Podcasts about Supreme Judicial Court

On today's show we're talking about one of the quietest ways a deal gets killed. Not a rate move, not a cost overrun. A city council vote you assumed would never happen.Let's start with the constitutional plumbing, because it explains everything that follows.In the United States, municipalities are creatures of the state. They have no inherent sovereignty. Their zoning power, their taxing power, their permitting authority, all of it is delegated from above. Most states follow some version of Dillon's Rule, which says a city can do only what the state has expressly authorized it to do.Now, if you stop reading there, you would conclude something very reasonable and very wrong. You would conclude that when a state or the federal government creates a housing incentive, it flows downhill automatically. The state says multifamily is permitted near transit, so multifamily is permitted near transit. The state creates a property tax exemption for workforce housing, so the exemption exists.That is not how it works. And I see investors underwrite as though it is.Here's the thing. The fact that a city gets its power from the state doesn't mean the city is obedient. Let me give you real examples.Massachusetts passed the MBTA Communities Act. It requires 177 municipalities in the transit service area to zone at least one district for multifamily as of right. This is a mandate. Not a suggestion. The town of Milton hired a consultant, filed an action plan, and adopted the overlay district in December of 2023. Two months later the voters overturned it by referendum. The Attorney General sued. The Supreme Judicial Court upheld the law. And five years after passage, in January of 2026, the AG had to sue another nine towns for continued noncompliance.So even a hard mandate with an enforcement mechanism took five years and multiple lawsuits. If your pro forma assumed as-of-right entitlement in one of those towns in year one, you were carrying a multi-year hole.Florida' Live Local Act created a seventy-five percent property tax exemption for units between 80%-120% of AMI. Local taxing authorities were allowed to opt out, and thirty-four of the forty-nine eligible counties did exactly that. Their reasoning was straightforward. The state gets the policy win, the county writes the cheque. Because the exemption generally applies only after completion, lenders were discounting it at underwriting. So even where the incentive survived, it didn't reliably show up in the capital stack.Colorado is my favourite case, because it's the trap that looks like a win. Proposition 123 sent about three hundred and fifty million dollars a year at affordable housing. More than two hundred jurisdictions opted in, covering over ninety percent of the state's population. Looks like near-universal adoption. But the piece that actually matters to a developer is the ninety-day fast-track approval commitment, and as of early 2025 roughly five jurisdictions had implemented one. Opting in and building the machinery were two different votes, years apart.-------------**Real Estate Espresso Podcast:** Spotify: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://open.spotify.com/show/3GvtwRmTq4r3es8cbw8jW0?si=c75ea506a6694ef1)   iTunes: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-real-estate-espresso-podcast/id1340482613)   Website: [www.victorjm.com](http://www.victorjm.com)   LinkedIn: [Victor Menasce](http://www.linkedin.com/in/vmenasce)   YouTube: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](http://www.youtube.com/@victorjmenasce6734)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/realestateespresso](http://www.facebook.com/realestateespresso)   Email: [podcast@victorjm.com](mailto:podcast@victorjm.com)  **Y Street Capital:** Website: [www.ystreetcapital.com](http://www.ystreetcapital.com)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital](https://www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital)   Instagram: [@ystreetcapital](http://www.instagram.com/ystreetcapital)  

Imagine being 13 years old and told by a court that you cannot go to church, you cannot associate with your Christian friends, you cannot celebrate Christmas or Easter, and you cannot even read the Bible! If you think this is about Communist China today or perhaps even North Korea, think again. Join Jim Schneider and Mat Staver as they examine the details concerning a case (Bickford v. Bradeen) related to a girl named Ava in the state of Maine. Ava loves going to church. She misses her friends. She wants to worship with her mother. She wants to hear the Word of God, but the Supreme Judicial Court in Maine has told her NO. Commenting on this case Mat said, "In my 39 years of practicing law, I have never seen anything like this case." As a result, he will be taking this case to the United States Supreme Court.
 Other legal issues were discussed and listeners brought their thoughts to the discussion as well. More Information: LC.org

Imagine being 13 years old and told by a court that you cannot go to church, you cannot associate with your Christian friends, you cannot celebrate Christmas or Easter, and you cannot even read the Bible! If you think this is about Communist China today or perhaps even North Korea, think again. Join Jim Schneider and Mat Staver as they examine the details concerning a case (Bickford v. Bradeen) related to a girl named Ava in the state of Maine. Ava loves going to church. She misses her friends. She wants to worship with her mother. She wants to hear the Word of God, but the Supreme Judicial Court in Maine has told her NO. Commenting on this case Mat said, "In my 39 years of practicing law, I have never seen anything like this case." As a result, he will be taking this case to the United States Supreme Court.
 Other legal issues were discussed and listeners brought their thoughts to the discussion as well. More Information: LC.org

Imagine being 13 years old and told by a court that you cannot go to church, you cannot associate with your Christian friends, you cannot celebrate Christmas or Easter, and you cannot even read the Bible! If you think this is about Communist China today or perhaps even North Korea, think again. Join Jim Schneider and Mat Staver as they examine the details concerning a case (Bickford v. Bradeen) related to a girl named Ava in the state of Maine. Ava loves going to church. She misses her friends. She wants to worship with her mother. She wants to hear the Word of God, but the Supreme Judicial Court in Maine has told her NO. Commenting on this case Mat said, "In my 39 years of practicing law, I have never seen anything like this case." As a result, he will be taking this case to the United States Supreme Court.
 Other legal issues were discussed and listeners brought their thoughts to the discussion as well. More Information: LC.org

Imagine being 13 years old and told by a court that you cannot go to church, you cannot associate with your Christian friends, you cannot celebrate Christmas or Easter, and you cannot even read the Bible! If you think this is about Communist China today or perhaps even North Korea, think again. Join Jim Schneider and Mat Staver as they examine the details concerning a case (Bickford v. Bradeen) related to a girl named Ava in the state of Maine. Ava loves going to church. She misses her friends. She wants to worship with her mother. She wants to hear the Word of God, but the Supreme Judicial Court in Maine has told her NO. Commenting on this case Mat said, "In my 39 years of practicing law, I have never seen anything like this case." As a result, he will be taking this case to the United States Supreme Court.
 Other legal issues were discussed and listeners brought their thoughts to the discussion as well. More Information: LC.org

When Tina Bowen and her sister, Karen, began hearing knocking in the walls of their home in Pepperell, Massachusetts, the girls believed it was their recently deceased mother trying to reach out to them from beyond the grave. In time, however, the knocking became more intrusive and aggressive, and it was soon accompanied by objects being moved around the house and frightening messages left on the walls. After months of torment, the Bowens discovered that it wasn't a ghost haunting their home, but sixteen-year-old Daniel LaPlante, a boy Tina had briefly dated and who'd become obsessed with her. Daniel LaPlante was arrested and charged with various crimes, for which he was convicted and served a sentence in a juvenile detention center. Unfortunately, the court's decision to try LaPlante as an adult meant that he was granted bail and after just one year in detention, he was bailed out and allowed to live with his mother pending trial. It turned out that brief period of freedom was all the time LaPlante needed to find a new object of his obsession and by the time the police learned of his violent intentions, it was already too late. References Campbell, Jerome. 2019. Mass. High Court Rejects Early Parole Petition For Man Convicted Of Murder In 1987. June 6. Accessed July 9, 2026. https://www.wbur.org/news/2019/06/06/daniel-laplante-parole-denied. Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Daniel J. LaPlante. 1993. 416 Mass. 433 (Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, November 16). Conteras, Cydney. 2023. Daniel LaPlante hid in walls before murdering pregnant woman and her children. July 28. Accessed July 7, 2026. https://www.oxygen.com/crime-news/daniel-laplante-murder-priscilla-gustafson-family. Crimaldi, Laura. 2017. "Doctor doubts killer's remorse." Boston Globe, March 23: B1. Cullen, Kevin, and Jim Gomez. 1987. "LaPlante ordered to undergo tests." Boston Globe, December 5: 1. Cullen, Kevin, Diego Ribadeneira, and Doris Wong. 1987. "Suspect in slayings is captured." Boston Globe, December 4: 1. Cullen, Kevin, Richard Kindleberger, Paul Langer, Diane Lewis, Diego Ribadeneira, and Doris Wong. 1987. "A youth who sowed fear." Boston Globe, December 4: 1. Lagner, Paul. 1988. "4 more letters given to judge in LaPlante murder case." Boston Globe, September 16: 82. Lane, Tom. 2021. The Elm Street Nightmare. July 8. Accessed July 7, 2026. https://www.celticssentinel.com/2021/07/the-elm-street-nightmare.html. Langner, Paul. 1988. "LaPlante convicted, gets life in 3 killings." Boston Globe, October 26: 1. Ribadeneira, Diego, and Doris Wong. 1987. "Police seeking 17-year-old suspect for slayings of three in Townsend." Boston Globe, December 3: 1. Ribadeneira, Diego, and Jim Gomez. 1987. "Two families shaken by close calls as suspect in murders roamed free." Boston Globe, December 5: 10. 2015. Your Worst Nightmare. Directed by Pat Rogers. Performed by Pat Rogers. Cowritten by Alaina Urquhart, Ash Kelley & Dave White (Since 10/2022)Produced & Edited by Mikie Sirois (Since 2023)Research by Dave White (Since 10/2022), Alaina Urquhart & Ash KelleyListener Correspondence & Collaboration by Debra LallyListener Tale Video Edited by Aidan McElman (Since 6/2025) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

There's no version of this verdict where Lindsay Clancy walks out of a courtroom and goes home. Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis lays out exactly what waits for her down each of the two paths this jury can choose. Path one: not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility. Under Massachusetts law that doesn't mean release — it triggers up to forty days of court-ordered observation, after which the state can petition for civil commitment with no time limit written into the statute. Andrea Yates walked that same road in Texas after drowning her five children in 2001 and was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 2006. She remains committed to this day, declining her annual release hearing every single time it's offered. Path two: first-degree murder. Massachusetts has no sentencing hearing for that charge — the penalty is automatic life without parole, and the case is automatically appealed to the state's Supreme Judicial Court, which will review every piece of psychiatric evidence the jury just weighed and set aside. Faddis explains what makes a jury choose second-degree murder instead — the option that actually carries eventual parole eligibility — and why almost no one convicted of first-degree murder ever sees the outside of a facility again. Then there's the body this all has to move. Clancy is paralyzed from the waist down and has been under suicide watch since January 2023, housed at Tewksbury Hospital since that May. Conviction means transferring that care into a prison system that isn't built for it. Two verdicts. Two very different buildings. Neither one is a door marked exit. Links: Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod Legal Disclaimer: This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. Hashtags: #LindsayClancy #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #LindsayClancyTrial #PostpartumPsychosis #CriminalResponsibility #MassachusettsMurder #TrueCrime #TrueCrimePodcast #AndreaYates 

If this jury convicts Lindsay Clancy of first-degree murder, the sentence writes itself — life in prison, no parole, no discussion. But what that sentence means in practice for a paralyzed woman who has been living in a hospital on suicide watch for over three years is a question nobody in the courtroom addresses at sentencing.Eric Faddis, a defense attorney and former prosecutor, answers it. Clancy would leave Tewksbury Hospital and enter the Massachusetts corrections system. The prison system would have to accommodate her physical condition — paraplegia requiring around-the-clock medical care — while also managing her psychiatric needs. In a treatment facility, the institution is built around care. In prison, care exists within a structure built around confinement. Faddis explains what Reddington can fight for inside that system — placement, conditions, mental health access — and how long the attorney-client relationship extends after a life sentence.Every first-degree murder conviction in Massachusetts is automatically appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court. Reddington does not need to file — the case goes up by operation of law. The SJC reviews the trial record, which includes the psychiatric testimony from both sides, the medical records, and the jury instructions on criminal responsibility. Faddis walks through what that review examines and whether the mental health evidence the jury rejected can come back in a different form.This jury can also convict on second-degree murder — life with parole eligibility. How twelve people reach that conclusion on facts where the killing is undisputed comes down to how much weight they give the mental health evidence without fully buying the insanity defense.Two exits exist from a first-degree sentence — appeal and commutation. Both are steep roads.Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LindsayClancy #LindsayClancyTrial #HiddenKillers #LifeWithoutParole #CriminalAppeal #MassachusettsLaw #PostpartumPsychosis #MentalHealthPrison #TrueCrimePodcast #TrueCrime

Lindsay Clancy has been at Tewksbury Hospital for over three years. She is paralyzed from the waist down. She has been on 24-hour suicide watch since January 2023. If this jury convicts her of first-degree murder, she leaves that facility and enters the Massachusetts corrections system. The sentence is mandatory — life without parole.Eric Faddis breaks down what that transition looks like. The prison system must accommodate Clancy's physical condition — around-the-clock medical care for a paraplegic inmate — on top of her psychiatric needs. In a treatment facility, she is a patient. In prison, she is an inmate who happens to need care. The institutional mission changes, and with it the daily structure, the staffing, and the access to mental health treatment.Faddis covers what Reddington can do for Clancy once she is inside the system. Advocacy for an incarcerated client includes fighting for placement, conditions of confinement, medical care, and mental health treatment access. The attorney-client relationship does not end with the verdict.Every first-degree murder conviction in Massachusetts triggers an automatic appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court. The trial record — including all of the mental health testimony the jury heard — goes up for review. Faddis explains what the SJC looks for and whether the rejected insanity defense evidence has any life on appeal.The verdict slip gives this jury a second option. Second-degree murder carries a life sentence with parole eligibility after 15 years. How a jury reaches that verdict when the act itself is undisputed depends on how they weigh the mental health evidence without fully accepting the insanity defense.First-degree life without parole has two exits — commutation by the governor or a successful appeal. Both are rare.Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LindsayClancy #LindsayClancyTrial #HiddenKillers #FirstDegreeMurder #LifeSentence #CriminalAppeal #PostpartumPsychosis #PrisonSystem #TrueCrimePodcast #TrueCrime

A first-degree murder conviction does not end the case for Lindsay Clancy or for Kevin Reddington. It changes the fight. The sentence is automatic — life without parole — but the legal work that follows could take years.Eric Faddis sits down to explain the roads available after a guilty verdict. Massachusetts automatically sends every first-degree murder conviction to the Supreme Judicial Court for review. The SJC examines the trial record for legal errors — evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, constitutional issues. That record contains everything the jury heard, including the competing psychiatric testimony and the medical records that formed the basis of the insanity defense. Faddis explains whether that evidence, rejected by the jury, can become the foundation of an appellate argument.The physical reality of Clancy's situation adds another layer. She has been at Tewksbury Hospital since May 2023, paralyzed and on 24-hour suicide watch. A conviction means she transfers from a medical setting to a corrections facility. That handoff involves moving a paraplegic patient on continuous suicide watch into a system built for a different purpose. Faddis covers how that process works and what an attorney can push for on behalf of a client inside the prison system.The jury also has the option of finding Clancy guilty of second-degree murder, which carries life with eventual parole eligibility. Faddis breaks down how a jury lands on second degree when the defense never argued she did not kill her children.Outside of a successful appeal, the only other path out of a first-degree sentence is executive commutation. Massachusetts governors have granted commutations for first-degree murder a handful of times in decades.Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LindsayClancy #LindsayClancyTrial #HiddenKillers #FirstDegreeMurder #LifeSentence #CriminalAppeal #PostpartumPsychosis #PrisonSystem #TrueCrimePodcast #TrueCrime

