FBI Agent John Connolly: A Summing Up: Don’t Associate with Honest Guys

I began writing this week about John Connolly suggesting he is wrongfully incarcerated in Florida. After doing that I wrote about the problems I have with him. The first was his attempt to subvert a federal case pending against Stephen Flemmi and other gangsters; the other was his involvement in the John Naimovich prosecution.

Those who commented on my posts did not address the matters I wrote about. I heard lots of things about how Connolly was doing his job and the evils of the federal prosecutors. I even heard about the FBI and Justice Department regulations that were in force. Nothing I read changed my mind that Connolly’s actions were justifiable. I strongly believe that an FBI agent should not befriend gangsters nor should he or she continue associations with them, if they did because the job required it, after they left. I agree that Connolly had a First Amendment right to write an anonymous letter to Judge Wolf on Boston Police stationery making false allegations about other law enforcement officers that interfered with Judge Wolf’s hearings on motions;  but I would suggest that exercising a First Amendment right does not shield you from repercussions having done so.

A recent example of this is a young man who had a scholarship offer to a college was shown in a video making racist comments. He had a right to do that. The college also had a right after seeing that to withdraw the scholarship.

I set out my questions about John Connolly to show when I say he is wrongfully incarcerated in Florida I do not look at his case through rose-colored glasses. He was convicted in Florida of being involved in the murder of John Callahan. The murder was committed by John Martorano. He did it because Callahan paid him fifty thousand dollars to murder legitimate business man Roger Wheeler in Oklahoma. There was only one person who could link him to the Wheeler murder. That was Callahan.

Martorano wrote a book telling of his murders. He routinely murdered people who were a danger to him or who he thought might become government witnesses. When he learned the investigation of Wheeler’s murder had turned its eyes to Callahan because of his prior involvement with Wheeler’s business no one had to tell him to murder Callahan. He knew if he eliminated him the connection between him and Wheeler’s murder would be severed.

David Boeri wrote back in 2008 about The Martyrdom of John Connolly. It was written shortly before his trial was to begin in Florida. The prosecutor of Connolly, Fred Wyshak, was planning to have John Martorano testify against him. Martorano would say that he murdered Callahan because Connolly told Whitey Bulger and Stephen Flemmi that if Callahan talked to investigators he would give everyone up. Connolly had never  talked to Martorano nod did he have any involvement with Callahan. He was in no danger no matter what Callahan did; no one had to tell Martorano that Callahan presented a risk to him.

Boeri wrote: “According to Miami-Dade detective Ram Nyberg’s report in December 1999, “Martorano had no idea of anyone else besides [himself and] Bulger and Flemmi who were involved in the conspiracy to kill Callahan.” At a deposition in March 2006, the detective reaffirmed his earlier report: “Neither of Mr. Martorano’s proffers included any information on John Connolly.”

Boeri also wrote: “During a deposition in New York in April 2005, an attorney asked Flemmi, “Did [Agent Connolly] ever suggest to you directly or indirectly that certain people should be killed?” “No,” Flemmi said. “He gave information for Bulger. Bulger interpreted it the way he wanted to interpret it.”

How was it then that Prosecutor Wyshak knowing that disregarded it? How was it that in 2002 at Connolly’s trial in Boston Martorano testified that he met in New York with Whitey and Flemmi. He said Whitey did most of the talking saying that Connolly told him that Callahan had been hanging around with Brian Halloran, Callahan told Halloran that Martorano murdered Wheeler, and Halloran had told the FBI. Martorano said that’s why Whitey murdered Halloran.

He also said Connolly told him the FBI would put a lot of pressure on Callahan and the latter would not be able to stand up to it. if he talked, they would spend the rest of their lives in prison. The problem with the whole scenario is that the only one in danger if Callahan talked was Martorano. He would have known nothing about the contact between Martorano and Flemmi, if any, prior to Wheeler’s murder.

The other problem is that the way Martorano testified in 2002 he had Connolly as an essential player. Why in prior proffers had he not mentioned him? The jury in Boston totally disbelieved Martorano. Yet, how is it that a prosecutor, in this case Fred Wyshak, knowing this went on to Florida to prosecute Connolly a second time for the same matter.

During Connolly’s Boston trial I became convinced that the case was not so much about Connolly as it was about trying to get Bill Bulger.  Any doubts on that behalf were resolved when I saw a video of Wyshak saying after Connolly’s conviction in Florida when asked where did Connolly go wrong, he replied, “he got too close to the Bulgers and South Boston.”  Bulgers, plural.

I’ve always thought you should never commit a crime alone. If you do you have no one to squeal on. Bring along some others so you can rat them out and get a deal for yourself. Another part of that is one should not associate with people who are not criminals. Here was Connolly’s big dilemma: Bill Bulger was not a criminal. He was, as Connolly said, “a man of integrity.” Wyshak was convinced Bill was a criminal. He wanted Connolly to give him something on him. Connolly had nothing to give. Nor did any of the other legion of people Wyshak squeezed trying to get something on him.

