried.
According to the prosecutors, Now, Reid also said, I wonder
if he's dead. It's snowing. He got hit by a plow.
We need to remind everyone, as you started off with
(19:46):
at the very beginning about the weather, blizzard conditions were existing.
That means freezing cold temperatures and a lot of snow, right.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Yeah, yep, And when you think about it, it would
be And here's to you know this. You know the
witness earlier that thought, you know that they saw something
dark in the yard adjacent to the flagpole. If you're
in these kind of I don't know if this would
be classified necessarily as a wide out, but when you
begin to talk about blizzard conditions, certainly to the less
(20:16):
educated among us, like myself, I would think that your
vision would be obscured greatly as well. You can't pick
out detail in that kind of environment, particularly at night.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
You didn't even think about that because it's dark as
a night. So maybe there's some lights outside, you got
the headlights of the car or what have you. But yeah,
the headlights of the car are getting all snow in them.
It's difficult to see ten feet in front of your
car anyway. All right, so here we are. It's five
point fifteen in the morning. All right, let me go
to five eleven because we have her comment at five
am about getting hit by a snowplow. A lot of
(20:46):
people will say that's somebody trying to set up an
alibi and a different story of what happened. Surveillance camera
eleven five to eleven AM Library surveillance video captures large
black suv turning on to Washington Street towards the waterfall
five point fifteen am. The same camera captures the suv
traveling in the opposite direction toward the temple five eighteen am.
(21:09):
A camera at the temple captures the suv passing five
thirty am. Reid and the friend arrive at the home
of the sister of the Fairview Road resident, where she
is described as hysterical. Karen Reid is One of the
women drove Reid back to O'Keefe's house, while the other
followed in her own vehicle. During that drive, she told
(21:31):
investigators that Karen Reid said, quote, could I have hit him?
Did I hit him? And told her about a cracked
tail light on the black suv. That's a lot of
info right there, Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Boy, it is. And you know the thing about it
is you've got all of these different perspectives on it
relative to what these eye and ear witnesses are providing.
And when during the course of this trial you're going
to have a bevy of people that are going to
come across this the stand that will offer testimony that
(22:06):
are going to get into this kind of granular detail
about time and where's that going to leave the jury
because it's very complex, and what gets lost in all
of this, I think is when you begin to consider,
at the heart of it, what's going on with this
man who is obviously missing. She's distressed over it. We
(22:30):
don't know what the interaction truly was, because you know,
you have no idea what was going on inside of
that vehicle where and what happened predating that, you know,
as far as fights that were going on, or was
there any kind of animosity here, anything that would have
driven one individual to try to end the life of
(22:51):
another individual with car. When we think about violent deaths
(23:13):
in America, I think most people their default position is
going to be firearms related deaths. And you know, the
most common type of violent death in America is related
to motor vehicle accidents. So in the medical legal world,
(23:35):
we work a lot of these cases, probably more so
than any anything else that we covered that's a violent event.
And without fail, the underlying actual cause of death in
motor vehicle accidents is in fact blunt force trauma. And
(23:56):
of course, Dave, that's what we're dealing with with mister
O'Keeffe death here, is that this is what they have
come to conclude at this point that his death is
in fact massive blunt force trauma to his head and also, uh,
you know, he's got these peripheral injuries to his arms.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
And this case is going to turn on what the
autopsy says and what the physical evidence.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Says, yeah, yeah, and that is that is injury because
we're talking about sorry, yeah, no, no, no, no, The biggest,
the biggest thing that we're talking about is this. He's
got what they're describing as a two inch gash on
the back of Big Joe. That's a that is a
big gash. Yeah, two inches. And you and I both
(24:42):
have had babies, and you know how age.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
I have to point out to Joseph Scott Morgan and
I did not physically have children come out of our bodies.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
But you know, the the reality is is that when
you're you're raising kids, it's they will crack their heads
open and it's one of the most terrifying things in
the world as a parent because you see how much
blood there is. It does and you're thinking, oh my god,
my child.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
But you know, you will swear filmed bad. It is bad.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
But we have to consider something else that has been
noted about mister O'Keefe's remains when they were examined. He's
got bilateral black eyes, which you know we talked about before.
