Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Galluccio under 24-hour house arrest

By

In a court hearing today, a judge ordered that Sen. Anthony Galluccio be placed under 24-hour house arrest — no exceptions for church, Senate votes, or, I assume, anything else.  This is in light of his having failed an alcohol test earlier this week.  There will be a probation surrender hearing on January 4, at which Galluccio could be sent to prison.  Senate President Murray released the following statement:

“The court will determine on January 4th whether or not Senator Galluccio violated the terms of his probation.  At that time, the Senate will consider its next steps.”

Meanwhile, the Globe has now joined us in urging Senator Galluccio to resign his seat.  It’s just hard to see how he can continue to do his job effectively at all, much less while also giving his personal issues the time and attention they need.  

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Senator Galluccio has broken the law.  He holds an elected position of honor and privilege in the Commonwealth.  He apparently has a problem with alcohol and is likely an alcoholic.  Alcoholism is a sickness that can and must be treated abstinence.  The medical community and larger society has recognized alcoholism as a disease for decades.

    <

    p>Why is the media, the Senate President and this blogs authors being so retarded about his condition?  I don’t remember this kerfuffle over Rep. Paul Kujawski’s alcohol induced indiscretions and arrest in 2004…why the extra scrutiny of Senator Galluccio?  Is it just bad timing on the part of his disease to deteriorate to the level of breaking the law and public shame  following Wilkerson (theft), Marzilli (mentally ill), Dimasi (theft)?

    <

    p>What I want to know is why you/they are not asking about treatment for the man, who despite being a pol is a human being?  House arrest?  How stupid is that when it seems pretty obvious he needs rehab.  Duh!

    <

    p>If anyone could get their heads out of their Christy Mihos-like-advertisement-2006-butts, they would know that his sentence should have required treatment and supervision.  No wonder the state is such a mess.  If you can’t figure out simple, how the hell do expect to figure out complex?

    <

    p>This is such a lost learning opportunity and a sure bet to keep more addicts in the closet of misery versus facing public humiliation.  It could be different, it should be better and let’s pull for a positive outcome.

    • did you really just write this?

      <

      p>

      Why is the media, the Senate President and this blogs authors being so retarded about his condition?

      • Retard – to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.

        <

        p>The actions of the media, the Senate President and comments on this blog have done nothing to enhance positive outcomes for the Senator and others with addiction.

        <

        p>Go ahead write me up with the PC police.  

        <

        p>

        • Retardation is a sickness that can and must be treated.

          <

          p>

          <

          p>

          <

          p>Written half tongue in cheek, of course.

            • That comment of yours is on BMG forever and you are hence labeled an insensitive troglodyte. I feel for you…

              • Apparently a lesson to learn on my part.  How would you write about the slow? latent?, missed? forgotten? ignored? ignorant? responses of MSM, Senate President and bloggers on this issue?  Can the word retarded never be used because of it’s derogatory stigma attached to developmentally disabled people?  

                • Heartland Dem asks “How can…be so retarded?” and elsewhere called the sentence “stupid” thus definitely putting “retarded” in that context.  If the word was used as transitive verb, such as “Why are these people retarding progress toward sentencing reform?” that would have been fine.

    • because he hadn’t killed anyone yet.

      <

      p>Yeah, alcoholism is a disease and needs to be treated, but tell that to a woman who gets beat by her husband every night, or the dad who has to bury his teenage daughter who was killed by a drunk driver.

      <

      p>Put that in your progressive pipe and smoke it.  

      • What I have experienced with the impacts of alcohol abuse. I have buried loved ones (plural).

        • and there are people who abuse alcohol every single day and don’t hurt anyone but themselves.

          <

          p>The second you get behind the wheel, it’s not longer a personal matter.  It’s my business.  It’s your business.  This guy had repeatedly got behind the wheel drunk.  Most likely, many dozens of times.  He has been convicted of it -still didn’t stop him.  He is a danger to the community and a danger to you and me.

          <

          p>I understand it’s a disease and that his body and mind tell him he NEEDS to drink, but nowhere in his psyche or his physiology is there a red light blinking saying he NEEDS to drive.  That’s the difference between someone who is battling an addiction to alcohol and a irresponsible drunken wastrel who just might be the one to send your wife and kids to the morgue because he’s too much of a pompous prick to take a cab home after a night at the bar.  

      • Obesity… disease?
        Domestic violence…
        Racism… disease?
        Conservatism… disease?
        Porn… disease?
        Pedophilia… disease?
        Sex… disease?
        Laziness… disease?
        Smoking… disease?
        BMG… disease?
        Blackberries… disease?

