Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
‘An exemplary trooper’: Ex-trooper Michael Proctor fights for his job back at civil service hearing
Proctor's vulgar texts about Karen Read took center stage as Tuesday's hearing got underway.
Fired in light of his conduct during Karen Read‘s high-profile murder case, former Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor fought his termination in the first of several hearing dates Tuesday.
Previously:
Proctor appeared before the state’s Civil Service Commission, with his attorney arguing that the ex-trooper was an “exemplary” member of the State Police prior to Read’s highly publicized 2024 mistrial.
“Mike Proctor was a very good trooper, an exemplary trooper, a detective who has been made to be a scapegoat as a result of the Mass. State Police caving in to public pressure,” attorney Daniel Moynihan argued in his opening remarks.
Advertisement:
Proctor led the investigation into the January 2022 death of Read’s boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe. While prosecutors alleged Read backed her SUV into O’Keefe following a night of drinking, a Norfolk County jury acquitted her of murder and manslaughter charges earlier this year.
State Police fired Proctor in March following a lengthy suspension and internal investigation, pointing in part to the texts he sent friends, family, and coworkers about Read’s case. In those texts, Proctor called Read a “wack job c**t” and “retarded,” made crass remarks about her appearance and Crohn’s disease, and joked about looking for nude photos on her cellphone.
Advertisement:
Stephen Carley, a lawyer for the State Police, touched on the texts Tuesday as he began to make his case that the ex-trooper’s termination was warranted.
“‘Distastetful. Unprofessional. Inappropriate. In poor taste. Juvenile. Sexist. Disgusting. Dehumanizing,’” Carley recited. “This selection of words does not come from a public comment section on a website, an op-ed columnist, or a protester outside the Norfolk County courthouse. No indeed, one would be forgiven for not immediately recognizing that these words are Michael Proctor’s accounting of his own conduct in this case.”
He also noted a State Police trial board found that Proctor provided confidential case information to civilians and once consumed alcohol on duty before driving his department-issued cruiser.
Yet, while the trial board ultimately found Proctor guilty of “unsatisfactory performance,” Moynihan argued the charge was “misplaced” and designed “simply to appease the masses and fire Mike Proctor.” Contrary to the narrative Read’s defense team offered during her two trials, he asserted Proctor’s personal feelings did not influence the evidence or outcome of the investigation into O’Keefe’s death.
Advertisement:
Likewise, Moynihan added, “The personal cellphone texts did not affect his performance of his police duties.”
Proctor was ‘shocked’ that feds ‘infiltrated’ his phone, lawyer says
Proctor’s vulgar messages initially surfaced as part of a secretive federal probe into Read’s case. According to Moynihan, the ex-trooper was asked to testify before a federal grand jury in February 2024 after Read’s lawyers “convinced the U.S. Attorney’s Office to open an investigation into a theory of a grand conspiracy against Ms. Read on the part of law enforcement and others.”
“And when [Proctor] appeared, he was shocked to discover that the U.S. Attorney had somehow infiltrated his personal cellphone and obtained — surreptitiously obtained — personal text messages on his personal cellphone,” Moynihan alleged.
Federal authorities have declined to comment on the investigation’s scope, and the probe ended earlier this year with no charges or arrests announced.
However, “since the disclosure of these text messages, the world has changed,” Moynihan told a Civil Service Commission hearing officer Tuesday. “Law enforcement officers and people in all walks of life now shudder at the thought that a federal agency could infiltrate their personal phone and look at text messages, personal text messages on a personal phone, to family members and friends.”
Advertisement:
He alleged Proctor still hasn’t received the complete text message threads and doesn’t know why his personal cellphone was “infiltrated.” Moynihan also noted Proctor has never disputed the authenticity of the messages or denied they were inappropriate and unprofessional.
In fact, he said, Proctor reported the messages to his State Police superiors and disclosed their content to the agency’s legal team. Moynihan alleged State Police superiors “assured Michael Proctor that not much would come of this, and that he may receive a letter of counseling as a result, or a written reprimand.”
But after Read’s first murder trial ended in a mistrial on July 1, 2024, he added, “the witch hunt for Michael Proctor began.”
First witness testifies in Proctor appeal
The sole State Police witness, Detective Lt. Kevin Dwyer, testified about investigating Proctor’s alleged misconduct as part of an internal affairs probe. His testimony was punctuated with video clips of Proctor’s testimony during Read’s first trial and his subsequent interview with ABC’s “20/20.”
Dwyer also spoke about two allegations that were not sustained due to lack of sufficient evidence, including claims that Proctor might have acted on texts joking about searching for nude photos on Read’s phone and receiving a potential “thank-you gift” from a witness in the case.
Dwyer testified he found nothing to suggest Proctor took the witness up on their offer. The ex-trooper’s response — “get Elizabeth one” — was meant to indicate that Proctor’s wife deserved recognition for caring for their children while Proctor worked long hours, Dwyer explained.
Advertisement:
As for Proctor’s text about searching for nudes, Dwyer testified it’s not uncommon for investigators to inadvertently come across sensitive images while searching through someone’s phone. He said Proctor told him the text was an “inappropriate joke referencing that anecdotally true fact,” and that he hadn’t actually tried to search for explicit images.
“And I found that to be credible,” Dwyer added.
However, Dwyer agreed with Carley’s assessment that Proctor’s texts as a whole brought the State Police into disrepute and contributed to the appearance that he was not impartial toward Read.
Proctor, for his part, has said his emotions “got the best of” him.
“It’s understood that police officers are humans and natural feelings and emotions are going to develop,” Dwyer acknowledged. “But as a police officer, it’s important that any actions taken are based on reason and fact.”
Fielding questions from Moynihan under cross-examination, Dwyer said that before Proctor, he had not investigated anyone for personal comments made on personal devices. Moynihan also confirmed Proctor never received a target letter as part of the federal investigation into Read’s case, nor was he ever criminally charged in connection with the probe.
A separate State Police inquiry into Proctor’s ties to witnesses in the case unearthed no evidence of inappropriate relationships or bias, Moynihan asserted.
“There was a theory presented by the defense in the Read case that there was a conspiracy,” he noted. “But there was no finding of a conspiracy … was there?”
Advertisement:
“No, there was not,” Dwyer replied.
Responding to a later question, he testified he hasn’t reviewed the complete thread of Proctor’s text messages.
“Is it fair to say … that it was not Michael Proctor’s intention for his personal thoughts on his personal phone to be published to the world?” Moynihan asked.
“Correct, yes,” Dwyer responded.
Moynihan also hammered at the timing of Proctor’s discipline, noting the ex-trooper was relieved of duty months after his texts came to light, and after Gov. Maura Healey publicly slammed his choice of words.
Proctor’s appeal based on ‘evading accountability,’ State Police lawyer claims
The administrative hearing will resume Wednesday morning with Dwyer still under cross-examination. Proctor’s lawyers are also expected to call additional witnesses on Oct. 21, 22, and 23.
Earlier Tuesday, Carley accused Proctor’s attorneys of mounting an appeal based on “dubious and flimsy comparisons, whataboutisms reflecting the choices of others, spurious emotional appeals to the absolutely real difficulties experienced by members assigned to a homicide investigation, and insinuations that written statements by a case officer regarding his own investigation are somehow private or out-of-bounds.”
“In short,” he continued, “the department expects an appeal not based on the truth, but on evading accountability.”
Moynihan acknowledged Proctor’s conduct “probably” warrants some discipline, but he argued termination was disproportionate and incongruent with the agency’s past actions.
“No one should be unjustifiably pushed aside from his job simply because an organization wants to satisfy an agenda,” he said. “And that’s what happened here, folks.”
Livestream via NBC10 Boston.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com