Whitey’s Last Grasp At Who Knows What

December 10, 2012 002According to the Patriot Ledger Whitey’s lawyer J.W.Carney said Bulger was pleased with the trial and its outcome, because “it was important to him that the government corruption be exposed, and important to him to see the deals the government was able to make with certain people.”

 Carney also tells us: “Jim’s (Whitey’s) goals for this trial were to show that he was never an informant, that federal law enforcement was incredibly corrupt and that he was actually not involved in many of the murders independently done by Mart­orano, Weeks and Flemmi.”

Co-counsel Hank Brennan said, “I don’t think you’ve heard the last word from James Bulger. It’s a story that should, and hopefully still will, be told.”

Both lawyers did excellent jobs representing their client as I told USA Today just before closing arguments.

But they surely recognize that Whitey accomplished little with his trial and he was far from pleased with it. Do we so soon forget his words that the trial was a sham? I’ve never known anyone to be pleased with being railroaded.

Was he pleased with the outcome? I don’t see how. He was only going for a couple of things: prove he wasn’t an informant and prove he never murdered the women. The first part will be debated forever; the latter part he struck out.

He was convicted of strangling Deborah Hussey in the most sinister and heartless manner. Even with Debbie Davis he came out tainted. Powerful evidence of his not being involved in that strangulation death was the statement Steve Flemmi made to John Martorano that he accidentally strangled Debbie which under normal circumstances would have given lie to his testimony that Whitey had done it.

Yet the prosecution had built within the first couple of days a picture of Whitey that could not be erased. He was a bad gangster with his own little armory who terrorized others along with his partner who was with him more than his shadow, Steve Flemmi. We watched witnesses testify who appeared quite tough and had terrorized others showing great fear of him.

That picture cleverly and subtly imprinted on the jurors mind left some with the indelible idea that whatever Stevie did then Whitey helped him. Some could not be persuaded he did not participate in Debbie Davis’s murder. I hardly believe Whitey was pleased with that outcome.

I’m really unable to figure out why it was important to Whitey that “government corruption be exposed.” That statement ranks up there with the well-known example defining the meaning of chutzpah: a person who kills her parents and begs for mercy because she is now an orphan. If asked for a definition of government corruption one could answer: Whitey Bulger. Government corruption was his best friend, now why would it be important to him that his best friend be exposed?

As far as the people seeing the deals the government made, those were exposed in the trials of John Connolly and nothing new about them of any major import was disclosed during Whitey’s trial.

His goals were also not reached. He didn’t prove that he wasn’t an informant although he raised some questions about whether he may have been one. The issue remains wide open and leans heavily to the side believing that he was one because the mainstream media had decided that issue months if not years ago and had written books on the idea that he was one,

As for not being involved in many of the murders, in truth all that mattered was those of the women, and perhaps Wheeler and Callahan. His image of himself as one who only murdered gangsters made him want to win those, he cared little about the other things.

The only outcome of the trial that could have made him happy is that he gets to stay in Plymouth through the middle of November. That will give him time to tell his story to someone so that his version of things will be given an airing. We’ve learned from the trial that he has extensive telephone privileges as well as family visits and that he was scribbling all the time on his yellow pad.

So, as we’ve been warned, we haven’t heard the last of Whitey. We’re told that his story should be told. He’s 84 years old in a month. I’m not so sure there’s a big audience for it any more. I’m sensing the feeling that fewer and fewer actually care about what he will say. But it does seem to me that when the jury convicted him on Monday that pretty much all sums up all we have to know about him. But then again I’ve been wrong before.




36 thoughts on “Whitey’s Last Grasp At Who Knows What

  1. Matt,

    Saw CNN was denied an interview request, anyway wyshak and the bop sign off on dateline or 60 minutes due to their past appearances? Or should we just hold out for Bill Jr.’s book based on whiteys note taking? Have you gotten any more info regarding his book that your friend at the courthouse told you about?

    1. Jim:

      Nothing more than I already wrote about. I haven’t been out and above and the people I have spoken did not discuss it. If the decision by Whitey not to testify was a last minute decision, as I think it was judging from the cross-examination by defense counsel of the witnesses, I’ve got a feeling that what I wrote advising Whitey that: he’d just be enriching his enemies; hurting the chances for his story to get truly told because the press bias would distort what he testified to as it did with Fitzpatrick; and taking money from the pockets of his nephews or nieces got to Whitey and that helped him make up his mind. I’ve been told by good sources that he is aware of what I write.

