Daily Wrap: Friday, July 26,2013

bulger_jacket_300The prosecution ended as expected.  Not much to talk about what happened from an evidentiary point of view. The first witness from the IRS police force has spent years doing a review of the financial transactions of Whitey and his friends. For 45 minutes or so we listened to how Whitey was doing all sorts of tricky things with illegal money to try to make it look like he was earning legal money. All the evidence she put in had already been put in before.

After her came the FBI Special Agent Scott Garriola who grabbed Whitey in Santa Monica. He told how Whitey went around telling him where he had hidden his guns. Whitey told him he was cooperating with him because he wanted to see if his cooperation would inure to the benefit of Catherine Greig. Garriola was a good witness answering questions in a forthright manner without any hesitation the way a good witness will.  He said he would note in his report Whitey’s cooperation which he did. A lot of good it did. Catherine Greig got the harshest sentence ever imposed upon a woman in the United States who had no record and who was charged with a non violent crime.

Garriola’s testimony put together the necessary picture of Whitey and guns. We started off hearing about guns. During the trial we heard how they were put to use. We ended hearing about them again.

After that the prosecutor rested and the judge discussed the future. It seems we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. J.W. Carney said he expects to put on witnesses on Monday and Tuesday. Then the case will be over; except if Whitey testifies.

The status of the case is such that Whitey must testify. Carney and Brennan don’t want to show their hand but how could Whitey possibly walk off the stage now.  He has a lot that he wants to tell us about. He’s thinking of his reputation – how he will be remembered.

All along I’ve noted only two things are important to him, although listening to today’s testimony about his interaction with Special Agent Garriola I realize there is a third thing.

Carney talked about the first thing in his opening. Whitey knows the history of the Irish. The bane of their long subjugation by the British was the informer. It was that type person who undermined the attempts by the Irish to throw off the British yoke. He does not want to go down in history, and he knows these are the last days in which he can have a say in his history so that all things people made up about him can be challenged, as an informant and join the ranks of those low people. He’ll  testify that he was never and informant.

Whitey’ desire to shed that from his reputation is the only explanation for Wyshak’s attempt to show that he was an informant — that makes him argue in one court that Connolly never got anything of value from Whitey and then here that Whitey was a valuable informant . Wyshak want to take away from Whitey any last ounce of respectability even though he has no problem benefiting people like Martorano and Flemmi who are much worse than Whitey.

Whitey will have to talk about his life to prove he’s not an informant. Boston media has accused him of being an informant when he confessed to a robbery to save his girlfriend from the clutches of the FBI. A long time ago I pointed out how absurd that allegation was. But it’s telling that each time he was arrested, his main concern was not himself but the woman he was with. He’ll tell how all through his incarceration when he was jammed in and how by informing on someone or another he could have made his life easier that he refused to do it.

Then he’ll explain how Agent Condon approached him in 1971 during the Killeen/Mullen war and told him the FBI would protect him from the Mullens if he would become an informant. Condon jumped the gun and notified the Seat of Government (FBI headquarters) he was on board. Condon went back to Whitey who told him to take a walk, he’d take care of himself. Then he’ll explain how keeping with his tradition he paid for information and never gave any.

Next, Whitey wants to make it clear he had nothing to do with the murders of the two women. He wants to put that totally in the lap of where it belongs, Steven Flemmi. Even though any unbiased person would recognize that Whitey had nothing to do with their murders especially because the reasons offered Flemmi for him wanting to have them murdered are lame, nevertheless Whitey wants to tell the world how the women were murdered by Flemmi and the reasons why Flemmi did it by himself.

Finally, he’ll set the matter straight relative to Catherine Greig, not that he has to do so because Special Agent Garriola has told us how he cooperated fully asking only that Catherine be given a break. I always thought Whitey was too selfish to do something like that. So I wonder whether he’ll have more to say in that area. Will he testify, as he wrote to Billy Dick Sunday “I never loved anyone like I do her and offered my life [execution] if they would free her — but no they want me to suffer — they know this is the worst punishment for me by hurting her!” Did he do that and the federals turn him down causing this unnecessary trial and the attendant costs out of spite.  

If you have any doubts about his testifying, put them aside. Next week will end with Whitey taking the stand.

45 thoughts on “Daily Wrap: Friday, July 26,2013

  1. Belated thanks for your reply about Grieg, Matt. I had not considered the marriage angle. I thought even a spouse could be charged with harboring a fugitive in a federal case? Do you really think Freight wad prosecuted because she was a girlfriend instead of a wife? That seems so odd to me.

