What Have We Learned: The Day of The Verdict

IMG_4512Not that anyone can guess what a jury will do, I’d expect the jury to come back today with its verdict. There is very little to discuss outside of the government approach to the case since the facts have already been conceded except to one or two of the particulars of the racketeering counts, the murders of the women. If the jury lingers on longer than today which seems highly doubtful it is either because there are some who are seeking to send the government a message that its actions have been wrong or like Pavlov’s dogs, the jurors are so used to coming to court in Boston everyday that they can’t wean themselves from doing it. After all, these were people who said that giving up their summer to sit as jurors at the trial was no great problem, remember the trial was projected to go into September, so some may be anxious to have a place to go to during the day.

If we can slip by the two outliers, we’ll see Whitey convicted, the case postponed until some later date for sentencing, the last day in the sun for the victims families who’ll be able to take the stand and tell the judge what a horrible man they believe Whitey to be and then stand in line outside the courthouse at the end of the day to air their views to the local media, and Whitey, who’ll have just turned 84, will go into the Bureau of Prison custody to serve out the remainder of his life in some hell hole reserved for the worst of the worst, the Terry Nichols and Robert Hanssen types.

Why then is there still a sour taste in my mouth at what went on. Is it because the friends of this man, some much worse than he, received government favors? Is it because we can see a man who admits to 20 murders walking free when it did not have to be so? Is it because a man who killed two women and perhaps many more than 20 other people was an FBI informant who refused to accept blame for any of them, always suggesting he had no choice to do them as a member of the underworld, or as he called it “the real world,” who absolutely was not needed as a witness received a deal that allows him to serve his time outside the federal bureau of prison’s custody and may be back on the street since the government refused to guarantee that it would not file a Rule 35 motion to set him free. If that man is ever set loose then the trial was truly a sham since the government argued to the jury it would not do it, but was it engaged in another bit of skullduggery as it did with David Lindholm and blamed his release on his lawyer.

Does the off taste remain because we got a closer look at the FBI and the Boston Media? The media that is so lopsided on the side of the government that the closeness gives ones chills lest they morph into one. The media that has published books containing more fiction than facts yet persists in the fictions by not reporting the evidence straight out, using government questions as a basis for its reports, calling them government accusations. The media because it lacked a semblance of fairness deprived us of hearing Whitey’s testimony. Is there any doubt that the prosecutors with the gleeful assistance of the media would not have gaily and daily, if not every few minutes, in its cross-examination peppered questions at Whitey with statements implicating his brother Billy in every one of his murders. Any doubt on that evaporated in an instance when prosecutor Kelly apropos of nothing asked an FBI witness whether Billy Bulger was a guest speaker at John Connolly’s retirement party. I’d guess that one inept and inappropriate question sealed the question in Whitey’s mind along with him having learned how the media treated the testimony of FBI agent Robert Fitzpatrick whose great problem seems to be his belief that lifting up the cover over the corruption in the Boston FBI office was what he took an oath to do.

Some may think that Whitey never intended to testify. I disagree. He direly wanted to tell his story. Do I have inside information on that? I guess you could say so because of my experience as a litigator on both sides of the criminal aisle. The cross-examination of the first gangster witness John Martorano told me quite clearly that Whitey would take the stand. Defense counsel didn’t do anything to show Martorano could not be believed when he said Whitey was in the back-up car, or as he would have it the crash car. Brennan avoided the area pretty much, an area ripe for plucking which is a traditional area a defense lawyer would wade into and whack the witness around with, or at least would have heavily emphasized Martorano was the one with the grease gun doing the killings and he was just adding Whitey in like one would salt a piece of fish to spice it up to make it irresistible to the federals. It continued on, except for the women murders, up through John McIntyre the defense counsel tip toed around the murders.

It all shouted out to me that Whitey would take the stand. When he didn’t it had to have been a compelling reason for him not to have done it. His failure to do so left J.W. Carney in the unenviable position of having to argue Whitey did not participate in the murders when he didn’t question his involvement in them during his (Brennan’s) cross-examination.

 

 

19 thoughts on “What Have We Learned: The Day of The Verdict

  1. MTC
    The jury might procrastinate because the chow for jurors at the Moakley Courthouse is good and one could get used to eating on the Uncle’s dime.

    Time will tell if Flemmi skates, lets hope that it doesn’t happen ever since our faith in the Justice Department is pretty low as it is.