    1. Henry:

      His article shows the problem when someone who grew up in East Milton thinks he knows something about Southie.

  2. Connolly was framed. Does Double Jeopardy exist? He was tried twice for the same crime. A jury of his peers in Boston found him not guilty of the Callahan murder yet he’s retried on the same facts by the same prosecutor in Fla. Remember all the serial killers walking the streets of Boston are free thanks to the prosecutors not defense attorneys.

  3. Matt- just wondering the mindset of patty nee? Matt, what does a good lawyer tell you to do at this point? just wait for it all to come down and hope it doesn’t or is it time to go for a long road trip? AS good lawyer what does one tell his client? (no sarcasm intended)

    1. Doubting:

      Shut up. That’s what any good lawyer tells a person who is or may be in trouble. Keep your mouth shut. I’ve never known anyone who helped himself by talking.

      Nee, unlike his cronies, has no one to give up. Unless he already has a deal with the federals that gives him total protection, sort of like the deal Whitey was unable to present at trial, he should be indicted. I think, and I’ll write about it, how there is enough evidence to indict him set out in his and Weeks’s book, and with a bit more, to guarantee his conviction.

      In his case, even if you had the weakest of cases it is time to go after him since any more delay will let him escape by his dying.

      1. Matt- Thanks for the advice, not that I ever intend turning to the darkside. I was just wondering do you know who his attorney is? My gramps used to say to me “kid get a good jewish lawyer and have a swimming pool full of money”

        1. Doubting:

          I wasn’t giving the advice for you but to pass on to Pat Nee. I have no idea who his attorney is but I have to believe he is being protected by the FBI. Who needs an attorney if the FBI is in your back pocket.

          Thee are good Jewish lawyers but there are also equally as good lawyers in every other ethnic group. Some of the top criminal defense lawyers are Jewish but there are also some Jewish defense lawyers who are stumble-bums. The trick is finding the right one.

      2. Matt- I also have no doubt Nee is running crews in southie, but I feel also that no matter what he has to pay tribute to someone in the upper echelon. There is always someone higher up. I don’t think he could just operate as an independent. The show SAINT HOODS basically shows a single branch of his operation SPORTS GAMBLING. There is more than enough evidence in the show to get the rico ball rolling Robert Blakey would have a field day wih it all. I am curious to know who Nee answers to? I will keep digging!!

        1. Doubting:

          It is hard for gangsters to get away from the easy money. You raise a good point that I wonder about, who know is running the rackets in Boston and is he an FBI informant. I think Nee really rubbed it in the face of the Boston Police Department with his reality show where he’s taking bets. I wonder where the Boston cops are? Or, what about the Suffolk DA. Where’s our DOJ now protecting us from gangsters?

          You can’t run a gaming operation without paying tribute to someone. I heard Blakey speak many years ago at Cornell Law School at a nationwide prosecutors conference. I went there with a good Boston cop, Jack O’Malley, and Tommy Dwyer, one of the prominent defense attorneys in Boston. He was really into the RICO prosecutions but I believe he’d never had thought they would be used against probation officers.

          Don’t you think the Martoranos or their friends are still in business? John’s been protected by the federals who have to tip toe around him. I see some of the jurors are doing a job on the prosecution for using him as a witness.

    2. Matt: Some more backstory, bedtime reading for you.

      see link for full story

      August 15, 2013

      Former FBI agent who heads Intelligence committee urged to explain if he withheld crucial NSA document
      Critics demand answers from chairman Mike Rogers after claims that committee failed to share document before key vote

