Colin Albert — Cross/Voir Dire

MR. JACKSON: Thank you.

MR. JACKSON: Mr. Albert, who did you talk to in order to prepare for your testimony starting yesterday?

MR. JACKSON: Yes. Rephrase the question? You didn't understand my question?

MR. JACKSON: Who did you speak to in order to prepare for your testimony yesterday?

MR. JACKSON: Other than your lawyer, who did you speak to to prepare for your testimony yesterday?

MR. JACKSON: You didn't speak to your parents?

MR. JACKSON: You didn't speak to your mom, your dad?

MR. JACKSON: At any time before yesterday about your testimony or your statements?

MR. JACKSON: Did you discuss with your parents their testimony?

MR. JACKSON: So after they got off the witness stand, your dad didn't come home and say, here's how my day went?

MR. JACKSON: Your mom didn't come home and say, here's how my day went?

MR. JACKSON: The Albert family just ignored the fact that both of them testified in a court of law before a jury about the events of January 29th of 2022? Nothing was ever said?

MR. JACKSON: Did you talk to Mr. Lally at any point, at any point, before yesterday in preparation for your testimony?

MR. JACKSON: Correct.

MR. JACKSON: Tell me when.

MR. JACKSON: What did you talk about?

MR. JACKSON: Tell me what that means. What does it mean to prep for this?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Remember my first question, very first question this morning? I said, have you spoken to anybody in order to prepare for your testimony, and you said "no"?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So that's not true. You spoke with Mr. Lally.

MR. JACKSON: It's not an okay. It's "yes" or "no."

MR. JACKSON: Okay. You said that was about a month ago, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Tell me -- I'm sorry. I didn't mean to --

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Tell me what you and Mr. Lally discussed.

MR. JACKSON: Can you be more detailed?

MR. JACKSON: Did he go over the questions that he believed he would ask?

MR. JACKSON: Did you give him answers to those questions that you believed you would give in response to his questions?

MR. JACKSON: What questions did he tell you he was going to ask?

MR. JACKSON: What answers did you tell him you were going to give?

MR. JACKSON: That was just a month ago, right?

MR. JACKSON: Obviously, you've been thinking about this case quite a bit, haven't you?

MR. JACKSON: Over the last two and a half years?

MR. JACKSON: How long have you been thinking about this case?

MR. JACKSON: How about since you were at a house where an individual ended up dead on the lawn the next morning? Did that prompt you to start thinking about this case?

MR. JACKSON: Not so much, huh?

MR. JACKSON: Did you speak with -- when Mr. Lally spoke with you, who else was there?

MR. JACKSON: Steve Nelson?

MR. JACKSON: Who else?

MR. JACKSON: Tully, T-U-L-L-Y?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Anybody else?

MR. JACKSON: Was Sergeant Tully taking notes while you were having this conversation with Mr. Lally?

MR. JACKSON: Was Mr. Lally taking notes?

MR. JACKSON: Do you remember being told by either Sergeant Tully or Mr. Lally that your conversation was being recorded?

MR. JACKSON: How long was that meeting?

MR. JACKSON: Were you given any instructions either by Sergeant Tully or Mr. Lally about your preparation for your testimony?

MR. JACKSON: Sure. Did they give you any instructions about the preparation for your testimony, how they wanted you to answer questions? The tone and tenor of your testimony.

MR. JACKSON: How they wanted you to dress, for instance?

MR. JACKSON: Other than that time a month ago, have you spoken with Mr. Lally or anybody from the D.A.'s office since then before yesterday?

MR. JACKSON: Have you watched any coverage of this case online?

MR. JACKSON: No social media?

MR. JACKSON: No news coverage?

MR. JACKSON: Nightly news, Channel 25, Channel 5?

MR. JACKSON: National news?

MR. JACKSON: Blogs?

MR. JACKSON: So literally, according to you, you know zero about the media coverage concerning this case, Commonwealth versus Karen Read?

MR. JACKSON: Did you talk to Alli before her testimony?

MR. JACKSON: When was the last time you did talk to Alli before she testified yesterday?

MR. JACKSON: Give me an idea. She is one of your best friends. A week ago? A day ago? A month ago?

MR. JACKSON: Could it have been a year ago?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Could it have been five years ago?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So it's more recently than five years ago that you spoke with Alli?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So you have no independent recollection as you sit here the last time you talked to one of your best friends, or your cousin, about any subject?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Were you ever told in preparation for your testimony if you start to get stumped or nervous, just say "I don't remember"?

MR. JACKSON: Nobody ever told you that?

MR. JACKSON: That's all right. So nobody ever informed you that you might get nervous on the witness stand, there might be tough questions and the easiest way to get out of that is just say, yeah, I don't recall?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So you just don't recall because your memory is that bad. You literally don't recall the last time you spoke with Alli?

