Remember back in the olden days when the probation trial was going on where Fred Wyshak created a crime to get a Bulger and/or the Speaker of House? Remember? Through some bizarre interpretation of the RICO statute a middle manager became a racketeer for kissing up and protecting his turf.
Note: The government’s theory had nothing to do with O’Brien working for the state. The facts could apply to the night shift manager at your local McDonalds.
Remember when Fred Wyshak’s entire case rested on Judge Robert Mulligan testifying that he had no idea patronage went on in the hiring of court personnel and as such he was duped? Mulligan is official victim in the indictment. Not the government or the taxpayer. But because O’Brien didn’t follow in-house procedures (not laws or regulations) he committed racketeering by defrauding Mulligan who, and this is an element of the so-called crime, had no idea this was going on.
It’s like this: the work manuel says work starts at 8:30. People show up at 8:45 all the time. Even the boss. He knows it. Nobody ever says anything.
Then one day Fred Wyshak shows up and says to the boss, “Hey, you have a person here I don’t like. He’a a middle manager and he and his secretary are allowing the workers to show-up at 8:45 everyday. You don’t know anything about that, do you? In fact you’re paying these people to start at 8:30, right? before you answer remember I’m Fred Wyshak and I get what I want no matter who is in my way. Good. Now I’ll need you to testify to this. Okay? Good.”
So this week the defense attorneys filed a motion with an affidavit from a court employee stating she kept a list for Mulligan that was just for people sponsored by Sal DiMasi or Robert Traviligni. The have the list of job candidates which shows and “S” for Sal or a “T” for Trav as the sponsor.
If this is true it means Mulligan could not have been duped. Just like the company boss.
BTW, but very important to keep in mind, patronage is not a crime. Judge Young said so just about everyday during the trial. Nothing illegal for hiring someone solely on the recommendation of the elected official. Never mind being qualified (which the O’Brien hires were, some arguably)
I recommend you peruse the short motion. Here’s a taste:
The defendants repeatedly cross-examined CJAM Mulligan on the hiring process he employed with regard to court security personnel. CJAM Mulligan repeatedly denied that members of the legislature influenced his hiring decisions. In particular, he testified that he did not keep lists of people who called regarding candidates. He testified that he ran a merit based hiring process when it came to hiring court security personnel. He denied knowledge of various lists that contained the names of legislative sponsors.3 The overall thrust of his testimony was that his hiring process was not influenced by the people who made recommendations.
However, information recently obtained by the defendants demonstrates that CJAM Mulligan did in fact kept lists of people recommended by those at the highest levels of the Massachusetts legislature and that he saw that those names were passed on to the Acting Head of Court Security to whom CJAM Mulligan had delegated hiring responsibilities.
Now remember folks, Fred Wyshak was promoted recently to head the public corruption unit of the Boston US Attorneys Office. This man is so obsessed with all things Bulger that what we see is outlandish creativity in targeting those who shouldn’t be. The obvious question is what are the real bad guys getting away with? We will never know as long the dangerously misguided Fred Wyshak is calling the shots and using all the fear and intimidation a rogue prosecutor can muster.
johnk says
kinda, sorta, might have, something or other, and that’s the best they could come up with. Grasping at straws.
Peter Porcupine says
It wasn’t the redistricting, it was getting pissed off and lying to the congressman about it under oath.
Now under oath, Mulligan swore that there WAS no tracking of patronage.
As Bill Clinton said, “I did NOT have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky..”
It ain’t the crime, it’s the cover-up.