Whitey Bulger’s Claim of Immunity Is Backed Up By The Ongoing Immunity Given To His South Boston Crime Partner

Over the last three days we went into Whitey Bulger’s claim that Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeremiah O’Sullivan gave him immunity. We’ve seen that the only people who would know about this are Whitey, his handler, FBI Agent John Connolly, and O’Sullivan. The prosecutors have made much of O’Sullivan’s denial that he gave immunity but the actions of O’Sullivan when viewed in a critical light, beyond the self-serving denials, show that it is quite probable that he had that arrangement with Whitey. I expect Whitey will testify he got immunity and from press reports John Connolly will testify to the same thing.

The media reported last Thursday that J.W.Carney, Whitey’s lawyer, filed papers making this claim. One person in the media went out to the usual contacts, some of the families of the victims, seeking their opinion. As expected, it was reported that they scoffed at the idea the federal government would give people immunity for murdering people. It would seem to be a far-fetched notion to persons not familiar with the operations of the Justice Department and FBI. It is not to us who have seen them operate in the matters surrounding Whitey.

In the comment section on my blog we have been talking about one person who is believed to be getting immunity from the feds at the present time for the murders he may have been involved in. This man is Patrick Nee who wrote a book about his exploits as a gangster calling himself a criminal. Nee brags how he tried to murder Kevin Daley shooting him twice from several feet away, then standing over him shooting him twice more with a .38 automatic, and finally kicking him in the face. He tells how he was involved in a gun war with another Southie gang.  He tells how Billy O’Sullivan, the top gun for the Killeen gang, was killed, as well as Donald Killeen. As expected, the guys he identifies as killing them are dead although some suggest that he left out one participant who was very close to his heart.

In 1972 Nee finally sought a peace conference with Whitey who was a member of the Killeen gang. They met at a restaurant and, as Nee wrote: “Whitey and I were now officially partners . . .”  He writes later talking about the time around 1974 or 1975 “Whitey and I were still in complete control of South Boston, . . .”

In May 1982 Whitey, and many believe Nee, killed Halloran and Donohue. The feds have evidence that he did it. Apparently Stevie Flemmi testified to that fact. Kevin Weeks is covering for Nee saying he wore a ski mask when an independent witness says he wasn’t masked. Isn’t Nee getting immunity from the feds if he’s the other gunner with Whitey?

Then there’s the killing of John McIntyre. He was the first mate on the Valhalla which made the trip to off the coast of Ireland and unloaded several tons of weapons for the IRA. When the Valhalla got back to Boston, the feds were looking for the crew and the people involved in the transaction. Nee was up to his ears in it, Whitey, according to Nee, backed it but half-heartedly.

It unclear whether McIntyre ever met Whitey. He was a skilled marine mechanic who was needed to keep the Valhalla running.  His only prior criminal involvement was as a member of a crew on a ship carrying marijuana. Yet the feds allege that Whitey murdered him.

Nee who had the motive to murder him says this of his murder. A grand jury was investigating the Valhalla and the heat was building. McIntyre was apparently going to give evidence to it. Nee writes, “Whitey asked me to bring McIntyre to see him at my brother’s house on East Third.” He drove to East Boston, picked up McIntyre, told him Whitey wanted to see him, and drove him to his brother’s house. He brought him there and walked into the living room and saw Whitey, Stevie Flemmi and Kevin Weeks sitting in there. Whitey “asked to speak to John alone in the kitchen.”   Nee writes, “I had some business at the club and told them I’d be back. I returned to my brother’s house an hour later.”  He returned and found Whitey, Stevie and Weeks in the basement and McIntyre lying dead on the floor.  He helped bury him in the cellar.

Kevin Weeks writes about the same incident which took place on November 30, 1984, saying  McIntyre was told by “another guy” who we know is Nee that he had to drop off beer at a party on East Third Street. They arrived around noon. Nee, carried in a case of beer and went out to get another one. McIntyre came in with a case and was immediately grabbed and tossed to the floor by Weeks. McIntyre remained a captive for six or more hours tied to a chair while being questioned by Whitey.

Nee has the motive to kill McIntyre. McIntyre is murdered at his brother’s house. Nee admits he brought him there and was there all but an hour. Nee admits burying him. Weeks said it took over six hours to kill him. Nee has him dead in an hour. It seems clear from this evidence Nee was involved in McIntyre’s murder. That he isn’t being prosecuted means he has been given immunity for this by the feds and he is probably a top echelon informant.

If right up to this date Nee, who is Whitey’s partner, can be given immunity by the U.S. Attorney’s office for his murders, why is it so difficult for people to accept that Whitey also was given immunity.

10 thoughts on “Whitey Bulger’s Claim of Immunity Is Backed Up By The Ongoing Immunity Given To His South Boston Crime Partner

  1. Re all the comments on Pat Nee’s current status

    I am no fan of Pat Née. I knew him in South Boston in the 1970’s and he was without a doubt a major player and stone killer.

    If he is now a TE informant ( I have no info either way on this but think that AG Reno did away with the TE program at least in name) it must have occurred after 2000. Née went down for the Vallhalla gunrunning with Joe Murray and then after he got out was taken down in progress trying to rob an armored car. He was inside on that from 1990-2000 (roughly).

    I don’t think he would have been incarcerated for either case if he was TE then. Bulger was up to his neck in the Valhalla case and being TE he got a pass.

    Someone set Née up in the armored car arrest, I might have known who at one time but just now can’t recall.

    Recent photos depict Née as a balding, stout, grandfatherly figure. Unless the leopard has changed his spots he is not.

    1. Pat Nee in his book identified the guy who set him up to be arrested in the attempted armored car robbery. The TE program may not exist in name but it certainly continues in fact as we saw last year when a Mafia capo’s conversation with an FBI agent was intercepted and the agent said his job was to protect him. It is the worst idea ever conceived by the FBI and one Hoover was worried about. I agree that if he is a TE it happened recently. I believe the feds may have evidence of his involvements in several murders and put it to good use. Nee’s photograph is on the inside back flap of his book. He is a bald, short, stout old guy. He’s with his grand kids. But old stout bald guys can still run rackets so I figure he’s got to earn a living somehow and being a criminal is all he knows.

  2. BELOW ARE SOME FACTS FROM JUDGE WOLF’S FINDINGS. THE MOST INTERESTING FACTS ARE:
    1. THE USA AND FBI (INCLUDING BOB MUELLER) WERE TOLD BY JOE MURRAY WAY BACK IN 1988 THAT NEE WAS THE BACK SEAT SHOOTER ON THE WATERFRONT AND PARTICIPATED IN THE MURDER OF BUCKY BARRETT.
    2. MURRAY ALSO SAID THE LOOKOUT FOR THE WATERFRONT HIT TOLD HIM ALL ABOUT THE WATERFRONT SHOOTING. [WE NOW KNOW THE LOOKOUT WAS KEVIN WEEKS]
    3. MURRAY FURTHER SAID THE LOOKOUT/WEEKS WAS WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND COOPERATE SOON.
    4. JUDGE WOLF DETERMINED: ‘On February 3, 1988, Weld directed Keeney to have the information that he had received sent to the United States Attorney in Boston, Frank McNamara, and to the Strike Force Chief, O’Sullivan. Ex. 151. Weld added that: “Both O’Sullivan and [Assistant United States Attorney] Bob Mueller are well aware of the history, and the information sounds good.” Id.”
    THIS LAST POINT PUTS JUDGE STEARNS’ CLOSE FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE, FBI DIRECTOR BOB MUELLER, (AND O’SULLIVAN) SQUARELY IN THE MIDDLE OF EVERYTHING. THEY LEARN AN IDENTIFIED COOPERATING “TERRIFIC’ INFORMANT, JOE MURRAY, HAS IMPLICATED FBI AGENTS IN HELPING WHITEY AND FURTHER IMPLICATED NEE AND WHITEY IN THREE MURDERS.
    MUELLER’S CLOSE INVOLVEMENT RAISES A PROBLEM FOR HIS BUDDY STEARNS.

