Weekly Update With Thoughts: Whitey, O’Brien, Bond, Matanov, FBI .

(3) johnny-depp-300WHITEY

Whitey is having difficulty filing his brief on his appeal. Needs more time. His attorneys have asked for another extension of time until August 22. As you know I think he has no chance on an appeal for the prosaic reason no one in the judiciary wants to have the circus come back to town. It really is something that should run only once. However everyone will pretend that the thing is on the level and file their briefs and eventually present their arguments to a three judges on the court of appeals. The judges will probably get their decision out sometime in the summer of 2015 shortly before Whitey’s 86th birthday.

None of it makes a difference to Whitey who’ll never experience a day in the sunshine of freedom again. The murder cases in Florida and Oklahoma are pending. Even so, I have no doubt the conviction in Boston will be upheld. The trial under Judge Casper was fair and handled well. Whitey’s real problem is his life was full of gangsters, guns, greed and gruesomeness which compels any fair minded judge to give his appeal short shrift. Too bad the people have to continue to pay for this charade.


A sick juror and a scheduled day off has slowed down the trial of Probation Officer John O’Brien for using his office to give jobs to people recommended by persons in power, politicians and judges. For the first time in American history a person is being prosecuted for patronage. Following the trial in the newspapers it still appears the evidence consists of people getting their jobs because they were connected. One or two of the persons hired was not deemed qualified by some other persons even though they met the basic qualifications for the job. Those people who said the person was not qualified were using their position of power on behalf of other candidates.

No matter how you want to shake this case out, neither O’Brien or his two co-defendants people with unblemished records never took a penny to give out a job. They honestly played the time tested and age old game of patronage. That’s all the evidence shows. The federals have turn it into a racketeering charge with penalties up to and twenty years in prison.

O’Brien has lost his job and pretty much gone broke trying to defend himself. Unlike real criminals he was not allowed to get the attorney who got him an acquittal in the state court. He had a federal public defender appointed for him. Not that that’s all that bad because some of those attorneys are as good as they come. O’Brien’s defense attorney seems to be doing a banged-up job. It’s just the idea the worse you are the more the federal judges are willing to spend our money on high priced private counsel. You’d think the people without records who could not afford attorneys would be given the choice and not the other way around.


Not James, but Carol. I stick this in here because it shows how the judgment of federal prosecutors, the plethora of crimes, the sickening high prison time afforded each one, the rubber stamp judges and the delays and costs of the federal criminal system are out of hand. Carol of Pennsylvania a microbiologist back in 2006 got upset at her best friend Myrlinda.  Carol’s husband was dreaming about all the charms of Myrlinda and ended up getting her pregnant. Seeking to get back at Myrlinda  (rather than her husband?) on over 20  occasions Carol spread mildly toxic highly visible chemicals on Myrlinda’s doorknob and car-door handles. Myrlinda spotted most of them and suffered only a minor burn to her thumb. Enter the federals.

In 2007 Carol was charged with violating a federal statute passed to implement the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty in 1997 which was designed to prevent horrors of war like we saw in WWI where poisonous gas was used.  A person convicted of this act faces a sentence of “imprisonment for any term of years.” No doubt the zealous prosecutor was recommending double figures if Carol went to trial so she pleaded to six. Now the Supreme Court has unanimously said this type of act was a matter of state jurisdiction and not federal.

The Court just about said any donkey should know a treaty to outlaw the use of chemical weapons by nations would not include as its intent a scorned woman. It said Carol should never have been charged under that statute. Carol won in court but her victory came after she had served her prison time. Who’ll give that part of her life back to her?


Connected to the Marathon Terrorist Attack (MTA) by his friendship with the Tsarnaev’s but not by any criminal activity, he’s to remain in jail awaiting trial because he lost his job and been evicted  after being indicted, His lawyer says he has nowhere to go. At his bail hearing the FBI pointed out he sent $56,590 home to his family and $14,800 to non-family over 4 years using fictitious names. None of this is criminal..

I’ve noted he is facing up to 44 years in prison: 8 for denying he watched certain videos; 8 when he told a wrong story about when he learned the Tsarnaev’s were involved in the crime; 8 for falsely describing how he went to a restaurant with them; and 20 for hiding what was on his computer. (this was recovered and nothing was criminal). His crimes have no relation to the MTA; they all relate to the investigation of him which showed he was not involved in criminal activity.

J Edgar HooverFBI:

Like O’Brien who committed no crime but is charged with hiding it; Matonov committed no crime but is charged with misrepresenting and hiding his non-criminal activity.

Here’s my weekly warning to all: if you have commited no crime but the FBI decides to investigate you, Don’t talk to an FBI agent; Don’t use your computer again; Buy a new one. You may tell them the absolute truth about what you did but by the time the FBI agent writes down what he thinks you told him and dictates it to his secretary, remember the FBI does not record interviews outside its office, your words may no longer look like your own. Also, if you erase anything on your computer, the FBI will  allege you were obstructing its investigation.

An article in the New Yorker (tip of the hat to cousin Jeff) is informative on this issue although the writer doesn’t see there are more holes in the new policy requiring things to be recorded than in the Boston streets, some as big as Florida sinkholes.


  1. Matt, speaking of books, there was a commenter a while back that was putting chapters up of a book he was writing. If I recall correctly, he was also the guy who’s brother allegedly witnessed the Halloran/Donahue shooting and inexplicably had the FBI show up at his unknown girlfriends apartment 45 minutes later in Dorchester. That book sounded authentic. Do you know if it got published? and the title? Thanks.

    • Rather:

      I had forgotten all about him so I had to go back to refresh my memory. He posted under Afraid of the FBI. His name was Jon Stuen. His book is “Gaga”: The Real Whitey Bulger/Irish Mob Story. It is available on Amazon. He posted some of it on his book on here but parts of it seemed to me to be degrading of women so I suggested to him I did not want that type of writing. He apparently got upset and after that I didn’t hear from his again.

  2. Wow! Foley just can’t get enough of Whitey, huh?

    • Jim:

      Funny thing is that Foley has less of an idea what Whitey is like than a cop on the beat in Sturbridge. That’s what makes movies so bad, the people they depend on for advice are flying by the seats of their pants trying to be experts in areas where they are walking blind.

      • I’m with ya 100%, at least Leo DiCaprio had Weeks as his advisor on the departed… and even that was subpar.

  3. who is the guy that is in the picture with Depp? I have seen him everywhere with him while on set, don’t know if he’s intricately involved with the real story or if he’s just a boston guy who can give depp a little more of a clue what went on and how to act like jim bulger. no telling what that guys done or knows to have gotten that gig..

    • That is Ret. Col Tom Foley, MA State Police, who doggedly pursued Whitey over the years, and wrote the book “Most Wanted.”

      • Rather:

        Foley didn’t pursue Whitey during his hey days in Southie; he did not come onto the scene as far as Whitey was concerned until he hooked up with Wyshak and company. His book is part fact, part fiction. He’s responsible for the false charges against Naimovich. He’s a good advisor to the movies since they are mostly fictitious.

    • Jim:

      I could not put my finger on him but Rather was able to identify him. Foley in his book wrote that the FBI took down the mob at the Apalachin meeting when it was the NY State police and he also went after Naimovich. He knows as much about Whitey’s life in Southie as Crazy Red from Savin Hill.

  4. Everyone;

    If folks are interested in learning about the Dreyfus affair, Barbara Tuchman gives a splendid several page synopsis of the case in her book “The Proud Tower.”

  5. Matt,

    This video by law professor James Duane, “Don’t talk to the police”, has been making the rounds for years and I would be interested in your group’s opinion of it.

    It’s fun and entertaining and, to a non-lawyer and former project kid, it seems to me to be the soundest of advice.

  6. Att. Silvergate said the Feds wanted to talk to a client. He showed up for the interview with a tape recorder. The session was cancelled. Displaying the recording device prevents the Feds from proceeding with the interview. Rather than refusing outright insist on the recording. 2. Remember the prosecutor Wyshak asked for special treatment for the Congressman’s wife. Congress funds his job. His acts are identical to the Probation officials. Double standard? Why should state employees face criminal charges for engaging in the identical conduct of federal employees? If the judge doesn’t direct a verdict he is not doing his job.3. On the Hernandez matter. If one aids or assists in the escape from the scene of a crime or aids and assists in the hiding of the crime one is in a joint venture and is responsible as a principle. How does he get around those elements? He drove away from the scene and destroyed some home video. He was at the scene, fled the scene as the killer or along with the killer. He tried to hide evidence of the crime.