        <

        p>When will we stop giving passes to the flunkies of our world who can’t get it done. Lack of will power to do something (or not do something) should not be condoned and forgiven as a “disease”.

        • If I don’t check it every day I feel like I won’t know whats going on in the State and something will jump out and suprise me.

          • And totally miss stories which they would rather just go away (How’s that Congressional Ethics panel doing with Charlie Rangel… just went over the 1 year “in progress” mark?).

        • Of course alcoholism isn’t a disease.  It’s a crime and should be punished!

          <

          p>What do those doctors know about physiological dependence?  

          <

          p>We should all listen to JohnD and his hateful biases, especially when it comes to health issues.  Screw science!  Alcoholics are just losers being given a free ride on JohnD’s tax dollars.  THATs what’s important.  MONEY.  

          <

          p>Merry Christmas!

    • Because he has an alcohol-related criminal record, and because he is currently serving a sentence for a crime.  I don’t know anything about the Kujawski stuff, but (a) BMG didn’t exist then, and (b) from your description, it doesn’t sound like he broke any laws.

      <

      p>Lawbreaking is a pretty easy bright-line rule for me.

      <

      p>Of course he should get treatment, and I certainly hope he does.  My point is that he needs to focus on that before he can hope to do the very demanding job he was elected to do; hence he should resign.

      • The consideration of his need for treatment is a post script in the story rather than a primary focus of the situation.

        <

        p>a) I know BMG did not exist in 2004.  MSM barely touched the issue of b) Kujawski’s  DUI arrest and lewd behavior (public urination in front of an officer) google it and you can only find about 4 hits, especially in comparison with the Galluccio sensationalism.

        <

        p>I am adamantly against drinking and driving and believe that alchohol and drug-related criminal sentences should have serious consequences immersed in treatment.  Where is the call for treatment?  People have responded more vehemently to their misunderstanding of one word I used upstream vs. the lost learning opportunity with this individual and high profile case.  

        • The public has an investment in Galluccio’s performance as a public official, not in his ability to maintain a healthy lifestyle or to treat any diseases he might have.

          <

          p>Galluccio does not owe the public treatment of his disease and the public has no right to demand he treat any diseases he might have.  He does not have a communicable disease.  So if we consider his alcoholism a disease, then he is entitled to privacy as with any other noncommunicable disease he might have.  The public does not have a right to demand, for example, he treat his undoubtedly advancing liver disease.  

          <

          p>The public does, however, have a right to demand that this individual uphold his responsibilities as a public official and that he behave in a manner consistent with his role.  In return,  he, then, has an ethical responsibility to do the job he was elected to do.  

          <

          p>You are confusing the roles of each in this mess.  His illness is not the issue; that he has broken the law is.   How he deals or doesn’t deal with his medical problems is not the public’s business–both literally and figuratively.

          • While I agree with the majority of your post he does need to resign as he can no longer uphold his responsibilities as an elected official. Under the terms of his probation he cannot leave the house to vote in the Senate. He cannot do the job he was elected to do.

            <

            p>Obviously he has a problem with demon rum. Resign, and then he can go get the treatment he needs out of the public magnifying glass

          • for putting it better than I could.

            <

            p>To further respond to the questions about why “bloggers on this site” haven’t said more about treatment: I am not a doctor, a psychologist, a social worker, or any other person qualified to say much about alcoholism and how it should be treated.  I comment about law and politics.  And so, as lightiris states, I see my role in this business as limited to the questions around Galluccio’s service as a Senator.  My view on that is that he should resign, as I’ve repeatedly stated.  I hope he gets help, but that’s not really my hunt or my business.

            • My perspective is that laws and consequences should be about the business of the people, the human beings not the systems.

              • … ‘boss’, we must be concerned with the business of his business.  Certainly when someone says he should resign and get treatment we’re addressing both concerns.  When it goes to far and he also breaks the law, then he should face legal repercussions as well as treatment.

          • The public has an investment in Galluccio’s performance as a public official,

            <

            p>Without a doubt your post has logic.

            <

            p>I would extend that however, to state that the public has an investment in his recovery which is directly related to his performance.

            <

            p>Is the Senator a commodity or a human being needing treatment?

            <

            p>Are public officials with addiction problems held to a different standard?  Except when they are from a prominent powerful political family?

            <

            p>What is this really saying about our understanding of alcoholism/drug addiction as a disease?  Would he lose his job in the private sector or be given a leave of absence?  I have seen it go both ways.