      Mike Rogers, a former FBI agent, chairs the House intelligence committee. Critics have accused the committee of being too close to the NSA. Photograph: AP
      The leadership of the House intelligence committee is under growing pressure to explain whether it withheld surveillance information from members of Congress before a key vote to renew the Patriot Act.
      A Republican congressman and government ethics watchdogs are demanding that the powerful panel’s chairman, Mike Rogers of Michigan, responds to charges that the panel’s leadership failed to share a document prepared by the justice department and intelligence community.
      The document was explicitly created to inform non-committee members about bulk collection of Americans’ phone records ahead of the vote in 2011. Michigan Republican Justin Amash alleged that the committee kept it from non-committee members – the majority of the House.
      Now Morgan Griffith, a Republican who represents Virginia’s ninth district, is calling for answers. “I certainly think leadership needs to figure out what’s going on. We’re trying to get information so we can do our jobs as congressmen,” he told the Guardian. “If we’re not able to get that information, it’s inappropriate.”
      “Obviously, this is of concern,” he added.
      Griffith has been been critical of the committee for blocking attempts by non-members to obtain information about classified programs. On August 4, the Guardian published a series of letters he had written to the committee requesting more details, all of which had gone unanswered.
      The accusations broaden the focus of the surveillance controversy from the National Security Agency to one of the congressional committees charged with exercising oversight of it – and the panel’s closeness to the NSA it is supposed to oversee.
      Amash told the Guardian on Monday that he had confirmed with the House intelligence committee that the committee did not make non-committee members aware of the classified overview from 2011 of the bulk phone records collection program first revealed by the Guardian thanks to whistleblower Edward Snowden. The document was expressly designed to be shared with legislators who did not serve on the panel; it appears that a corresponding document for the Senate in 2011 was made available to all senators.
      “Nobody I’ve spoken to in my legislative class remembers seeing any such document,” Amash said.
      Amash speculated that the House intelligence committee withheld the document in order to ensure the Patriot Act would win congressional reauthorization, as it ultimately did.
      For the second consecutive day, the House intelligence committee’s spokeswoman, Susan Phelan, did not respond to the Guardian’s queries about the accuracy of Amash’s allegation. Phelan, however, told The Hill newspaper that the committee held pre-vote briefings for all House members ahead of the Patriot vote. She did not deny Amash’s claim.
      Amash countered that members who attend classified briefings conducted by the panel, formally known as the House permanent select committee on intelligence or HPSCI, often receive fragmentary information.
      “The presenters rarely volunteer the critically important information and it becomes a game of 20 Questions,” Amash told the Guardian.
      Government ethics experts accused the committee of betraying its oversight mandate.
      “If the HPSCI leadership withheld a document, intended by the administration for release to non-committee members – a document that could have led to a different outcome when the Patriot Act was reauthorized in 2011 – this is tantamount to subversion of the democratic process,” said Bea Edwards, the executive director of the Government Accountability Project.
      “Americans have the right to know exactly who made this decision and who carried it out.”
      “There is clearly a loss of confidence in HPSCI leadership among some House members, notably including members of the majority party,” added Steve Aftergood, an intelligence and secrecy expert with the Federation of American Scientists.
      “This can manifest itself in a reduction of trust and comity, and increased skepticism toward committee actions. It can be remedied, perhaps, by permitting greater allowance for dissenting views in the committee’s deliberations.”

      Ever since the intelligence reforms of the 1970s, Congress has struck an institutional deal with the intelligence agencies: to balance the needs for protecting government secrets and informing the public, oversight is the responsibility of two committees, one in the House and one in the Senate, that conduct most of their business in secret.
      Members who do not sit on the committees have little recourse but to rely on their colleagues on the secret panels to accurately inform them about complex and often controversial intelligence programs.
      Yet over decades, the relationship between the intelligence committees and the intelligence agencies has become more often collegial than adversarial. When the House intelligence committee held its first public hearing into the ongoing NSA bulk collection of Americans’ phone records, it titled the hearing ‘How Disclosed NSA Programs Protect Americans, and Why Disclosure Aids our Adversaries’.
      The panel’s chairman, Mike Rogers, is a former FBI agent. Its ranking Democrat, Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, received over $220,000 in campaign contributions during his past term from the defense and intelligence industries, according to David Kravets of Wired. Both are staunch advocates of the NSA bulk surveillance programs.
      “The congressional committees charged with oversight of the intelligence community have long been captive to, and protective of, the intelligence agencies,” said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight.
      “Many of the congressional staff, in fact, come from those agencies. This latest revelation demonstrates the harm caused by that conflict of interest. When the congressional oversight committee is more loyal to the agency it oversees than to the legislative chamber its members were elected to serve in, the public’s interest is seriously compromised.”

      see link for full story

      FBI Says It Can’t Reinstate Agent Until 2015
      August 14, 2013

      The FBI says a Virginia man who won a discrimination lawsuit against the bureau can’t be reinstated as a special agent until 2015 because of budget cuts.

