The Families of Some of Whitey’s Victims Speak: Sadly Some Spoke Shamefully

Sometimes Some Come In With An Advantage

Fortunately, the majority of those who spoke today comported themselves with dignity. Mrs Patricia Donahue, who has maintained the high road throughout the trial and who perhaps suffered the most by Whitey’s actions utilized her time on the stand properly telling us of her husband, Michael Donahue, “I want him to be remembered for the wonderful man he was. He was the soul of our family … gone in the blink of an eye.”  

Tom Angeli spoke of his father and the harm Whitey did to his family; Marie Mahoney of the suffering she incurred by Whitey’s actions; Billy O’Brien of how it felt to grow up without a father.

Theresa Barret BondKathleen Connors, Timothy Connors and Meredith Rakes likewise demonstrated courage and decorum in their addresses to the court explaining their loss and the horror of it.

In all 12 people spoke about the sufferings incurred by them as a result of 9 murders Whitey committed or was alleged to have committed. Of the other 10, the families of those victims choose not to speak. Well it was for the latter, for all who spoke ended up being further hurt by Whitey’s refusal to face them and his stone silence except for the word “no” when asked to speak. He then slunk out of court to await his sentencing tomorrow. No apology, no regrets, the audacity to indicate that he was the victim.

As you know I have no fond feelings for Whitey. I do for what I perceive as the American system of justice where I earned my living. But reading of some of the tawdry happenings in the courtroom of Judge Casper today I feel like I can only repeat the phrase uttered by Attorney Joseph N. Welch and ask of some of those participating in today’s debasement of the justice system, especially those in positions of responsibility: “Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

What was the purpose of letting some people hide behind the protection of the court and utter epithets at Bulger? It may make them feel better but is that what our system of justice is about. I find nowhere in the penalties established for a criminal act that a person must sit and have people yell at and insult him. Is the next step to give victims and the families some stones to throw?

Is this a sign of an advancing civilized nation or one that is slipping back to the days of yore when the belief was “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth?” What has happened to our country when a man manacled by surrounding police is forced to listen to people toss vile names at him? Where in the common law is that practice found? Why does it remind me so much of a person in old England or revolutionary France being moved to the gallows or guillotine in a tumbrel past angry crowds? Are our courts now to become forums for tossing vile epithets; or coliseums for parading a tethered POOF before an angry crowd?

Do we gain honor by lowering ourselves to the level of the criminal by wallowing in his milieu? Where is the justification for giving people free rein to make some of the statements that I have read which were uttered. (Similar statements were also uttered at sentencing of Catherine Greig who never committed an act of violence in her life.) Ask yourself whether the court has not harmed itself and our system when it allows statements such as these:

David Wheeler: “You were a punk. . . . You’re a bag of jailhouse rags waiting to be stored on cold steel.”

Sean McGonagle, stating he is “Satan,” a “domestic terrorist” and a “sad, lonely and irrelevant old man.”

The ubiquitous Steven Davis saying that Whitey: “piece of shit” and a “son of a bitch” and “I’d like to strangle him myself.”

Patrick Callahan calling him a “coward.”

Is this what we want to show as the face of justice? Commit the crime, do the time but not before we give people the chance to insult you to your face (or in this case your back).

To compound this trumpery four of the people who were allowed to speak did so without right; the jury having been unable to conclude Whitey played a role in the death of their relative. Is this a sign of a too cozy relationship between court and prosecutor when an allegation even though unproven gives rights to people to appear as an aggrieved party? What does that tell the jurors who spent days deeply considering the matter and finding the evidence insufficient who then see the judge implicitly stating that they were wrong.

The problem is that the federals believe Whitey is such a bad person that they would bring down the justice system in order to show their disdain for him.

J.W. Carney said afterward that Whitey considered the trial “a sham.” He said Whitey didn’t want to face those who testified because that would validate the trial. As any of you know who have followed this blog the trial was far from a sham. Whitey was given the best defense and as fair of a trial as any person could expect, if not more so. After all he got skillful counsel appointed to represent him whereas most others are thrown onto the backs of the busy public counsel. Whitey’s trial may not have been perfect but few have ever received a such a trial and from my point of view fair is just about right for a guy like Whitey.

