Mel dee Devil

Katherine Loftus’ interview with Norfolk County DA candidate Greg Connor is best understood by focusing on the little spaces in between, rather than what Mr. Connor said directly (or what Ms. Loftus asked). Some have attacked Ms. Loftus (@NoteMyObjection) for her prosecution-friendly positions in the Karen Read and Sandra Birchmore cases. I have always found Ms. Loftus’ insights helpful, even if I don’t always agree with her. She is a practicing criminal attorney with both prosecution and defense experience. Her interview with Mr. Connor (@VoteGregConnor) is substantive and informative. Give it a listen. Mr. Connor is perfectly well qualified to be a candidate for Norfolk County DA, by virtue of his experience alone. But that’s not the issue most (including me) have with his candidacy. The problem - as underscored by the interview - is his desire to perpetuate the status quo of the existing DA’s Office (he calls it his “family”); his doubling down on his personal belief of Karen Read’s guilt; and his vow to further weaponize “intimidation” and “obstruction” laws against citizens who dare raise a voice against the corrupt, entrenched political class, of which Mr. Connor is a part. These are my personal opinions about what Mr. Connor said (and didn’t say) during the interview: 🔹 Greg Connors's entire 25-year career was spent with the Norfolk County DA's office. He left that office on March 6, 2026 to run for office. Connor has lived in Norfolk County his entire life. His father was an ADA in the Norfolk County DA’s office and was a District Court judge. Mr. Connor appears to be as thoroughly steeped in OG Norfolk County politics as anyone. He very much wants the office to continue as it has been and to serve the same interests it has served all along. 🔹 Mr. Connor decided to run for Norfolk County DA in mid-to late February 2026. He had a list of other qualified candidates in mind for the job, but “everybody who I thought was going to run, decided not to.” That remark tells me everything I need to know about what he thinks of former Assistant US Attorney Adam Deitch (@adamdeitch), also a candidate for Norfolk County DA. What an unnecessary insult. 🔹 Mr. Connor reaffirmed how he has both feet squarely in the “Karen Read is Guilty Even Though She Was Acquitted” camp. In hindsight, he’d have preferred Ms. Read not be indicted for murder because that would have avoided all the inconvenience that followed. As Norfolk DA, certainly isn’t going to open a new investigation into the death of Officer John O’Keefe. Mr. Connor seems to display no prosecutorial curiosity about the way Officer O’Keefe’s died. While he seems to agree that the Michael Proctor/Jennifer McCabe version of the investigation was an unmitigated disaster, he expressed no overarching desire to change anything. Mr. Connor seems to like the way things are going right now. 🔹 Mr. Connor thinks some cases (such as the Karen Read and Sandra Birchmore cases) should start with an inquest so that charging determinations aren’t made “in a vacuum.” An inquest is a special hearing with both medical and lay witnesses (including the medical examiner) designed to determine the cause of death in a homicide case, but the accused can’t testify or defend themselves. Connor floated the notion of including higher-level ADAs, victim’s advocates, and special witnesses (such as you-know-who) in the decision as a hedge against awkward and embarrassing circumstances (such as in the Read and Birchmore cases). Instead of a vacuum, Mr. Connor seems to prefer an echo chamber. 🔹 Much of the interview focused on Mr. Connor’s desire to insulate certain witnesses from “insults” and “intimidation.” Mr. Connor did not say how he learned about the insults and intimidation, nor did he say whether he witnessed those things first-hand. Yet he was visibly shaken by those witnesses’ inability to get restraining orders, and he expressed an earnest determination to protect his favored witnesses going forward if he’s elected as Norfolk DA. Does this mean Mr. Connor will project the authority of his office into the various civil matters involving the House Defendants? Direct certain witnesses to cooperate and testify in a certain manner? Ms. Loftus did not ask him these things. I think somebody should. 🔹 Ms. Loftus asked Mr. Connor if other ADAs declined the opportunity to chair the second prosecution of Ms. Read, thus giving rise to the Henry B. Brennan (@MediadeskHB) Experience. Mr. Connor demurred, saying only that *he* was not asked. He acknowledged that Michael Morrissey personally asked him to sit in and *watch* the second trial. When Ms. Loftus later raised the specter of a DA from a different county taking over the Read case for the second trial, Mr. Connor said, “I don’t think there was another DA’s office that wanted to do Read.” 🔹 Throughout the interview, Mr. Connor circled back to what seemed like his near-obsessive desire to insulate and protect “trial witnesses.” He did not identify any specific witness, but I took him to mean the House Defendants. He doubled down on using obstruction and intimidation laws to prosecute protesters. Mr. Connor railed against “two hundred people with megaphones” (yeah, he really said that!) protesting his favored witnesses. He completely missed the point, of course. The one guy with the megaphone (@DoctorTurtleboy ) and the dozens of grassroots citizens were protesting Mr. Connor’s office, and everything corrupt it represented, not the witnesses. This was possibly the most disturbing instance of Mr. Connor’s political posturing to come out of the interview. 🔹 Mr. Connor kept pressing an awkward and inappropriate analogy between entirely peaceful street protests, and threats of violence from murderous street gangs. The Karen Read protests - all of which have been filmed and carefully documented, were directed at the kind of entitlement and official corruption that Mr. Connor and his office represented. Mr. Connor tired several times to persuade Ms. Loftus that those protests were “the same thing as” violent, murderous street gangs telling victims’ families they’ll get killed if they testify against a homicidal gang leader. I don’t think even the enthusiastic Ms. Loftus was convinced, even after Mr. Connor tried several times to peddle this nonsense in a more palatable fashion. 🔹 We all remember Michael Morrissey’s comical 2023 correspondence exchange with US Department of Justice personnel, through which Mr. Morrissey (and his staff) demanded the “dirt” on the DOJ investigation into the Norfolk DA’s Office, under the ridiculous premise of satisfying mandatory disclosure obligations to Ms. Read. Mr. Connor actually doubled down on this during the interview. He faulted the US Attorney’s office for “withholding” the Michael Proctor text messages from the Norfolk DA, complaining that the DOJ had an obligation to disclose them as soon as they were discovered. That failure “hindered” other prosecutions in which Mr. Proctor was an investigator because it didn’t allow the DA enough opportunity prepare a substitute for Proctor’s testimony, according to Mr. Connor. What it really meant was that Henry B. Brennan had to throw Yuri Buquackie in at the last minute, and they both came across looking like complete buffoons. So, what did we learn? Candidate Greg Connor promises to protect his “family” by bringing more of the same into the only world he knows. He still thinks Karen Read is guilty, he shares Michael Morrissey’s disdain for the U.S Attorney’s Office, and he’ll toe the McAlbert line to his last breath. As Norfolk DA, Mr. Connor will double down on witness intimidation charges. Not only will he devote unlimited resources to the persecution of @DoctorTurtleboy, he’ll also find new ways to weaponize existing law to go after people like you and me for writing things like this.

@dougiesgoindeep 95% of my stories come from tips