Maybe disgraced ex-state trooper Michael Proctor should have gotten out of Canton while the getting was good.

But he didn’t, and now his best option may be to ask the feds to lock him up, in a cell next to his fellow disgraced neighbor cop, Matthew Farwell, now charged with killing both his girlfriend and her unborn child.

Not that Proctor has been charged criminally, but the 46-page complaint lays out everything that we’ve known for some time now, in one damning, brilliantly-drafted document.

Karen Read, acquitted twice of the same murder, now returns to avenge herself against the Neanderthals who put her through this living hell.

Those are the McAlberts, known in this filing as the “House Defendants,” as well as the crew of  crooked state cops, among them both Proctor and Yuriy Bukhenik, the pidgin-English-speaking Ukrainian thug.

Of course the McAlberts counter that they are suing Karen Read, for defamation. Good luck with that one!

A lot of recurring themes here, but what stands out for me are those 47 pieces of broken red taillight from Karen Read’s SUV.

Read’s lawyers, Alan Jackson and Damon Seligson, return again and again to the “planting of evidence at the scene,” as they say for the first time in Paragraph 9.

Paragraph 77: Regarding the cops, both MSP and Canton Police: “One or more of them destroyed the taillight, secretly took pieces of it into their possession and then planted some of them.”

They had to do it, to prove that Karen Read had struck her boyfriend, John O’Keefe. Which she didn’t. So there wasn’t any broken taillight, until there was.

Paragraph 80: “Proctor and Bukhenik took taillight pieces from the (CPD) sallyport, brought back to 34 Fairview to place them… and then falsified various documents in an attempt to hide their conduct….”

Paragraph 82: “He could later claim the pieces had been there….”

Sadly for Proctor, the complaint continues, surveillance camera video and a report from the Dighton Police Department proved that the troopers had been lying in their desperate attempt to lynch Karen Read.

Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.

Another thing: if you’re going to lie, it helps to have an IQ above 80, which neither Proctor nor Bukhenik have.

But once you get started with planting evidence, it’s hard to stop. And you know, glass is a lot easier to break than hard plastic, like in a taillight. So, according to the lawsuit, Proctor decided to… improve the frame up of Karen Read, by planting glass shards all over the area where the body of John O’Keefe was found.

The cops’ abject lie would be, O’Keefe held a cocktail glass in his hand when he was struck by Read, which he wasn’t. But they’re cops – they lie and everybody knows they lie. So why not just add a few fake details to make the story more plausible?

Paragraph 87: “Proctor also planted pieces of glass on the bumper… to make it look like the shards originated from a cocktail glass.”

But then Karen Read’s lawyers insisted on forensic testing of the shards.

“The five glass pieces originated from multiple different sources…. The only way for the glass to have ended up on the SUV bumper is that Proctor planted it there in an attempt to connect the vehicle to the death of Mr. O’Keefe.”

In paragraph 114, Proctor is accused of lying under oath about discovering the SUV taillight with “large pieces missing.”

That’s just sub paragraph a. Sub paragraph c continues:

“He retrieved taillight pieces on subsequent searches at the Alberts’ home, when he knew he had deposited or arranged for someone to deposit taillight pieces at the property.”

Wow! Jackson seems to be saying that Proctor was so brazen that he may have “arranged” for someone else to have dropped at least some of the taillight pieces at the death house.

Who’s that mystery crooked cop? Or was the crime farmed out to a civilian, a Canton townie no doubt.

The cops kept finding pieces of new taillight for weeks after the death. As time went on, and the snow melted, the pieces kept getting bigger. It almost seemed like they were growing, like tomatoes. In the middle of the winter.

If you followed the two murder trials (double jeopardy, anyone?) you know about most of this. But it’s nice to see it all laid out, with references to “constitutionally deficient malicious persecution” and how Proctor and the House Defendants “perverted the justice system” with their “corrupt prosecution.”

And look at the result for Karen Read:

“She lost employment and income. She lost her professorship. She lost her private health insurance. She lost her car and her driver’s license. She lost her house. Her reputation – both personally and professional – was utterly destroyed. She incurred millions in expert fees, and costs….”

Not to mention her terror at being “imprisoned for the rest of her natural life for a crime she did not commit.”

And just to repeat, the crooked Democrats in Norfolk County tried her again, for the same crime, after she was acquitted first time, because… professional courtesy for their fellow corrupt cops.

Double jeopardy is unconstitutional in the United States.

Except in Norfolk County, and they’re trying to frame Karen Read.

The last time or two I’ve been out on the road making personal appearances, I’ve brought with me a bag of broken red taillight pieces to hand out as souvenirs. I tell people various stories about the taillight. Sometimes I saw these are like pieces of the True Cross, shards of the True Taillight.

Other times, I joke that I went to the State Police Gift Shop at GHQ in Framingham and bought a couple of bags for giveaways.

Sometimes I point at the bag of taillight pieces and say, “This is standard equipment in all State Police cruisers,” just in case a trooper is involved in a crime committed by his fellow sleazy cops and he needs to… pin it on the girl, as they say in Canton.

I’ll be doing more book signings in a couple of weeks, and I just called the guy at my go-to body shop in Arlington.

Get me more red taillight!

(Order Howie’s new book “Mass Corruption: Vol. 1 The Cops” at howiecarrshow.com/store.)

Questions surrounding the broken taillight of Karen Read’s SUV are central to a lawsuit she has filed in the case. (Herald file)