Connolly will die in prison because Bill Bulger is an honest guy. Go figure that one out. Maybe by now Wyshak will have been happy with his pound of flesh and accept that Connolly can’t give him anything. Time to lift up his thumb off the scale of injustice. Connolly’s suffered enough.

15 thoughts on “FBI Agent John Connolly: A Summing Up: Don’t Associate with Honest Guys

  1. Wyshak’s actions throughout are not just overzealous and corrupt but evil, in my book. When he deputized 5 State Cops including then Major Foley as FEDs working for him, Wyshak fed them info or told them explicitly that their targets were two-fold: (1) Whitey and the gangsters and (2) the Honorable Bill Bulger and his colleagues at the State House . . .how do I know this? Retired Colonel Foley explicitly stated that a public hearing in Somerville in 2013 . . .I’ve seen his speech on Youtube . . .Wyshak and the Sterns Gang (Sterns, Durham, Wyshak, their cohorts (leaking Bulger’s GrandJUry Testimony) and their cohorts/associates/greenlighting Bosses in Washington D.C. with laser beam accuracy wrongfully singled out a few FBI agents as “Rogues” then with extra-intense laser beam accuracy singled out John Connolly, his family and his associates, in an evil Jihad intended to frame the Honorable Bill Bulger and intended to do the bidding of the Boston Globe, Cullen, Carr et al (Wyshak and the Sterns’ Gang’s Cheerleaders (the entire leftist MSM cheered them on) and intended to do the bidding of Harvard Professor Emeritus who had a 40 year grudge against the Honorable Bill Bulger and who urged Wyshak and the Sterns Gang and their Bosses in DC “to squeeze Connnolly to get Bill Bulger” Squeeze one innocent man to get another innocent man.
    EVIL . . . Abuse of Federal Prosecutorial Power that was EVIL

    2. FREE SPEECH: Professor Dershowitz has free speech rights and has done much intellectual good throughout his life. I especially enjoyed his debates with Bill Buckley, oftentimes when panels of men and women, liberals and conservatives, debated each other. But his advocacy of using prosecutorial/government power to go after a political/legal opponent was wrongful.

    There are very few instances were writing or speaking can be criminalized and usually they are clarified by Statutes: Calls to do immediate violence, “Crying Fire in a Crowded Theater.” A college does not imprison someone whose writings they don’t like. They may reject his application because he writes poorly or writes racial epithets or supports HIllary’s Military Interventionism in Syria and Libya.

    The Government/The FEDs can not prosecute folks because of their written opinions, even if those opinions are critical of Boston Cops or Supreme Court Justices or even if those opinions contain falsehoods, or defamations, or curse-words and are sent to a FED Judge or the President Himself.

    The Sterns Gang (Wyshak, Durham, Sterns et al and their bosses ex. Mueller, who must have greenlighted and approved their every action, if not ordering it, CRIMINALIZED FREE SPEECH: a FBI agent, five to 8 years retired, writing a letter to a judge; telling a guy he heard through the grapevine an indictment was coming down; sending a message or two to Flemmi “to tell the truth” and a message or two to Flemmi’s Legal Defense Team . . .at a time NO ONE knew of the murders Flemmi committed while John Connolly was assigned/ordered to handle him as a TEI (In fact, the 1995 indictments against Flemmi and Bulger, which caused the latter to flee, had no murder charges,, only Racketeering (intimidating bookies; pay to play extortion charges) . . .the first murder charges against Flemmi were for 3 1960s murders, murders committed before John Connolly handled him as a TEI, and these were first brought in May of 1996, six years after John retired. The HORROR killings of the 1980s were not known until Weeks, Martorano began to fess up around 1998.

    3. We . . .DB,NC, Me et al . . .amply answered your every charge/implication that John Connolly engaged in any impropriety after retiring from the FBI . . . .if you want to establish a rule/regulation that former cops should have no contact with known criminals, try to get that through the legislature. The Globe drove Bob “Kutzy” Cunningham out of High Office because he hung around the L-STREET GYM and was seen playing handball with former felon.

    There is nothing wrong with trying to help the legal team of a snitch who helped you take down a good part of the New England Mafia . . . .especially when you are not aware of the heinous murders he hid from all (DAs, Reporters etc) when you retired in 1990.

    Perhaps you’d approve a law that cops could not date or marry former felons . . .FBI agents shouldn’t hang around with whom else: recovering alcoholic, recovering drug addicts, active alcoholics, active drug addicts . . .shouldn’t help them get their lives together . .shouldn’t have a cup of coffee or lunch with or invite them to their houses or parties or weddings . . .what? these retired FBI agents should wash their hands clean of the real world and only associate with whom? LAWYERS? POLITICIANS? GLOBE EDITORS? MUD-SLINGERS WITH CLEAN RECORDS LIKE MR. SMEAR AND MR. SCHADENFREUDE, HOWIE THE CUR CARR.