Retired Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elspeth Cypher returns to the podcast (her first appearance was episode 183) to map the legal landscape of the gender turf wars, fought on four major frontiers: prisons, schools, sports, and therapy. As president of the Women's Liberation Front (WoLF), Elspeth walks me through the Chandler case challenging California's SB 132, which eliminated all gatekeeping for men seeking transfer into women's prisons, and the protective orders finally winning women in federal facilities some measure of relief. We discuss the aftermath of Skrmetti, Mahmoud, Chiles, and the BPJ sports ruling — and why a Supreme Court victory on paper doesn't translate smoothly into changed practice on the ground.We also explore how women's speech has been silenced across millennia, from the scold's bridle to modern cancelation; what “radical feminist” means to her; the ethics of surrogacy; the falsification of birth certificates; WoLF's remarkable new executive director, Jasmine Faulk, who escaped Saudi Arabia; the FTC's fraud case against WPATH; and why parental authority has to be established early. This conversation asks: when nearly 200,000 women are incarcerated in facilities an unknown number of men can now enter, who is defending their right to safety, privacy, and dignity?Elspeth B. Cypher retired from the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts in 2024. She is president of the board of directors of the Women's Liberation Front (WoLF), a nonpartisan radical (meaning "root") feminist organization dedicated to the rights of women and girls. She is also a founding member of the Gender Critical Law Society. Follow her on X @ebclaw or here on Substack Elspeth Cypher. Email: boardpresident@womensliberationfront.org.[00:00:00] Start[00:03:51] How Women's Speech Gets Silenced[00:12:23] What Radical Feminism Really Means[00:17:23] The Ethics of Surrogacy[00:24:01] Falsified Birth Certificates and Identity[00:28:27] WoLF's New Executive Director[00:32:03] Chandler Case: Men in Women's Prisons[00:39:15] Protective Orders in Federal Prisons[00:47:30] Skrmetti, Mahmoud, and Chiles Rulings[00:54:29] Supreme Court on Girls' Sports[00:57:12] Four Frontiers of the Gender Battle[01:00:30] Counting Women in US Prisons[01:09:30] Gender Identity in School Curricula[01:14:06] Parental Authority Starts Early[01:19:08] FTC Fraud Case Against WPATH[01:24:10] Final Words of WisdomROGD REPAIR Course + Community gives concerned parents instant access to over 120 lessons providing the psychological insights and communication tools you need to get through to your kid. Now featuring 24/7 personalized AI support implementing the tools with RepairBot! Use code SUBSTACK to take 50% off your first month.PODCOURSES: use code SOMETHERAPIST at LisaMustard.com/PodCoursesPRODUCTION: Looking for your own podcast producer? Visit PodsByNick.com and mention my podcast for 20% off your initial services.MUSIC: Thanks to Joey Pecoraro for our song, “Half Awake,” used with gratitude & permission.ALL OTHER LINKS HERE. To support this show, please leave a rating & review on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Subscribe, like, comment & share via my YouTube channel. Or recommend this to a friend!Learn more about Do No Harm.Take $200 off your EightSleep Pod Pro Cover with code SOMETHERAPIST at EightSleep.com.Take 20% off all superfood beverages with code SOMETHERAPIST at Organifi.Check out my shop for book recommendations + wellness products.Show notes & transcript provided with the help of SwellAI.Special thanks to Joey Pecoraro for our theme song, “Half Awake,” used with gratitude and permission.Watch NO WAY BACK: The Reality of Gender-Affirming Care (our medical ethics documentary, formerly known as Affirmation Generation). Stream the film or purchase a DVD. Use code SOMETHERAPIST to take 20% off your order. Follow us on X @2022affirmation or Instagram at @affirmationgeneration.Have a question for me? Looking to go deeper and discuss these ideas with other listeners? Join my Locals community! Members get to ask questions I will respond to in exclusive, members-only livestreams, post questions for upcoming guests to answer, plus other perks TBD. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

8/20/26 Co-Host-Andy Bukowski Mafer Bandola , one of the Ladama's three absolutely amazing women musicians from across the Americas –high energy, soul-restoring joy and music –- coming to Whately this Saturday. Tara Jacobs, Governor's Councilor and candidate for re-election: confirming (or not) Parole Board members and Supreme Judicial Court nominees, operating as a check and balance, promoting diversity and Western Massachusetts. Righting Wrongs: Carol Rose, Exec Dir, ACLU of Mass, on fighting Flock city by city and town by town; victories in important voting rights and immigrants' rights cases! All That Jazz: Northampton Jazz Festival President Ruth Griggs with Ken Longstreeth and Jeff Gavioli, members of the 19-piece Bad News Jazz and Blues Orchestra—a preview of their performance at the Jazz Festival.

8/20/26 Co-Host-Andy Bukowski Mafer Bandola , one of the Ladama's three absolutely amazing women musicians from across the Americas –high energy, soul-restoring joy and music –- coming to Whately this Saturday. Tara Jacobs, Governor's Councilor and candidate for re-election: confirming (or not) Parole Board members and Supreme Judicial Court nominees, operating as a check and balance, promoting diversity and Western Massachusetts. Righting Wrongs: Carol Rose, Exec Dir, ACLU of Mass, on fighting Flock city by city and town by town; victories in important voting rights and immigrants' rights cases! All That Jazz: Northampton Jazz Festival President Ruth Griggs with Ken Longstreeth and Jeff Gavioli, members of the 19-piece Bad News Jazz and Blues Orchestra—a preview of their performance at the Jazz Festival.

8/20/26 Co-Host-Andy Bukowski Mafer Bandola , one of the Ladama's three absolutely amazing women musicians from across the Americas –high energy, soul-restoring joy and music –- coming to Whately this Saturday. Tara Jacobs, Governor's Councilor and candidate for re-election: confirming (or not) Parole Board members and Supreme Judicial Court nominees, operating as a check and balance, promoting diversity and Western Massachusetts. Righting Wrongs: Carol Rose, Exec Dir, ACLU of Mass, on fighting Flock city by city and town by town; victories in important voting rights and immigrants' rights cases! All That Jazz: Northampton Jazz Festival President Ruth Griggs with Ken Longstreeth and Jeff Gavioli, members of the 19-piece Bad News Jazz and Blues Orchestra—a preview of their performance at the Jazz Festival.

8/20/26 Co-Host-Andy Bukowski Mafer Bandola , one of the Ladama's three absolutely amazing women musicians from across the Americas –high energy, soul-restoring joy and music –- coming to Whately this Saturday. Tara Jacobs, Governor's Councilor and candidate for re-election: confirming (or not) Parole Board members and Supreme Judicial Court nominees, operating as a check and balance, promoting diversity and Western Massachusetts. Righting Wrongs: Carol Rose, Exec Dir, ACLU of Mass, on fighting Flock city by city and town by town; victories in important voting rights and immigrants' rights cases! All That Jazz: Northampton Jazz Festival President Ruth Griggs with Ken Longstreeth and Jeff Gavioli, members of the 19-piece Bad News Jazz and Blues Orchestra—a preview of their performance at the Jazz Festival.

Salem, Massachusetts, is famous for its witch trials, but did you know that it also hosted a murder mystery so twisted that it inspired literary legends like Edgar Allen Poe and Nathaniel Hawthorne? The mystery began with an old ship captain murdered in his bed and ended with the deaths of three more prominent citizens. Was the motive love, greed, or something more sinister?Sources: Brooks, Rebecca Beatrice. “The Murder of Captain Joseph White.” History of Massachusetts Blog. July 25, 2025. https://historyofmassachusetts.org/captain-joseph-white-murder/“Captain Joseph White.” Salem Public Library. https://salempl.org/captain-joseph-white/Curtis, Charles P. “The Young Devils and Dan'l Webster.” American Heritage, Vol. II, Issue 4. June, 1960.Duke, Thomas. Celebrated Criminal Cases of America (San Francisco: The James H. Barry Company, 1910). Second trial of John Francis Knapp by a new jury: Recommenced at Salem, August 14, 1830, for the murder of Capt. Joseph White, before the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at a special session, commenced at Salem, July 20, 1830… (Boston: Dutton and Wentworth, 1830). Trial of George Crowninshield, J.J. Knapp, Jun. and John Francis Knapp. reported by John W. Whitman. (Boston: Beals and Homer, and Frances Ingraham, 1830.)Lewis, Walker. “The Murder of Captain Joseph White: Salem, Massachusetts, 1830.” American Bar Association Journal. Vol. 54. May, 1968. Pp. 460-466.Wagner, E. J., “A Murder in Salem.” Smithsonian Magazine. November 2010. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/a-murder-in-salem-64885035/Music: Credits to Holizna, Fesilyan Studios & Virginia Liston

Welcome to the Monday Night Talk podcast for July 13 2026. It's a special, abbreviated edition of Monday Night Talk with Kevin Tocci this Monday on 95.9FM WATD before WATD's political forum takes over the airwaves! We'll tackle some of the biggest issues facing Massachusetts with Paul Craney, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, discussing the Supreme Judicial Court's rejection of the income tax ballot question and Governor Healey's proposal to use state pension funds for economic development grants. Then, meet Anthony O'Brien Sr., candidate for Plymouth County Commissioner, as he shares why he's running and why the salaries of county commissioners and other elected officials are front and center in his campaign. Monday Night Talk is proudly sponsored by Tiny & Sons Glass and Alcoholics Anonymous. Do you have a topic for a future show or info on an upcoming community event? Email us at mondaynighttalk@gmail.com If you're a fan of the show and enjoy our segments, you can either download your favorite segment from this site or subscribe to our podcasts through iTunes & Spotify today!  Monday Night Talk with Kevin Tocci - Copyright © 2026

Welcome to the Monday Night Talk podcast for June 22, 2026. This week's  show begins with the State House Report, which is proudly sponsored by Tiny & Sons Glass, features State Representative Joan Meschino  who provides updates on her community media legislation and the newly approved FY2027 Massachusetts budget. Political strategist Greg Maynard of Maynard Strategies breaks down the recent Massachusetts Democratic Convention and the Supreme Judicial Court's decision to keep a proposed income tax ballot question off the 2026 ballot. Author and legal scholar Gloria J. Browne-Marshall discusses the inaugural Martyrs Day, a national day of remembrance honoring protesters and activists who gave their lives in the pursuit of social justice. Then, a little fairy dust and political satire! Elysium Ellis and Lucio Faria from the Maenad Theatre Troupe join us to preview their upcoming production of Iolanthe, or the Peer and the Peri, Gilbert and Sullivan's whimsical operetta that proves politics has been ripe for satire for well over a century. Monday Night Talk is proudly sponsored by Tiny & Sons Glass and Alcoholics Anonymous. Do you have a topic for a future show or info on an upcoming community event? Email us at mondaynighttalk@gmail.com If you're a fan of the show and enjoy our segments, you can either download your favorite segment from this site or subscribe to our podcasts through iTunes & Spotify today!  Monday Night Talk with Kevin Tocci - Copyright © 2026.

Welcome to the Monday Night Talk podcast for May 18, 2026. Brockton Mayor Moises Rodrigues opens the show to break down Brockton's FY2027 budget, his continued role as School Committee chairman, and the latest developments surrounding the city's long-awaited new high school project. State Auditor Diana DiZoglio discusses the latest twist in the legal showdown over auditing the Massachusetts Legislature, including the Supreme Judicial Court ruling and the Attorney General finally authorizing outside counsel to move the case forward. Author Pauline Steinhorn shares the incredible true story behind Dreaming of the River: A Mother and Daughter's Fight for Survival During the Holocaust — a powerful account of courage, resistance, survival, and unlikely heroes during one of history's darkest chapters. Monday Night Talk is proudly sponsored by Tiny & Sons Glass and Alcoholics Anonymous. Do you have a topic for a future show or info on an upcoming community event? Email us at mondaynighttalk@gmail.com If you're a fan of the show and enjoy our segments, you can either download your favorite segment from this site or subscribe to our podcasts through iTunes & Spotify today!  Monday Night Talk with Kevin Tocci - Copyright © 2026.

Massachusetts' highest court disqualified a proposed rent-control ballot question over an exemption for religious housing. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled the proposal could not appear on the ballot because its exemption for religious organizations violated the Massachusetts Constitution. Although voters will not decide the issue this November, supporters are pursuing other proposals that would let cities and towns adopt limited rent controls. Dan talked with Conor Yunits, Chair of the Housing for Massachusetts coalition.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Thursday, the MA Senate voted to turn over records sought by State Auditor Diana DiZoglio as part of her audit of the chamber. However, the 33-6 vote does not mean the Senate "concedes". In a resolution note responding to the Supreme Judicial Court's order, while they voted to turn over requested documents, they “do not concede” to an audit, saying if senators believe it’s unconstitutional, that the chamber could still object to an audit from DiZoglio’s office in the “present or future.” While this is a small victory for DiZoglio, her legislative battle is still not over. In addition, this weekend the Massachusetts Democratic Party’s 2026 Nominating Convention begins. It will be held in Worcester at the DCU Center on Friday and Saturday, May 29th and 30th. State Auditor Diana DiZoglio is expected to attend as are other members of the State Legislature that Diana has been "battling" with...Were there fireworks? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's episode, Jennifer welcomes Jon Hecht, a former Massachusetts State Representative and leading advocate for democracy reform. Jon has spent years at the State House gaining firsthand insight into the legislative process and now serves as a key member of the Coalition to Reform Our Legislature. Despite political differences, his bipartisan work through the Legislative Efficiency and Accountability Project (LEAP) and the legislative stipend reform movement has united individuals across the political spectrum who are dedicated to increasing transparency and accountability in state government. This episode explores the controversial failure of the Massachusetts legislature to allow a citizen-led stipend reform question on the ballot, exposing a process that critics claim is riddled with undemocratic maneuvers and a lack of transparency. The conversation delves into the legislature’s alleged misuse of procedural loopholes, including a rare advisory opinion from the Supreme Judicial Court, to block popular reform efforts. Jennifer and Jon highlight the enormous bipartisan volunteer effort that gathered over 95,000 signatures, discuss the impact of legislative stipends on power dynamics and public trust, and question the accountability of leadership bonuses. The discussion challenges entrenched legislative culture, addresses frustration with dismissive attitudes toward voters, and calls out the resistance to openness and reform on Beacon Hill. "We have this crazy system in Massachusetts where our legislators get a large part of their pay from another legislator." ~Jon Hecht This week on Political Contessa: The legislative stipend reform ballot question and the bipartisan coalition behind it The rare procedural tactics used by the Massachusetts legislature to block reform efforts The overwhelming public support, demonstrated by 95,000 gathered signatures Claims of legislative stipends creating conflicts between serving leadership and serving constituents Critique of dismissive attitudes from Massachusetts legislators toward voter concerns The role of legislative bonuses and travel stipends in state government Efforts to keep the democracy reform movement alive through public engagement and future ballot initiatives Calls for voters to directly ask their representatives about stipend reform and legislative accountability Connect with Jon Hecht and the Coalition to Reform Our Legislature: Stipend Reform Website:com/donate Resources Mentioned: The Legislative Efficiency and Accountability Project (LEAP) Information about signing up for volunteering and donation opportunities available atcom See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Massachusetts State Auditor Diana DiZoglio discussed the latest in her ongoing battle to audit the State Legislature. This week, a Supreme Judicial Court judge denied DiZoglio's request for an outside lawyer to represent her in her battle to audit the State Legislature. The judge said, DiZoglio didn't cite a statute, power, or rule that would allow the court to appoint an outside lawyer. What happens next? Diana checked in to discuss!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts is weighing whether adults under the age of 21 can be banned from possessing a handgun in the state, with oral arguments taking place this week. Cam has details on that case, as well as several important legislative updates from across the country.

The Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts is weighing whether adults under the age of 21 can be banned from possessing a handgun in the state, with oral arguments taking place this week. Cam has details on that case, as well as several important legislative updates from across the country.

This Day in Maine Thursday, February 26, 2026

As of the end of 2025, the Massachusetts Parole Board had approved the release of 39 murder convicts, while denying parole to 12 inmates. This year so far in 2026, the Parole Board has released 5 more murder convicts, denying just 3. This comes in the wake of the state Supreme Judicial Court ruling in 2024 that ruled that emerging adults aged 18 to 20 at the time of the offense cannot be sentenced to life without parole.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A Supreme Judicial Court ruling changed Nate Benjamin's life. In January 2024, the state's highest court ruled that those under 21 who commit a crime cannot receive life without the possibility of parole sentences. 