            <

            p>I am not confused about the roles in this mess. I have a different perspective and believe that his medical problems, the approach and process (since they are public due the criminal behavior) are the public’s business.

            • …the public has an investment in his recovery which is directly related to his performance.

              <

              p>Why? The public is entitled to a senator who can conduct out the public’s business. Gallucio as a human being is no doubt entitled to our concern and hopes for a recovery. Gallucio as a public official is, like all public officials, entirely expendable. No one–not a Gallucio, not a Kennedy–has a right to public office, or to continue in office while he sorts out his problems.

              <

              p>TedF

            •  Since when is the public entitled to have any say in a person’s medical decisions just because s/he is a public official?  That’s ludicrous.  And let’s be clear:  if we accept that alcoholism is a disease, then it must be afforded all the privacy considerations other diseases merit.  If we say it is not a disease, then the ethics surrounding the public’s appropriate involvement may be arguable.   We accept, however, that alcoholism is a disease and that the individuals who suffer from this disease maintain their rights to privacy and agency.    Actually, your suggestion that there is an appropriate role for the public in  Sen. Galluccio’s private medical matters commodifies him,  not mine.  Your view strips him of his rights to privacy and places his personal life and decisions  into the public domain.    

              <

              p>Had Sen. Galluccio not run afoul of the law, we would not be having this conversation.  Indeed, many functional alcoholics lead productive lives.  To the extent their job performance is not adversely affected by their alcoholism, there’s not much to talk about.    But Mr. Galluccio is a public official who has broken the law.  The reason is irrelevant.

              <

              p>As well, the public has no real investment in his recovery any more than it has a real investment in the recovery of a public official who has gallstones or pancreatitis.   Reasonable and humane concern for the individual and an appreciation for the collateral damage untreated diseases inflict on others?  As a theoretical matter, yes.    But intrusion of the public into his decisions to treat his own noncommunicable disease?  No.  The public cannot and should not have any standing in matters concerning an individual’s medical decisions except in those cases where the medical condition poses a communicable public health issue.  

              <

              p>His medical problems are his business.  His breaking the law as a public official is ours.  Whether or not others have received different levels of tolerance for similar problems is not terribly germane.    

              • I am sorry that you misunderstood me, I thought I was clear in my post that medical matters are private and only is this case due to the legal/criminal offense it has become public information.

                I have a different perspective and believe that his medical problems, the approach and process (since they are public due the criminal behavior) are the public’s business.

                <

                p>So let me restate, I am not suggesting that there is an appropriate role for the public in Sen. Galluccio’s private medical matters, but rather as a matter of public policy regarding the proper treatment of those whose addictions have spiraled into the public realm through dangerousness –  must have a strong emphasis on punishment/consequences and treatment….hence my criticism of MSM, Senate President and this blog.

                <

                p>While scholarly, hawkish and legally astute individuals have expressed in a variety of eloquent posts that public officials are commodities and expendable in this thread, I will not lower my humanistic perspective to that level.  Not once have I excused his behavior.  My intention of staying with this thread is to express an absence on the public level, MSM and this blog to call loudly for treatment.  Without treatment and intervention, recidivism increases and the chances of someone being hurt also increases.  I don’t want to see anyone else hurt in this fiasco.  I think that there are parties that have the public authority and position to see the odds of a positive outcome increase, that have not exercised prudent actions and words on this matter.

                <

                p>These dynamics are similar to media and public policy responses to domestic abuse that sensationalize the crime and often fail to include information about the cycle of abuse and resources for help….missed opportunities.

                <

                p>Maybe, just maybe, one of the reasons many good people do not run for elected office is the crucifixion and glee that erupts when they screw-up.  

        • While I agree with you, as someone who has also lost many a BMG argument over semantics and hyperbole on my part, I would also say this part:

          <

          p>People have responded more vehemently to their misunderstanding of one word I used upstream vs. the lost learning opportunity with this individual and high profile case.  

          <

          p>is your own fault. You knew the double meaning and ran with it trying to be snarky, it back fired and made your valid points about BMG hypocrisy fall to the way side. Take it from an expert, don’t swear or belittle your opponents too personally.  

          • Thank you for the guidance.  I can see how it backfired and I own the poor word choice…my bad, my fault.  Yes, I was more than frustrated when I began posting on this issue. I was pissed and my passion/anger got the best of me.

            <

            p>I am still frustrated at myself for not being able to better articulate my position in a manner that can be “heard” on this blog.  I have a valid perspective and life experiences to share on this issue.  I do not believe that government is about serving government, systems, laws or even philosophies of governance.  It should only serve people and the people’s interests.  When elected officials are viewed as “commodities” and “dispensable” then we have lost some of our humanity.