    We all should hang around with all of us and associate with all of us and try to help all us make America, the greatest nation on planet earth, and even better, fairer, more just place . . .we’re all created equal, and we’re all suppose to be equal in the eyes of the law . . .

    Keep writing and speaking out until they Clean House in the Federal Prosecutors’ Offices and in the DOJ . . .

    FREE JOHN CONNOLLY !

  2. Wyshak is a criminal. He along with Mueller hid the Fitzpatrick exculpatory evidence for ten years, denying Connolly a fair trial. You, Janet and everyone else have come to the correct conclusion that Connolly was framed in Florida. He must write a pro se writ of habeas corpus to judge Ruiz when the Senate confirms him. He may not be dishonest unlike Tauro, Blake, Rosenberg and the Court of Appeals judges in Boston. 2. You misapprehend the 1st Amendment. No criminal conduct can be involved in speech except a threat or incitement to riot. A private institution can act but the government can’t charge one with a crime for writing a letter with alternative facts. The judge could have disregarded that missive, He alone had the discretion to hold a hearing. How does his decision inculpate an other person. Should everyone who writes a pol or a judge a letter they don’t like be charged? There should be no criminal repercussions for a different opinion. There would be no Free Speech if your standard existed. This was gross misconduct by the Deep State. 3. There were five families in NYC that ruled the Mafia. Are the Clinton’s the sixth crime family? When Mrs. McCabe ran for office in Virginia she received $700 thousand from Clinton’s former campaign manager at the same time her husband was the Number 2 FBI Agent in DC. He was Strzok’s boss. Strozk was conducting the Hillary investigation. Was this a payoff or hush money? Now it is revealed that the #4 man in the DOJ Ohr had a wife that worked for Fusion GPS. Fusion got $12 million from the DNC ( Clinton campaign)for opposition research. How much money did Nellie get? It seems the Clinton’s had the FBI and DOJ on the payroll. Did Nellie get $700 grand too. Tip O’Neill said follow the money during Watergate. A good suggestion. This corruption is much worse. Drain the swamp.

    1. You fail to understand the First Amendment. You absurdly state the judge should have ignored the letter. Could he have done it if it was true? How could he know it was false? Bottom line what kind of guy sends that letter.

      As for First Amendment you have a right to tell your boss he’s a jerk. You have no right not to expect repercussions like being fired.
      As for First Amendment you have a right to interrupt and speak your peace to a judge in her courtroom, you have no right to not be held in contempt. You would look pretty foolish defending yourself saying the judge should have ignored the speei.

  3. Perhaps, in the mists of time you might underestimate the 1988 Boston Globe articles about the Bulger brothers. At that time most New Englanders who were not on the inside of law enforcement thought those articles painted a picture of Billy using his public office to benefit his brother with getting away with crime because of their family relationship. The media plays such a role in setting public discussion and elected officials react to that and it all seems to roll downhill.

  4. Glommed onto your thesis some time back , Afternoon Class, it is straightforward and as transparent in its existential clarity as John’s actions on behalf of …. THE GANG …post retirement : John may or may not have had anything to hide. But, such extraordinary efforts as sending Federal judges gangster mash notes on Boston Police Department stationary on behalf of a jammed up boyo do not reassure a suspicious public that there is at the least the … Appearance ….of John being compromised.

    Don’t sense personal rancor or bias in your conclusions.

    Common sense !!!

  5. * do not reassure a suspicious public that there is not at least the … Appearance…. of John being compromised.

  6. The letter was innocuous. Much ado about nothing. Comparable to the fake charges against the Probation Officials. A total fabrication by the Deep State.

  7. That a Federal prosecutor, Wyshak, would baldly suggest to John that his freedom lay in … conjuring …. up scenes of the impeccable and imperial Senate President Bulger in murky machinations with the masters of mob mischief in Boston is a stretch.

    The ones who know ain’t tellin.’

    Spec you later !!!

  8. MC, DB, BC, NC, E.FREEH,ABIE, AND ALL UNRECONSTRUCTED CONNOLLY’S:

    Bill C. ,in particular, by dint of sedulous research, natural wit, Hibernian revenge as blood sport, all Jesuits on board and a loquacity unmatched since Toulouse Lautrec charmed the dancers at the Moulin Rouge has cited, Chapter and Verse, for us every single passage of THE BIBLE OF FEDERAL PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT … Wyshak Version .

    Bill, in a paradox so fathomless in its capacity to delight those who appreciate these sorts of paradoxes that I leave it to the reader to swim, swim, swim, has for years now built a tremendous case for just why Fred Wyshak did not need John Connolly to give him the Massachusetts Senate President .

    If Fred had that sort of hard on for Billy Bulger he would have just taken him down by indictment and the slow death and torture of a Federal trial. For indeed Federal Prosecutors win ninety five percent of the cases they bring.

    It is so obvious that it is hiding in plain sight !!!

    Just ask Bill. C.

  9. “Fred Wyshak will stop at nothing. ”

    Except indicting Billy Bulger as it turns out !!!

    With or without FBI Agent John Connolly !!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *