Will AUSA Freddy Wyshak Indict DA Timmy Cruz?

IMG_2796Freddy Wyshak is an assistant U.S. attorney (AUSA) in Boston. He is in his mid sixties having spent most if not all his legal career as a prosecutor in the hallowed halls of the Department of Justice. After many years on the job last year he got a promotion to become head of the Boston U.S. attorney’s Public Corruption and Special Investigations Unit.

Unfortunately since Wyshak has taken command of that office there seems to be little of the things happening that he is supposed to be investigating and prosecuting. The paucity of crimes has required him to become quite imaginative in his approach. We have seen in the past when he was just a line AUSA how he charged the head of the Massachusetts Probation Department, O’Brien, and two of his staff with racketeering because he engaged in patronage. He did this after the Boston Globe wrote a series on the probation department and demanded that action be taken against it.

Since he has been in charge we know of two people he has brought charges against. Both have gone through half or more of their lives living a crime free existence. One, a former FBI agent, Fitzpatrick, now in his seventies who testified for Whitey Bulger’s defense team in a manner that Wyshak did not like he charged with perjury; this was ironic since the gangster witnesses Wyshak used against Bulger could have been similarly charged ten times over but since they testified for him he overlooked their actions.

He also charged an attorney, Flaherty,  with an unblemished record with a silly crime that he set up with the assistants in his unit. (Yes, even though he has little business he has others helping him.) It appears they arranged a call between a guy who took $2,500 not to go forward with a prosecution and this busy attorney who had just completed a murder case in Barnstable County which he had won in which the guy told him the FBI wanted to speak to him about a case and he told the guy not to call the agent back. He was charged with a serious federal crime of interfering with a federal officer in an investigation. The sad part of that case is that Wyshak and those in his office know this attorney and know he is not a criminal but in their desperate attempt to look busy and get publicity that mattered little to them.

That is why I worry for DA Tim Cruz. There’s every chance in the world now that the Globe is after him then Wyshak will be hot on his trail. It doesn’t matter that Cruz is not a criminal; John O’Brien the probation chief was in his mid-fifties without a blemish on his criminal record but he became prey for Wyshak so Cruz could be in his cross-hairs. The way Wyshak operates you would think there are no real criminals bilking the public and that only people who aren’t criminals are corrupt.

What then can Wyshak charge Cruz with? Obviously it is racketeering. Cruz and two of his assistants right now are being sued by two of his former assistants who worked many years for him alleging they violated their civil rights. The three of them, like the probation officers, are an organization that has gotten together to deny people their civil rights. Or, perhaps like with probation he can prove that Cruz’s actions in dealing with the dirt bags to get evidence on murders somehow violated the federal bribery statute for after all he was offering them a deal for their testimony. Or, that the flight of so many attorneys from his staff somehow shows he was intent on not keeping the best attorneys and thus depriving the public of the representation that it deserved.

I’m not familiar with all of the federal laws but Wyshak is and he probably does not need me to spell out the basis upon which he can charge Cruz. But Cruz may not have to worry too much. He has one thing going in his favor. He’s not Irish.

11 thoughts on “Will AUSA Freddy Wyshak Indict DA Timmy Cruz?

  1. As Matt points out, Freddy’s primary factor in indicting someone is often the Globe’s stance on the particular target. In the Cruz matter the Globe has staked out its position, albeit in reliance on some false information.

    There are also some lesser factors to consider here. Cruz is a Republican. That may discourage Freddy from indicting him. Freddy and his former sidekick Kelly are fervent Republicans. Their friends at the Globe, Lehr and O’Neil, once described Kelly as an “arch-conservative”. Once indicted, Cruz will have to step down and the Republican Governor can appoint a replacement to serve until the next popular election. Maybe Boy Wonder wants the job, although he lives outside the County in tony Westwood.
    On another hand, Cruz is a Catholic and Freddy is a Protestant. Freddy’s targets are almost exclusively Catholics, preferably Irish American Catholics. Cruz’s first assistant, Mike Horan, is looking particularly vulnerable.
    I’ve tried some cases against Cruz in the past. He was honest, hard working, and a good guy. Unfortunately, those are the exactly kind of attributes that attracted Freddy to indict Jack O’Brien.
    If the Globe keeps beating on Cruz, I’d bet Freddy indicts. Consider it a Republican form of “diversity”.