    1. Saint:

      I might be wrong on that – I just checked federal law and don’t see a defense for a spouse – there is in the Massachusetts law. Federals are harder on that.

      If a wife can be prosecuted, then I still think Greig got a little higher sentence because she lived with Whitey in sin. Both the district court judge
      Woodlock and the Appeals Court seemed to suggest that she provided sexual comfort to Whitey and for that a higher sentence is justified. Had she been married, I don’t think that would have been a suggestion.

  2. I am hesitant to leave a comment because I feel like a neophyte in this arena. I have followed your daily blogs carefully and in the past read much about Whitey, et al. My question… is your sentiment now that Whitey will be a much more credible witness on the stand than Weeks, Flemmi, etc.? Do you feel he is less evil than his cohorts? Just trying to grasp the big picture. Thanks.

    1. BRS,
      I won’t speak for Matt but I don’t think any of the people that comment here have anything but contempt for whitey Bulger. No one is suggesting that he is either more credible or less culpable than the rest of these vile animals. The problem most of us have is the picture that has been painted that he and john connolly alone are responsible for all of these heinous crimes. In order to paint that picture (and with the support of the media) Wyshak has made mind numbinly stupid deals week a collection of serial killers that not only gave them their freedom but allowed them to keep a large percentage of there criminally derived proceeds as well as their ability to profit from these crimes by telling there sordid tales. The real question is why he did thid. None of the answers make him look like a particularly good person, to say the least.

      1. Declan, you forgot Flemmi, I think the DOJ considered it a three-some – Connolly, Bulger and Flemmi.

      2. Declan:

        You sum things up pretty well but that too is only part of the picture.

    2. BRS:

      Dot’t be hesitant, we are all here to learn. Thanks for following along. I do believe Whitey’s story will have more of a ring of truth than the others because when he testifies, he’ll not only take the blame for all his criminal actions he’ll put himself in the leading role. “Yes, I set up Tommy King to be murdered. The guy was a threat to me. I couldn’t operate knowing he might be trying to take a shot at me or undermine me at any minute. So me and the boys decided he had to go. Johnny M. was the one who would do the job. He knew how to do it best.” The jury will feel a fresh breath of air in the court heaving a criminal not trying to blame someone else.

      I feel he is as evil as the others but some of the others like Martorano, Flemmi and Salemme have done more evil things than he has done but at the level all those men occupied they are pretty much the same in their wickedness and depravity.I always keep in mind that they were partners in crime and they all knew of the things the others done so they are all pretty much alike.

      I know it sometimes appears when I’m tearing down the testimony of one or the other witnesses that I’m on the side of Whitey. Far from it. I have given Wyshak credit for bringing Whitey to account for his crimes. I have no good feelings toward Whitey and look forward to his conviction.

  3. WB doesn’t have to testify if the prosecution gave his lawyers sufficient material to question their case. The reliability of the witnesses( Gucci, Weeks and Flemmi) is in serious doubt. False in small things false in all things. No forensics connecting him to the killings or the guns. The bodies were buried in Nee’s brothers house. Who are these bookies and drug dealers going to blame for the shakedowns? The killers who are around ( Gucci, Nee, Winter and Salemmi) or the guy who has disappeared? 2. If WB testifies Wyshak will cross exam him about his brothers. Wyshak will invent some claim against them and use their visits to Plymouth as a pretext to charge them. Claiming some on going conspiracy. Wyshak has totally failed to get the target of his probe. No matter the outcome of this case Wyshak lost and the Feds and press have been exposed for the corrupt cabal they are. 3. There was a documentary done on Tip O’Neil in which the Speaker proclaimed that the people have to realize that the government is their friend and working on their behalf. Reagan was fond of saying that the scariest words in the English language were” I’m from the government and am here to help”. If the jury has more members who adopt the Reagan approach then WB could get a favorable result.4. C and B should have called you to explain Naimovich, Kerr and Wolfinger on Rico and the FBI guys who worked with Connolly to show he was framed. Demonstrate that this entire matter was for the benefit of the Mafia and LCN is pulling the strings.

    1. N:
      1. You shall be known by the companions you keep. These were all Whiteys partners, buddies and allies. Evil in small things, evil in all.