      Justin Slaby of Stafford sued the FBI. The Army veteran who lost his left hand in a training accident said the agency wrongly kicked him out of its training academy because of his prosthetic hand, even though he was otherwise qualified.

      A jury agreed and last week awarded him $75,000. But a judge must decide whether Slaby will be reinstated as a special agent.

      1. MS

        Answer me this, who is the FBI? Is Mueller making these decisions or is it a bunch of low life bureaucrats who have risen to the top by doing nothing and then hiding the fact that they do nothing. Hell if we got the head of the Intelligence Committee a former FBI agent who by the way is a member of the retired FBI agents club then the country has no hope. The only thing that will make Americans sit up and take notice is when we get hit really hard by some group and we realize the FBI is and has been all smoke and mirrors.

        1. I hear you Matt.

          see link for full story

          Attorney alleges FBI planted agent at Todashev presser
          Tuesday, August 13th, 2013

          Tampa, Florida– Did the FBI have an agent planted at Tuesday’s press conference from the Center for American Islamic Relations?

          That’s the claim of Tampa defense attorney Barry Cohen, who is now representing the father of Ibragim Todashev.

          10 News obtained the email that Cohen sent to the FBI director Tuesday night.

          Ibragim Todashev was friends with the Boston Marathon suspects. Following a four hour interrogation, agents allegedly shot the unarmed suspect seven times, killing him inside his Orlando Apartment back in May.

          At Tuesday’s press conference, Todashev’s father not only revealed he hired Cohen as council, but said his son was a good boy, who was innocent.

          “He didn’t do anything wrong. He was simply not capable of doing it.”

          At this point the family is waiting on the results of an independent review of the shooting.

          Below is the email from attorney Barry Cohen to the Director of the FBI:

          “We have reason to believe that the bureau’s investigation had planted, in a clandestine manner, someone to attend the conference who was to report back to the FBI.

          In the future, please know that you or your agents are always invited and you do not have to engage in such investigative tactics to learn from us the truth.”

          1. MS:

            I have no problem with an FBI agent attending a press conference. Overtly or covertly doesn’t make much difference to me. The article seems a little bit of quirkiness to it.

        2. Let me introduce you to the guys at the front lines making America safe from terrorists.

          Former top FBI agent charged with child porn distribution
          By Bill Mears, CNN
          May 15, 2012

          (CNN) — A former supervisory FBI agent has been arrested and jailed on child pornography charges.

          Donald Sachtleben was taken into custody and charged Monday after a nationwide undercover investigation of illegal child porn images traded over the Internet.

          A federal complaint alleges 30 graphic images and video were found on Sachtleben’s laptop computer late last week when FBI agents searched his home, about 23 miles north of Indianapolis.

          Sachtleben is currently an Oklahoma State University visiting professor, according to his online resume. He is director of training at the school’s Center for Improvised Explosives, but all references to his work have now been removed from the university’s website. There was no indication from the school as to whether it had suspended him. Calls to the university and his Indianapolis attorneys were not immediately returned.

          He had been an FBI special agent from 1983 to 2008, serving as a bomb technician. He worked on the Oklahoma City bombing and Unabomber investigations, according to his university biography.

          A separate LinkedIn profile filled out by Sachtleben says he is an “accomplished investigator with more than 25 years of experience in FBI major case management, counter terrorism investigations, bombing prevention, post blast investigations and public speaking.”

        3. To quote Matt:

          The only thing that will make Americans sit up and take notice is when we get hit really hard by some group and we realize the FBI is and has been all smoke and mirrors.


          I think we have taken the hits: the planes, the disaster named Whitey, decades of abuse of children in which the children and/or abusers have crossed state lines, the bombing of the Marathon.

          The planes flew out of Logan.

          This trial has reached Bostonians: jurors disgusted by the prosecution’s choices, widespread knowledge that serial killers walk free.

          The widespread culture of pedophilia has been powerfully challenged by victims and their families. The fact that many abusers walk our streets and beaches is as disgusting as the serial killers. But entire nations have been moved to action by the voices of Boston. (One of whom was Chris Nilan.)