    As far as not testifying, it was his way of telling the authorities and their pals in the scribblocracy to “kiss my arse”. He’ll take his well deserved punishment like a man. Any lawyer with a brain in his head would have told him that the die was cast and why let them play with you.
    Let them go play with their new homeboys Flemmi, Martorano,Weeks.

    1. Hopalong, I agree; although I hope he writes/publishes his version of events or someone does it for him. You know, put all the cards on the table!!!

    2. Hopalong:

      I agree. One big reason he didn’t testify was the press. Sort of stuck it to them. So far his luck holds. I can’t believe the jury lasted this long.

  2. Assuming a guilty verdict on some counts how long till Wyshak contacts Carney with an offer of a better prison if WB will co operate against the main target?

    1. N:
      Whitey has no use for the federals. There’s nothing they want from him. So he goes off into the night peacefully. Met a Lithuainian guy from St. Kevin’s,6′ 4″, lived near St. Margaret’s hospital who said he played basketball with a guy from Savin Hill named Sammy Connolly. I was wondering if you might know who Sammy Connolly is? He apparently went to BU.

  3. Matt,

    Was following your tweets earlier, what do you make of earlier today with the jury? Was convinced he had a mistrial in the bag. I guess the jury foreman (a stay at home dad) gave up a job to be on the jury…

    1. Jim:

      Right now I can’t make heads or tails out of what happened. Doesn’t seem light the brightest bulbs on the marquee are in the jury.

  4. Jay,

    Thank you for posting the link to the Congressional hearings and the quote.
    (They’re in The Thanks, The Thoughts, The Blog – I couldn’t reply there.)

    I will be using that and two books:

    Kaiser’s The Road to Dallas I which learned of from Matt, downloaded a sample and placed a hold at library.

    Lance’s A Deal with the Devil which I learned of from MsFreeh.

    I’ve read the decision on Angiulo’s appeal: He got back the yacht and half the money. He got out in 2007, I think, and lived at home with his family until he died in 2009.

    There is also some information on him in Silverglate’s Three Felonies a Day. Angiulo’s lawyer went to jail and Silverglate doesn’t agree with it. This lawyer was disbarred and readmitted as soon as was legally possible..

    1. Matt- do you remember how much half of his cash was ? Angiulo always fascinated me as far as mob history goes.He never killed personally to become a made man. Basically bought his way in through paying Raymond SR. I also found it interesting that LARRY BAIONE ZANNINO extorted him early in his career. Larry obviously knew he had a goldmine in the piss ant Gerry and his brothers. Larry ended up siding with Raymond Jr. when it was time to pick a new boss. Old bastard Gerry had a mansion in Nahant and I think lived into his 90’s and got to die at home! Just a little thought while we wait on the jury!! Stay digging for the truth kids!!

      1. Doubting:

        I’ve got to admit that what you say is what seems to be commonly believed about Gerry Angiulo but the Gerry I met and knew about was no shrinking violet. He was in firm control of the Boston Mafia and you’ll note that those guys who would go to Raymond with their matters if they were dealing in the Boston area were always sent back to get it OK’d by Gerry. Larry worked for Gerry, and not the way around and my little experience was that Gerry was the boss even though Larry was the muscle. The guys had no reason not to get along since there was plenty of pickings for all of them to share. The ideas Gerry was some song and dance man and wasn’t a dangerous dude doesn’t fit the man I knew.
        Gerry did get out and died at home after doing a chunk of time; remember Gerry was buried with an American flag on his coffin for his service to the country during WWII, four years in the Navy in the pacific. I wonder if Stevie will get an American flag for his time in combat in Korea.

        1. Matt- Zaninno did work for Gerry, but I have never heard anyone say Gerry was a man who could handle himself physically. He was either screaming his head off half drunk or he was trying to find out who was robbing him. He was a classic bully with serious connections in providence and a bottomless barrel of money. What about him made the impression that he was no shrinking violet? Also the concept of SHARING was not in Gerry’s vocabulary.

          1. Doubting:

            I never suggested that Gerry could beat Larry in arm wrestling. I don’t think Gerry was physically tough so that he could beat up anyone, he was a small wiry guy who I figured could hold his own. He was the boss in the area and others went along with him being boss whether it was because he freed them up to make money or whatever. Gerry was cheap but not to the extent of not caring for his own people and giving them an opportunity to make money as long as they paid their dues.

