Paula Barrows

In the March 12th hearing, David Yannetti spoke on his interpretation of D.A. Morrissey's video statement.

In the March 12th hearing, David Yannetti spoke on his interpretation of D.A. Morrissey's video statement.

Yannetti and Jackson were of the opinion that the public release of the nearly six-minute video violated their client's right to a fair trial, and that D.A. Morrissey's office failed to disclose information regarding the additional federal probe into the communication between Turtle Boy and Karen Reed. For them, these actions were oversights worthy of disqualification.

Yannetti and Jackson were of the opinion that the public release of the nearly six-minute video violated their client's right to a fair trial, and that D.A. Morrissey's office failed to disclose information regarding the additional federal probe into the communication between Turtle Boy and Karen Reed. For them, these actions were oversights worthy of disqualification.

Making matters more complicated, Jackson and Iannetti also claimed the U.S. Attorney's Office, in the wake of these perceived missteps, launched a federal investigation into the district attorney's office that proffered further grounds to remove him from the case.

Making matters more complicated, Jackson and Iannetti also claimed the U.S. Attorney's Office, in the wake of these perceived missteps, launched a federal investigation into the district attorney's office that proffered further grounds to remove him from the case.

But the validity of said investigation remains a bit of a mystery. A spokesperson from the U.S. Attorney's Office issued a statement in response to Jackson and Iannetti's claims, reading, At no time has the U.S. Attorney's Office named any person or entity as a target of an investigation to anyone. the Norfolk District Attorney's Office doubled down, issuing a statement of their own.

But the validity of said investigation remains a bit of a mystery. A spokesperson from the U.S. Attorney's Office issued a statement in response to Jackson and Iannetti's claims, reading, At no time has the U.S. Attorney's Office named any person or entity as a target of an investigation to anyone. the Norfolk District Attorney's Office doubled down, issuing a statement of their own.

They claimed that neither D.A. Morrissey nor anyone else in their office had ever been a target of a federal investigation and that Yannetti and his team misrepresented that detail completely. When given the opportunity to rebuttal, Prosecutor Lally presented an argument that skirted any mention of D.A.

They claimed that neither D.A. Morrissey nor anyone else in their office had ever been a target of a federal investigation and that Yannetti and his team misrepresented that detail completely. When given the opportunity to rebuttal, Prosecutor Lally presented an argument that skirted any mention of D.A.

Morrissey, but argued that Iannetti and his team were kept well aware of the probe into the relationship between Turtle Boy and Karen.

Morrissey, but argued that Iannetti and his team were kept well aware of the probe into the relationship between Turtle Boy and Karen.

Tensions were clearly mounting between the defense and prosecution. It appeared that the more information revealed, the less clear this case was becoming. Unlike most investigations, more evidence seemed to only make everything even more complicated.

Tensions were clearly mounting between the defense and prosecution. It appeared that the more information revealed, the less clear this case was becoming. Unlike most investigations, more evidence seemed to only make everything even more complicated.

With these new arguments entered, the hearing to dismiss the case and throw D.A. Morrissey out of it adjourned without a firm decision by Judge Cannone on whether or not to dismiss Karen's case completely or disqualify District Attorney Morrissey. As the legitimacy of the investigation into D.A.

With these new arguments entered, the hearing to dismiss the case and throw D.A. Morrissey out of it adjourned without a firm decision by Judge Cannone on whether or not to dismiss Karen's case completely or disqualify District Attorney Morrissey. As the legitimacy of the investigation into D.A.

Morrissey became subject of debate, just one day after the motions to dismiss were entered, another investigation into a key player was confirmed. On March 13th, the Massachusetts State Police confirmed that Trooper Michael Proctor, lead investigator in the death of John O'Keefe, had become subject of an internal investigation for a potential violation of the department's policies.

Morrissey became subject of debate, just one day after the motions to dismiss were entered, another investigation into a key player was confirmed. On March 13th, the Massachusetts State Police confirmed that Trooper Michael Proctor, lead investigator in the death of John O'Keefe, had become subject of an internal investigation for a potential violation of the department's policies.

While the language of their statement was vague with regard to what prompted the investigation, onlookers and online sleuths felt strongly it just had to be in connection to Proctor's alleged missteps at the scene. The announcement of the investigation into Trooper Proctor emboldened the defense's theory that he had hid his personal ties to people involved in the case.

While the language of their statement was vague with regard to what prompted the investigation, onlookers and online sleuths felt strongly it just had to be in connection to Proctor's alleged missteps at the scene. The announcement of the investigation into Trooper Proctor emboldened the defense's theory that he had hid his personal ties to people involved in the case.