          The two brothers who practiced bomb-making at our own state university and murdered and maimed our friends at a beloved event has woken every parent of every child put into our trust in Boston to educate. Having hundreds of thousands of college students shelter in place has been noted and discussed by their parents around the country and world.

          So from a local angle, I think Boston is more than hip to the fact that we need the very best that the New FBI can offer. And a strong and truthful narrative of the last thirty years in Boston will be extraordinarily helpful in guiding our thoughts and those of that New FBI.

          Aaron Swartz, our own kid of promise, is an example of what the new approach is. May Carmen Ortiz retire with her own idea of dignity and as soon as possible.

          Boston doesn’t want this.

          The killing of Todashev as he was supposedly preparing to confess to murders in Waltham is an example of the New FBI.

          Boston rejects this.

          Boston demands better.

          Can a Firefly speak for Boston?


          Blogging is a fabulous idea. So is writing a riveting account of the Life and Times of William Bulger as well as The Terrorizing of Trooper Naimovich. It is writers, writers in perilous times, who have helped awaken and move the thoughts of the people around them.

          1. Firefly:

            I’m very serious when I say there is no new FBI, it is the same old FBI. It has the agents who do an excellent job in some things which are always highlighted but it has others who don’t pass muster at all yet the nature of the beast is that it is covered up. We’ve had our national tragedy which some say a more alert FBI may have prevented. We’ve had the Marathon Terrorist Attack and neither the FBI nor Congress is willing to look into why that happened. As long as the FBI can hide all that it does we are in deep trouble.

          2. Oh Matt, can’t regular people who happen to be lawyers or doctors or FBI agents or local cops or kids hopping into taxis after a night out or brilliant students of some sort – or parents of all of the above – can’t we all come together and say that Boston Says No?

  4. sounds like the prosecutor had one tilting their way
    might the defense have had a seasoned cold blooded gangster to tilt in their direction
    we accountants would call that a wash

  5. Maybe Matt will explain Voir Dire
    and how the defense and prosecutors act out that
    Kabuki Drama,eh?

  6. Juror 12 appears to be well educated and reasonable and she was repulsed by the prosecution’s tactics. She suggests half of the jury was for acquittal. A more aggressive half led by Juror 5 were were for conviction on everything. He said he has a degree in law enforcement.
    The Boston media isn’t giving Juror 5 much play. Hope she doesn’t get attacked for her honesty.


    1. Patty:

      Juror 5 Hotyckey was for guilty from the beginning. He led a group of men. Juror 12 Uhlar had a brain in her head and held out as well as she could. Juror 5 is star of the day but he made the statement in one video that even if Whitey knew about the crime being committed he was guilty. He dismissed the idea of government complicity saying the government didn’t commit any of the murders. I received a tweet “Pat Nee just stopped in his Jeep by BPD at L&3rd. Redfaced sweating bullets but drove away. Charmed.”

  7. MTC:

    We have now left the gridiron of the courtroom and we are know on the cold hard slippery ice of the Spinmeister Garden. There have been very few high profile mouthpieces that can resist the chance to make a score in the Tournament of Spin. The problem is the shelf life expiration date. C&B are able to take advantage of the appearance that their client was a victim of a governmental conspiracy and dirty cops. Nobody in the media lets the truth get in the way and C&B want to capitalize.
    Maybe they think that the government didn’t compensate them enough for their effort. ?”Do you know how much we could have made if we were doing our regular work,we got screwed”

    It is all about making a buck now for those that might have an angle to promote in the marketplace. These stories have a following. It is a good chance for you to learn more about the spin and marty burke world of New york and Hollywood. The matters of law will take a back seat to unfettered opinion on the juicy stuff of murder mayhem and molls

    Mr. Dark White is the golden goose right now and he is a hot commodity.
    The US Attorney’s office will spend their time explaining how they couldn’t finish the job. A well know coach at a Boston High School would say that “they couldn’t hit a bull in the arse with a banjo”

    Tell Mr. White that you are available as the ghost and you’ll get him a better deal than anybody else