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines sham as: “something that is not what it appears to be and that is meant to trick or deceive people.” Who better fits that description than Whitey. Mendacious people made him into something he never was and he believed the lies they told about him. He was never more than a run of the mill hoodlum who like his associates found no difficulty in murdering and threatening others. He became notorious not for what he was but because the FBI opened its arms to him and kept him safe and malignant willful people wrongfully tied his honorable brother into his criminal activities.

The truth is still to be told in this matter. Over 30 books have been written about Whitey but most have failed to deal with the real issues. One is left to wonder why so many books and such a failure.

Tomorrow we can bid Whitey a less than fond adieu. The show is over. Time to pack up and go home.





11 thoughts on “The Families of Some of Whitey’s Victims Speak: Sadly Some Spoke Shamefully

  1. Good Post Matt:
    I have been talking with murder victim Wheeler’s son
    by phone over the last few years along with retired Detective Huff
    in Tulsa. Thanks for filling out the backstory to Natalie Wood in my response to your previous article.

    Professor Steve Hochstadt was Chair of the History Department at Bates College when I approached him in 1989 about helping us organize the 2nd Annual Conference Investigating Crimes Committed by FBI agents. Steve did not know anything other than we were able to hold our 1st conference the previous year at BU . He said yes , and with his help we were able to organize 11 consecutive conferences at Bates for the next 11 years. The reason I mention this is Professor Hochstadt is the leading authority in the world about how China was the only country who opened it’s borders to jews fleeing Germany during the 1930’s. see In the spring of 2001 we had our last conference at Bates College.We brought an honor roll list of speakers that year that will probably never be matched. We brought former LAPD narcotics detective Mike Ruppert to speak about the CIA working with local police to distribute heroin and cocaine into our communities including Boston. Later that year after 911 he went on to make a documentary that is one of my favorites about 911 . see In 2009 a documentary about Mike Ruppert was made called COLLAPSE that film critic Roger Ebert put on his top 10 list of documentaries. see
    Other speakers on the dais included attorney John DeCamp who was elected
    to the Nebraska State Senate as a Republican while a soldier in Viet Nam. His book THE FRANKLIN COVERUP details a national pedophile ring that tortured,sexually abused and murdered little children . The ring went all the way to the White House. FBI agents were involved with the pedophile ring. DeCamp was probably responsible for getting his friend William Colby murdered. Colby mentored DeCamp in Viet Nam and would later head up the CIA. DeCamp sought Colby out for his advice about all the people getting murdered in his investigation. see
    Daryl Cherney see shared the dais as well as attorney John Clarke whom I would urge you to visit his website. If there was ever a smoking gun linking Bill and Hillary Clinton to the murder of their friend and counselor Vince Foster Clarke has it on his website. see There were other speakers
    that weekend but you have more important things to do. In passing we never held our conference at Bates College after the spring of 2001.
    The next year, after the 911 attack, FBI supervisor Tom Carey quit his job at the FBI investigating the 911 Anthrax Attack to run the campus police at Bates College. see this 2004 issue of the Bates Magazine about Tom Carey

    In other news

    Inconsistencies Haunt Official Record Of Kennedy’s Death

    by Marcus D. Rosenbaum
    November 10, 2013 5:10 AM

    1. ms:

      I’m amazed and dismayed at your story about the conferences you had about crimes by FBI agents. Amazed that I never heard of it, dismayed because it seems nothing was accomplished. You have a wealth of knowledge on FBI malfeasance so you must find it extremely frustrating that no one cares about it. Don’t you want to throw your hands up in despair that the things you pointed out twenty or so years ago and highlighted through conferences still continue to this day. Anyway, good information and thanks.

  2. Good post. But WB should have been allowed to raise the immunity defense in front of the jury. When the press, prosecutors and judges combine to run a smear campaign against an individual a fair trial is unattainable. 2. A claim was made that there were Mafia Deniers abroad. Some discounted it. Would Att. Cardinale fit into that category? He asserts that the Italian Mob in the eighties were only bookies. The FBI unfairly target then because of their ethnicity. He reminds one of the character in the Godfather movie Frank Pantangelli who appears before a Senate Committee and recants his claims ” I know nothing about no Mafia Senator I was just in the olive oil business with Corleone’s father” If one looks at the cable tv programs about Gaspipe Casso, Dimeo,Karate Patera and Francezze the Elder there are over two hundred murders involved. The book on the Calabrese family in Chicago chronicles over 3000 OC murders. The Mafia in America is responsible for at least ten thousand killings but Cardinale, the DOJ and Judges can’t see them. I guess they were all just in the olive oil business together. Cardinale must have had relatives back in the old country telling everyone that Mussolini and Hitler were benign. He is a Mafia Denier and a moral Quasimodo. 2. The person with the most dignity at the hearing was Bucky Barrett’s daughter. Takes after her father.

