Michael Proctor's attorneys to be pressed on deposition delay in Karen Read wrongful death suit
Published in News & Features
BOSTON — Attorneys for Michael Proctor will have to answer in court when the disgraced former state trooper became unavailable for a scheduled deposition in Karen Read’s wrongful death suit.
The attorneys will also be pressed on when Read’s legal team was informed of the request to delay Monday’s deposition and why preparation couldn’t take place on Friday or over the weekend.
Plymouth County Judge Mark Gildea has scheduled a Zoom hearing for 8:45 a.m. on Monday for Proctor’s team to answer questions in response to its last-minute request, filed after 2 p.m. Friday.
Proctor’s deposition had been scheduled for 9 a.m. on Monday.
The push to delay the deposition — an out-of-court interview in which a witness in a lawsuit answers questions under oath, but without the presence of a judge — came a day after Read sued the Massachusetts State Police and Town of Canton.
At the heart of the complaint are scores of racist and obscene texts allegedly shared between Proctor, the lead investigator in the failed murder case against Read, and former Canton Police sergeant Sean Goode.
Read, acquitted for the murder of her Boston cop boyfriend, John O’Keefe, argues that the explosive text messages between the two cops reveal the State Police and Town of Canton “built” a “culture of bias and corruption that they … tolerated, and hid from the public.”
Read was already allowed to use the messages in the wrongful death suit that the O’Keefe family filed against her in August 2024.
Proctor’s attorney, Matthew Hamel, argued that the motion for a protective order to delay his client’s deposition on Monday was “supported by ample good cause,” citing scheduling conflicts within the legal team and Proctor’s “personal circumstances.”
Monday’s deposition was scheduled on April 3, when Proctor’s legal team “accepted service of a … subpoena,” Hamel wrote in his motion. He added that Read’s counsel was “advised” on Friday of the “scheduling conflict.”
“Mr. Proctor is not a party to this matter,” Hamel wrote. “He is — at best — a mere fact witness. Although Ms. Read has litigated this case extensively in the media, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, only three depositions have been taken in this case.”
“Ms. Read’s desired litigation strategy aside,” the attorney added, “Mr. Proctor will be produced for his deposition, but the previously agreed upon date of June 8, 2026, is no longer workable due to a variety of circumstances as described further herein.”
©2026 MediaNews Group, Inc. Visit at bostonherald.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.







Comments