            <

            p>Maybe those who have walked in the moccasins of a sick and addicted, shamed and disgraced individual can understand what I am trying to explain.  For the rest, count your blessings.

            <

            p>I am also frustrated that as a society we have not moved forward much in the past 35 years to either true understanding of the diseases of addiction, mental illness or equal rights (thought I’d throw that in, too).

            <

            p>I have learned a lesson about the lack of tolerance by some bloggers for perspectives and literary skills different than their own.    

            • I agree with you that Gooch is not a moron to be mocked or a villian to be demonized, but rather a fellow human being who needs help with an addiction. I am blessed that my dad was in the half of his siblings that did not have alcohol addiction at some point or another, and my grandpa and great grandpa had problems with it too. They are all fine people. What people also tend to forget is that alcoholics, when they are drunk, have completely different personalities so a lot of the arrogance and poor judgment the Senator had are likely the result of that. In person, I know him as one of the most dedicated public servants in Cambridge, always trying to help fund youth athletics, always willing to go at bat (literally and figuratively) for their funds. Yet here he stands, a slave to a disease and unable to continue his duties. I think his best bet is to resign, sober up, and chair a non-profit to fund Cambridge sports. Maybe politics contributes to his problem.

      • My daughter walks to work every day and returns home each night across the intersection where Senator Galluccio nearly killed two people. She is a chef, and walks home in the early morning hours when drunks like Mr. Galluccio are on the loose.

        <

        p>When Senator Galluccio gets drunk, at home, it is a disease that he is welcome to treat whenever and however he and his loved ones deem most appropriate.

        <

        p>On the other hand, when he drives in a drunken stupor, crashes his car into whoever and whatever happens to be nearby, and then flees the scene, he is a criminal. In that case, the purpose of arrest and confinement is to protect society in addition to whatever punitive or rehabilitative benefit it may offer.

        <

        p>In my view, a person who perpetrates virtually any violent crime shows symptoms of some sort of disorder, and is surely a candidate for some sort of therapy. A great many of those would benefit from starting therapy before, rather than after, they commit whatever crime they are imprisoned for.

        <

        p>So what.

        <

        p>Until we invent or discover a better way to protect society from individuals whose crimes demonstrate that they are a danger to society, Senator Galluccio and people who commit repeated offenses like him need to be incarcerated.

      • Go back to my first post, I have not made one statement or judgment about him stepping down or not.  

        <

        p>I am talking about the missed opportunity for treatment and the apparent lack of understanding of the disease of alcoholism as presented by MSM, Senate President and this blog.

        • Does that mean we don’t punish a crime committed by someone who is “under the influence”? Who among us has not done something stupid while drunk and paid the consequences? Do we all have the “I was drunk” defense and sprinkle magic pixie dust to make everything go away? I’m not saying treat people for their drinking problem “weakness” but in no way diminish their total responsibility for what they did while drunk.

        • I believe that any rehab program starts by drying the drunk out, and the judge did attempt to do that. The attempt was not stringent enough, probably out of respect for Galluccio’s office, and so it failed. Fortunately, the failure did not result in anyone being harmed. Now Gallucio is confined, and the presumption is he will be successfully dried out either at home or in prison (if his probation is revoked). In any case, further rehabilitation has at worst been delayed, not denied.

          <

          p>The man is in denial, as Kathy points out below, and has to realize that he’s screwed up so badly that the justice system has taken charge of him because he’s demonstrably not capable of being in charge of himself. If that system is not so prompt as you’d like in bringing all the tools of rehab to bear, it’s because Galluccio’s welfare is not the system’s primary concern – the public’s safety is. When that is secured, there’s no reason to think he won’t get the help he needs.

    • little patience with Galluccio not because he’s alcoholic but because he refuses to take responsibility.  Galluccio has the benefit of a lot of people’s support who, I’m sure, have urged him to a) get treatment b) resign his seat and c) acknowledge his addiction.  To the extent that he is unwilling or unable to do that after all this time has people suffering from compassion fatigue.

      <

      p>In other words, even if an individual is addicted to substances, that individual is still held accountable for his or her actions–both legally and ethically.   What you’re seeing in the comments here, I think, is a reflection of that, naturally enough.  