This is indicative of skull fracture. And I think that
he's got extensive skull fracturing. So here's one idea I
(25:40):
want to throw out to you to day. We talked
about the amount of blood that that is absent from
the scene. Some people have described it as little or
no blood, and again we have to also say that
this is during a snowstorm, so I don't know how
deep they dug because working a crime scene in the
snow is complete, depletely different than what most people have
(26:02):
ever envisioned. Based upon the fact that he has sustained
this trauma to his head. Remember the raccoon eyes. I
think that there's a fractured nose, as a fractured skull,
there's going to be a lot of internal bleeding here.
And as a matter of fact, when you have a
closed head injury, I've actually been present for autopsies and
(26:24):
have removed brains at autopsy where there's so much blood
contained within what we refer to it cranial vault that
sometimes it'll come pouring out and other times you'll see
these big coagulated masses that are focused on one side
of the brain, like if you've got if you think
about the back of his head where his head actually
(26:45):
impacted either a surface or was impacted by something else
in that little area which is posterior. I would expect
to see like this huge mass of blood that's probably
coagulated and resting over the surface of what we refer
to as the dura, which is the sack that the
brain is actually contained in, and that's called an epidural hemorrhage.
(27:07):
I would expect to see that. I'd also expect to
see probably some little vessels that are torn in the
brain itself, where you'll have bleeding within the sack and
maybe contained within the brain itself, which is what's referred
to as subarachnoid hemorrhage. So you're going to have this
huge mass of blood that has begun to leach out
(27:30):
the underlying probably floor, the skull has been fractured, and
they're going to talk a lot about this in the case,
this is a tremendous amount of trauma, and yes, this
can happen. I know that people wonder can this happen
from a single blow, particularly if you're talking about a
motor vehicle that's traveling at a sufficient rate to generate
(27:50):
the kind of energy, because this is a transfer of
energy where you have a car, which is what the
prosecution is stating, where a car literally strikes an individual.
Here's the problem. When we work, we're referred to as
pedestrian versus motor vehicle cases. That is, you've got a
person that is not contained within the structure of another
(28:14):
motor vehicle. They're just there, you know, as a person
standing outside of the vehicle, and they are struck. We
look for something called bumper marks, Dave, because most of
the time you're going to be struck either with the
rear of the vehicle and that bumper, or you'll be
struck in the ford area. Now, many times when you
(28:35):
get a presentation of bumper marks, it's going to look
like it'll have kind of a linear structure to it,
where if you think about the thighs of the knees
that somebody's just standing in the middle of the street,
you'll get this kind of bilinear because you've got the
margins of the bumper, and it creates a hemorrhage. It
also creates an abrasion. We're not seeing that here. We're
(28:58):
not seeing that, and so I really wonder if we
just kind of go with this idea that he was
backed up over which the prosecution is putting forward. His
posture is very important here because we're talking about cracktail,
like we're talking about an individual that has struck his head.
(29:18):
I really wonder, Dave, if they're going to discuss whether
or not he was standing or seated, and if he
has been drinking, there's a high probability that he could
have been seated or crouched behind this vehicle, and this
would explain the absence. They haven't talked about a bumper, Mark.
I haven't heard anything about that at this point, because
you have to have that point of contact where the
(29:40):
bumper is actually meeting up with the body with the
person and then generating enough energy to throw his head
back so that he impacts onto the ground. And that's
something that they're really going to dig into, I think,
And well.
Speaker 3 (29:53):
We've got a dead man and two different stories. The
prosecution claims that Karen he got into it an argument
with her boyfriend inside her black suv, her Lexus, in
the driveway and it became so violent that he gets
out of the car and she runs him over and
takes off the defenses, claiming that they were fine. They'd
gone out for drinks. He wanted to go to this
(30:15):
other party at a friend's house, and she dropped him
off there and went on about her merry way, and
apparently something bad went wrong in there, and a bunch
of cops all got together and decided, after beating him
up sufficiently, to take him out in the driveway and
leave him out there, and then framed Karen Reid for murder.
Those are the two different That's what we're going to
court on. Either either he was beaten up by his
(30:37):
friends and left out in a blizzard to die, or
he was run over by his now what they call
former girlfriend and left to die.
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
Well let's throw one one added little bonus in here too,
in this environment, in this house day and that's.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
To ask you, where does the dog fit into this? Joe?
Speaker 2 (31:01):
Yeah, Because what they're saying is there's this photo that's
floating about. The defense has presented in the proceedings where
we see this image of mister Keith's arm and Dave
those he's got these kind of straighted marks on his
arm and they're very kind of uniformed and linear, and
(31:22):
they they the defense is saying that this is evidence
of a dog attack. And Okay, I mean, I'll go
down that road with you. They're talking about potential puncture marks,
these sorts of things. And I have worked, and I
have a lot of friends that have worked dog attacks. Unfortunately,
I have had cases where children have been killed by dogs.
(31:43):
Hate those cases, but those injuries are very, very specific.
So here's what I'm going to be very interested in hearing.
I want to know if the defense in this particular
case is going to hire and the people do in
fact exists Dave Hire a veterinarian that specializes in forensics.
(32:10):
Because they can talk about the light mark of a dog. Now, now,
for whatever reason, this dog no longer exists. They say
that the what's the term that's so popular now the
animal was re holmed, And I've heard other people say
that the animal is no longer with us. And look,
(32:31):
you know that dog is gone and there's no way
that you're going to be able to get that dog.
And you know if you could, if the dog is deceased,
was it incinerated or was the dog buried in somebody's
backyard or was it trash or you know what happened,
because you know the kind of the forensic scientist in me.
(32:52):
I would want to render down the dog's skull and
have a forensic veterinarian. Really take a look at these
teeth and if you could compare them to the injuries
that he has on his arm, But I don't really
see it. And look, all of this is this pales
in one area that I'm more curious about than inn.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
Please tell me it's about the car.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
We'll get to the car. But here's the thing that
no one seems to be talking about. And forensic investigations
are layered, okay, and in this case, I literally mean that,
because if you've got these insults to mister O'Keeffe's arm,
where's his clothing? Because the clothing is actually going to
(33:36):
be the tail of the tape, if you will. So
you're telling me, in blizzard conditions, even if this man
wore a jacket into the home, you're going to tell
me he stood around with his jacket on. Wouldn't there
be evidence of tears in the jacket, And tears that
are generated from the underside of a motor vehicle compared
(33:59):
to what an animal would do to a jacket, looks
completely different. Let's you say that he took his jacket
off in the house and he's or you telling me
he's walking around a t shirt in this weather, or
he doesn't have a sweater on or a long sleeved
shirt in this particular type of brutal weather. I think
that he probably would. Well, what's the status of the shirt?
(34:20):
Are there tears in the shirt? Did they look for
any kind of transfer of evidence that would be consistent
with two things here? And we're exploring both possibilities here.
Is there a potential that there could have been animal
hair or saliva on that shirt adjacent to the tears,
because what you're saying is that the defense is saying
(34:41):
that these are puncture wounds on the arm. They've talked
about puncture wounds and maybe they're scratches. Well, did the
dog leave behind any kind of evidence of that? And
if that's not the case, then if he was hit
by a car and his arm went up in a
defensive position, we talked about defensive wounds, okay, you know
(35:03):
with knife attacks and that sort of thing. If he
went up trying to you know, thwart this blow that
he saw coming, you would actually get road debris like
grease and grime. We see this all the time and
rollover injuries with cars that would transfer onto the clothing.
And it stands out I mean it's it's very visible
(35:25):
if the car actually went over his body. Now, if
it's just a straight on like strike, you know, where
his head or another portion of his body hits that
tail light that they say was fractured, and then he
slams into the ground. I would be very interested to see, well,
(35:45):
what evidence is there on the clothing relative to any
kind of road dirt, grime, grease, anything else that might
go as an indication the clothing is going to play
a big role in us. And to this point, I
haven't really heard anybody talking much about it.
Speaker 3 (35:58):
Yeah, I've seen you when we were talking about this.
I had to change a tire on the side of
the interstate a couple of weeks ago, and just dealing
with just the tire lug nuts and just this one,
I was filthy, and yeah, I didn't.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
Crawl up underneath.
Speaker 3 (36:13):
I've actually, you know, no gotten filthy from head to toe.
I couldn't even stop anywhere to wash off because I
was that dirty. I just wanted to, you know, bottom
line here, what condition are his clothes in and why
haven't we seen these yet? Because either he was beaten
by his fellow officers inside the house and drug out
and dropped in the driveway to die in a blizzard,
or his girlfriend got into a fight with him and
(36:34):
while he was maybe crouched behind the car been overthrown up.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
She backs over him hard enough, gets enough speed going
that she can hit him harder to break that tail light, which,
to be honest with you, Joe, not an easy feat
tail lights.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
And they don't break easy.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
Yeah, no, they don't. And it's high impact plastic. There's
a reason they're made that way, Dave, so that they
can you know, we can travel in our vehicles, you know,
through through the world that we that we dwell and
it's not going to come apart even with the slightest bump.
There's a reason it's called it's thicker than most plastics
(37:13):
that are out there. It's one of the reasons. That's
one of the things that makes it high impact plastic.
And they're talking about two separate lenses here. You've got
the kind of red color that's fractured, and you've also
got the clear lens that's fractured. I think that goes
to backup lights, uh, and that that lens is actually
both those are actually fractured. There it is claimed that
(37:36):
DNA from mister O'Keeffe is found in this collection of
of of fragments. Here's another piece to this that everyone
should be keeping their eye on in this particular case,
because we're going to have you're going to hear trace evidence.
Uh scientists, they're going to be getting up on the
(37:58):
stand and these people are or fantastic when it comes
to plastics and glass. They will restructure this thing and
they'll talk about points of impact. One of the things
that you see with fracturing of glass in particular, but
to a lesser degree with plastics, is you'll get this
kind of bullseye spiderweb pattern that kind of extends out
and it fractures in different ways. And they have ways
(38:20):
they measure all this and they can talk about velocity
and all that, and so we'll hear from those individuals here.
One other issue here as well is that there is
actual literal glass that they're saying came from a potential
fractured cocktail class that he may have had in his hand.
(38:43):
That this has been found around the area as well.
So you've got this dynamic of fracturing that's going on
not just with the victim, with his skull. But we've
got glass that he may or may not have been
holding in I don't know, like a high ball container
like you make a mixed drink in h And also
(39:04):
this lens that's coming into play here. So it's very
dense material when you think about think about just the
perspective of the impact event, because that's going to be
key because that goes to the narrative that the prosecution
is putting forward. Can you explain this in simple terms
(39:25):
to the jury so that they understand, Okay, this is
what happens when you back a car up and the
lens fractures upon impact. This is what you would expect
to see. And is that consistent with what they were seeing?
Speaker 3 (39:37):
It's what about autopsy, Joe?
Speaker 2 (39:41):
The autopsy itself will be.
Speaker 3 (39:45):
Again.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
I go back to this idea of the proper mark
are are you not yet? But in the universal sense,
the universal you are you? Are you saying that that
this distinct event involving his head with this nasty injury
(40:08):
that is a closed head injury, by the way, and
you got the fracturing with the blackened eyes and maybe
a fractured nose. You're saying that his head hits a
tail light, because again that has to be demonstrated at autopsy,
and they're going to ask the forensic pathologist, is this
consistent with a car backing into an individual, and can
(40:31):
you generate this kind of injury if if let's just
say that he's he's in and just go with me
here just for a moment, if he is in kind
of a croust or seated position and he kind of
raises up and is struck by this oncoming vehicle that
(40:56):
is backing over him, you would not you would see
some kind of a braided area on the on the
surface of the skin. Let's just say he's struck in
the front and we know that this this impact on
the back of his head, he had to have hit
a heart surface and was hit by something heavy to
generate this laceration. This is not a cut, This is
(41:19):
not an incized injury. This is a laceration. So you're
going to have the tissue bridging that we've talked about
before with unclean margins. It's essentially the skin ripping in
that two inch area and that's a sign of impact.
