When I wrote about the part where Gertner was correct I noted how Joe Barboza the FBI cooperating witness kept his friend Jimmy Flemmi who was part of the Teddy Deegan murder out of it. He substituted other people who were involved in the planning and at the scene instead. Various reasons have been offered for him doing that but I’d suggest the true reasons as to why he included Joe Salvati and Louie Greco may never be known. If I had to guess he probably just didn’t like Salvati [Frank Salemme had a great dislike for him]; but had some type of grudge against Greco. There was street talk that Greco stood up to him when he was giving another guy a hard time.
Judge Gertner found that they were not involved in the murder. She based that on the idea that Barboza was willing to perjure himself as to Greco and Salvati then his testimony as to others, such as Henry Tameleo and Peter Limone, must also be wrong. In her decision she takes a very narrow view of the evidence; she ignores what is commonly known about the way the Mafia operates.
There are several charts of the Mafia in the Boston area that were in existence around the time of the Teddy Deegan murder on March 12, 1965. They all show Raymond Patriarca as the boss, Gerry Angiulo as the underboss, Henry Tameleo as Patriaca’s right hand man and Peter Limone as a member of it.
Here is one thing we know for sure from an illegal FBI intercept of Raymond Patriarca. Deegan would not have been murdered without seeking his prior permission. To get that permission the FBI “wire had captured Barboza and Jimmy Flemmi seeking Patriarca’s permission to murder Teddy Deegan on March 9, 1965″ This was three days before his murder. This is hugely significant in analyzing the murder. Two guys with reputations for murdering people went to the boss to ask his permission.
Much is made of the fact by Judge Gertner that Barboza did not mention this and did not tie Raymond Patriarca into the Deegan murder. The reason which seems obvious. Patriarca did not give them permission to murder Deegan, During that conversation with Patriarca, Flemmi called Deegan “an arrogant, nasty sneak” who “should be killed.” Patriarca, according to Judge Gertner, “told them to collect more information on Deegan and then to contact Angiulo who would give them a final answer.”
How would Barboza implicate Patriarca? Patriarca washed his hands of the matter. He passed the buck. If they wanted to murder Deegan they needed permission from Gerry Angiulo the underboss.
Gerner would write: “he [Barboza] falsely substituted Limone and Tameleo for Patriarca as approving and/or initiating the hit.” That is clearly wrong because as just explained Patriarca never approved the hit.
Barboza said that he did the hit on Deegan because around January 25, 1965, Limone asked him to do it for “the office” which was the way people referred to the Cosa Nostra or Mafia. He testified they wanted him hit because he had robbed Puopolo’s house, he was involved in the October 17, 1964, murder of Sacramone, and he caused trouble at the Ebb Tide where Henry Tameleo hung out.
Gertner suggests that could never have happened because FBI intercepts showed that on October 20, 1964, three days after Sacramone’s murder, Limone warned Deegan that Flemmi was out to murder him. That may have been the case but perhaps Limone did not know Deegan was in on Sacramone’s murder at that time or the passage of time changed the Mafia’s view of Deegan as it often does among these criminals.
What we know in truth it that Deegan could not have been murdered without the approval of Angiulo. Barboza testified that after Limone asked him to do the hit he said he would check with Tameleo and remained in contact with him throughout that time. Gertner well knew that would have been the way to do it. Her decision read as if Patriarca told Barboza to get Angiulo’s approval and then he just went ahead and did it. Things don’t work that way in the Mafia.
Barboza was wrong in adding in Greco and Salvati, but there was no reason to doubt the involvement of Limone or Tameleo who were members of the Mafia and in positions to ask for the hit and approve it. The case was reviewed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the conviction of Limone and Tameleo was upheld in 1970. For a decision 37 years later to undermine it and to give tens of millions of dollars to two Mafia members under circumstances where the judge makes up her own version of what happened which contradicted the evidence did not serve justice.
They would not have been stupid enough to think they could go to the Old Man as he was called and then use his deferring of the decision to Angiulo as an indication of any other Will besides Raymond Patriarca’s executing itself in the Teddy Deegan murder .
He insulated himself, but had to give Angiulo his blessing for Deegan to die.
In a surprising egalitarianism to some the Mob allows these appeals from the ranks directly to the Boss regarding Hits it would seem . Normally they are reporting to Angiulo in Boston and Providence is just Atwells Avenue away . Brooking the Old Man’s infamously bad temper by just taking Angiulo’s nod is not enough . The polity , and it is a sensible one, allows the grievance to be directly aired to the Boss. And then , unlike the rash and out of control Gotti’s of the modern breed. the Old School Mr. Raymond would nod and wink them to Angiulo .