      • I would completely agree. To me this man deserves our sympathy and help, not our ridicule. I have plenty of ex-alcoholics in my family (and a few I wish were ex’s already but aren’t) and I really resent the crude jokes and the political sniping coming from the BMG peanut gallery. The man has a disease, he needs to certainly resign since the disease is preventing him from fulfilling his duties to his constituents, and he should sober up and either work in non-profit, particularly with youth which is an area he is good at, or get back into politics. But I would argue the latter route would be more trouble than its worth. He also has a gorgeous young wife and I am sure wants a family someday so he should really clean up his act for them above all else, putting the petty political concerns aside. My hopes and prayers go out to him and his family and lets all hope he gets the help he needs. Beyond saying ‘he should resign’ I really don’t see the need to keep commenting on this story. BMG is starting to resemble a tabloid the way it beats these stories to death.  

        • Are you sure about that?  If so, it’s a change since last month, I guess, unless the Globe is misinformed….

          <

          p>

          He is single, and in recent years, has spent much of his time serving as a coach and a mentor to kids.

          • I remember at his last City Council inauguration he had a beautiful women escorting him whom he introduced to me as his fiancee, I assumed he’d have married her, he’d be a fool not too. Maybe this Senate seat wasn’t the only thing he lost because of this addiction.

    •  Got pulled over. Tried the “do you know who I am” gambit. It failed miserably. Kujo then proceeded to show his respect for women and law enforcement by urinating on the lady state troopers foot.
      He paid the fine, went through the first time offender [rogram, and lost his license.
      About six months later, he cried “hardship” and received his license back early. We call that a “Cinderella” license because it reappears like magic.  

      • Billxi, you have mentioned a similar experience, also in Worcester County.  Would it be accurate to say, in your opinion, that Rep. Kujawski was treated like any other defendant?  No better and no worse?  I believe that DA Conte worked hard to ensure that all defendants were treated fairly.  An acquaintance of mine had a similar experience, eventually getting a Cinderella license. Limited as my experience is, that is my sense; the Representative was treated like any other defendant.    

        • And this is the same guy the Lege might make AG. Only in Massachusetts

          <

          p>”One time I was caught fleeing the scene of a car accident in Massachusetts and was arrested, the judge asked me if I knew what the punishment was in this state, I said ‘I don’t know re-election to the Senate'”-Emo Phillips

  2. in the annals of ridiculous legal maneuvers comes Galluccio’s “toothpaste” defense. Since when does Colgate or any other toothpaste manufacturer have 90 proof toothpaste?

    <

    p>Galluccio, your toothpaste and protestations of innocence
    have run dry.

    • Next we’re going to be hearing about an accidental slice of a Christmas rum cake and, perhaps, eventually, the effects of vanilla extract in puddings.  

  3. He is obviously in denial about his disease, blaming toothpaste for a failed breathalyzer test. For anyone that has known an addicted person, denial is part of the disease. He has been caught driving under the influence and caused two accidents recently (in Oct. and 2005). It’s only a matter of time before he kills someone or himself. The judge did him a disservice by not mandating rehab rather than house arrest.

    <

    p>Gallucio needs to resign so we can elect another progressive who can dedicate himself or herself to the district, and not one that is distracted fighting his personal demons.

  4. I’ll admit to never seeing Tip or Ted sober when the press wasn’t around.  The problems of substance abuse are larger than one man.

    <

    p>Perhaps the problem with the public is the notion that people in responsible position are, or should be, somewhat more responsible that the average person.  They aren’t.  Having been around government, politics, private industry and non-profits for many years, I’ve seen their behavior mimic “The Office” more than the other teleplays that strive for reality in their drama.  

    <

    p>I don’t know if Mr. Galluccio should remain senator or not.  It is naive to believe he is alone with a problem that many people share.  Certainly, he is less discrete.  Some work through their problems, some not.  Would he be terminated if he had a job with a private company – or would the problem be covered up?  

    <

    p>We, the people, have a responsibility also to realize that the people in positions of power in politics and government are no better morally and intellectually than other average people.  All the good and evil and downright stupidity we see in average people can be found in our elected and appointed.  

    • I don’t recall seeing any stories about Tip O’Neill crashing his car or being arrested for DUI — did I miss something? I’ve already written here that the premature termination of the investigation into what happened at Chappaquiddick was a failure of our judicial system should not be repeated. As a consequence, we will never know what really happened that night.

      <

      p>The reason Senator Galluccio should step down or be removed is that he is a criminal. He, like Tip O’Neill and Ted Kennedy and countless other elected officials, can drink as much as he likes. What he cannot do is then climb behind the wheel of a car. Even average people are expected to obey the law. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I think basic logic suggests that a convicted criminal must not be allowed to make law.

Archives