      2. Whitey will testify. He will refuse to be cross-examined.

      2. Wyshak has failed – he aimed to high – he wanted Billy, but not only that he wanted Southie – the world on the street is that Wyshak saw how the how the DOJ just indicted Halliburton and SAC Capital – no people, just the entities – Wyshak seeing that ran into the U.S.Attorney’s office – he argued that if a corporation could be treated like a person which was held by Citiens United why couldn’t a section of the city be similarly treated. He convinced Ortez to let him indict South Boston. He plans to subpoena Bill Bulger to the grand jury and have him rat out Southie.

      3. A just result is to send Whitey away forever. O’Neil and Reagan were friends. They were both wrong. The government is necessary to help those who truly need it but it is not anyone’s friend except for those who control it and those who are the friends of those who control it.

      4. C&B are going to call the FBI guys who worked with Connolly. They are going to say he was stealing their files. And as for Connolly being framed, his buddy Whitey will put that idea to rest for all time.

  4. I wish I found your site early on in the trial. I read articles from every outlet, as I grew up in Boston but live in NY now, and this trial was hugely anticipated but never really expected by Mass citizens, so it’s great to get a much more thorough perspective on the proceedings as opposed to the repetitive, regurgitated, biased, main-stream opinions from the press who are more interested in drawing readership than providing a factual insight on the proceedings. Thanks for your coverage. It’s become my one-stop shop for all the Bulger trial coverage I need. I lived in Southie and went to B.C. High in Dorchester, and the legend of Whitey permeated the collective Boston conscience growing up, so this is like watching the biggest story of our shared Boston experience unfold before our eyes. It’s a story that needs to be told, and a story that is finally going to get somewhat of an ending for those he and the W.H. Crew hurt so much. Thanks again for your coverage.

    1. Boston:

      Thanks for the nice comment. Through luck and circumstances this blog attracted a group of individuals from extremely different backgrounds who were intested in discussing the issues rather than trying to force their beliefs on the others. The draw was an interest in going on a trip with me through these matters trying to get a better understanding of what was happening. If you read my early posts you will see I came here as naive as possible thinking that Black Mass was a good book and other books written about Whitey were based on legitimate sources. The more we learned the more we saw we had been told a story from a point of view of willful men who had an agenda – which was pretty much summed up by Wyshak’s remark that indicated he was on a crusade against “the Bulgers and Southie.” We’d have to wrestle with the idea that amost every one we knew who had a bad sibling was never faulted for that yet Billy Bulger was faulted for having Whitey as a brother through the strangest of reasoning. We’d see that linking Billy was done through the federals, all the Boston media, promient law professors, and finally a Congressional committee.

      From my vantage point, having been a prosecutor very active in going after organized crime during those days and working with many various detectives from both federal and state agencies, there had never in our minds been an association between Whitey and Billy. No one ever said, or even thought, let’s give Whitey a pass because Billy is his brother. Yet those who had no idea what was going on in the law enforcement community pass that off as what was happening, that Whitey got away with what he did because Billy was protecting him.

      You being from Southie and having gone to B.C. High followed the same steps as Billy Bulger. You had the opportunity to learn under the Jesuits and you learned to grow into a man, a different man in subtle ways than you were when you entered high school. Billy did the same thing. He went from there to college, the army, and law school. Whitey went to prison. They were connected through kinship, not through interests.

      I’m glad you found the blog and enjoy the various opinions of people mostly who still live in the area but of others who have left the area and moved to other parts of the country (one even to Ireland). Thanks for writing. One final thought, maybe it is two three. One of the greatest slanders of this case is the attack on Father Drinan, a Jesuit and respected scholar, Congressman and Law School Dean, who may have tried to help Whitey. The Boston media turned him in one of Whitey’s criminal allies; speaking of Jesuits, we have the new Pope who is living what the Jesuits tried to teach at B.C. High which was that the true service one could make to God was to care for the least able; and finally, I’n not sure we are getting to an ending here with Whitey’s case, I rather think of it as the end of the beginning, there’s a lot more we must do to insure things like Winter Hill never repeat themselves, that we don’t lose our rights which are set out in the Bill of Rights, and we remain vigilant to keep our country as a beacon of light for whole world.

  5. I also echo the thanks of others for your great reporting and professional opinioning and teaching, Matt.

    I hope Bulger speaks. I really do. I will go again to the courthouse for that. This makes me wonder – when will the full transcripts be available for ordinary folk like me to read?

