Black Mass: The Irish Mob, the Boston FBI, and a Devil's Deal (60 page)
Read Black Mass: The Irish Mob, the Boston FBI, and a Devil's Deal Online
Authors: Dick Lehr,Gerard O'Neill
Tags: #Social Science, #Anthropology, #Cultural, #Political Science, #Law Enforcement, #Sociology, #Urban, #True Crime, #Organized Crime
Bulger advised that he does not possess a great deal of knowledge regarding the Mount Vernon Realty Trust (MVRT). Bulger explained that Finnerty established the MVRT and Bulger does not even know if he (Bulger) is a beneficiary of this trust. Bulger advised that he has never seen any trust documents regarding the MVRT. Bulger only knows that he is a 50% owner of the property located on Mount Vernon Street.
Bulger advised that the purchase price on the Mount Vernon property was $I90,000. $90,000 of the $190,000 was back taxes due to the City of Boston. Bulger did not participate in negotiating the purchase price of this property. Bulger did recall being told by Finnerty that the back taxes could be paid in installments to the City of Boston. Bulger advised that he is still confused on how he paid for his share of ownership in this property but that he paid Finnerty $50,000 within thirty days of the closing date on the above property. Bulger also recalls that he has made installment payments to Finnerty and the St. Botolph Realty Trust regarding the back taxes owed on the above property. Bulger assumes Finnerty paid the real estate taxes from this account.
Bulger reiterated that he depended on Thomas Finnerty to involve him in the above investments and that it was not unusual for Bulger to repay Finnerty for the investment at a later time after the purchase had been made. Bulger cannot recall ever extending any loans to Thomas Finnerty or receiving any loans from Thomas Finnerty other than for the short period of times [
sic
] for investment purposes.
In regards to Harold Brown, Bulger advised that he has no recollection of ever meeting Harold Brown and has had no financial dealings with him.
Bulger recalled that the first time Thomas Finnerty ever mentioned Harold Brown to him was when Finnerty mentioned he was having a business disagreement with Brown. Bulger believes that Finnerty mentioned this in late 1984 or early 1985. Finnerty also mentioned that the disagreement was over the Kilby Street Development [another name for 75 State Street]. At the time of Finnerty’s first mention of Harold Brown, Finnerty never disclosed to Bulger his business relationship with Brown or any terms of any agreement between Finnerty and Brown. The only knowledge that Bulger had of Harold Brown at that time was that Brown had a bad reputation as a large landlord in the City of Boston.
Bulger recalled being told by Finnerty at a later time that Finnerty was having some dealings with the Beacon Companies in regards to the Kilby Street Development. It is Bulger’s recollection that at some point Finnerty said he had worked out his disagreement with Brown and that Finnerty was currently attempting to define his ownership interest in the Kilby Street Development. Finnerty also mentioned that he would be selling his interest to the Beacon Companies. Finnerty described this interest as an asset.
Sometime during the Summer of 1985, Finnerty mentioned to Bulger that he had received $500,000 from Beacon Companies as a buy out of Finnerty’s interest in the Kilby Street Development. Bulger said he was told this by Finnerty because Finnerty was just sharing his good news.
Subsequent to Finnerty receiving this $500,000, Finnerty told Bulger that he had ideas about how both of them could benefit through various investments. Bulger recalled that it was Finnerty’s suggestion that the both of them invest in tax free bonds through the Fidelity Fund. Bulger surmised that Finnerty’s suggestion regarding these investments were [
sic
] made in light of Finnerty just receiving the $500,000 and Finnerty’s knowledge that Bulger would be receiving $267,000 for his legal work regarding the Quirk case. Sometime after this discussion, Bulger borrowed money from Finnerty in order to place it in the Fidelity Tax Free Bond Account. Bulger borrowed $225,000 from Finnerty in August, 1985, in the form of a check drawn on Finnerty’s St. Botolph Realty Trust Account at the Bank of Boston. Bulger said there was no written documentation regarding this loan and Bulger borrowed it with the understanding that it would be repaid after Bulger received the Quirk legal fee. At the time that Bulger received the $225,000, he did not know the source from which the funds originated other than it came from Finnerty’s account. Bulger said that the St. Botolph Realty Trust was Finnerty’s account and he had no knowledge at that time regarding the details of the trust including who the beneficiaries were.
Bulger advised that in October, 1985, he borrowed another $15,000 from Finnerty for an investment opportunity. Bulger could not recall what investment the $15,000 was used for by him. He believes that it might possibly have been used to purchase stock in the South Boston Saving[s] Bank. Bulger advised that his real reason for taking the loans from Finnerty was to insure that he got the money in hand that he expected the Quirk’s [
sic
] to remit to the law firm of Thomas Finnerty. Bulger said that his logic for taking the advance was the fact that he would be in Europe and if anything ever happened to him this money would already have been put in his accounts and not retrievable by Finnerty or anyone else. He assumed that Finnerty would use the Quirk fee as repayment of Bulger’s loan if anything ever happened to Bulger.
