Whitey and the FBI: Questions From Jerome: Part II

Female IRA fighter, 1970sJerome read my response and set out to follow-up on the things I suggested that would aid him in figuring out the answer to his problem which is he can not find any information Whitey gave to the FBI.

Rather who comments here helped him identifying “Little Al.”  He also included with that some of the things I had said in the past about him. “Little Al” was the name the Chicago FBI gave to the illegal bug that was planted in a Chicago Mafia office for several years that gave them information on all the criminal doings in the Chicago area that involved the Mafia and others.

Jerome got back to me on the 20th under the NY Girls post. He said he still did not understand why Whitey was an informant but he had yet to find anything about the three persons I mentioned. He wondered whether Whitey was made an informant by the FBI agents who hoped that he would give them “a boatload of money” and in return they would give him “tips and protection.” That is something that many are puzzled about.

He is also troubled that the only information about Whitey’s involvement in the murders came from Weeks, Flemmi, and Martorano who were jammed in and to get a sweeter deal they gladly threw Whitey under the bus. That is a genuine concern especially when you see an FBI report of an informant who was in prison with Salemme, a Mafia king pin and close friend of Flemmi, who told the FBI informant that the investigators he was dealing with gave him a copy of “Black Mass” to read so that he could refresh his memory and also figure out what they were looking for.

It was Weeks who gave the best warning about him and the others: he said to be a criminal is to live a life of lies. They lie so often they become expert at it. So the concern is valid that testimony from a criminal, especially one who is going to get a deal if his evidence confirms what the prosecutors and investigators want to believe, is inherently suspect. Even more is the testimony totally unreliable when they are given a script to follow.

Five minutes after that post Jerome came back again with a perceptive comment. He is beginning to see the big picture by stepping back a bit. He asked “why was John Connolly singled out”  He pointed out that there have been other Top Echelon handlers over the life of the Top Echelon program whose informants have committed murder and they were never brought up on charges for that happening. He wanted to know why the FBI made Connolly a “scapegoat” pointing out that to be an informant in the Top Echelon program one has to be a criminal.

He is right about the Top Echelon program which was an FBI secret from the time it was instituted in the early 1960s. The idea behind it was to reach out to guys with connections to the highest levels of the Mafia to make deals with them so that they would provide information to the FBI. That program continues to the present time. The FBI is in bed with major criminals.

One FBI agent who was intercepted in 2011 talking to a Mafia guy who is suspected of several murders and who was his Top Echelon informant. He was heard telling him that “my job is to keep you safe.” John Connolly said his job was to protect his informants so that they could continue to provide information to the FBI. It would be the height of naiveté to believe that none of these top Mafia and other organized crime types never murdered or had someone murdered while a Top Echelon informant.

Pause for a second and think of what the FBI can give a guy who is at a high level in the Mafia in exchange for him giving it information if it has not jammed him in with some criminal charge. The only incentive is to give him a pass; that is it would protect him from other law enforcement agencies and from other criminals who might be informing against him. Many judges have talked about Top Echelon informants without looking at the other side to question what the guy got for his information. That has been a great failing in our justice system.

Jerome is right when he says Connolly was singled out since many other FBI agents were doing the same thing. Next time I’ll tell you why if you have not figured it out by ths point.

17 thoughts on “Whitey and the FBI: Questions From Jerome: Part II

  1. Way to go, Jerome, with your insights and pointed questions.

    I’ve bookmarked this post, as it provides this casual observer a convenient refresher on the matters of Whitey, Connolly and the FBI.

    “…if it has not jammed him in with some criminal charge. The only incentive is to give [a Mafia guy] a pass; that is it would protect him from other law enforcement agencies and from other criminals who might be informing against him.”

    Of course, one more incentive would be to give him a pass for crimes he would commit later.

    1. GOK:

      That is implied in the agreement that the FBI will also protect him from past, future and present crimes unless like Rossetti it has an end run pulled on it and is unable to do so.