    2. One of the speakers we brought to our conference looking at crimes committed by FBI agents (held from 1988-2002) at Bates College is
      Quincy native Ed Tatro. We were so impressed with Ed that we asked him to return and speak again the next year. I have been nudging Matt to call Ed
      and invite him out for lunch. We later introduced Mr Tatro to Alan Witwer
      who had attended our conference in Maine. Mr Witwer managed the Del Charo Motel where the Texas Oil Mafia conspired to assassinate President Kennedy and funded the assassination through the the Texas Law Firm of Edward Clark. Barr McClellan was an attorney at the firm and say the FBI, Texas Oil Mafia and LBJ assassinated Kennedy. McClellan was privy to the pay off. see
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQ

      For more on Ed Tatro, who will be speaking in Dallas and Olney Central College in the coming months see
      http://jfklancer.com/dallas12/speakers.html

      Ed Tatro – Anecdotes
      tatroEd Tatro taught high school English for 38 years specializing in science-fiction; mystery and horror; satire and comedy; creative writing; media and propaganda; and the origin, history and poetry of rock music. He also taught college and adult education courses for thirty years specializing in the JFK assassination, subliminal messages in advertising, the influence of rock music on drug abuse, backward messages in music, and plagiarism in music. Tatro is a distinguished author of over thirty mystery and horror short stories, literary essays, and poems published in many national magazines. A long time researcher and expert in many areas of the assassination research, he has authored many research articles pertaining to the JFK assassination conspiracy; publishing in Jerry Rose’s “The Third Decade”, Penn Jones’s “The Continuing Inquiry”, and Ireland’s “The JFK Assassination Forum”. Tatro has been acknowledged/footnoted in many JFK assassination books including “Crossfire” by Jim Marrs; “Reasonable Doubt” by Henry Hurt; “Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover” by Anthony Summers; “Destiny Betrayed” by Jim DiEugenio; “The Assassinations” (Probe Magazine) by Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease; “The Kennedys: Dynasty and Disaster” by John H. Davis;” Killing Kennedy” by Harrison Livingstone; “JFK; The Book of the Film” by Oliver Stone and Zachary Sklar; Doug Weldon’s essay in “Murder in Dealey Plaza”; and “JFK and the Unspeakable” by Jim Douglass. Tatro was also the original editor of “Texas in the Morning”, the memoirs of LBJ’s mistress, Madeleine Duncan Brown. He was editor of the Bugliosi chapter in “Biting the Elephant” by Doctor Rodger Remington and contributed research to Senator Sam Ervin’s Watergate investigative committee, the House Select Committee on Assassinations and the National Academy of Sciences (JFK Acoustical Analysis Project). Tatro attended Clay Shaw’s trial for one week in New Orleans, February, 1969, and was given access to the court exhibits by Judge Edward Haggerty and was a Minor consultant to Oliver Stone’s film, “JFK”. Tatro was also responsible, via the LBJ Library, of the release of the rough drafts of NSAM #273, which he shared with L. Fletcher Prouty, who then shared them with Oliver Stone for “JFK”. He testified before the Assassination Records Review Board, March, 1995, in Boston, Massachusetts and was responsible, via the ARRB, for the release of the unidentified print found on a box in the alleged sniper’s nest in the Texas School Book Depository. Tatro was a consultant to Nigel Turner’s “The Truth Shall Set You Free,” part VI of “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” series and consultant to Nigel Turner’s “The Smoking Guns,” part VII of “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” series. He was the primary recruiter and participant in Nigel Turner’s “The Guilty Men,” Part IX of “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” series.

    3. One of the speakers we brought to our conference looking at crimes committed by FBI agents (held from 1988-2002) at Bates College is
      Quincy native Ed Tatro. We were so impressed with Ed that we asked him to return and speak again the next year. I have been nudging Matt to call Ed
      and invite him out for lunch. We later introduced Mr Tatro to Alan Witwer
      who had attended our conference in Maine. Mr Witwer managed the Del Charo Motel where the Texas Oil Mafia conspired to assassinate President Kennedy and funded the assassination through the the Texas Law Firm of Edward Clark. Barr McClellan was an attorney at the firm and say the FBI, Texas Oil Mafia and LBJ assassinated Kennedy. McClellan was privy to the pay off. see
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQ

      For more on Ed Tatro, who will be speaking in Dallas and Olney Central College in the coming months see
      http://jfklancer.com/dallas12/speakers.html