    I am excited to hear Bulger, frankly. I want him to tell his own story. I want you, Matt, future author of the only new book I’ll ever read on this, to get this material!

    But I guess there are still some, like David Frank from Lawyer’s Weekly, who doubt it. He tweeted “The judge has no right to ask Carney & Brennan if Bulger will testify (which he won’t). That didnt stop her from doing so.”

    Last comment: I hope we get to hear BOTH Carney and Brennan close!!

    1. Mmargaret:

      I appreciate you taking the time to come here. Whitey has to tell his story – nothing else makes sense. David Frank and David Boeri – I think they did a piece together at one point – do have a better perspective on what is going on than most of the others who are stuck in their own agendas feeding off of each other maintaining the popular fiction they have created. Thinking back on the meeting by the beach told in Black Mass makes us smile at the naivete of all of us at one time and how we believed things made up out of thin air. I think we will have both men give final argument. Carney’s been very good to Brennan who is a young lawyer on the rise who will be one of the good ones down the road. Rather than hogging all the limelight he found a kid with talent and gave him a chance to shine. More old trial lawyer should step back and recognize that trila work is a yount man’s business.

      By the way as I told Rather I’ll still be around and posting on occassion although not like I’ve been doing. There’s still a lot of things about the criminal justice system and the federals that should be held up to scrutiny. I home some of you who have come here with questions and comments and good ideas will come back every once in a while when you see something not to your liking out there. But I am appreciative that thre were so many who were willing to join in our discussion and that I drew comments from all aspects of our society.

      1. Excellent point Matt about Carney giving a great deal of the limelight work to Brennan.
        Carney impresses me more and more.

        As for your future postings Matt you can say what you want about not posting often but we all know you won’t be able to stop yourself.

        1. Ernie:
          There is a greater force than I am who has been very tolerant of me going off on this frolic. She who must be obeyed has long lists of things I have negleccted. We’ll see what happens. I have not given much thought to the future after Whitey’s trial. I’m very serious that a lot of this would have been impossible without you and the others giving your two cents and even hundred dollars worth of comment. I learned much from these exchanges and developed a greater knowledge and understandings of the matters surrounding Whitey. I will always appreciate that involvement by all of you.

      2. Matt,

        Will you be posting at this same website? With the same URL? Or will you rename the blog?

        1. Jon:

          I’ll keep this websited for as long as I can. Too much gold here from all of us to let it go. Nothing will change. There will always be some of us interested in how things play out in connection with Whitey although as time passes it will be a more smaller select group and I’m sure those who stick around will be disussing other things. I’d also leave it open for you to have interaction with others which I’ve enjoyed reading even though I’m not a part of the discussion.

          My quandry is I’d like to write about other trials (maybe – trials are tough being too much like work) – but other things about the criminal justice system in Massachusetts and the broader idea of preserving our liberties against the government’s grabbing of them and the increasing growth of the police state. Do I do it here or do I come up with another site that is linked to from here.

          I haven’t given it much thought other than that I’ll keep this website and URL alive to make it simpler for the NSA to keep up with what we are doing.

        2. Jon:

          Then again I might start up a national blog site – I’d call it the U.S. Daily news – I’d let everyone who writes here have a column on whatever subject they wanted to opine on – they would have to commit to doing it once a week – we’d cover the subjects we cover here – it wouldn’t appeal to a liberal or conservative – but to an American-type person who is interested in thing like we cover here; or should it be just called the Boston Daily News and have the same appoach. We’d al have a chance to expound our varing views – we’d commit to answering those who commented on our specific articles – etc. One commenter here N. knows more about sports than anyone else I know and he can be in charge of the sports section and fill it with people he chooses – it’d be a peoples paper – no one would make any money off of it – so it’d be free from trying to please the money guys

          1. Matt,

            et ux. is provocative. I had to look it up and think if Boston was the husband and the rest of the land is the wife. But I don’t use it, and lawyers do. It might do the trick.

            et al. is inclusive, a favorite here already, and not provocative which may argue against it.

            1. Firefly:

              I was just having a little fun. I’ve decided to use Latin – You know like the Marines have their “Semper Fidelis” and the Coast Guard “Semper Paratus”,I’ll call it “Semper Ubi Sub Ubi”

  6. I have enjoyed reading your perspective on the trial-it is my main window into it other than the liveblogging. In that spirit, I wonder why you would deal so gently with Grieg. She is not the recipient of the longest sentence for a female convincted of a nonviolent crime. I know of several other cases of women convicted of first-time marijuana infractions right off the top of my Google-fu that are twice as long. Growing weed vs. aiding and abbetting a serial killer? And I am sure more research would yield your statement is wrong.