The GOAL-backed Westbrook suitability case is headed for the Supreme Judicial Court.  Also, The P320 saga gets another twist, more 2A news, and a look at the Model 1814/1817 "Common" rifle

On the evening of May 10, 1988, a passing driver on Howard Street in Brockton, MA, stopped to investigate something unusual on the side of the road. When the driver got closer to what they thought was a bag, they realized it was actually the body of twenty-four-year-old Anthony LoConte, bleeding badly from injuries to his face and head.Initially, investigators believed LoConte was the victim of a hit-and-run accident; however, when the coroner examined the body, he discovered a bullet hole in the back of LoConte's head, indicating that he'd been murdered.It took twelve years for investigators to track down LoConte's killer, but in the winter of 2000, California Highway Patrol arrested Robert Morganti on drug charges and a quick background check connected them to a 1988 warrant for Morganti for the murder of Anthony LoConte. Robert Morganti was extradited back to Massachusetts, where he was tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for LoConte's murder. However, due to a controversial 2024 law concerning life sentences for young offenders, Robert Morganti could be granted parole in the near future.Consider signing the petition by visiting https://www.change.org/p/help-uncle-tony-uphold-mandatory-life-sentences-in-massachusetts-bill-s942 .Thank you to the Incredible Dave White of Bring Me the Axe Podcast for research and Writing support!ReferencesBoston Globe. 1988. "Police believe drugs are linked to slaying of Brockton man." Boston Globe, May 12: 35.Boyle, Maureen. 2000. "Murder suspect caught in Calif." The Enterprise (Brockton, MA), March 21: 1.Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Robert J. Morganti. 2009. SJC-09830 (Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Plymouth, November 25).Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Robert J. Morganti. 2014. SJC-11281 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, February 12).Peterson, Dave. 2000. "Murder suspect's long flght ends in Modesto." Modesto Bee, March 21: 1.Stern, Amelia. 2025. 'No remorse': Taunton woman devastated by ruling that could free her brother's killer. April 25. Accessed May 04, 2025. https://www.tauntongazette.com/story/news/courts/2025/04/25/taunton-ma-brockton-anthony-loconte-murder-victim-sjc-robert-morganti-parole/83271252007/.Stay in the know - wondery.fm/morbid-wondery.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Karen Read Appealed the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Ruling that stated there was no verdict and therefore no double jeopardy. The defense's arguments for dismissal is based on the lack of "manifest necessity" for a mistrial. A look at the United States v. Tribio Lugo case and its relevance to Karen Read's situation might be an open door to get counts 1 and 3 dismissed. With so much happening in this complex case, it's hard to keep up. I'll guide you through the legal maze and explain what it all means for Karen Read's future.Watch the full coverage: https://youtube.com/live/hQjZkiAIVkcRESOURCESSJC Ruling - https://youtube.com/live/rbYylRyjISkHalted Hearing - https://youtube.com/live/M5p-UrfGKDYCase Law from First District Ruling - https://casetext.com/case/us-v-toribio-lugoBreakdown of Count 2 and Lesser Included - https://youtu.be/zRH39FlfYJIThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

The Supreme Judicial Court denied Karen Read's motion regarding dismissing counts 1 and 3. Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator, is undergoing disciplinary hearings. These hearings are currently ongoing and Day 3 will continue in March.The Re-trial is scheduled for April 1st. The defense is requesting the court to order the prosecution to produce all video evidence and associated metadata in a forensically sound manner. We are still waiting for the defense to file their Motion to Dismiss and the deadline is Feb 20th.Watch the full coverage: https://youtube.com/live/rbYylRyjISkThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

The GOP lawmakers said their omnibus legislation would change the Supreme Judicial Court's 2017 Lunn decision, by allowing state courts and law enforcement to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers in the case of "violent offenders."

Steve and Jenn are joined by State House News Service reporter Alison Kuznitz to break down the drama on Beacon Hill over an audit of the Legislature and calls for transparency. Plus, an exclusive look at the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling on Milton and the MBTA Communities Act.

It's been nearly a year since authorities shut down a brothel ring operating in Cambridge and Watertown. We ask listeners whether they think the names of the Johns should be released by the Supreme Judicial Court. MIT Professors Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson discuss their Nobel prize-winning research on global inequality and AI in the workforce.Charlie Sennott of the GroundTruth Project discusses Biden authorizing Ukraine's use of long-range missiles for strikes inside Russia, as Russia launches a major attack on Ukraine's power system.State auditor Diana DiZoglio discusses state legislators moving to have an outside firm conduct the audit that voters approved DiZoglio's office to do.For our text prompt of the day: should Massachusetts follow New York in ditching broker fees, and would that be enough to ease the pain for renters here?Khalil Gibran Muhammad discusses the intersection of academics, race, and politics. He'll discuss how white nationalism partly fueled Trump's election win and threats to the education system under another Trump presidency. Ahead of Black Friday, we ended the show to ask listeners about pros and pitfalls of online returns.

Control Body Odor ANYWHERE with @lumedeodorant and get 15% off with promo code EDBQB at https://LumeDeodorant.com! #lumepod #adSarah Boone wants a new trial. Karen Read's case was heard by the Supreme Judicial Court. Bryan Kohberger had a hearing to go over the Death Penalty Motions. The government is not having it with Tom Girardi. The estate of the show's creator, ER, sued Warner Brothers. There are updates with the Peanut the Squirrel situation. The MA Supreme Judicial Court changed the law of the land that has been standing since the 1960s.RESOURCESThe Viall Files - https://youtu.be/QgYm_KEP1oESo Bad It's Good with Ryan Bailey - https://youtu.be/4cOBcJnL48oThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacyChartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