  5. Harvey Silverglate gets plaudits for being one of the few attorneys in the country who openly sided with the Veterans in the St. Pat’s Day Parade case. He tried to persuade CLUM and the ACLU to support the Veterans’ free speech rights: he wrote an editorial in the Phoenix urging them to do that, but in doing so he did take a few unnecessary swipes at the Veterans, basically accusing Southie people of being Neanderthalic knuckle draggers. On the other hand, Silverglate loses points by being a friend and ally of Harvard Law School bully-boy Allen Dershowitz, a chronic blowhard stone-thrower, and he did join forces with Professor Dershowitz in unfairly attacking the nominated Judge Paul Mahoney who eventually became the honorable chief presiding judge of a District Court (Chelsea or East Boston, as I recall)!!!

    1. WIlliaam:

      Harvey is a good lawyer who is a first amendement expert an basically follows the law; he was a friend of Dershowitz who got involved with him in going after Billy Bu;ger on behalf of Harold Brown which I never quite understood because it seemed a step to far for him.

      1. Dear Matt,

        From what I understand, Silverglate has since denounced Alan Dershowitz and has spoken out in support of William Bulger on more than one occasion since those dark days of 75 State Street. Once such recent example follows here in the following article entitled “It’s Not a Crime to Love a Sibling.” See Harvey Silverglate, The Boston Globe, June 29, 2011, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2011/06/29/its_not_a_crime_to_love_a_sibling/. This change in pace is also noted here: http://bluemassgroup.com/2013/06/jeff-jacoby-globe-employee-and-close-friend-of-alan-dershowitz-now-putting-out-propaganda-on-bill-bulger/.

        Needless to say, while Silverglate was once apparently a legal partner of Dershowitz, he has since renounced that relationship and has taken a different path in speaking out to support William Bulger. We may at least take some solace in that.

        Respectfully,
        Jay

  6. Matt: Welcome back to the Psychological Soup Kitchen for the Whitey Bulger down and out. Help flesh out this story for me that appeared in the Guardian. If the victims of the Omargh bombing were killed by the 80 pounds of C4 the Boston FBI office provided Whitey Bulger then would the families of the victims have any recourse in civil court?
    Secondly was the C4 given on Boston FBI SAC James Greenleaf’s watch?

    see link for full story
    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/08/omagh-bombing-intelligence-withheld-ira

    FBI Intelligence on Omagh bomb ‘withheld from police’

    Security forces had two agents in the Real IRA but did not share that information with Northern Ireland officers, report claims

    Wednesday 7 August 2013

    MI5, the FBI and Garda special branch “starved” police in Northern Ireland of vital intelligence that could have prevented the Real IRA bomb that killed 29 people at Omagh in 1998, a damning new report on the atrocity concludes.

    The investigation, commissioned by families of the Omagh victims, will show evidence that they claim proves that information from two key informers inside the Real IRA – one in the United States, the other in the Irish Republic – was not passed on to the Royal Ulster Constabulary.

    The Omagh bomb was the single biggest atrocity of the Northern Ireland Troubles. No one has been convicted in a criminal court in connection with the bombing in the County Tyrone market town.

    Ahead of the publication of the report in Omagh, the father of Aidan Gallagher, a young man killed in the blast, said access to new intelligence files proved that the FBI, the security services and the Garda’s crime and security branch (the Republic of Ireland’s main anti-terrorist unit) all withheld vital information.

    Michael Gallagher, who has campaigned since the atrocity for a cross-border public inquiry, said: “All good policing is based on intelligence, especially prior intelligence before any criminal act is committed. In the case of the events running up to the Omagh bomb, it is now clear that the police in the north were starved of information. The security forces in America, Britain and the Republic had two key agents inside the Real IRA but did not share the information they were providing to the police in Northern Ireland.”

    The Omagh Support and Self Help Group also demanded an inquiry into the explosion.

    “There has been no full investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Omagh bomb. The inquest did not inquire into the intelligence, the criminal prosecutions did not lead to any convictions, and the civil action did not deal with the issue of preventability. The police investigation has been heavily criticised and the report highlights such concerns that the states [UK and Ireland] must now establish a full cross-border public inquiry,” a spokesperson for the group said, adding that failure to do so would be a failure to comply with obligations under article 2(1) and article 3 of the European convention on human rights.

Leave a Reply

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