    . Joseph Murray

    In 1988, Joseph Murray, who was then in federal prison, alleged, among other things, that Connolly and Newton were selling information to Bulger and Flemmi concerning electronic surveillance. The FBI assumed responsibility for investigating Murray’s charges. Although Murray was interviewed by agents in the FBI’s Boston office, he was either not asked about his claim that Connolly and Newton had tipped Bulger and Flemmi off to electronic surveillance or the information that he provided was not included in the 302 of his interview. Nevertheless, the Boston office characterized that charge as “unsubstantiated” and the administrative inquiry of Connolly and Newton was quickly terminated. The evidence presented in the instant case, however, demonstrates that Murray’s claim was correct.

    More particularly, beginning in January 1988, Weld’s secretary at the Department of Justice received a series of increasingly specific telephone calls from an individual, who asked that the information being provided not be passed on to Boston authorities because of the people involved. Ex. 148; Weld May 26, 1998 Tr. at 78-115. The caller initially claimed that Connolly and Boston Police Deputy Ed Walsh “sell information to Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi — and that’s how they find wiretaps.” Ex. 147. See also Ex. 148. The source later alleged that Newton was “another agent besides John Connolly who fed Bulger, Flemmi, Nee and Weeks information.” Ex. 160.

    Weld took these allegations seriously. Weld May 26, 1998 Tr. at 93. Based on his knowledge and experience in Boston, he felt there might be a “weak link” between Connolly and Bulger. Id. at 94. Initially, he referred the matter to his Deputy, Jack Keeney, with a note saying “I know all this. So this [source] is on the up and up.” Id. at 92; Ex. 147.

    The source also claimed to have information that Bulger and Pat Nee had murdered Halloran and Bucky Barrett. Exs. 149, 150. The source subsequently said that there was an eyewitness to the Halloran shooting who might come forward, and elaborated that: “there is a person named John, who claims he talked to Whitey and Nee as they sat in the car waiting for Halloran on Northern Avenue. He sits in a bar and talks about it. He saw the whole operation.” Exs. 149, 152. The source added that the person providing the information to the source “will be willing to talk to you (authorities) soon.” Ex. 152. On February 3, 1988, Weld directed Keeney to have the information that he had received sent to the United States Attorney in Boston, Frank McNamara, and to the Strike Force Chief, O’Sullivan. Ex. 151. Weld added that: “Both O’Sullivan and [Assistant United States Attorney] Bob Mueller are well aware of the history, and the information sounds good.” Id.

    At some point, it was determined that the ultimate source of the information being communicated to Weld was Joseph Murray, who was then in federal prison. Ex. 156. His allegations were referred to the Boston office of the FBI. Ex. 156; Clark June 3, 1998 Tr. at 28. These allegations included the claim that “FBI Agents John Connolly, Jr. and John Newton were selling information regarding wiretaps, to Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi.” Ex. 156.

    Dennis O’Callahan, the ASAC who had succeeded Potts, was charged with directing an administrative inquiry of Murray’s claims concerning Connolly and Newton. Clark June 13, 1998 Tr. at 106, 116. In June 1989, O’Callahan assigned Edward Clark, the supervisor of the Bank Robbery squad, to interview Murray. Id. at 29. Edward Quinn, a member of the Organized Crime squad who had then worked with Connolly for thirteen years and characterized Connolly as a “close friend,” accompanied Clark to witness the interview. Id. at 39; Quinn Aug. 19, 1998 Tr. at 13-14.

    Clark and Quinn were briefed and given the documents reflecting the information that Weld had received. Id. at 29-31. Clark testified that they were instructed to focus on the allegations of misconduct against Connolly and Newton in their interview of Murray. Id. at 31, 61-62.

