Michael Proctor communications from Karen Read investigation shared in murder cases

Defense lawyers for five defendants whose cases were investigated at least in part by former Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor are getting their hands on some of the texts he sent during his investigation into Karen Read.

Federal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s office for Massachusetts agreed to turn over the communications, which were unearthed from an extraction of Proctor’s personal iCloud, to defense lawyers whose cases were investigated by the former trooper. The lawyers will get the same 168 pages of messages that were turned over to the lawyers in the Karen Read case.

That means at least five defendants will now have the opportunity to go through some of Proctor’s communications to determine if there is evidence that could help their defense. The impacted cases are of defendants Myles King, Shawn Johnson, Jovani Delossantos, Brian Walshe and Bianca Chionchio. All but Chionchio are charged with murder.

But Norfolk County prosecutors have not yet gone through the remaining materials disclosed by the federal government in the Read case for information beneficial to those cases. That’s because they say they are barred from doing so by a federal court order.

Federal court proceedings

The issue of the federal materials arose in July, when prosecutors filed notice that they were required to return or destroy the materials 30 days after the conclusion of the Read case, which ended with her acquittal on June 18.

The U.S. Attorney’s office got U.S. District Judge Denise Casper to extend her order requiring the return or destruction of the material by 30 days. But that extension is up Aug. 18.

First Assistant Norfolk District Attorney Lisa Beatty said Tuesday that she believes a recent motion filed by the district attorney’s office in federal court tolls, or essentially pauses, Casper’s order.

Superior Court Judge Peter Krupp was not entirely convinced.

“If Judge Casper doesn’t agree with your tolling idea … that’s a real problem, right?” he said. “Because that means things expire on Monday and have to be destroyed or returned on Monday under her order.”

Prosecutors are essentially in a catch-22. They are constitutionally obligated to review any materials in their possession, custody or control for evidence that could benefit a defendant and turn it over.

But they say the federal court order bars them from doing so in any case other than Read’s. As a result, the district attorney’s office has moved to intervene in the federal court case.

They have asked for Casper to modify her order to allow the district attorney’s office or an outside lawyer to review the materials, to allow the district attorney’s office to possess the materials for six months and to pause the destruction order until the issues are resolved.

Further complicating the issue is that federal prosecutors asked Casper to deny the district attorney’s office the ability to intervene.

Still, Beatty said it was her view that the government was not trying to prevent local prosecutors from complying with either a state or federal order.

Krupp set an additional hearing on the issue for 2 p.m. on Thursday.

Lawyers’ arguments

While getting those pages of communications represents progress for the lawyers, they pushed prosecutors to go through everything else they have.

It’s not clear what other materials the district attorney’s office received from the federal government, but prosecutors have said they are barred from going through it outside the context of the Read case.

Larry Tipton, a lawyer for Walshe, countered that prosecutors must go through the material to meet their constitutional obligations. The federal court order, a copy of which was provided to him, did not bar them from doing so, he claimed.

“The commonwealth has failed to inform this court or any court what the exact basis is that they’re relying on that says they can’t review the documents in their possession and custody,” he said.

In his argument, Tipton highlighted that a prosecutor assigned to both the Read and Walshe cases found information she felt was beneficial to a defendant in an unrelated case during her review of the materials.

The prosecutor, Laura McLaughlin, subsequently informed either another prosecutor or a defense lawyer about the information. Still, McLaughin was barred from actually turning over the information.

Tipton suggested McLaughlin should be obligated to do the same in at least the Walshe case.

But Tracey Cusick, another prosecutor in the Walshe case, said it was the district attorney’s position that doing so would violate the federal protective order.

Krupp didn’t take any action on Tuesday but warned prosecutors that they could face sanctions if they didn’t comply with their obligations.

“There would be consequences on you and your prosecution of these cases if you did not comply with your state constitutional requirements or your Rule 14 requirements with respect to the material that’s in your possession and custody,” he said.

Rosemary Scapicchio, who represents both King and Johnson, said she would be moving to dismiss both cases if prosecutors were ordered to destroy the materials and they weren’t turned over.

Both men “cannot get a fair trial without the opportunity to review and analyze the information that’s been in possession of Commonwealth since February of 2024,” she said.

Outside the courthouse, Scapicchio said if Casper doesn’t extend her order, Krupp will be forced to either order prosecutors to go through the materials or dismiss the cases.

Beatty pledged to continue working to ensure the district attorney’s office met its obligations.

“These are important issues for the defendants. These are important issues to the Commonwealth, to the victims and to our whole process,” she said. “And this office is committed to and is continuing to work through these issues.”