Everyones ass gets covered except Teddy Deegan’s .
The hubrus of the Black Robes is their misbelief in their omniscience. Rather than let settled law be, bad jurists routinely ignore Legal Precedents and settled facts, scientific or established by stipulations or in other fair trials.
So, too, to be loved by the Media, and be famous, and get your face on TV, some power abusing judges like to be in the headlines and lime lights. They think they are in Show BIZ. Their Courtrooms become THEATERS, and increasingly THEATERS OF THE ABSURD, THE IRRATIONAL, THE LAWLESS.
I’ve relayed how a judge I dealt with ignored STIPULATIONS, stipulated facts by both parties, and invented her own ABSURD FACTS, for example that all lakeside wells of over a dozen homes were above the surface of the lake, that there was one overflow of sewage, when both parties had stipulated to dozens of overflows over multiple years, etcetera. The judge was intellectually moronic, and a partisan, favoring the state . . .
Also the MEDIA is corrupted, when Judges, Clerks, Prosecutors, leak info with the understanding that the MEDIA will cover the corrupt and outrageous acts and decisions of the judges, prosecutors, etc
Finally, the MEDIA, like Carr who befriended the serial killer Martorano, “Hey, Johnny: Carr called him, and Cullen who repeated every lying word of Martorano and Flemmi as if they were GOSPEL, are deeply involved in the corruption of the system of this justice in the Boston area, and throughout the country, where these types of things happen often, especially with the FEDs and especially in DC.
they are bully boys, the men and woman judges, prosectors, clerks, who abuse power, and the henchmen who work for them . . .they are part of a new MAFIA . . .MEDIA, ACADEMIA, FEDS, INTERVENTIONISTS, ATHEISTIC-ANTAGONISTS at work to undermine America, the Constitution, the Family, Traditional Values, Goodness, Justice and Wholesomeness . . . .
power abusing, hubristic, bully boys . . .and FED black robes and FED prosecutors top the list of power abusers, along with Political Hacks in Congress, nad Media hacks
Peace to persons of good will; to persons not of good will and to bully boys, SPECIAL FORCES
Bill:
For all your attacks on the courts you have to admit that it was the nine black robes on the Supreme Court who decided in favor of the St. Patrick litigants. I would think you would appreciate that. For my understanding of what you suggest is that could never have happened but it did.
You write: “Rather than let settled law be, bad jurists routinely ignore Legal Precedents and settled facts, scientific or established by stipulations or in other fair trials. I don’t suppose if the conservatives on the Court overturn Roe which as Justice Kananaugh said is a “legal precedent” you would consider them “bad jurists.” It seems if the results are not what you want then the judges are bad.
Actually from my experience most judges have no desire to be in the public eye. I assume had they the need for being seen and heard they would have let cameras into their courtrooms which they have refused to do. My experience in the courts is that almost all judges are doing their best and few refuse to follow the established law. They believe, like myself, that the only functioning democracy is one where the law is respected and followed as best as we are able and they no more want to undermine it than I do. Believe me there have been many decisions during trials or on motions or otherwise that I disagreed with over my career but I never thought the judge was bad or evil other than on one occasion and in that case his bias was so obvious his decision was reversed on appeal.
As I see it, the mobsters become part of the fabric of the judiciary and law enforcement in our society and the law enforcement and judiciary become part of the mob’s world. Two squid cannot engage without losing parts of their tentacles.
Honest:
Good analogy on the squid. There’s something in the isolated lives judges lead that make them want to identify with the “Godfather” movie or that long running HBO series “The Sopranos.” I recall one of the federal judges in Boston dealing with a case of an elderly Mafia gangster and treating him as if he had earned the Nobel Peace prize.
Then there was the Salemme appeal before the Court of Appeals where the judge writing for the three judge panel based his decision on Salemme having had Anthony Cardinale as a lawyer suggesting he would never have allowed Salemme to do such a thing. (forget exactly what it was) He clearly didn’t understand the relationship between Mafia guys and their lawyers.
I always thought that Judge Ito did a horrible job on the Simpson trial. I wish that had not been televised.
Honest:
Judge Ito had a distinguished career: “In 1992, he presided over the trial of financier Charles H. Keating Jr. Keating’s ensuing ten-year sentence was later overturned on appeal because Ito had neglected to instruct the jury to determine whether Keating intended to defraud investors.” Seems to me either the Keating fiz was in or you have to intend to defraud people to be guilty of defrauding them.
Perhaps that O.J.’s trial was televised had no bearing on his actions but he did seem to be out of his elements there.