  2. Hi Matt,
    As a historian, were the subjects of my research still alive, I would move heaven and earth to communicate with them directly. Why all this guess work about why and what Bulger and Connolly did or didn’t do? Go to the source. Anything less is questionable fiction. As for the stories of Weeks/Martorano/Flemmi/Morris/Wyshak/Murphy/Cullen/Lehr/O’Neil, and, let’s not forget my favorite — Howie Carr! they’re all based in fiction, and each received a huge payout for their tale in one way or another.
    Could the answer as to why Connolly became the scapegoat be that the FBI and US Attorneys Office knew that Connolly would tell ALL? (and was Bulger a scapegoat of sorts as well? When you consider that Martorano and Flemmi were allowed to make a deal with another sort of devil (DOJ)) rather than rot in prison, perhaps it was because the DOJ feared that in time, Bulger and Connolly would talk — with names, dates, and enough info to shake the very foundation of the Department of ‘Justice’. It was a safer deal for the US Attorneys Office to pay off the list of scum, with the hope of getting Connolly and Bulger, rather than risk the truth being revealed. (Let’s not forget that Connolly should now be a free man, but the powers that be won’t allow it. WHY?)
    Go to the source — I think you’ll be amazed at what they have to say. I am.
    Janet

    1. Janet
      What is the name of the “source” that you are referring to? Also, in your opinion, what types of things could Whitey Bulger and John Connolly expose IF they told the truth? Any thoughts as to why Whitey Bulger did not use his trial as a platform to expose the truth about what he did and with whom in law enforcement?

      1. The source would be the individuals everyone is trying to figure out! Connolly and Bulger. What types of things could they expose? Seriously? Why continue dialog about THEM if you don’t think the truth of their stories have anything to add or expose. The entire conversation seems futile if everyone is guessing about everything!? Would they tell the truth? What do they have to lose? Certainly, no one else has told it thus far….

        1. As for using the trial as a platform to expose truth about what he did and with whom in law enforcement — his defense team tried. At least this juror got it. The media didn’t seem interested. And though the defense team tried, for the most part their hands were tied and their mouths taped shut by the judge (with the help of Wyshak and Kelly). The trial was a circus, and the trained animals testifying for the prosecution were mesmerizing to those gathered. The rule of the court is the ‘golden rule’: He who has the most gold wins. Certainly that was the DOJ! Is Bulger guilty of much? Yes! His defense team said it from the get go. Does he have much to tell (and was forbidden to speak to) absolutely!

        2. Janet
          With all due respect you said to go to the “source” as though the “source” was someone else instead of just saying Bulger and Connolly. Also, how can one go to the source and get answers from sources of Bulger and Connolly when they wont or havent been able to speak the truth. I continue to dialog about them for the very fact that the truth hasnt been told. I was not aware that you were a juror.

          1. Oh, I know both of them would like to have the opportunity to talk — if it were safe to do so. Right now, Connolly’s freedom is on the line. Wyshak won’t chance him getting out because he’d talk. And, if, by some miracle he does, he’ll have a target on his back (and it won’t be the ‘bad’ guys that take him out). As for Bulger; he won’t talk about those still living (whether ‘good’ guys or ‘bad’ guys), and, he’s constantly concerned that Wyshak will further Catherine’s punishment (she is his Achilles’s heel).
            So, unless someone can come up with an idea of how to offer them a safe opportunity to tell what they can, I guess maybe it will never happen until they’re both dead. I’ll have stories to tell then — as I’m sure many others will, who have believed all along that they have truth to offer.

    2. Many of the publicly important trial and appeal documents in the Bulger are still sealed or not docketed on pretext basis of “ongoing investigations” or “national security” and should be unsealed. I can also confirm that there are some CIA documents and operatives that were involved.

      We should all demand the immediate unsealing of the judicial records.

    3. Janet:

      As a historian you would probably be dealing with a different type of cat than Whitey and Connolly. Right off the bat from what we know they have said they are totally contradicting themselves: Whitey sia he gave Connolly tons of money but Connollly says he never took anything. I ask rhetorically: “who do you believe?”

      You are right that the stories of others are all based on fictional stories that make no sense on close examination. Unfortunately for Connolly, he is responsible for a lot of the fiction himself since he was a big bs type guy (which is why he was effective in recruiting informants). Stories Connolly told to Morris were passed on to the Globe by Morris who had formed a friendship with O’Neill and Lehr.