  8. Your statement to USA TODAY was true. Anything less than a clean sweep would be a disappointment for the prosecution. The DOJ and the media have been trafficking in the lie that WB was the greatest criminal ever . Comparable to Conrad’s Kurtz and Borges Red Scharlach. This verdict with eight not guilty or not proven findings on murder charges refutes the thirty year disinformation campaign. It leaves WB with a paltry eleven compared to a huge twenty for Gucci. Add in ten more for Weeks and Nee, plus another twenty for Gucci’s brother, Winter and Salemmi. WB has less than 20% of the overall killings, Plus he never shot three unarmed Blacks in the back of the head and never put a bomb in a lawyers car. 2. One of the jurors was shocked at the level of government corruption. While the press tries to bury it this trial shed light on it. An important civics lesson. If you add Week’s killings with Nee’s you get a five year sentence for ten murders or 6 months per homicide. If you combine the Gucci brothers twenty five plus killings you get less than six months per murder. Doesn’t fairness dictate a five and a half year term for WB? 3. In Europe if you are over seventy five you don’t even go to prison. Seniors are confined to an apartment in a more humane approach. At that age they don’t pose a societal threat. 4. Foley of the State Police worries that the FBI has not changed. If that is true what has he achieved? He help frame three innocent cops ( Naimovich, Rico and Connolly). He orchestrated the release of corrupt cops ( Flemmi, Morris and Schneiderman) and eight serial killers ( Gucci, his brother, Salemmi, Limone, Winter, Weeks Nee and the Greek). He had zero impact in reforming the Feds. A total failure. Things are worse now than ever. 5. What were the names of the State Police present at the Todashev killing?

    1. N:
      1. Whitey did become #1 on the FBI’s Most Wanted list; for a while he was #2 next to Osama bin Laden and when Obama got Osama he took his place. He was clearly a top gangster. The worst ever, hardly. The worst ever in Boston, not by a long shot. What made him so bad in the FBI’s eyes was his relationship to it and it was being pushed by DOJ to keep him up there and DOJ was being pushed by the writers of books who worked for the newspapers who all found his story worth telling because it could spill over onto Billy Bulger and one agent in the FBI. Whitey was bad, real bad, but so were others. He deserved to be taken down and to spend the rest of his life in prison and for that the prosecutors must be appreciated.

      2. The hearings by Judge Wolf spotlighted the corruption back in 1997 and 1998; we’re just doing a visiting of it in 2013 in the Whitey trial. Whitey brought out a little new in the area but not much. Your concept of fairness is not mine. Fairness dictates life for each premeditated murder. That some don’t get it does not change what fairness should be.

      3. If societal threat was a factor then Martorano would never have gotten out. The other conception of punishment is not whether the person is a threat to society but whether he deserves to be punished in some way for his criminal acts. Europe does punish all criminals relatively easy with many, not just the elders, going into home confinement. That’s never been the American way. Would you like to see Bernie Madoff confined to his home and having to go to court as the seasons change to ask permission to go to his other homes? Remember European society has many less guns and gangsters than we do. It’s something about having a culture where the law is respected and gangsters aren’t considered heroes.

      4. Foley cannot change the FBI. The FBI can change the FBI but it likes things they way they are not being accountable to anyone and scaring the shit out of any Congressman who might decided to criticize it so that every statement begins with “the FBI is the greatest crime fighting organization the Universe has ever seen” so let’s not let its many blunders detract from its reputation.

      Foley helped frame Naimovich which is true. He had nothing to do with Rico. And Connolly was not framed. He did go light on Schneiderhan, he had nothing to do with Morris decision and brought about the incarceration of Flemmi’s brother who was a Boston cop. He was on the team that brought down Whitey which was a feather in his cap. No state cop could ever reform the federals and putting that on Foley is unfair.

      Things are not worse now because of anything Foley did.

      5. The names of the state troopers present at the Todashev killing were the well known John Doe and Jane Roe.

  9. There’s more to know. Hopefully it isn’t camouflaged with another bogus tipster call from Iceland story line.

    1. Jan:

      I can assure you that before we hear anything it will be filtered through lots of interest groups and testing panels.

  10. Very true Matt, I have a feeling we are in for another surprise though, I was also wondering how he could be pleased with the outcome considering the fact that you pointed out about him saying it was a sham. The funny thing is that his lawyer said this trial was never about Whitey being set free, and he knew he would die in prison or by lethal injection, so if Whitey knew that would be the outcome then why was he trying to take the stand to prove that O’Sullivan gave him immunity from his crimes if he knew he would never be set free ? I had read that the Judge wouldn’t allow that supposed deal to be spoken about in the trial and that was part of the reason if not the whole reason Whitey called it a sham amd decided not to take the stand.