So hah. You begin to go down this road and
you think about you think about how are they going
to translate that in this case so that the members
(41:42):
of the jury will be able to understand it.
Speaker 3 (41:43):
When everything's said and done. According to the Office of
the Medical Examiner, the doctor opined that extensive, extensive injuries
to his head likely rendered mister o'keef incapacitated. The doctor
further opined that upon viewing mister o'keef's injuries and her
exam emination of the body, she observed no signs of
mister O'Keeffe being involved in any type of physical altercation
(42:08):
or fight.
Speaker 2 (42:09):
Yeah, I've heard, I've heard some some say that there
was bruising on the hands. Uh, and you know, bruising
on the hands most of the time implies that you
could have been in a fight. I'll be curious as
to that assessment to see because again we go back
to this this friction that's placed on the skin. So
(42:32):
not only let's just say you have a bruise on
your hand after a fight and maybe you have underlying fractures, Well,
you have to have a point of impact relative to
that and the skin. This friction injury occurs with the abrasion,
you'll have correlating abrasions over this area that lead to
the bruising. Okay, the bruising comes about as fracturing of
(42:53):
the bone, you know, and you get this what they
call echemosis, you know, contusion that goes that leeches out
into the soft tissue. We'll see how that plays out
as well. I'm I'm interested in understanding his response. And
when I say his response, I mean mister O'Keefe's response
to whatever was going on in his environment at that
(43:16):
point in time. That brings it back to the arm.
If he was run over, say backed over. I hate
to say run over because with a runover injury, which
you get, actually there's a classification or category that we
talked about with bodies. They have what are called rollover injuries,
(43:39):
and these are fascinating because your body gets caught up
by the tires and it's kind of rolled under the vehicle.
So you'll get all these kind of weird, odd looking
braided areas where skin there's so much friction, the skin's
kind of getting twisted, you know, within the clothing. You'll
see transfer evidence off the undercarriage the car. That's typically
(44:01):
what you see where you have a rollover injury. But
what they're saying is the car apparently was used almost
like a battering ram. It wasn't like a traditional pedestrian
struck by an oncoming vehicle and then you know, kind
of a bump bump where the car goes over the body.
It's not what they're saying. What they're implying is that
(44:23):
the car was weaponized and that it was used almost
like a battering ram. So you this guy's behind the
car and you, you know, you slam it into reverse
or whatever, hit the gas on a snowy, snowy surface,
by the way, and you hit this guy and knock
him down, and then you drive off. Okay, So is
(44:46):
there going to be evidence of that? Did they? Were
they able to recover any kind of tire tracks off
of this as well, which again is kind of a
fascinating thing in this in this environment, again we're fighting
with blizzard like condition. Were they able to identify anything,
you know, with in snow in particular? And again, granted,
(45:07):
I'm an old Southern boy, so I have worked many
cases in snow. I've had a couple. But you know,
when these forensics people that are amazing up north and
they have to deal with snow and they're dealing with
tire tracks they have to put down to capture these
these impressions in the snow. They've actually got this kind
of spray on wax that they put on onto the
(45:30):
surface of the treads and they can lift it out.
It's a painstaking process. It's not like, you know, we
use like what's referred to as dental stone. You know,
if you have like a muddy track and you mix
this dental stone up and you pour it down on
top of the track and then it hardens, you know,
you lift it up and you can pick out all
the details. So to do this, to capture that kind
(45:54):
of evidence in the snow, you've got to really know
what you're doing. I would hope that they had looked,
at least photographed, you know, some evidence of tire tracks
in the snow, and do just anything. Would those tire
tracks approximate the wheelbase of this lexus that they're talking about.
(46:16):
So a lot to unpack, a lot to dig into.
But you know, when it's all sudden and done, the
people that are court observers here that watch true crime,
when they see everything laid out, it's going to be
(46:36):
certainly an education when it comes to the basic forensic principles.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks
Host
Joseph Scott Morgan
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.