    I agree that weeks et al should go away forever and it makes no sense that Grieg is sent away for longer than those malformed murderer’s. But we shouldn’t let that cloud our handling of the facts. Especially not if we are going to be attacking the accuracy of dedicated journalists.

    Thanks for sitting in that courthouse so we don’t have to!

    1. Superlatives are risky and easily challenged, but Grieg’s sentence is in stark contrast to the fact that the woman who fled with Martorano, went home to get funds for him, etc didnt even get charged.

      Mr Connolly you seem to me more dedicated than any of those ‘dedicated joirnalists’ in there, most of whom are only dedicated to preserving their acces and selling their works of fiction. So my thanks as well!

      1. Snowflake:

        Thanks for the nice comment.Superlatives are indeed risky but maybe I just should have added “ouside of illegal drug dealing like marijuana” bu then someone else would have pointed to it being wrong again. I should have said it was the most outrageous sentence ever for a woman who went on the run with her boyfriend and never committed a violent crime.

    2. Saint:

      You got me there. I completely forgot the drug area where women were often used as mules and got hammered. Yes,there are other injustices that are caused by the timidity of prosecutors and the wide sweep of mandatory sentences.

      I guess my problem with Greig is that had she married Whitey and run off with him she would not have been subject to any punishment. So for lack of a formality, she got the book thrown at her. There’s also the suggestion by both the trial judge and the appeals judge that they were offended by her providing “other services” to him, which seemed to me that somehow we were back to a system where a little extra punishment was added for her “living in sin.”

      I guess I don’t think a woman who “stands by her man” or the other way around should be punished for the sins of the partner. Being in love should not be considered a crime and acting under the sway of love should not result in a person having the maximum sentenced tripled under conjured up reasons/ As you know, the law can justify anything, even torture.

    3. Which of the dedicated journalists credibility are you concerned about, Saint?

      Is it Howie Carr, who became business partners with and put 75k plus in the pocket of a vile serial killer? Or Murphy and Cullen, Wyshaks personal journalists who ignore the facts in order to sell more of their grade school crime fiction? The same dedicated journalists who have repeatedly been part of federal felonies, by printing leaked grand jury testimony?

      If those are the journalists you are worried about, rest easy. Their credibility is long gone..not due to the challenges of bloggers, but by their own greed and lack of journalistic ethics.

      1. Declan:

        Observing these “journalists” as I have a chance to do they are all part of a chummy club each one taking care of the others – more interested in advocating a viewpoint than telling the truth. Howie Carr is one of those guys who judges his worth by the money he makes so he’s busy working hard doing that; the others busy perpetuating the many falsehoods they set out that were unchallenged for so many years.

        Somewhere along the line the idea of the media as a watchdog on government changed to where it became a lap dog. And for that we are much the lesser, especially in the criminal area.

        1. Matt,

          Who’s the crack journalist that fell asleep and was snoring in the over flow press room on Friday??

          1. Declan:

            I have seen some media types dozing off at times but I’ve imposed a ban on telling what goes on in the press room on myself. The media actions there are interesting and the relations strange but I don’t think it is something I should be writing about as it doesn’t relate to the purpoe of the blog. I’m still a big believer in privacy. But to answer your question, I did not see anyone but I was out of the room a lot because I was not interested in listening to money laundering testimony. Had I not done that, I’d have to take the blame for that testimony would have put me to sleep.

  7. Oh yeah Matt, he did do that. Guilt to all count if they would lighten her sentence. Wyshak said screw.

    1. Ernie:

      I heard that but I heard it was above Wyshak = the top wanted the publicity.

      1. Matt,

        Wyshak has been working with DOJ HQ for thirty years. About 10 figurehead Boston US Attorneys have come and gone during this time. Wyshak has been a constant and has the relationships in D.C with other career guys like Margolis. Wyshak can get what he wants.

        He has always earned them good press and never any bad press. That can’t be understated in terms of its importance to DOJ D.C. Wyshak’s media control is excellent.

