Plymouth Superior Court is hauling everyone into the same room Wednesday afternoon to find out whether someone broke a secrecy order in the civil case tied to Karen Read. At 3 p.m., Judge Mark C. Gildea will hold an in-person hearing to probe whether records he sealed in the wrongful-death lawsuit against Read, involving former state trooper Michael Proctor, somehow slipped into public view. Every attorney in the case has been ordered to show up.
Judge Cites Possible Breach Of Impounded Materials
In an endorsement filed Tuesday, Gildea said he had been “advised of information that allows for a reasonable inference of a violation” of his June 8 impoundment order, and directed all parties to appear for the 3 p.m. session. According to The Boston Globe, that June 8 order sealed records tied to Proctor, including “medical documentation,” although the court has not said exactly what might have been disclosed. Gildea also ordered the attorneys to file sworn certifications detailing any sharing or dissemination of the impounded material.
What Was Impounded And Why Proctor’s Deposition Matters
Proctor’s lawyers had argued that an affidavit and related medical records should stay under seal after they moved to postpone a scheduled deposition, a request Gildea labeled “extraordinary” while pushing back on a broad delay. As reported by NBC10 Boston, the judge initially ordered Proctor to sit for a deposition on short notice, before the parties eventually agreed on alternate dates. Proctor’s team has maintained that the impounded filings concern an ongoing medical issue that, in their view, should not be aired in public.
Proctor’s Role And The Tangled Civil Suits
Proctor, the former Massachusetts State Police trooper who led the investigation into the January 29, 2022 death of Boston police Officer John O’Keefe, was later fired after findings of misconduct, as years of derogatory text messages surfaced in court filings. Court TV reported that some of the materials now under impound were filed as part of Proctor’s last-minute effort to put off his deposition. The impoundment order, along with Gildea’s new move to investigate a possible leak, adds another procedural twist to a cluster of overlapping civil cases, including the O’Keefe family’s wrongful-death lawsuit, separate defamation claims, and Read’s own state and federal suits against investigators and witnesses.
What’s At Stake Wednesday
The court has not publicly identified which documents or disclosures triggered Gildea’s concern, or suggested that any particular party is suspected of leaking the impounded information. The Boston Globe reports that Gildea’s order also blocks further discovery from the party whose information was impounded, at least until the court says otherwise, and that all of the civil cases in this broader dispute remain active. Depending on what comes out at the hearing, the judge could impose sanctions, tighten protective orders, or adopt other measures that end up reshaping the timetable for key depositions.
Read’s Criminal Case In Brief
Read was charged criminally after O’Keefe’s death in January 2022. Her first trial ended in a hung jury in 2024, and a retrial brought acquittals on the most serious charges in June 2025, with a conviction only on an OUI count. CBS Boston’s timeline notes that jurors returned the not-guilty verdicts on June 18, 2025. The civil cases have carried on in the wake of the criminal proceedings.
Legal Context
Under Massachusetts law, impoundment is treated as a narrow exception to the usual rule that court records are open to the public. It is governed by the Trial Court’s Uniform Rules on Impoundment Procedure, which spell out how parties ask to seal records, how courts review those requests, and how others can challenge them. The handbook on those rules outlines the responsibilities of court staff, the steps for filing and opposing impoundment or unsealing motions, and the methods for contesting an impoundment order, according to the Trial Court. Any penalties for a violation of Gildea’s impoundment order will be up to him to decide after Wednesday’s hearing and could range from narrowly tailored remedies to broader court-imposed sanctions.