  2. Matt
    I just recently finished reading your book DON’T EMBARRASS THE FAMILY. Overall a very good read. The most compelling part to me was Kevin Weeks testimony. In the book you even made a comment along these lines. His testimony portrayed the reality of Whitey Bulger unlike any others’ testimony. Also your book did a great job sharing the motives and reasons and lies told by the government witnesses such as Martarano and Flemmi.

    I also recently picked up a book that goes into depth, although its all over the place format wise, called BOSTON MOB. It gives insight and details into the Irish Mob War. I had no idea just how dangerous, violent,and psychopathic the McLaughlins and Buddy McLean were during their lifetime of criminal activities. Some very vicious individuals. Anyway, I am not sure what new aspects you could share regarding the whole Whitey Bulger/Steve Flemmi era but I am interested in what you have to share in your new book coming out in 2016?

    1. Jerome:

      Thanks for the nice words on my book. It could have been a lot better if I understood some things better. When I first wrote it I was told it was very boring like reading a transcript which I recognized to be the case but I knew of no other way to put people in the trial other than making it like that. My next book is coming along slowly because I’m delving into areas that are new to me which is taking a lot of time to understand but it is necessary to do.
      The McLaughins and McLeans were not as bad as the Roxbury guys who were linked with the Mafia. I don’t have my exact figures in front of me but of the sixty plus murders during the so-called Irish war only eleven or so can be attributed to the Charlestown/Somerville dispute.

      1. Matt
        I didnt find the book boring but your style of the book is much different than BLACK MASS or HITMAN. If anything your book cleared up misconceptions and the testimony was required. Perhaps those who said the book was boring said so because they find trials boring and prefer instead to read about the crimes and criminal activites. I liked reading the testimony. It is interesting as to what law enforcement says during a trial and your book shed light on the competing aspects of law enforcement to get “credit” for solving crimes and capturing criminals. What helped me get the most out of the book was that I attended the Whitey Bulger trial on 2 seperate days. I regret I didnt go more days. I say this because I could envision better what you wrote and the testimonies.

        When you write the book on Whitey and Stevie and Martarano and Weeks will you include some of the more common stories? What will be new and different in your book from all the other ones? Personally I would include footnotes all at once at the end of each testimony if you write it in same format. Or have you considered simply telling the events of the Bulger/Flemmi and explaining what really happened instead of including testimony?

  3. I hope you are not advocating for shutting down the DOJ, Matt?

    Until we as a society shift our consciousness from a punitive model
    of criminal justice to a model of restorative justice the inmates will
    continue to run the system.

    As voters and taxpayers , did I mention we are alao the primary
    consumers of the criminal justice crime family system, until we
    set and enforce standards of performance, we will remain stuck
    in the punitive model designed to teach us lessons that are
    painful and funded by our tax dime.

    In other news October conference will detail evidence
    how the DOJ wacked President Kennedy

    New Orleans and The
    JFK Assassination

    WHEN October 16-17-18 Friday AM Tour – Sunday PM Dinner
    WHERE New Orleans, LA Crown Plaza New Orleans Airport


    Ed will presentation his personal experiences with Jim Garrison, his assistant D. A., James Alcock, the trial’s judge, Edward Haggerty, and Clay Shaw in New Orleans when I attended Clay Shaw’s trial for one week in February, 1969. I will also discuss the puzzling background of the alleged Clay Shaw-David Ferrie photograph (which does NOT depict Ferrie) as well as various controversial Radical Right individuals linked to the Garrison saga.

