The emotionally charged trial of Karen Read, accused of running down her Boston Police Department boyfriend, John O’Keefe, ended unexpectedly with a declared mistrial. The case, which captivated public attention due to its confusing timeline and witness statements, ended abruptly when the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict.
Retired Massachusetts State Police Trooper and security expert Todd McGhee emerged as a pivotal voice in analyzing the trial’s implications. McGhee’s insights shed light on Massachusetts State Police regulations as he answers the question, “Where does the Massachusetts State Police go from here?”
Below is an edited and condensed version of the interview with host Anaridis Rodriguez. You can watch the in-depth conversation here.
ANARIDIS: As a former Massachusetts State Police trooper, what was it like to see the force under scrutiny like this?
TODD: Unfortunately, my former agency has been in the news from the Turnpike overtime scandal, the CDL licensing scandal, and of course, this scandal with Trooper (Michael) Proctor. So it was difficult to hear. The lack of professionalism, the misogynistic statements, there’s no room for that type of conduct and behavior, not to mention sharing that information with friends outside of your police unit. What happened in this particular case, that communication, is a violation of MSP rules and regulations. All state police business is to be held confidential.
ANARIDIS: In Massachusetts just a few years ago, soon after the murder of George Floyd, an act relative to (the) Justice, Equity, and Accountability in Law Enforcement was passed in the Commonwealth, officially ending qualified immunity. Is that the right response? Do we need more?
TODD: Regarding the aspect of qualified immunity, typically, qualified immunity is extended towards government officials that, in the performance of their duties they have some level of protection. Well, when you have misconduct over and over again, the question comes up, “Should they be protected with qualified immunity for a wrongdoing, misconduct, and corruption?” Here in Massachusetts, our Police Officer Standards and Training is a state entity that monitors and is the reporting agency for any police misconduct, and the Brady Bill is the actual list where those names appear. The Brady List is also responsible for tracking (elected) government officials, not just police officers, of any wrongdoing and misconduct. So I believe that the Legislature has made moves to try to bring a level of accountability, greater accountability, to government officials, whether they’re elected, or whether they’re sworn duty officers.
ANARIDIS: What do you think is the way forward? I know this is a very complicated question when you think about restorative justice and restoring the bond between communities of color, vulnerable communities, and police officers. What do you think it’s going to take?
TODD: On the part of the police officer, it’s gotta be transparency. It has to be working with your community leaders. It has to be that show of we are going to do better. We recognize our oath of office is to protect and serve, and to minimize that us against them mentality. To recognize who the good people are in the community, as well as identify(ing) the bad actors within the community, just like we want to identify the bad actors within law enforcement. So it’s a collective challenge.
Generation Rising airs Fridays at 7:30 p.m.