Karen Read, charged twice in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has opened up about her ongoing legal battle, strained personal life, and unyielding quest for justice in an interview with *Vanity Fair*. Speaking to reporter Julie Miller, who was granted unrestricted access, Read shared insights into her life since O'Keefe's death and the impact of her highly publicized case. In what Vanity Fair described as a series of candid, in-home interviews, Read, 44, invited Miller to her former Mansfield residence in August. Read opened up about her relationship with O'Keefe, her pending retrial, and the toll her legal battles have taken. Miller reported that Read, who has been staying with family and friends, chose her previous home as the setting for the interviews. She was joined by a volunteer security guard, described by Miller as someone “who looks like John Cena and has a license to carry.” Facing an uncertain future, Read has prepared for the possibility of another arrest, keeping a Ziploc “go bag” on hand with essentials: Advil, melatonin, a toothbrush and toothpaste, a hairbrush, lipstick, and foundation, as well as her lawyer's phone number. “I'm not backing down now,” Read told Vanity Fair, despite the looming prospect of a life sentence if convicted. According to Read, she won't entertain the idea of a plea deal, even under the risk of severe penalties. “As scary as a potential conviction is, I will go to jail for something I didn't do before I plea out. I will never give them that win.” Read, a former Fidelity Investments analyst and Bentley University finance professor, has assembled a team of criminal defense attorneys, but the cost of her legal defense has been steep. She has sold her home to offset expenses and is now living off the remains of her 401(k), accruing more than $5 million in legal fees. “If I can get the entire truth of this case out in the public forum, that, to me, is priceless,” she said. At the core of her defense are allegations that O'Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, was the victim of a violent cover-up involving other Boston police officers. Prosecutors argue that Read deliberately ran him over in her SUV after an evening out on January 29, 2022, a claim her defense refutes, asserting that O'Keefe was beaten by others. In July, her case resulted in a mistrial, and her legal team has appealed to Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two of the charges ahead of a scheduled retrial in January. Reflecting on her relationship with O'Keefe, Read described challenges in their dynamic, with disagreements over his role as a disciplinarian for his niece and nephew, who lived with him. According to Read, O'Keefe struggled to mourn his late sister, the children's mother, and remained hesitant about seeking therapy. “I think that's part of his stock,” Read told Vanity Fair, “this Irish Catholic, south-of-Boston, rub-some-dirt-on-it, drink-through-your-problems mindset.” In detailing the night of O'Keefe's death, Read recalled attending a gathering at the Waterfall Bar & Grille in Canton, after which she and O'Keefe joined others at an afterparty. Feeling uneasy upon arrival, she sent O'Keefe inside, only to leave after he didn't return. She admitted to a fleeting thought that he might be “screwing around,” explaining, “I didn't think he was physically incapacitated.” She left him multiple voicemails before heading home. Prosecutors, who highlight Read's flirty exchanges with O'Keefe's acquaintance Brian Higgins, argue that these interactions hint at motives for the crime. In response, Read openly admitted to seeking validation from Higgins. “I knew Higgins found me attractive,” she said, “It helped me emotionally validate myself, which is embarrassing to admit.” Amid the stress of her case, Read has remained steadfast about her innocence. Addressing rumors that she implicated herself in texts, she explained to Vanity Fair that she and her attorney, David Yannetti, only began communicating after police seized her phone. She said she initially told her parents, “If I did anything in any way, I'll pay my dues. That's how this should work. I want to know the truth — good, bad, ugly.” Read's retrial is set to bring her story back into the public eye, with high stakes and public scrutiny on both her legal and personal lives. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Karen Read, charged twice in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has opened up about her ongoing legal battle, strained personal life, and unyielding quest for justice in an interview with *Vanity Fair*. Speaking to reporter Julie Miller, who was granted unrestricted access, Read shared insights into her life since O'Keefe's death and the impact of her highly publicized case. In what Vanity Fair described as a series of candid, in-home interviews, Read, 44, invited Miller to her former Mansfield residence in August. Read opened up about her relationship with O'Keefe, her pending retrial, and the toll her legal battles have taken. Miller reported that Read, who has been staying with family and friends, chose her previous home as the setting for the interviews. She was joined by a volunteer security guard, described by Miller as someone “who looks like John Cena and has a license to carry.” Facing an uncertain future, Read has prepared for the possibility of another arrest, keeping a Ziploc “go bag” on hand with essentials: Advil, melatonin, a toothbrush and toothpaste, a hairbrush, lipstick, and foundation, as well as her lawyer's phone number. “I'm not backing down now,” Read told Vanity Fair, despite the looming prospect of a life sentence if convicted. According to Read, she won't entertain the idea of a plea deal, even under the risk of severe penalties. “As scary as a potential conviction is, I will go to jail for something I didn't do before I plea out. I will never give them that win.” Read, a former Fidelity Investments analyst and Bentley University finance professor, has assembled a team of criminal defense attorneys, but the cost of her legal defense has been steep. She has sold her home to offset expenses and is now living off the remains of her 401(k), accruing more than $5 million in legal fees. “If I can get the entire truth of this case out in the public forum, that, to me, is priceless,” she said. At the core of her defense are allegations that O'Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, was the victim of a violent cover-up involving other Boston police officers. Prosecutors argue that Read deliberately ran him over in her SUV after an evening out on January 29, 2022, a claim her defense refutes, asserting that O'Keefe was beaten by others. In July, her case resulted in a mistrial, and her legal team has appealed to Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two of the charges ahead of a scheduled retrial in January. Reflecting on her relationship with O'Keefe, Read described challenges in their dynamic, with disagreements over his role as a disciplinarian for his niece and nephew, who lived with him. According to Read, O'Keefe struggled to mourn his late sister, the children's mother, and remained hesitant about seeking therapy. “I think that's part of his stock,” Read told Vanity Fair, “this Irish Catholic, south-of-Boston, rub-some-dirt-on-it, drink-through-your-problems mindset.” In detailing the night of O'Keefe's death, Read recalled attending a gathering at the Waterfall Bar & Grille in Canton, after which she and O'Keefe joined others at an afterparty. Feeling uneasy upon arrival, she sent O'Keefe inside, only to leave after he didn't return. She admitted to a fleeting thought that he might be “screwing around,” explaining, “I didn't think he was physically incapacitated.” She left him multiple voicemails before heading home. Prosecutors, who highlight Read's flirty exchanges with O'Keefe's acquaintance Brian Higgins, argue that these interactions hint at motives for the crime. In response, Read openly admitted to seeking validation from Higgins. “I knew Higgins found me attractive,” she said, “It helped me emotionally validate myself, which is embarrassing to admit.” Amid the stress of her case, Read has remained steadfast about her innocence. Addressing rumors that she implicated herself in texts, she explained to Vanity Fair that she and her attorney, David Yannetti, only began communicating after police seized her phone. She said she initially told her parents, “If I did anything in any way, I'll pay my dues. That's how this should work. I want to know the truth — good, bad, ugly.” Read's retrial is set to bring her story back into the public eye, with high stakes and public scrutiny on both her legal and personal lives. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Karen Read, charged twice in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, has opened up about her ongoing legal battle, strained personal life, and unyielding quest for justice in an interview with *Vanity Fair*. Speaking to reporter Julie Miller, who was granted unrestricted access, Read shared insights into her life since O'Keefe's death and the impact of her highly publicized case. In what Vanity Fair described as a series of candid, in-home interviews, Read, 44, invited Miller to her former Mansfield residence in August. Read opened up about her relationship with O'Keefe, her pending retrial, and the toll her legal battles have taken. Miller reported that Read, who has been staying with family and friends, chose her previous home as the setting for the interviews. She was joined by a volunteer security guard, described by Miller as someone “who looks like John Cena and has a license to carry.” Facing an uncertain future, Read has prepared for the possibility of another arrest, keeping a Ziploc “go bag” on hand with essentials: Advil, melatonin, a toothbrush and toothpaste, a hairbrush, lipstick, and foundation, as well as her lawyer's phone number. “I'm not backing down now,” Read told Vanity Fair, despite the looming prospect of a life sentence if convicted. According to Read, she won't entertain the idea of a plea deal, even under the risk of severe penalties. “As scary as a potential conviction is, I will go to jail for something I didn't do before I plea out. I will never give them that win.” Read, a former Fidelity Investments analyst and Bentley University finance professor, has assembled a team of criminal defense attorneys, but the cost of her legal defense has been steep. She has sold her home to offset expenses and is now living off the remains of her 401(k), accruing more than $5 million in legal fees. “If I can get the entire truth of this case out in the public forum, that, to me, is priceless,” she said. At the core of her defense are allegations that O'Keefe, her boyfriend of two years, was the victim of a violent cover-up involving other Boston police officers. Prosecutors argue that Read deliberately ran him over in her SUV after an evening out on January 29, 2022, a claim her defense refutes, asserting that O'Keefe was beaten by others. In July, her case resulted in a mistrial, and her legal team has appealed to Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss two of the charges ahead of a scheduled retrial in January. Reflecting on her relationship with O'Keefe, Read described challenges in their dynamic, with disagreements over his role as a disciplinarian for his niece and nephew, who lived with him. According to Read, O'Keefe struggled to mourn his late sister, the children's mother, and remained hesitant about seeking therapy. “I think that's part of his stock,” Read told Vanity Fair, “this Irish Catholic, south-of-Boston, rub-some-dirt-on-it, drink-through-your-problems mindset.” In detailing the night of O'Keefe's death, Read recalled attending a gathering at the Waterfall Bar & Grille in Canton, after which she and O'Keefe joined others at an afterparty. Feeling uneasy upon arrival, she sent O'Keefe inside, only to leave after he didn't return. She admitted to a fleeting thought that he might be “screwing around,” explaining, “I didn't think he was physically incapacitated.” She left him multiple voicemails before heading home. Prosecutors, who highlight Read's flirty exchanges with O'Keefe's acquaintance Brian Higgins, argue that these interactions hint at motives for the crime. In response, Read openly admitted to seeking validation from Higgins. “I knew Higgins found me attractive,” she said, “It helped me emotionally validate myself, which is embarrassing to admit.” Amid the stress of her case, Read has remained steadfast about her innocence. Addressing rumors that she implicated herself in texts, she explained to Vanity Fair that she and her attorney, David Yannetti, only began communicating after police seized her phone. She said she initially told her parents, “If I did anything in any way, I'll pay my dues. That's how this should work. I want to know the truth — good, bad, ugly.” Read's retrial is set to bring her story back into the public eye, with high stakes and public scrutiny on both her legal and personal lives. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The American Civil Liberties Union is supporting Karen Read and her appeal to the Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, arguing that the judge presiding over the case declared a mistrial too quickly and failed to take the appropriate steps to ensure she's protected against double jeopardy. Dan discussed.Ask Alexa to play WBZ NewsRadio on #iHeartRadio and listen to NightSide with Dan Rea Weeknights From 8PM-12AM!

Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts have submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts in support of Karen Read's ongoing legal battle. Read, a former adjunct professor from Mansfield, is appealing to have two charges dismissed in her murder case. The ACLU's brief was accepted by the court but did not immediately reveal their stance or include a summary of their position. Karen Read faces accusations related to the death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe, who prosecutors claim was struck by Read's SUV and left to die in the snow following a night out in Canton. Read, however, maintains her innocence, contending that O'Keefe was assaulted inside the house of another Boston officer, Brian Albert, before being left outside. Her first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury, comprising six men and six women, reached a deadlock. Some jurors have since come forward, stating they had reached a consensus to acquit her of the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Following the mistrial, Read's defense sought to have these two charges dismissed. Judge Beverly Cannone denied this motion, leading to the appeal now before the SJC. Read's legal team contends that the jury's alleged agreement should constitute an acquittal on these counts and argues that protections against double jeopardy should prevent a retrial on the charges. “The court relied solely upon the lack of an ‘open and public verdict affirmed in open court,'” the defense wrote, referencing Judge Cannone's decision. “This reasoning is rooted in a formalism that has been consistently rejected by the United States Supreme Court and this Court in a string of precedents spanning more than one hundred years.” The defense also believes that the Supreme Judicial Court should allow a post-trial inquiry into the jury's statements, which they argue constitutes an “overt factor” that should prompt further investigation. Additionally, they are questioning Judge Cannone's decision to declare a mistrial when she did, given the alleged consensus from the jurors. District Attorney Michael Morrissey, responding to the appeal, has appointed Attorney Hank Brennan as special prosecutor for Read's case. Brennan, known for his work in other high-profile cases, will lead the prosecution when Read's second trial, currently scheduled for January 27, begins. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office stated that their response to Read's appeal will be submitted by the court's deadline, with Read's attorneys expected to reply shortly after. Should the  Supreme Judicial Court side with Read's defense and dismiss the charges, it would mark a significant development in a case that has drawn extensive public and media attention. If the charges are upheld, Read faces up to life in prison for second-degree murder, as well as significant penalties on charges of manslaughter while operating under the influence and leaving the scene of a personal injury and death. Throughout the trial, prosecutors faced setbacks, including complications with surveillance footage and misconduct among investigators, which has contributed to the intense scrutiny of the case. The defense has also raised these issues in their appeal, seeking to underscore what they argue are critical flaws in the prosecution's case. With oral arguments scheduled to take place before the SJC, Read and her legal team are preparing for a pivotal hearing that could determine the course of the upcoming trial. For now, the court's decision will hinge on whether the defense's arguments regarding jury consensus, double jeopardy, and procedural conduct are persuasive enough to merit the dismissal of charges or, at the very least, a re-evaluation of the trial's conduct. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts have submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts in support of Karen Read's ongoing legal battle. Read, a former adjunct professor from Mansfield, is appealing to have two charges dismissed in her murder case. The ACLU's brief was accepted by the court but did not immediately reveal their stance or include a summary of their position. Karen Read faces accusations related to the death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe, who prosecutors claim was struck by Read's SUV and left to die in the snow following a night out in Canton. Read, however, maintains her innocence, contending that O'Keefe was assaulted inside the house of another Boston officer, Brian Albert, before being left outside. Her first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury, comprising six men and six women, reached a deadlock. Some jurors have since come forward, stating they had reached a consensus to acquit her of the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Following the mistrial, Read's defense sought to have these two charges dismissed. Judge Beverly Cannone denied this motion, leading to the appeal now before the SJC. Read's legal team contends that the jury's alleged agreement should constitute an acquittal on these counts and argues that protections against double jeopardy should prevent a retrial on the charges. “The court relied solely upon the lack of an ‘open and public verdict affirmed in open court,'” the defense wrote, referencing Judge Cannone's decision. “This reasoning is rooted in a formalism that has been consistently rejected by the United States Supreme Court and this Court in a string of precedents spanning more than one hundred years.” The defense also believes that the Supreme Judicial Court should allow a post-trial inquiry into the jury's statements, which they argue constitutes an “overt factor” that should prompt further investigation. Additionally, they are questioning Judge Cannone's decision to declare a mistrial when she did, given the alleged consensus from the jurors. District Attorney Michael Morrissey, responding to the appeal, has appointed Attorney Hank Brennan as special prosecutor for Read's case. Brennan, known for his work in other high-profile cases, will lead the prosecution when Read's second trial, currently scheduled for January 27, begins. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office stated that their response to Read's appeal will be submitted by the court's deadline, with Read's attorneys expected to reply shortly after. Should the  Supreme Judicial Court side with Read's defense and dismiss the charges, it would mark a significant development in a case that has drawn extensive public and media attention. If the charges are upheld, Read faces up to life in prison for second-degree murder, as well as significant penalties on charges of manslaughter while operating under the influence and leaving the scene of a personal injury and death. Throughout the trial, prosecutors faced setbacks, including complications with surveillance footage and misconduct among investigators, which has contributed to the intense scrutiny of the case. The defense has also raised these issues in their appeal, seeking to underscore what they argue are critical flaws in the prosecution's case. With oral arguments scheduled to take place before the SJC, Read and her legal team are preparing for a pivotal hearing that could determine the course of the upcoming trial. For now, the court's decision will hinge on whether the defense's arguments regarding jury consensus, double jeopardy, and procedural conduct are persuasive enough to merit the dismissal of charges or, at the very least, a re-evaluation of the trial's conduct. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts have submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts in support of Karen Read's ongoing legal battle. Read, a former adjunct professor from Mansfield, is appealing to have two charges dismissed in her murder case. The ACLU's brief was accepted by the court but did not immediately reveal their stance or include a summary of their position. Karen Read faces accusations related to the death of Boston police officer John O'Keefe, who prosecutors claim was struck by Read's SUV and left to die in the snow following a night out in Canton. Read, however, maintains her innocence, contending that O'Keefe was assaulted inside the house of another Boston officer, Brian Albert, before being left outside. Her first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury, comprising six men and six women, reached a deadlock. Some jurors have since come forward, stating they had reached a consensus to acquit her of the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Following the mistrial, Read's defense sought to have these two charges dismissed. Judge Beverly Cannone denied this motion, leading to the appeal now before the SJC. Read's legal team contends that the jury's alleged agreement should constitute an acquittal on these counts and argues that protections against double jeopardy should prevent a retrial on the charges. “The court relied solely upon the lack of an ‘open and public verdict affirmed in open court,'” the defense wrote, referencing Judge Cannone's decision. “This reasoning is rooted in a formalism that has been consistently rejected by the United States Supreme Court and this Court in a string of precedents spanning more than one hundred years.” The defense also believes that the Supreme Judicial Court should allow a post-trial inquiry into the jury's statements, which they argue constitutes an “overt factor” that should prompt further investigation. Additionally, they are questioning Judge Cannone's decision to declare a mistrial when she did, given the alleged consensus from the jurors. District Attorney Michael Morrissey, responding to the appeal, has appointed Attorney Hank Brennan as special prosecutor for Read's case. Brennan, known for his work in other high-profile cases, will lead the prosecution when Read's second trial, currently scheduled for January 27, begins. The Norfolk District Attorney's Office stated that their response to Read's appeal will be submitted by the court's deadline, with Read's attorneys expected to reply shortly after. Should the  Supreme Judicial Court side with Read's defense and dismiss the charges, it would mark a significant development in a case that has drawn extensive public and media attention. If the charges are upheld, Read faces up to life in prison for second-degree murder, as well as significant penalties on charges of manslaughter while operating under the influence and leaving the scene of a personal injury and death. Throughout the trial, prosecutors faced setbacks, including complications with surveillance footage and misconduct among investigators, which has contributed to the intense scrutiny of the case. The defense has also raised these issues in their appeal, seeking to underscore what they argue are critical flaws in the prosecution's case. With oral arguments scheduled to take place before the SJC, Read and her legal team are preparing for a pivotal hearing that could determine the course of the upcoming trial. For now, the court's decision will hinge on whether the defense's arguments regarding jury consensus, double jeopardy, and procedural conduct are persuasive enough to merit the dismissal of charges or, at the very least, a re-evaluation of the trial's conduct. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Use code EmilyBakerClass at https://www.GreenChef.com/emilybaker50 to get 50% off your first box, plus 20% off your next two months!Control Body Odor ANYWHERE with @lumedeodorant and get 15% off with promo code LAWNERD at https://LumeDeodorant.com! #lumepod #adGo to https://shopify.com/lawnerd now to grow your business – no matter what stage you're in.Karen Read's attorneys filed their Opening Briefs to the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts. The prosecution's response is due by October 16th and then Read will have a chance to reply by October 25th. Oral Arguments will most likely be at the end of November 2024 to hopefully get a decision by December 2024. There is a high likelihood that the defense will ask for the retrial to be scheduled further out.The Baby Reindeer Civil Lawsuit has a trial date set for May 2025. Netflix has filed a request for Dismissal and Anti-SLAPP. Netflix provided a Declaration from Richard Gadd including many exhibits proving Fiona Harvey sent Richard Gadd harassing emails, text messages, voice mails, and also accusations of stalking a Member of Parliaments' wife.These exhibits show that Harvey did do the things detailed in the mini series but was not a "beat by beat" recount of what happened. The Judge made a ruling by denying the Anti-SLAPP and dismissed some of the causes of action from Fiona's case; only leaving the Defamation and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. The line in the Netflix show that said, “this is a true story” was false and can imply malice because it can lead the viewer to believe that all of the things that happened in the series were true when that is not the case. It is likely that the case will go to mediation and settle out of court.Netflix is being sued for defamation by John Wilson for the documentary: Operation Varsity Blues - The College Admissions Scandal. John Wilson had almost all of his convictions overturned on appeal and that was not included in the documentary. Netflix lost the motion to dismiss and will be moving forward with discovery.RESOURCESKaren Read - Affidavit of Juror Doe - https://www.youtube.com/live/3VgRq1V7Wb8?t=18884s The $170 Million Baby Reindeer Lawsuit - https://youtu.be/WJrHwK_48d4Buster Murdaugh Sues Netflix - https://youtu.be/Zan5PlYEeJAThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacyChartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to review Karen Read's murder case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. Read, 44, is accused of striking O'Keefe with her SUV on the night of January 29, 2022, and leaving him outside to die in a snowstorm after a night of drinking. Read has consistently denied the allegations, with her defense arguing that O'Keefe was assaulted at a home in Canton, Massachusetts, before being left outside. Supreme Judicial Court Justice Elizabeth Dewar issued a court filing stating, “I hereby reserve and report this case, without decision, for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth. The parties shall prepare and file in the full court a comprehensive statement of agreed facts necessary to resolve the issues raised by the petition.” This decision sets the stage for oral arguments in November, with briefs due in September and October. This decision follows an appeal filed by Read's attorney seeking to overturn a ruling by Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone, who denied a motion to dismiss two of the three charges against Read—second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a deadly crash. The appeal focuses on testimony from jurors who claimed they were prepared to acquit Read of these charges during her first trial, which ended in a mistrial after the jury declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked. "After careful consideration, this court concludes that because the defendant was not acquitted on any of the charges and defense counsel consented to the court's declaration of a mistrial, double jeopardy is not implicated by retrial of the defendant," Judge Cannone wrote in her decision. The defense argued that retrying Read would violate double jeopardy protections, given the jury's stance during deliberations. Read's legal team is preparing to submit a principal brief on the case by September 25, with prosecutors required to file their response by October 16. Read's attorneys will have until October 25 to reply to the prosecution's brief, with oral arguments expected to take place in November. The case has garnered significant public attention due to conflicting narratives surrounding O'Keefe's death. Prosecutors allege that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle outside the Canton home of fellow Boston Police Officer Brian Albert, leaving him to die in the cold. The defense, however, contends that O'Keefe was dragged outside after being beaten in the basement and bitten by a dog. The mistrial in Read's first trial occurred on July 1, when the jury of six women and six men informed the court that they were deadlocked. The defense immediately requested the dismissal of the charges, citing reports from several jurors who said they were prepared to acquit Read on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene. Karen Read's future now hinges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision, with many eagerly awaiting the court's ruling on her appeal. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Rebecca Tushnet, the Frank Stanton Professor of the First Amendment at Harvard Law, joins Radio Boston to discuss the engagement ring case before the Supreme Judicial Court.