    1. N:
      1. Using the immunity defense a I point out today would have just prolonged the agony. Whitey got a fair trial – look at how many murders the jury rejected. As to the other charges he had no chance despile any smear campaigns.
      2. Cardinale is a Mafia mouthpiece. If pressed he’d deny there ever was any Mafia. Of course the Mafia was worse than Whitey and his crew but so what. Martorano helped the FBI in its fight against the Mafia. Do we excuse his 20 murders? It should be noted the Mafia never liked Mussolini.
      3. True, she had dignity. Never knew Bucky.

  3. Excellent post. Matt. As you all know, I, for one, have lost much respect for the so-called Department of Justice. It is a circus; a politicized system of injustice that singles out some for harsh treatment, and treats others with kid gloves. Compare the DOJ’s treatment of Congressman Tierney’s wife and City Councilor Chuck Turner. 2. That complaining juror in Bulger’s trial expressed disgust with the Federal prosecutors reliance on serial killers/serial perjurers. She said she didn’t know what or who to believe. 3. There’s an evil Zeitgeist afoot in America. The Boston Press and others are complicit in creating and perpetuating it. 4. Remember how Howie Carr, the Boston Press and Harvard-affiliated lackeys conspired to attack the honorable William Bulger for decades. It was and is despicable. Jacoby, Carr and Cullen still throw stones at William Bulger and his family. The Harvard Law professor, Allen Dershowitz, has been stoning him unjustly for decades. William Bulger is a studious, selfless, good natured man who has dedicated his life to public service and the public good; he has received 20 Honorary Degrees from Prestigious Nationally Recognized Institutions. He’s committed no crimes, not even a misdemeanor. Carr and his cronies want him shunned, pilloried and stoned. 4. Think 1930s Germany and think about Orwell’s “1984” and how Goldstein was treated, and think about Orwell’s “Animal Farm”, where “all animals are equal; but some animals are more equal than others.” Some FEDs, professors and press people think they’re “elite.”

    1. W.

      Good comment.
      1. The federal court must police itself – it has shown less than good judgment in the handling of victims in the Greig and Whitey matters. It seems hard to not be influenced by the animus toward POOF.
      2. The complaining juror should have expressed her disgust more when she was in the jury room rather than now. The evidence of what was being relied on was right before her.
      3. The Boston press has betrayed Boston – it continues to do this.
      4. True, the story of the denigration of Billy Bulger is a true black mark on all involved.
      5. Don’t know if any of those examples fit today but surely we’ve lost one of our watchdogs who helped keep our democracy alive when the press joined the government.

  4. Mr. MATT, during the course of the trial there was some speculation that there might be a book in the works being written by Whitey himself. It had been rumored that part of the reason that Whitey chose not to testify was that he had been working on a book of his own and that was how he wished to tell his side of the story. Any news on that front ? Thank you.

    1. Gus:

      I’m told one of his relatives is writing his true story. I expect it is being circulated among publishers or agents now. One of the difficulties in getting it published are the orders of forfeiture against Whitey. Most publishers will not want to get into legal difficultiess which could arise if they publish the book and they are sued for damages by the victims. Another problem is for Whitey’s relatives to keep the proceeds of any book that may be written about him. I’d guess the book is near done but the legal problems are just beginning.

  5. He compared his sentencing to “The Witch Trials” – did you see Juror #12 Janet Uhlar’s tirade outside the court? She has been writing with Jim as well.

    1. Jim:

      Yes, whitey like all the women deemed witches is falsely accused. That’s a reach. He probably thinks of himself as Joan of Arc or as some type of Robin Hood.

      Juror #12 is pushing publicity so her book will have some sales. There’s been over 30 books written so she wants to get in line but she has to stand out somehow. Her latest complaints seem to show that she was dozing off during the trial because what she alleges to have just found out was presented as part of the case. Who knows, maybe her correspondence with Whitey will lead to Wedding Bells.

    2. Jim – She was acting like a rabid dog. She is a few chicken nuggets short of a happy meal

Comments are closed.