Search the Site
Books By Author
Great Sites to Follow
- Mercer Co. man charged with downloading child porn - WKBN.com...
- Conn. Court Upholds Warrantless Search of Bedroom - Connecticut Law Tribune...
- AG announces 6 arrests of suspected child predators (MUGSHOTS) - WPXI Pittsburgh...
- AG announces arrests of 6 suspected child predators (MUGSHOTS) - WPXI Pittsburgh...
- Smart Meter Extortion -- Take Back Your Power! - Pure Energy Systems News...
- Did Weeks Commit Perjury Saying He Did Not Know Who Killed Halloran and Donohue With Whitey Bulger? on
- Tom Brady Welcomes Aaron Hernandez Back onto the Patriots? on
- The Bum’s Rush of FBI Agent John Connolly in Federal Court: Part Two on
- The Bum’s Rush of FBI Agent John Connolly in Federal Court: Part Two on
- How Whitey And Stevie Knew The Other Was An FBI Informant on
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
Category Archives: Uncategorized
I’m going back again at the Globe editorial demanding “prosecutors must answer for actions.” Yesterday I mentioned it seemed to be an ill-timed intrusion into the governor’s race since nothing it called for needed immediate attention; also, that it twisted the event into one of prosecutorial misconduct when the real problem involved ineffective assistance of defense counsel.
The Globe conjured up the idea there was a problem when the basis upon which it relied showed there was no problem. It suggested there was prosecutorial misconduct when the evidence points to a prosecutor who did his job. It yelled out that the case was brought on “the skimpiest evidence” when the prosecutor was confronted with evidence from six children between the ages of two and four, three boys and three girls, indicating the defendant, Bernard F. Baran, Jr., molested them. I’ll talk more about the editorial tomorrow.
Bringing the matter up during waning days of a close race for the governorship seemed out-of-place. Nothing was or is urgent. It could have waited. Whether the editorial was published last Saturday or the last Saturday of 2014 would make no difference. It was about events that happened 29 years ago.
Was it a disguised hit piece on one of the candidates? Will it be, like many Globe editorials, the introduction to other articles on the same subject but ones more directly aimed at one of the candidates? Or, will it just be allowed to hang out there as a reminder about what one of them allegedly did in the past hoping that its insinuations will cause voters to turn away from the candidate?
Perhaps because I’ve listened to so many intercepted conversations that I like to imagine dialogue between people. I’ve written how all the authors who have discussed these matters have trouble figuring out how Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi both became informants for FBI Agent John Connolly. The authors of Black Mass suggest Whitey became one and he “blended” Stevie in. They set the first meeting between Connolly and Whitey at Wollaston Beach in Quincy where Connolly convinced Whitey to become an informant to give them information on the Mafia. That never happened, but here’s what did.
It began at Old Harbor Village in South Boston during the month of M….. 1975. John Connolly approached the apartment of Mrs. James Bulger, the mother of Whitey. He knocks on the door.
Mrs. Bulger: Yes.
Connolly: Hi Mrs Bulger, is Jimmy in.
Mrs. Bulger: Yes, Come in. (She leaves and Jimmy appears)
Salemme, a known murderer and former head of the New England Mafia, admitted perjury at the trial of FBI Agent John Connolly coupled with what is called his recantation where he admitted to a fellow inmate that he testified to things that were false at that trial. His perjury and recantation is treated by Judge Selya as no more than a tempest in a teapot.
One of my favorite movies is The Shawshank Redemption. Banker Andy Dufresne is wrongly convicted of murdering his wife. While in Shawshank prison, another prisoner named Tommy Williams arrives. Tommy reveals that an inmate at another prison claimed responsibility for the murders Andy was convicted of. This proves what Andy has maintained all along that he is innocent. Unfortunately, Tommy is murdered before he can provide evidence of this. There is no doubt to anyone watching the movie that had Tommy not been killed, his testimony would have set Andy free.
This article is posted here: http://hubgab.com/?p=31
The most salient part of the evidence FBI Agent John Connolly presented to the Court of Appeals which Judge Selya choose to ignore was the part of the statement by the inmate confidant of Frank Salemme (CS) that Salemme was given information by the prosecutors to refresh his recollection of past event. Keep in mind that Salemme was in in prison from about 1973 to 1988 which would have been most of the time that the relationship between Connolly and Whitey Bulger existed. There was little in there that could refresh his recollection but much that could go to prejudicing him and presenting him the prosecutors view of reality.
There’s no doubt Frank Salemme’s testimony played a crucial role in the conviction of FBI Agent John Connolly. Federal Appeals Court Selya’s pretended Frank Salemme’s information given to a fellow prisoner (CS) was nothing more than braggadocio or excessive boastfulness. But when you start your decision as he did, as I indicated previously, with statement indicating a closed mind you have to falsely denigrate facts that strike at the heart of one’s beliefs.
He said of Flemmi’s statement to the CS: “Importantly, however, Salemme’s testimony did not occur in a vacuum. Several other witnesses corroborated aspects of it.” He adds later: “Thus, although Salemme testified to a number of things as to which no other witness had personal knowledge, much of his testimony received substantial circumstantial corroboration.”
I called the Middlesex DA’s office the other day to check up on Howie Winter’s case. You remember Howie, he was the guy John Martorano was with him when they were killing some of the people on behalf of Gerry Angiulo the Boston Mafia leader. Martorano testified how he and Howie met with Angiulo who was worried about another group led by Indian Al which was moving in on his gaming empire. Gerry hired Martorano and Howie and their merry men to wipe out Indian Al and his gang. In Boston at those times whatever Gerry wanted, Gerry got.
So they set about to do the job and did it very well. From John Martorano, the man who said you can’t rat on a rat, we learned that he did rat on Howie Winter who had never ratted on anyone. Nor had Howie ever been put in any FBI file as an informant. He told the feds to take a walk.
You won’t read it in our mainstream news media but the use of cannabis is definitely detrimental. This study has found that it is highly addictive and opens the door to hard drugs. More importantly it impairs intellectual development.
Now listen to President Obama: “As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol.”
I’ve been wondering whether his youthful use of marijuana is affecting his judgment as is shown by his suggestion marijuana use is not dangerous. Recent scientific studies prove him wrong. I sense in him a mental fugue. I know its little things but are these symptoms of his brain not working right.
Corrupt as an adjective is defined in Webster’s Third New International Dictionary as: “1 a: DEPRAVED, EVIL : perverted into a state of moral weakness or wickedness . . . b : of debased political morality: characterized by bribery; the selling of political favors, or other improper political or legal transactions or arrangements.”
It is best to have agreed upon definitions of words when considering ideas. On occasion I have people commenting here who accuse the federal judges in Massachusetts of being corrupt. I assume they are not referring to the more limited definition found when one asks Google for the definition which is gives as: “having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.”
The reason some suggest the federal judges are corrupt is that they don’t understand that corruption is inherent in our judicial system. That comes about because of the other phenomena that I’ve written about which is the disparate treatment of what I call poofs, which is the acronym for people out of favor.