Use code EmilyBakerClass at https://www.GreenChef.com/EmilyBakerClass to get 50% off, plus 50 free ClassPass credits!Justin Timberlake pleaded guilty to a traffic infraction driving while ability impaired to resolve his DWI case in the Hamptons. The public safety announcement in front of the Sag Harbor Police Department was part of the plea deal that knocked down the misdemeanor charge he was facing to a non-criminal traffic violation.Karen Read filed an appeal to motion to dismiss counts one and three to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. The defense argues that the jury acquitted Karen of charges one and three even though they didn't mark it on the jury forms. They relitigate that retrying her for counts one and three violates double jeopardy. They are asking for oral arguments.On Thursday, September 12th, 2024, Harvey Weinstein was indicted again in New York. According to Law360 reporting, the indictment will remain sealed until Weinstein is arraigned, which has yet to happen due to his deteriorating health. According to Weinstein's representative he was rushed to the hospital on Sunday, September 8th, 2024, for emergency open heart surgery.In his status conference in Illinois, Girardi wasn't present and prosecutors asked to continue to the pre-trial conferences until December 18th, 2024. They indicated that they may drop the charges against Girardi after his sentencing on December 6th, 2024 in Los Angeles.The Bryan Kohberger trial moves to Ada County's Fourth District located in Boise and gets appointed a new judge, Judge Steven Hippler. This means that trial dates and other deadlines are now subject to change.In the infamous viral clip, Redden is accused of leaping over the bench and attacking a Las Vegas Judge Holthus. He was charged with Attempted Murder of a victim 60 years of age or older. On the second day, after hearing the testimony of Judge Holthus and her law clerk, Redden pleaded Guilty but Mentally Ill. He has a sentencing Hearing on November 7th.This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacyChartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

The Honorable Justice Elspeth B Cypher (Retired) left her appointment on the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts to become the most-interviewed yet least-heard Heterodorx guest. Cypher discusses the Biden administrations attempts to replace sex with gender in Title IX, and the efforts of 20+ states and Moms for Liberty to push back. We also cover women in Afghanistan, the Chevron Doctrine, federal money held over foster care, Tickle vs. Giggle, Tennessee vs Cardona, stays, staying stays, appeals, districts, the MA Supreme Court-to-TERF pipeline, faith in the judicial system, why pi does not equal 3 in Indiana, making unpopular decisions as a judge, retroactively transing Ruth “Theyder” Ginsburg, biological height, masculinity, fighting oppression with more oppression, flexibility vs functionality of law, hijacking compassion, and boobs. Cori gives Elspeth his Trans Blessing but doesn't have enough testosterone to give Nina his Andro-Blessing, proving once again there is no justice.  Links: The Alabama case Cori was talking about: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202211707.2.pdf scold's bridle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scold%27s_bridle WoLF: https://womensliberationfront.org/ Chevron Doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natural_Resources_Defense_Council,_Inc. https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-chevron-doctrine-what-you-need-know Tickle vs. Giggle (Australia): https://quillette.com/2024/08/27/tickle-vs-giggle/ TN vs Cardona: https://adfmedia.org/case/state-tennessee-v-cardona Fight the Bears: https://indamidle.substack.com/p/fight-the-bears Email Judge TERF: elspeth@womensliberationfront.org --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/heterodorx/support