    Location: Ballroom – Salon 3 Date: October 16, 2015 Time: 6:15 pm – 7:30 pm 212px_Tatro_v3 EDGAR F. TATRO

    1. MS:

      They way things are done in the DOJ there are standards of performance which seem to be that you convict as many people as you can. I have to admit I’m not into “restorative justice” (whatever that is) and lean toward the punitive model believing there are some people who are bad to the bone and remain in prison so that they can not bring harm to those trying to survive on the outside.

      As for Lee Harvey Oswald, I believe he was a former Marine and as you know one of the secret oaths Marines take when we prick our finger and burn a card that has a picture of Tun Tavern on it is that we will never speak ill of a former Marine.

      1. Matt
        glad to see Russ Baker reprinting your work at http://www.whowhatwhy.org

        I never doubted your belief in a punitive system of crime and punishment,otherwise how could one justify sending men and
        women to those electronic cesspools called Walpole,Norfolk and Framingham that produce nothing more than a more vicious and
        competent criminal

        Mass taxpayers are delighted that Matt” their Semper Fi” protector
        is sending ” the bad guys” to human warehouses that are nothing
        more than schools for criminals.
        With a 75% recidivism failure rate, these men and women
        return to society comnitting more vicious crimes.

        Yea and the taxpayer picks up the tab

        Feb 29, 2012 – Staff from Vera’s Center on Sentencing and Corrections and Cost-Benefit Analysis Unit developed a methodology to calculate the taxpayer cost …

        Someday when I grow up I to hope to work for a company
        with a 25% success rate.

        1. MS:
          You know I agree with some of what you write. Yes, the prisons warehouses and “nothing more than schools for criminals.” I helped make them such. The people I sent to those schools did not have to be taught anything since they already had their doctorates in being criminals.
          How many houses does a guy have to break into before you want to keep him off the street? How many times can a person be placed on probation for felony after felony before you finally sicken of him abusing the elderly or other people who just want to get on with their lives in peace. What is to be done with two guys, Larry and John, dealing in large amounts of cocaine who conspire to murder a guy, Leo, who they hired to murder a guy named Rickie. Leo shot Rickie who jumped from a moving car and lived. John waited for Leo and pulled out his gun and shot him point blank in the chest but the gun misfired. You want them to be sent to some training school that will teach them how to handle their weapons better?
          There are bad people. Have you ever met any of them? If you have tell me where you want to put them. How about Whitey? You think he should have some type alternative punishment? What about John Salvi, should he have had a special program. How many times will you let a person commit a felony on others before you want to stop that from happening? Do you worry that murderers are going to learn how to murder in different ways?
          Yes the system we have is lousy because it only warehouses people to keep the rest of us safe. Of course it is costly, just like our military is costly but it is a price we have to pay so that those of us who want to live in peace can do this. You don’t think your pie-in-the-sky alternative system is going to be less costly do you? So your cost argument makes no sense.
          You think recidivism comes about because a person is incarcerated and but for the incarceration the person would not have committed the crime. I don’t.
          There are some who can be rehabilitated and others who cannot. We have no magical way to tell the difference . Guys I grew up with and went to prison went back again and again. Not because of the prison system but because of how they wanted to live their lives. We do have a right to the peaceful enjoyment of lives and to rid ourselves of those who take that away.

    1. Menowa:

      Thanks for those articles. Without knowing anythig more than is contained in them it appears that the questions at the deposition might have related to the conduct of Cruz’s assistant who resigned from office and the allegations made against him of sexual misconduct. Those would not be relevant to the federal case and probably are being asked to pressure Cruz into settlement. The last article relates to Cruz’s decision not to indict some guards but that matter was given to a special prosecutor by the AG and he has indicted them.
      My only complaint about Cruz is he does not (if true) plea bargain. I’m on his side when it comes to his dealings with people who have knowledge of murders which brought me to this issue in the first place. I do, as I previously told you, find it totally unacceptable lawyers in his office would be emailing racist material among themselves and if that was true then that is a matter that deserves our attention. If those emails exist and are as racist as they are suggested to be then it might be necessary to inquire into the actions of those prosecutors when it comes to prosecuting people of color.

Comments are closed.