sung to the “Gilligan’s Island” Theme Song
Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale, a tale of a fateful trip.
That started from the jealousies of the S.J.C.
The commissioner was a savvy man, his top aide tried and true. If not for the pleas from judges and pols, probation would be doomed, probation would be doomed.
With Mulligan,
Fred Wyshak too.
A guy named Ware,
and his lies.
A Federal Judge!
And The Senate Prez and Bobby D.
Here on Mulligan’s Island
The End
Really, this Probation thing is a disgrace. Read the latest via Commonwealth Magazine. And this from David Boer.i
Please share widely!
SomervilleTom says
The johns are never charged. The prostitutes whose pimps are powerful enough are never charged. The racket is old and well-established. Even if prostitution is someday legalized, I doubt many parents will want their children to be one.
The extent of this patronage scandal is nauseating. It doesn’t help me feel better to hear that “everybody does it, it’s the way government works”. There is ample evidence that actual evidence of qualification for the various jobs was never sought or valued. References were never checked. I guess that because powerful Democrats participated, we’re supposed to feel better. This Democrat does not.
When I write of a “pervasive culture of corruption”, this is what I mean.
HeartlandDem says
Corruption is alive and well in our state and nation.
I am very close to changing from a lifelong (D) to unenrolled as I no longer want to be associated with a party that continues to elect, enable and feed the “pervasive culture of corruption.”
I am a Progressive not a Democrat (if this is what it means to be a Democrat in Massachusetts.)
Christopher says
I followed both links and have read other things here and elsewhere about this supposed scandal, and I’m having trouble coming up with what the problem is beyond the proverbial smell test. Who is supposed to be making these hirings? Are there any checks and balances on those decisions? Are there objective criteria such as a state level civil service exam score that one must meet to be hired and are people getting hired despite not meeting the criteria? Are legislators legally prohibited from writing letters of recommendation for state jobs? I find myself having a hard time getting upset about this unless the answers to some of the above questions are different from what I think they are.
rcmauro says
… from the Herald and the federal indictment is here.
It looks like this went beyond routine networking and recommendations. If you believe the indictment, they were running a sham merit-based system that was supposed to conform to an official hiring handbook. It sounds like they must have left enough of a paper trail to show that they were bypassing more qualified candidates for politically connected ones.
Others who have been following this longer than I have will surely have more details.
johnk says
we do have resident apologist Ernie who makes random postings. It always judge this, lawyer that, Coakley blah, he’s the fall guy, everybody does it, why this guy, etc. Just throwing anything up there.
But bottom line, did he do it. Unfortunately for Ernie it’s YES.
David says
The question, I suppose, is whether that is, or ought to be, a federal crime punishable by long stints in federal prison.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
Wyshak says these are RICO violations. Sending rejection letters through the U.S. Mail gave the feds jurisdiction and the right to indict on this fedeal crime.
But here is what is really important!
The fact they are state workers is a red herring.
The feds could use the same facts and indict employees at the privately owned ACME Dynamite Company or The Boston Globe.
Suppose at ACME or the Globe there are important departments each with a manager. (LIke Probation and O’Brien)
Now pretend that each manager does the hiring and promoting and has guidelines to follow. Not laws or regulations but in-hoise rules (like probation)
Now pretty much each department head gets letters from co-workers at all levels for job and promotion candidates. These include very higher-ups who could destroy your department at a whim. Companies do it all the time. Merge departments etc.
You reject many if not most of the recommendations BTW. Nobody bat 1000 with you. Like baseball 300 is good.
Anyhow you never hire a dope or someone who can’t do the job. And you tell me what is the “Most qualified”.
And every other department head works the same way. And it was like that before you. And the big bosses know it and encourage it.
Would you have any reason to believe you were committing a federal crime?
Well, by making these hirings you are insuring yours and your tops staff (oh yes racketeering is a conspiracy so more than one person needed to indict) will continue to be employed and your department kept relevant thus gaining personal benefit.
That my friends is what John O’Brien, and two of his co-workers are charged with. One a woman and the other a 70 something guy who retired after 30 plus years at probation.
The indictments could apply to any private enterprise. Scary fucking stuff.
johnk says
federal workplace laws? Yes, scary stuff indeed.
David makes a better point, does the punishment fit the crime. That’s a good question.
O’Brien is guilt as hell, now as it turns out he’s the Heidi Fleiss of hacks. With his own personal hack ratings book for each hire. Un-frickin-believable.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
Please don’t mislead people John.
You’re just throwing untrue shit out there. This comment is proof that you are clueless.
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii says
are not criminal and certainly not RICO violations.
johnk says
as your Glen Beck like comments indicate. Scary stuff.
Please feel free to use the Heidi Fleiss line (if someone hasn’t already used posted something similar) that was good.
dasox1 says
“The feds could use the same facts and indict employees at the privately owned ACME Dynamite Company or The Boston Globe.” Why would that be a federal crime?
SomervilleTom says
Companies that do very much of that get eaten alive in the market. What is the analogous check on unrestrained government corruption?
If a publicly traded company were shown to be doing this kind of corruption, their stock market price would plummet and their shareholders would revolt. When the shoddy and dangerous products of such a company hit the market — especially when people die — the shinola would hit the fan. Are you really arguing that putting incompetent and corrupt parole officers in charge of recently-released felons is not dangerous to public safety?
In my view, the point is that the entire enterprise REEKS of corruption, incompetence, and arrogance — whether or not it’s criminal.
I understand that “nothing criminal” is perhaps different from “nothing wrong”. Nevertheless, that distinction colossally misses the point.
If criminal prosecutions are what’s needed to end such abuses, then I support criminal prosecutions. If you have some other remedy to offer, I’m all ears.
Christopher says
…certainly you are not suggesting criminal prosecutions for things that may not even be crimes?
To circle back to my questions in my previous comment maybe what we need are law changes. For example hire by committee or have the hirings subject to a review body like the Governor’s Council*. Institute a state-level civil service exam. Forbid legislators from writing recommendations for state employment. We can’t really blame people for doing something that only looks bad.
*PS: I’m kidding this time about the Governor’s Council. I just threw that in there to get a rise out of some people:)
SomervilleTom says
This prosecution is happening because the state asserts that these defendants DID commit crimes. I’m glad that these defendants, like any other, have good lawyers who are mounting a spirited defense.
The assertion that I dispute is that these laws are themselves fundamentally misguided. In many cases, the appearance of corruption or the appearance of conspiracy is, in fact, a result of a FACT of corruption or conspiracy.
I stand by my original comparison to prostitution. I think the probation scandal was illegal. I think the prosecution is appropriate. I also think the legislators, judges, and other public officials who apparently participated should be prosecuted as well.