        In Washington DC terms Wyshak put lipstick on the pig and won a blue ribbon. Wyshak accidentally uncovered the worst federal law enforcement corruption scandal in the history of the Country. Instead of cleaning house, he successfully turned it into a South Boston Irish scandal. He spent extraordinary amounts of money, endangered the public to no end, and violated his oath of office, but he pulled it off.
        All police corruption was successfully laid at the feet of John Connolly. There is nobody but the media to scrutinize any other DOJ employee, and Wyshak sold them a good enough story that they made great money and looked no further.
        Wyshak painted Whitey as the worst gangster ever. He used worse gangsters to prove this theory, and nobody questioned it. The media bought that whole hog, even when they saw the evidence of the depravity of Wyshak’s witnesses. Wyshak: “Bulger was forceful and overbearing?” Flemmi: “Yes, he was forceful and overbearing.” That sounds like the childhood defense: “he made me do it!”
        That’s only slightly better than the “Skippy Adams defense”.

        Assume Whitey is convicted. Then calculate the costs and benefits of everything. On one hand Connolly and Bulger are in jail, but Kevin Weeks, the Martorano brothers, Howie Winter, Pat Nee, Frank Salemme, and likely Steve Flemmi will all be free. That’s probably a hundred murders between them. Then look at all the scores of corrupt law enforcement officials who were protected. Then look at all the people who were abused by this system, Naimovich, Rakes, Limone, Greco, Tamelo, Salvati, Greig…
        Nothing has really changed here. The system is no better, but Wyshak did produce an effective paradigm for diffusing scandal: give the media a different scandal and feed the perception until it appears bigger than the real scandal.

        1. Patty:

          I agree Wyshak has been working with the DOJ and guys like Margolis and he has run his own little empire while the US attorney for the most part just looks on fearful of disagreeing. I saw his act in the courtroom and see how he is used to getting his way and whining and engaging in personal attacks against other counsel.I don’t disagree with JTB about him being a brute and a bully. He has a script he follows during his trial of going over the most simple of things. He’d ask did you see the car the defendant was driving. The witness would answer it was “a blue Chevy Malibu.” The next question is what color was it. The witness says. “a blue Chevy Malibu” Then he asks did you notice what make it is? The witness says “a blue Chevy Malibu.” And what was its model. I don’t know if he has memorized a scipt or he thinks he’s the only smart person and everyone else has to hear things a half dozen times.

          I know you are responding to my suggestion to JTB where I said he’s not bad and sees the world a little differently. I was responding to his suggestion he’d commit suicide if he was his father. I know nothing of his fathering but I don’t think within his family your only response would be to end it all. But I was also responding in a Saturday morning tired mood where I didn’t want to get into an extended discussion with JTB over him but did want to let JTB I had read his comment.

          I’m still digesting Wyshak. I tend to agree with you in most things as you know. I’ve mentioned over and over how his actions have based upon his warped perception. He set out, with media aiding and abetting, to go after”the Bulgers and Southie.” For him that represented all corrruption. Once he set out on that quest he had enough lackeys under him so that they all bought into that goal. It resulted, as you point out, in him letting a one of the most vile men who ever lived, one who far surpassed anything Whitey could ever imagine doing in his darkest hours, pass of his rot to another. He was complicit in Flemmi doing that – something again I have to digest.

          It’s good you mentioned the Skippy Adamski defense. That defense didn’t excuse my behavior, I didn’t say I got some 50s on my report card because Skippy was “forceful and overbearing” but I accepted my failing but tried to pacify my father by saying other did worse than I did. Flemmi isn’t even accepting the reseponsibility, he is saying don’t blame me because Whitey made me do it. That the “following orders” defense which is the lowest of all defenses.

          Whitey will be convicted and he should be. Wyshak will be praised and he shouldn’t be. The story needs time to mature and then the true story will be told, but it won’t come from any in the media who just have no idea what is happening.

  8. Do you really buy the suggestion that the DOJ would pass down a plea? Surely they must have had an idea how bad they and the FBI would look. Perhaps I am in the minority that thinks the FBI and DOJ were exposed to be as bad as the defendant with their corruption and shady deals.

    It seems more likely that the defendant would have wanted a trial to 1) tell his story and 2) stay in Plymouth longer.

    That is the only part of this story I can’t wrap my head around. Can someone explain why the Federals would really prefer to have the trial? The quicker this chapter of “ancient history” is closed, the better for the Feds, right?