    1. Craig:

      Believe half of what a criminal defense lawyer tells you about his client and question closely the other half. They are capable of asserting self-contradictory explanations without blinking an eye. The old defense in a rape case of “She was not raped, if she was I didn’t do it because I have an alibi, if you don’t believe my alibi then she consented,” is typical of that.

      Whitey knew once in he’d never get out. He also knew that his only chance which was a far reach was to allege that he had some type of right to commit these crimes which had been given to him by O’Sullivan. Even with that, if he won in Boston he still had to go to Florida and Oklahoma for his murder trials. Perhaps he could also argue the O’Sullivan pass in those states but the likely outcome would be the states saying no federal agent can give a person the right to murder in their states. You see how all of this would involve extended periods of time and appeals that would take many years.

      But rather than throwing in the towel he wanted to take the one chance by saying he had permission to do the crimes but Judge Stearns and then Judge Casper following Judge Stearns ruled that out so what was left for him to do. After that he could have taken the stand and told his story but all he would be doing would be trying to smooth off some edges without really effecting much of the evidence against him, for after all his lawyers admitted he did about everything that was alleged against him and if he was found guilty of only one of those other things 33 things he would have gone away forever in any event. In other words, the only way out was through the defense he could not use and to testify was to give the media an insight into his life as he saw it which he wants to save for the book he is writing.

      Al Johnson one of the top criminal defense lawyers wrote earlier. He made me recall that Whitey never asked for a change of venue or complained about the publicity. You may have read the other day how a guy killed his son and himself to spite his wife. He was a member of a rabbi’s congregation and when the rabbi was asked about how he could have done it he replied “The sane mind cannot comprehend the thoughts of the 
insane mind”. So when we try to figure out what is going on at times we must remember Whitey has a tried and true gangster mind that is incomprehensible to the non-gangster mind.

  11. Matt, your statements in USA today were succinctly prescient. 2. Whitey Bulger did want government corruption exposed, in the same sense as my nonagenarian friend, Tommy Leone, from L-Street, a daily swimmer, did: Tommy often said that the cops, FBI, lawyers and judges were more corrupt than the criminals. I generally agree with that statement and sentiment, excepting the criminally insane, psychopaths and sociopathic killers and bully-boys who intentionally hurt individuals. Corruption in government is widespread and it’s two fold: Abuse of Power/Office and Intellectual Corruption (rationalizing and flouting the law/constitution to achieve professional or personal goals or to advance some hidden agenda, usually an ideology, a socio-political viewpoint, or to garner advantage for family/friends, as when a classmate appears before a judge who likes Holy Cross grads, and the judge “leans his way.” It’s not petty; it’s malevolent unequal treatment under the law via abuse of office. Distinguish please, a politician who uses available legal means to help a person get a job; nothing stills nor should ever still the politician’s hand from picking up his phone and saying, “Senator; my constituent/friend needs a summer job at the State House; are there any available?”). 3. The serial killers and their friends/accomplices are not “tough”; they are cowardly, craven bullies; they’ve chosen evil, they’ve chosen to do the Devil’s work; they kill and pick on the unarmed, weak and defenseless. 4. Just as bad are government Bullyboys who abuse and misuse power to hurt people; the real evil ones think they can twist the constitution and law to sate their own lusts for power and glory and money.

    1. William:

      1. Thanks
      2. Corruption means taking money or other consideration for doing something which one should not take. Helping constituents or department heads following the recommendations of politicians seeking to help constituents was never a crime until Wyshak decided that it was – the money taken was a budget increase in the department head’s department.
      3. Agree – if you can put a gun up to the head of an unarmed person and shoot him, you’re not tough, but crazy.
      4. Those who fail to distinguish between those who are bad and good and even fail to distinguish between levels of badness like the U.S. attorneys in Boston are not doing the right job. When Carmen Ortiz says “stealing is stealing” it reminds me how they used to hang poor people who stole bread in England.

    2. WC: My sentiments as well. That is why I believe behaviour is truth, not blogging. If we can create a volunteer civilian police review board
      with subpoena powers the voters and taxpayers can set and enforce standards
      for their criminal justice system they own and pay for.
      You ready to hear my version of the St Crispin Day speech from Henry V ?

Comments are closed.