      Connolly has a problem with the truth because in his interview with a guy named English he was all about blaming the DOJ when it was the FBI that did him in. He cannot accept that the FBI turned on him because the FBI was so much what he was about. I’ve spoken to him and he told me he knows of no names to throw out so he could make a deal. He said if he did he wouldn’t have had to go through the trial. That, of course, is what happens to most innocent guys – they have no conspirators to turn on to make deals.
      Here’s the conundrum: Connolly was doing what he was supposed to do handling Top Echelon informants which is protecting them. The feds theory is hard to follow. They don’t want to admit he had the right to protect them; but they suggest if he did then he did it because Whitey gave him money and not because that is what his job required him to do.
      To go to Connolly as the source he will tell you what he told me, he is innocent but is being framed by the DOJ. I forget right now why he thinks the DOJ has a vendetta against him; if he could throw off his FBI cloak he would see the FBI needed to point to him as a rogue agent to save its reputation.
      There is also another thing to keep in mind: Bulger was on the lam when all the ones you named came up with their stories. No one expected he would be brought back.
      As for Whitey being a source, I’m not sure how truthful he will be. But I hope to have a chance to visit with him and talk it over since he has already cleared me to do so.
      Connolly should never have been convicted in Florida. His incarceration is all about the mindset of one person who is using the DOJ to keep him in there. Wyshak has an irrational hatred of Connolly and will move heaven and earth to do all in his power to hurt him. Of course he should be out by now.

  3. Matt
    Its probably of no strong interest to you and it could be a college course in and of itself BUT the book THE RIFLEMAN could be studied for a long time. What I mean by that is that all the stories that Steve Flemmi tells it would be an adventure to say the least to decipher where he is telling the truth and where he is lying. I had no idea just how deeply involved and for how long Steve Flemmi was a professional criminal.

    Regarding your post and Connolly and Bulger. It is still not clear to me yet just what Bulger could have fed Connolly and Morris that made him so valuable as to be kept as an informant. Is there no way of piecing together circumstances to say that this guy ended up in jail or that guy got killed or that criminal enterprise got busted based on “inside information” that Bulger fed Connolly and Morris. It really does look shady what John Connolly did but as you said he is just one of many FBI agenst doing “his job”. WOW

  4. Matt
    Forgive me if you already answered in a previous post but are you convinced that Whitey Bulger did commit murder and if so , who did he murder that has substantial proof. I asked because Bulger was convicted in a court of law based on Flemmi, Martorano, and Weeks testimony ONLY, no? Is it to be believed that Flemmi, Martarano, and Weeks WOULD NOT perjure themselves when it came to testifying about Bulger since it could mean going back to jail and a forfeiture of their deals? I still dont understand what Bulger had to lose by testifying and telling the truth. Did he believe that by not testifying he could possibly win his freedom?

    The more I study the more I realize that among criminals and crimes committed one will never know what really happened unless one was there at the time of the crime.

  5. Janet
    Thanks for the insight. It sounds like you have a lot to share and tell but you are very very reluctant to do so because of the Feds (FBI). Also, did you learn a lot more about the truth and what really happened with Bulger and Flemmi than the average reader of the Whitey Bulger books simply from being at the trial everyday? If you dont mind I am curious what you learned as a juror that is in the books

    1. Jerome,
      After going through that trial, and reading Harvey Silverglate’s book, I certainly am concerned about the power of the FBI. After watching Wyshak in action, and reading former Fed. prosecutor Sidney Powell’s book, and work by former Fed. Judges Nancy Gertner and Alex Kozinski, I certainly am concerned about the power of the DOJ as a whole. They can create charges, rig trials, put individuals in prison, and throw away the key. And, never forget, ‘Hard cases make bad law’. If they can do it to the vilest of defendants, they can do it to us.
      Yes, Jerome, I believe I ‘learned a lot more about the truth and what really happened with Bulger and Flemmi’. From the trial? In part. I was the ‘perfect’ juror (at least for the defense). I knew next to nothing about Bulger. I had lived outside the state when he was most active. I chose not to read about or watch things about organized crime. My purposed naivete backfired! The names Flemmi, Martorano, Weeks, Morris, etc meant nothing to me.
      During the trial I listened intently and observed all. After the trial I read everything the media had to say about the trial — shocked to find that few cared about the government corruption that was constantly revealed. I had already determined in the trial that the witnesses for the prosecution were out and out liars, and their testimonies couldn’t be depended on — so why read books where they were the source of information?
      I tried to contact, and spoke to many following the trial: Wyshak wouldn’t respond (no surprise). Carney did. Weeks did. Fitzpatrick did. Ralph Demasi did. And the list goes on —-. I interviewed for the documentary by Joe Berlinger. I interviewed several times with TJ English (he actually rescued me from the verbal attack of Steve Davis).
      I correspond with John Connolly and Jim Bulger. I’ve spoken to Bulger. There is much these men have to say — and they will say it when they are ready. But, will anyone believe it? Probably not. Somehow we’d rather believe Wyshak, Flemmi, Martorano and Morris….
      In the end, the only thing of importance is that the DOJ is corrupt — more than any of us can imagine. What will be done about that? The strength of this nation, from its foundation, was that it was a nation based in law. With the deterioration of the American judicial system comes the destruction of the United States of America. It’s that simple. None of us are safe.

      1. Janet
        Thank you for answering my questions and addressing what I brought up to you. What are the name of the books by Harvey Silvergate and Sidney Powell?

        As a juror what was the government corruption that you witnessed during the trial? What would have had to happen to insure that Whitey Bulger got a “fair” and “unbiased” trial?

        If you care to share, what did you discuss with Carney, Weeks, Fitzpatrick and Demasi? I am assuming you only were able to write to Jim “Whitey” Bulger, no?

        Thanks again

        1. Jerome,
          Harvey Silverglate: Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent
          Sidney Powell: Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice
          The corruption throughout the trial? That Wyshak and Kelly had free rein to manipulate witnesses with the hope of money, freedom, and, in the case of Martorano and Flemmi — staying alive! For John Morris? They wiped away his hideous crimes, and continue to steal our money to pay his pension. It often took three or four attempts to get these guys to ‘admit’ to what Wyshak and Kelly would accept as ‘substantial’ testimony to get the sweet immoral deals they got.
          Kevin O’Neil was faced with false imprisonment (for a year) because of a murder charge that was, in my opinion, concocted. His family faced destitution. When he offered Kelly what Kelly wanted to hear, Abracadabra! the murder charge was dropped and O’Neil was free!
          There is indeed a paper trail, and testimony of witnesses, showing that Jeremiah O’Sullivan met with Bulger. This certainly should have been introduced to the jury!
          The fact that Bulger wanted to plead out, and the the US Attorney’s Office rejected it, should have been introduced to the jury. And, the list goes on and on, etc…
          (There is even the possibility that one prosecution witness had absolutely no dealings with Bulger whatsoever, though he had quite a story about his dealings with Bulger. And, of course, he earned his freedom with this information—)
          What was shared with Carney, Weeks, Fitzpatrick and DeMasi? A lot. VERY briefly I’ll share that which I found most interesting:
          Carney: Bulger did in fact offer to plead guilty to all, with an expedited execution in return for leniency for Catherine (remember that Martorano’s girlfriend, who harbored him for as many years, was actively involved in money laundering, and lied to a Grand Jury — didn’t spend a minute in jail; except perhaps for conjugal visits with Johnny!)
          Also, there is a paper trail attesting to the fact that Bulger met with Jeremiah O’Sullivan, but the Court refused to allow it to be presented to the jury!
          Weeks: His outspoken verbal loyalty to Wyshak and Kelly made me suspect that our conversation was being recorded (interestingly enough, he called the night before the Berlinger documentary was being premiered in Boston). My take on his loyalty to them was that they have his balls in their hands. (Excuse the vulgarity, but it succinctly explains the situation).
          Fitzpatrick: That Bulger didn’t at all fit the profile of an FBI informant — yet he had the protection of all: FBI, US Attorney’s Office, etc. To the point that they would allow people to die (Halloran, Donahue) rather than make Bulger a target.
          DeMasi: That he never set eyes on Jim Bulger until the trial. He had no knowledge of Bulger being involved in the killing of Billy O’Brien. Yet, Wyshak and Kelly were determined to have him as a witness nonetheless.
          I correspond with Bulger, and have had face to face conversation.

  6. Janet, 🙂 Your words are weighted, carry significant weight, and await what will be. If it is written in The Stars; The Source of ALL. In the meanwhile … Here’s some Cosmic dust in their eyes 🙂

Leave a Reply

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