    1. You would think, but don’t forget they’ve partnered with the media do they can control the damage. For example – Morris is on the stand explaining how he laced a bomb on someone’s car. An FBI agent enjoying his

      1. Sorry hit post too soon

        Morris enjoying his retirement at our expense. What’s in the news? F bomb reports. Is that news?

        The reason the federals passed up the plea is that they don’t want it to die. They want to keep going after Bill Bulger. Wyshak’s built his career on this, he has paid several serial killers for this. He needs his egotistical culmination. As Matt has pointed out, he has so many details he is dying to spew like what case Bill Bulger won when he was in his thirties (relevance?!) that he’s lost sight of the big picture.

        Wyshak is very expensive to us taxpayers. Not just the trial, but the teams of investigators terrorizing innocent people plus the cost of having criminals paid millions an walking our streets. Strange, sad man.


        1. Dotty:

          He can’t get Billy Bulger – the statutes that give him jurisdiction to do that have passed. He is plainly out of luck. That is why this trial will end his quest for the Bulgers. Another reason he could not get Billy, and the main reason was there was nothing there. During the Connolly trial when the federals threw Billy’s name in the local newspapers spelled it out in their headlines. He was still president of UMass at the time so the media was still after him. He took his fall 10 years ago and has led a relatively quiet life since then. Having taken from him the presidency, the media has lost its blood lust. Wyshak has not figured this out and I’m sure he was shocked that his mention of him this time did not gain headline news.

          Wyshak is expensive. He has let too many killers roam our streets. He has let his personal feelings play too much into his role as a prosecutor.

          1. Matt, by one count, Wyshak is responsible for eight serial killers or their accomplices roaming the streets of Boston. How many of them directly or indirectly involved in the drug trade—protecting narcotics traffickers, for example; or providing “muscle” for drug dealers–and if some were, could they be tied to the stabbing/killer maniac Alemany (sp) responsible for attacking several young women to get his “drug money.” Did Wyshak ever think of the rippling effect on criminal activity in our community after he released serial killers and career major felons? Did he care? I’ve seen no evidence that he cared a jot about it. What loose leash did he keep these maniacs on? What is his and the FEDs responsibility in these matters related to narcotics trafficking and addicts’ crime sprees?

            1. William:
              I can’t blame Wyshah for the drug dealings because of his actions. Look at Whitey’s case the business was ongoing when he muscled in – and he just took a cut of the profits and made was able to get new sources. There will always be those involved in these activities who are ruining their lives and others. Alemany should never have been on the street – I blame courts and prosecutors. Widespread drug use then go to DEA and the cops, they seem less effective than ever. Overall drugs are a societits problem one where both right and left of the spectrum are to blame – and their general philosopies of giving too much which disables people and allows the brutes and scam artist survive or pocketing too much which provides an unstable society. We need more leaders in the image of Pope Francis who understand the trappings of office are traps for those on their way to losing their sense of family and community.

    2. Another:

      We used to have a DA who just before an election every four years would conduct a big roundup of the bookies. The media would play it up, he’d get his publicity as a crime fighter, and get reelected. After the elections the bookies got a small fine and went back to work.

      There’s a lot of yearning for the publicity here. They’re not really worried about the FBI because they will suggest we have a new FBI and the one they are attacking is an old FBI. Plus all that stuff has come out before and it is now old news, at least up here.

      Ambitious people like to use whatever mechanism they can to advance their careers. Here except for the Aaron Swartz case you might have seen the US Attorney running for a higher office.

  9. Could Mr. Dark White have kept his love around just for barter or is that too cynical.

    I’m surprised Mr. Wyshak didn’t try to pin the work of the Gustins on the defendant.

    Would it have been more cost effective on the taxpayers’ dime to send the same squad that confronted the Chechnian down in Florida?

    1. Hopalong:

      I like your suggestion that we start thinking of the financial costs of these things. Too bad the the Orlando team that questioned the Chechen hadn’t been in Santa Monica at the time the tip came in from Iceland. Whitey would have been taken care off, Catherine would have been deported back to Quincy, and the FBI would still be investigating it. Benji would have gotten out and he and Frankie Salemme could join up with Howie “do you know who I am” Winter in extorting people in the retired men’s club.
      I actually think Dark White actually cared for Catherine because he got involved with her cats and dogs which was his undoing. As for Wyshak, he’s trying to figure out how Whitey poisoned Steve Rakes – time for another strip search.

Comments are closed.