MR. JACKSON: Sure.

MR. JACKSON: Your testimony is you were not instructed to say, I don't remember. You just literally don't remember?

MR. JACKSON: It's an issue with your memory, not an instruction that you received?

MR. JACKSON: Right. But you do remember two and a half years ago you left 34 Fairview at 12:10 a.m., correct, down to the minute?

MR. JACKSON: Did Mr. Lally, during this meeting that y'all had, did Mr. Lally show you anything, items of evidence, photographs, videos, anything like that?

MR. JACKSON: Did you two talk about any evidence that you might see, photographs, documents, videos?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't show you the series of text messages between you and Ms. McCabe, Allie?

MR. JACKSON: So you're not saying he didn't. You're just saying, again, you just don't remember?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. And, again, this was just a month ago?

MR. JACKSON: It could have been sooner than a month? Let me ask that a different way. It could have been more recently than a month?

MR. JACKSON: You don't know that, either?

MR. JACKSON: Where were you when this meeting a month ago took place?

MR. JACKSON: Who contacted you to come to the D.A.'s office?

MR. JACKSON: You don't remember that, either?

MR. JACKSON: Phone call from Mr. Lally, maybe?

MR. JACKSON: So if your father received a phone call and then told you, you need to go to the D.A.'s office to meet Mr. Lally, that would be a conversation with your dad about your preparation for your testimony, correct?

MR. JACKSON: You wouldn't categorize that as such?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Because, of course, even though you went to the D.A.'s office to meet Mr. Lally and a sergeant from the Massachusetts State Police to talk about your testimony, you didn't mention that to your dad?

MR. JACKSON: You didn't mention that to your mom?

MR. JACKSON: And, when you got done with that meeting, your dad didn't ask you, how did it go, son?

MR. JACKSON: Your mom didn't say, how was that meeting --

MR. JACKSON: -- about this massive murder case?

MR. JACKSON: Let me ask it a different way. Do you consider this to be a high-profile murder case?

MR. JACKSON: In your mind, this is an important case, correct, obviously?

MR. JACKSON: But, according to you, it just never comes up in the Albert household?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. You were asked to look at a couple of text messages yesterday that looked a little bit like this. Have you seen that before?

MR. JACKSON: When did you see that before?

MR. JACKSON: Before yesterday, had you ever seen that before?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Other than on your phone when you made the screenshot, had you ever seen that before? Did Mr. Lally ever show that to you?

MR. JACKSON: So you two didn't discuss that in your meeting a month or less ago?

MR. JACKSON: But, again, you don't remember?

MR. JACKSON: Is that a "no"?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Did Mr. Lally tell you why he wanted to question you about those text messages?

MR. JACKSON: Did Mr. Lally tell you anything about what you might be asked on cross-examination?

MR. JACKSON: Did he ask you about any videos that you've ever posted?

MR. JACKSON: Did he ask you about any comments you've ever made online?

MR. JACKSON: Any photos you've ever been in?

MR. JACKSON: Any fights you've ever been in?

MR. JACKSON: Who is Courtney Proctor?

MR. JACKSON: I'm sorry?

MR. JACKSON: When you say "friendly with," describe that. What do you mean by "friendly with"?

MR. JACKSON: Have you ever been to Courtney Proctor's home?

MR. JACKSON: How many times would you say over the years?

MR. JACKSON: Her family is close to your family, it's fair to say?

MR. JACKSON: When you say "not that close but close though," what does that mean?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. How old are you now? You're 20?

MR. JACKSON: Your Honor, may I approach briefly?

MR. JACKSON: I have a photo I'd like to show Mr. Lally first. May I?

MR. JACKSON: Can you take a look at that photo and tell me if you recognize it? Just look at it to yourself, please, and let me know after you've studied it for a second.

MR. JACKSON: Do you recognize the photo?

MR. JACKSON: Who is in that photo?

MR. JACKSON: Yes.

MR. JACKSON: This photograph establishes a close familial relationship between the Albert family, specifically this witness, and the Proctor family.

MR. JACKSON: I know he did. And I want photographic evidence of it as well. The jurors are entitled to see it. I'm about to ask him a series of questions about being in a wedding, being part of the wedding party, the fact that that's him, the fact that that is Michael Proctor.

MR. JACKSON: I want to say it was 2011. Either '12 or '13. '12, I think.

MR. JACKSON: I couldn't disagree in stronger terms. It is both of their biases. And the fact that the photograph was taken several years ago establishes a longstanding familial relationship between this witness and the investigator, who ultimately was the person in charge of and did, in fact, conduct the investigation. It is the level of comfort they had with each other. The bias of Trooper Proctor showed the lack of investigation on Trooper Proctor's part of this particular witness. He's obviously a seminal witness. The prosecution called him to the stand. We didn't call him to the stand. The jurors are entitled to realize the depth and nature of the familiar relationship, and I think the photograph speaks for itself.

MR. JACKSON: I'm sorry. The photographs --

MR. JACKSON: You're saying it's cumulative. If I can't use the photo and I can't describe the photo, how am I supposed to establish to the witness's satisfaction or the Court's satisfaction that the witness has a deep familial relationship in the photo if I can't even describe it?

MR. JACKSON: I know.

MR. JACKSON: May I give it back to the witness so I can ask him about it?

MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: Thank you.

MR. JACKSON: Mr. Albert, approximately when was that photograph taken?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. You were the ring bearer in Courtney Proctor's wedding, were you not?

MR. JACKSON: So when you say we're friendly or we're close, rather, but not that close, you were actually close enough to be a member of her wedding party when she was married to her now husband, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Well, of course it was when you were younger. It was 10 years ago.

MR. JACKSON: Is that "yes"?

MR. JACKSON: That's my question. So for at least a decade, your family and the Proctor family has been close enough such that you, an Albert, were in her wedding, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Well, at least at that time, 10 years ago, your family was close enough to the Proctor family such that you were a ring bearer in Courtney Proctor's wedding, right?

MR. JACKSON: And who is Courtney Proctor's brother?

MR. JACKSON: And is Michael Proctor in the photograph that you're looking at?

MR. JACKSON: He's the person on the far left?

MR. JACKSON: Looks like he's in a tuxedo?

MR. JACKSON: You were also in a tuxedo?

MR. JACKSON: What I'm getting at is you all were part of the same wedding party, correct?

MR. JACKSON: And that's a photograph of Courtney Proctor's wedding and the entire wedding party, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Is that a photograph of a wedding party?

MR. JACKSON: Your Honor, may we approach?

MR. JACKSON: I don't understand how this is cumulative or not relevant. They are literally standing in the same wedding party. And, when I ask if that is a wedding party, counsel is objecting and it's getting sustained. What more can I ask about the foundation of this photograph?

MR. JACKSON: Because I'm choosing what evidence I want to present to a jury to establish bias. It's one thing for them to hear about it. It's another thing for them to see it. A picture is worth a thousand words. This is basic hornbook trial lawyering.

MR. JACKSON: My specific reason is because that man on the left interviewed that young man, a now grown man, on the right.

MR. JACKSON: I realize that. But the visual of having them in the same wedding party at the same time is powerful information that jurors can weigh and balance in determining to assign credibility not only to this witness as to his description about the relationship with the Proctors but ultimately with Michael Proctor and his relationship with the Alberts.

MR. JACKSON: Yes. He was asked by Mr. Lally yesterday.

MR. JACKSON: It's coming. I was going to publish --

MR. JACKSON: Okay.

MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: Thank you.

MR. JACKSON: Mr. Albert, I want you to look at that one more time. Both you and Michael Proctor are depicted in the photograph, correct?

MR. JACKSON: How long have you known Michael Proctor?

MR. JACKSON: And you've known him well enough to know -- I don't want you to tell me or tell the jurors, but you know where he lives?

MR. JACKSON: You consider the Proctor family close to your family?

MR. JACKSON: During the course of, for instance, just as an example, during the course of this event, a joyous event at a wedding, you actually sat at the head table along with the Proctor family because you were given the honor of being the ring bearer in Courtney's wedding, correct?

MR. JACKSON: And you know, of course, that that is -- being in a wedding party is reserved for the most special family members and friends, correct?

MR. JACKSON: In your mind, was that a special honor?

MR. JACKSON: And you were never interviewed by Canton Police Department in connection with this case, correct?

MR. JACKSON: How many times were you interviewed by the Massachusetts State Police in connection with this case?

MR. JACKSON: And that was in July of 2023, correct?

MR. JACKSON: It was about a year and a half after the events in question; is that right?

MR. JACKSON: Would it refresh your recollection if you saw a copy of a report of that interview, just as to the date?

MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: If I may just have a moment, Your Honor, please.

MR. JACKSON: Take a look at Paragraph 1. It's in the middle of the paragraph. Just read that to yourself, please. You got that?

MR. JACKSON: You saw the July 18th date?

MR. JACKSON: 2023?

MR. JACKSON: Does that refresh your recollection that that was the first time you were interviewed by the Massachusetts State Police?

MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: Thank you.

MR. JACKSON: Who conducted that interview?

MR. JACKSON: So Michael Proctor was the lead investigator that interviewed you, correct?

MR. JACKSON: That's the same Michael Proctor that appears on the far left of the photo of that wedding party, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Did you find that that -- by the way, how long did the interview last with Michael Proctor?

MR. JACKSON: Do you remember testifying at one point that it was about 10 minutes?

MR. JACKSON: You testified at a different hearing, a different proceeding, not this proceeding, one other time, correct?

MR. JACKSON: If I may have just a moment, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: May I approach?

MR. JACKSON: I need a foundational question first. I apologize. It's my fault, Mr. Albert. Do you believe it would refresh your recollection as to the length of that first interview if you were to see your testimony from a prior proceeding?

MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?

MR. JACKSON: Take a look at this. And I'm going to direct your attention to Line 18 and 19 of that transcript. Let me know when you've reviewed it. Is that "yes"?

MR. JACKSON: May I?

MR. JACKSON: Does that refresh your recollection?

MR. JACKSON: How long was that interview?

MR. JACKSON: The interview that you had with Michael Proctor. That's what that question was about that you just read.

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Do you recall that it says -- that you testified, "Question: How long did the interview last for" --

MR. JACKSON: Did this refresh your recollection as to the question and answer, how you answered the question, how long that interview lasted?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Did you say 10 minutes?

MR. JACKSON: So during the course of that 10-minute conversation that you had with Michael Proctor, what was the tone of that interview? Do you understand what I mean by "tone"?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Was it hostile and accusatory?

MR. JACKSON: Was it antagonistic or confrontational?

MR. JACKSON: Sure. Was he being mean?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. He was being nice, right?

MR. JACKSON: Yeah, because you've known him almost your whole life, right?

MR. JACKSON: He was friendly and cordial?

MR. JACKSON: And the interview was comfortable?

MR. JACKSON: The interview was comfortable?

MR. JACKSON: You didn't feel like you were on the hot seat?

MR. JACKSON: Did you find that the interview with Michael Proctor was consistent with the relationship that you've had with him your whole life, meaning he's always been friendly to you? He was just as friendly in that conversation?

MR. JACKSON: How was he different?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Obviously, he was doing a job, correct?

MR. JACKSON: But, when you walked in, you recognized him?

MR. JACKSON: He recognized you?

MR. JACKSON: You made natural greetings with one another, correct?

MR. JACKSON: He questioned you about a few things?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't look at your phone? He didn't ask to take your phone away from you?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't ask to seize your phone or seize any other physical items from you?

MR. JACKSON: You weren't asked to come down to the police station and sit in an interview room or an interrogation room, were you?

MR. JACKSON: As a matter of fact, where did the conversation take place for those 10 minutes?

MR. JACKSON: The D.A.'s office on Shawmut Road. Who else was there other than Trooper Proctor and his partner at the time, Trooper Clark?

MR. JACKSON: Who else was there? Was it just Trooper Proctor, Michael Proctor, and Clark?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So it was just the three of you?

MR. JACKSON: And Trooper Proctor was the one that was sort of leading the conversation?

MR. JACKSON: And, when it was done, he said, you're free to go?

MR. JACKSON: And he didn't take your phone?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't ask you to look at any text messages?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't look through your phone?

MR. JACKSON: He didn't take any screenshots or videos of your phone or the contents of your phone?

MR. JACKSON: He just let you walk out the door?

MR. JACKSON: Your Honor, may I publish the photo?

MR. JACKSON: No. I don't believe that we are forced at this point to put him in a category of a third-party culprit. Evidence is still coming in from the Commonwealth. The evidence is still being explored by the defense. This photograph is specifically to establish the bias and lack of investigation or lack of proper investigation by an investigator. This is evidence that that investigator never should have been interviewing this witness in the first place. It should have lasted far longer than 10 minutes. They should have done their due diligence. They did nothing. They never looked at phones. They never looked at text messages. They never looked at the phone. They never sought an extraction. This was a 10-minute conversation with someone a year and a half after the fact that they left pretty much alone for a year and a half, notwithstanding the fact that he was at the house for the interview at or around the time that John O'Keefe was injured and -- The Court seems to have an issue with establishing basic bias, and that's part of our defense. This entire investigation has been crippled by bias, personal relationships, favoritism, et cetera. This is absolutely some of the best evidence we have of that. It's not cumulative of anything. We haven't put any photographs in. It's not like this is the tenth photograph, one; and it's certainly not more prejudicial than probative. It's highly probative to the relationship and the interpersonal relationships that these witnesses have with this, especially this witness has with the Proctor family.

MR. JACKSON: If there is -- if we develop a third-party culprit defense to our satisfaction ultimately that we are comfortable with and ultimately the Court is comfortable with, I think that should come in for that purpose. However, irrespective --

MR. JACKSON: I appreciate that. I appreciate the Court leaving the door open, but I believe strongly that this goes to a Bowden defense, as well, which is what we are really exploring at this point. It's a lack of investigative interest in this witness. Why? Because he's a kid that he's known his whole life. I mean --

MR. JACKSON: Thank you.

MR. JACKSON: May I inquire, Your Honor?