    Clark and Quinn spoke to Murray at the Strike Force’s office in the federal courthouse in Boston, on June 14, 1989 — more than a year and a half after the initial call to Weld. Ex. 156. Murray was fully cooperative. Clark reported that:

    Murray was asked if he would furnish information regarding the above matters and what he wanted as a quid pro quo. Murray said that Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi have a machine and that the Boston Police and the FBI have a machine and he cannot survive against those machines. He is willing to furnish information and wants nothing in return. The information he furnished now will help save the life of a friend or a loved one in the future.

    Id.

    Clark and Quinn each knew that Bulger and Flemmi were informants handled by Connolly. Id. at 85-86; Quinn Aug. 19, 1998 Tr. at 19. Although the purported primary purpose of the interview was to explore Murray’s claim that Bulger and Flemmi were paying Connolly and Newton for information concerning electronic surveillance, there is no reference to this allegation in either the notes Clark made at the interview or in the 302 that he later prepared. Exs. 151, 158; Clark June 3, 1998 Tr. at 89. The court concludes that either Murray was not asked about his allegations concerning Connolly and Newton or that the information that he provided concerning them was not recorded. Similarly, although Murray reiterated that Bulger and Nee had murdered Halloran, neither Clark nor Quinn asked him about the individual named “John” who Murray had previously asserted witnessed the killing. Exs. 151, 158; Clark June 3, 1998 Tr. at 80, 114-15.

    Clark discussed the interview with O’Callahan and gave him the 302, which included information linking Bulger and Flemmi to the Halloran and Barrett murders. Ex. 156; Clark June 3, 1998 Tr. at 65. Clark was not asked to do anything further. Id. at 64.

    Two months later, however, O’Callahan prepared a memorandum from the SAC, Ahearn, to the Director of the FBI, reporting that Murray had been interviewed and that, “[T]he allegations that SSA Connolly and SA Newton are disclosing information regarding investigations being conducted by this Division to criminal elements are unsubstantiated by specific facts . . .” Ex. 157. The administrative inquiry was then terminated in Boston and, evidently, the matter was not pursued by FBI Headquarters, the United States Attorney’s Office, the Strike Force or the Department of Justice, which Weld had left in March 1988. Weld May 26, 1998 Tr. at 5.

    Moreover, although Clark viewed it as significant, the information that Murray provided implicating Bulger and Flemmi in the Halloran and Barrett murders was not provided to any agents responsible for investigating those matters or indexed so that it could be accessed by such agents. Clark June 3, 1998 Tr. at 66-67, 116-18. Similarly, while Clark felt Murray would make a “terrific” informant, there is no evidence that any effort was made to utilize him as a source despite his demonstrated willingness to provide information. Id. at 118-23. Accordingly, Murray was effectively eliminated as a threat to the symbiotic relationship between the FBI and Bulger and Flemmi.

    1. Ralph Ranalli was motivated to write his book Deadly Alliance by what happened when Ed Clark (a classmate of mine at BC Law first year. A memory of him is being with him in Copley Square leaving a joint one night. Ed was a tall guy from Belmont. We’d had a beer or two and were heading over to Cambridge to hit another joint. We ended up in a verbal confrontation with a three other guys over something. It almost came to fisticuffs but those guys walked away. I felt pretty good with Ed standing by my side and knowing he had my back. We got into my car and Ed said to me, “I’m glad nothing came of that.” I said, “we could have taken them easy.” Ed said, “I don’t know. I’ve never been in a fight. I’d never have known it for the way he stood up but I still couldn’t believe a guy had reached law school without having been in a fight. He was a good guy when I knew him. Ed left after the first year, probably for the FBI.)
      Ranalli could not believe Clark came back for that meeting with Murray and there was nothing in his report about the reason why he went there. Ranalli confronted him on it. Clark said, according to Ranalli, “I did what I was told to do. You weren’t there, you don’t know what it was like. You wouldn’t understand.” I wrote about this in my book. It was similar to FBI Agent Montinari’s statement that he didn’t remember what Halloran said about Connolly. Apparently the FBI agents are taught never to write down anything bad about a fellow agent. Fitzpatrick did and ended up all but being drummed out.
      I haven’t read Wolf’s findings in a while. When Bill Weld was in DC working for Justice beginning in January 1988, his secretary received a series of calls from Joe Murray’s wife who took down the information and forwarded it to Weld. Weld knew enough about the facts surrounding Whitey to believe the caller was creditable. You noted one of the allegations she made was that Bulger and Nee murdered Halloran and Buckey Barrett. (Wolf findings, p. 292-293) All of this I thank you for reminding me off as well as the other things. (Some I had forgotten about them.) What you also write about is correct and is well known to the prosecutors who participated in the hearings before Wolf. Why then are they not prosecuting Nee? Murray identified him. I’m told Flemmi identified him. He is the partner of Whitey who Whitey trusted. Weeks knows he was there but is allowed to tell a nonsense story about a ski mask. He has to be a top echelon informant being protected by the FBI in the same way Whitey was protected.
      I found something else in what what you write which is to my way thinking very significant. You note Weld said on February 3, 1988, “Both O’Sullivan and Bob Mueller are well aware of the history, and the information sounds good.”
      O’Sullivan was in the US Attorney’s office from 1973 to 1989; Mueller there from 1982 to 1988; Stearns there from 1982 to 1990, Weld there from 1981 to 1986. Frank McNamara was US Attorney from 1987 to 1989. Stearns was made chief of the criminal division on December 23, 1984 and presumably held that post until 1990. Ranalli wrote about the calls to Weld on pages 26 to 30 of his book He noted: “A month or two later Weld ran into Frank McNamara at a Justice Department conference and urged him to do something about the memos he had sent. “We need to talk about this,” he told his successor. Within a few weeks after urging McNamara, Weld was gone, having resigned . . . The leads from the mysterious caller languished during McNamara’s bizzare, brief tenure as U.S. Attorney.”
      It seems to me that McNamara who had no experience as a criminal lawyer would have to have relied on the chief of the criminal division for input on these matters. That would have been Stearns. It follows that Carney would have a very legitimate reason to inquire of Stearns why they sat on the report and did nothing about them. Could it have been perhaps because they knew O’Sullivan had given Whitey immunity. I wonder if J.W. Carney raised this specific issue in his motion. I’ll have to find out. Thanks as always for your input.

  3. Excellent posts. Have you contacted his lawyer regarding some of the perspectives and points posted on here? Some could have an impact on the trial.

    1. I’ve been told that Carney reads this post off and on. I’m sure anything that I’ve written about he has thought about. I know Carney and talk to him briefly at court along with his associate, Hank Brennan. I know Wyshak. I try to avoid talking about the case because I do not want to be influenced by either side.

  4. very well written. as far as the whitey bulger affair goes and other aspects of massachusetts crime you seem to have a phd in your knowlege. if i were to title these ongoing investigations i would call it shadow and fog. we have read for so many years that whitey did this and whitey did that . you point out that gee what a surprise hardcore gansters always point the finger at others. i think people thought this trial was going to be a slam dunk. think again. whitey and his lawyers will make a lot of people sweat.

    1. You know since I began writing this I’ve found out lots of things I did not know from comments and checking things out that came up as I was writing. Your description of “shadow and fog” is appropriate if you have read any of the FBI reports that come out with page after page of redactions so that you end up reading a sentence or two out of every twenty. You’re also correct about people thinking this is a slam dunk; even the prosecutors have thought this it seems. I think they thought Whitey would come in and fold his hand like Flemmi. They probably are getting the word to him that they’ll give Catherine Greig a break if he pleads guilty. I don’t think people realize that this is Whitey’s farewell tour and he wants to make the most out of it.

  5. If Whitey Bulger used the alias of John Iuele and this fact was known to those in Federal law enforcement, which there is credible evidence to show that it was, then the facts in my situation would lend credibility to the argument that Whitey Bulger had been given some type of immunity from prosecution from, at least, crimes of extortion.

    1. You may want to write to Whitey’s lawyer to see if he can cast any light on Whitey’s use of aliases. You may also consider writing the FBI but they don’t appear too cooperative on those type requests. Thanks for writing.

Comments are closed.