First a recap. As we all know Judge Robert Mulligan, the guy who runs the trial courts, conspired with the SJC, the New York Times, and Attorney Paul Ware to go after and destroy Probation Commissioner John O’Brien because he had something they want. Jobs. As a result the New York Times poor cousin the Boston Globe ran a spotlight series detailing how a number of probation employees exercised their First Amendment rights and donated money to politicians. It also reported that a dude named Corbett was Mulligan’s and some others’ first choice over O’Brien for the back when he was appointed. Corbett works for the SJC and as soon as the first Spotlight story came out detailing the donations and selected hires of the 2000 plus person agency Mulligan and all seven members of the SJC removed O’Brien pending an investigation and replaced him with there guy Corbett. They then appointed attorney Paul Ware, a big time lawyer whose firm has a considerable trial and appellate practice, to investigate O’Brien. Talk about a conflict and a set up.
In Commonwealth Magazine last week Judger Mulligan confessed to two things that calls into question his ethics, his legal reasoning and capabilities, and his competency to perform the duties of the CJAM.
1. He confessed to hiring the son-in-law of the Supreme Court Justice Margaret Botsford. He then promoted the chap to a better job the day before Judge Botsford finally signed off on Mulligans re-appointment to his powerful job. Three of the justices would not re-appoint Mulligan. Botsford was the only holdout. Then came the son-in-law’s promotion immediately followed by (the very next day) Bostsford giving the go ahead to re-appoint Mulligan.
Mulligan also confessed to Commonwealth Magazine that he rescinded the promotion because of an ” anonymous letter” that questioned its appropriateness.
Question. Was the anonymous letter an attempt to blackmail a judge and the SJC? It sounds that way. Mulligan promoted someone on merit and then rescinded it because an anonymous person raised questions. Why didn’t Mulligan ignore it or turn it over to the attorney general? It should be investigated. The public needs confidence that judges are not making decisions based on anonymous letters. Was this blackmail?
This confession by Mulligan is very disturbing. Judges should not be for sale yet Mulligan admits facts that indicate corruption played a part in him receiving his re-appointment. Funny how the Globe or the Herald has not picked up on this. Perhaps Lawyers Weekly will cover it. It should be a major story.
2. Mulligan admits in the Commonwealth Magazine article that he hired the spouse of a powerful legislator to be his lobbyist on Beacon Hill. She gets to whisper in her husband’s ear every night what Mulli wants from the Hill. Mulligan defends this action by saying he’s know this woman for over 20 years and she’s very qualified. And the only job for this qualified person that Mulligan had for her is for her to use her influence over her husband and his colleagues to do Mulligan’s bidding. And get paid for it too. Hmmmmm
Aren’t each of these incidence worse then anything O’Brien is reportedly to have done? Of course they are.
For many years attorneys, judges, and police officers have complained in person and in writing to Judge Mulligan about the serious negligence occurring in Roxbury District Clerk’s office. Mulligan has done nothing. Yet he admits that he prepared to oust O’ Brien based on his knowledge that a spotlight story was coming. It appears he acted before reading it. Mulligan is quoted in the story basically saying he didn’t like O’Brien when he first met him. (Talk about bias). Had he read it he would have learned that some people in the probation dept donate to politicians, a few of his hires are questionable based on accusations of people who had other cats in the fight for those jobs, and, oh yeah, O’Brien hired his daughter. The only questionable thing in the entire spotlight series. I believe the ethics commission is there for just this type of thing.
As for Mulligan and his hires. Should we talk about his Army buddy who he forced the clerk in Malden District to hire. Unfortunately this guy is having trouble grasping the basics of the job. People are pissed in Malden.
Or how about Mary Rafferty, the wife of a Mulligan buddy. She has no previous court experience yet was hired at a top salary without the job being posted. That is a huge no no. You have to post all jobs publicly. Even Jack O’Brien did that. It also appears from campaign reports that Ms. Rafferty exercises her first amendment rights and donates to politicians. Just like some probation department employees.
Liz Cerda, the lobbyist wife of the powerful legislator also got hired without her job being posted.
Same for Pamela Dashiell. She got a top salaried position from Mul.ligan withoput the job being posted. She’s now a judge.
Then there is a Trav friend who is now Administrative Deputy Assistant Register of Middlesex County Probate Court. His name is James Gandolfe. Did they do a CORI check on this guy? I understand Mulligan Okayed this hiring although he was aware of the gentleman’s past. I wonder what the other candidates’ qualifications were.
The big scam Mulligan has going is the hiring freezeand his ability to bypass it with out posting jobs. Thus it is easier to get people he wants in to positions. How does he plan on hiring a chief probation officer in New Bedford court if there is a hiring freeze?
The beautiful thing about the Commonwealth Magazine interview is that if Mulligan was cross examined based on his own statements it would take hours after which it would be apparent to everyone that he is a pathetic, not very smart, lousy lawyer. My god Mulli, didn’t you ever pay attention to the trials you sat through. You are killing yourself with your own words. Every half-assed trial lawyer would have a field day with your quotes. I know the lawyers representing Judge Botsford son-in-law are. Will you be deposed in that or will you find something else for the kid?
You admit you sign off on all hires but you don’t look closely at them. Until now of course. Mulli, that’s your fault, not O’Brien’s you putz. You admit you neglected your job responsibilities. You would be the worst client in world. Really. Keep your damn mouth shut. (Oh wait, I forgot, your Judge Mulligan. You’re smarter than everyone)
You know how some judges leave the bench and go back to practicing law? Well Judge Mulligan could never do that. No one would ever hire him. That is if they read his comments in Commonwealth Mag. The article is the definition of lousy lawyering. Not to mention lousy politics.
So now Paul Ware is brought in. Can he go back and say this a lot of crap being thrown around with the hope of something sticking. O’Brien has done nothing more than what the justices and Mulligan do every day. The first amendment allows campaign contributions. Of course that will make the SJC look like idiots. But it is the truth. The SJC fucked up. They listened to Judge Mulligan. Not only a fraud, but a lousy lawyer.
Don’t forget, the SJC’s ability to suspend O’Brien, especially for these allegations, which if taken as true, mean nothing. It is highly questionable among the legal types that follow this. Including, from what I understand, some members of the Court itself.