Bulger advised that sometime around this period of time and after he had learned that Harold Brown had been indicted by the Federal Grand Jury in Boston, Massachusetts, Finnerty disclosed to him that the source of the St. Botolph Realty Trust Funds, which Bulger had borrowed from Finnerty, was from Harold Brown. Finnerty did not go into any great detail regarding Finnerty’s association with Brown but it was clear that the $500,000 had come from Brown in some indirect fashion. Bulger did not think he should be anywhere near or associated with Brown because of Brown’s reputation and in order to disassociate himself from Brown, Bulger decided to repay Finnerty the money he had borrowed. Bulger advised that he repaid the loans by issuing checks to the St. Botolph Realty Trust from his Fidelity Account. This repayment was done out of the principal borrowed plus interest after Bulger conferred with his Certified Public Accountant, Lee Hyler, who was responsible for calculating Bulger’s debt on the loan. Hyler assisted Bulger in determining the means Bulger would use to repay the loan and what assets of Bulger’s would have to be liquidated in order to make repayment. Bulger reiterated that he never received much in the way of detail from Finnerty regarding Finnerty’s interest or Finnerty’s receipt of money from the Kilby Street Development. Bulger could not recall specifics as to what Finnerty’s role was in the development.
Bulger’s only knowledge regarding Edward McCormack and McCormack’s involvement with the Kilby Street Development was that McCormack represented Finnerty as his lawyer. This representation was needed by Finnerty in order to insure that he received his payment from Brown for the Kilby Street Development.
Bulger advised that he is familiar with name [
sic
] Graham Gund because of Gund’s architectural work. Bulger does not recall ever speaking with Gund and has had no business dealings with Gund. Bulger advised that Finnerty has mentioned Gund by name but Bulger had no specifics as to why his name was mentioned by Finnerty. Bulger had no information or knowledge regarding Gund’s role in the Kilby Street Development.
Bulger advised that Thomas Finnerty has sworn to him that Finnerty has never used Bulger’s name in order to influence individuals who were dealing with Finnerty. Bulger advised that the first time that he ever heard that his name was used by Finnerty was in documentation filed by Harold Brown in his civil suit with Finnerty on October 27, 1988. Again, Bulger advised that Finnerty has denied he ever used Bulger’s name to influence anyone.
Bulger advised that in regards to the St. Botolph Realty Trust, that he has never been a beneficiary of that trust. He advised that he has never seen any documentation regarding the realty trust. Finnerty has told him that Finnerty is the sole beneficiary of the trust and Finnerty has never disclosed who was on the Schedule of Beneficiaries regarding the trust. Bulger reiterated that the St. Botolph Realty Trust was a separate trust owned by Finnerty and used solely by Finnerty.
The 1991 law enforcement memorandum, prepared by then Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General David Burns, became the basis for a March 2000 story in the
Boston Globe
. The article examined discrepancies in William Bulger’s public account of his share of money from 75 State Street. It was disputed by Bulger and by his lawyer, R. Robert Popeo, who also represents FBI agent John Connolly. Neither addressed the story’s content but rather criticized the authors and the
Globe
. Popeo asserted: “What you have here is a recycled old news story by two
Globe
reporters who are hyping a book.” A statement issued by the University of Massachusetts for president Bulger stated in part: “Periodically, the
Globe
likes to reconvene its Star Chamber regarding this matter. We may have entered a new century but some things never change at Morrissey Boulevard.”
For the sections about the Vanessa’s bugging operation, we relied on the sworn testimony at the Wolf hearings of Stephen Flemmi, August 20, 1998; Jim Ring, June 6, 9, 11, and 15, 1998; and FBI agent Rick Carter, August 17, 1998; government documents and FBI reports either in the authors’ possession or released as part of the Wolf hearings as exhibits 15-18, 61, 116-120, 123, 128-130, 153, 165, 175, 207, and 237; a firsthand encounter between John Connolly and the
Boston Globe
’s Dick Lehr on February 8, 1988; a
Globe
article by Lehr and Kevin Cullen, April 17, 1988; numerous articles in the
Globe
archives reporting on Harry “Doc” Sagansky’s life and the content of the taped exchange between Sagansky and the Mafia; Connolly’s 1998 interviews with the
Globe,
WBZ-AM Radio, WRKO-AM Radio,
Boston
magazine, and the
Boston Tab;
Wolf, “Memorandum and Order.”
For the section on the FBI bugging of the Mafia induction ceremony on October 29, 1989, we relied on the sworn testimony at the Wolf hearings of Stephen Flemmi, September 1, 1998; government documents and FBI reports released as part of the Wolf hearings as exhibits 190-194; and a case that included extensive transcripts of the taped ceremony,
United States v Nicholas L. Bianco
et al.
For the section on the meeting between Connolly and Brendan Bradley of the Boston Police Department about the murder of Tim Baldwin, we relied on internal government reports prepared between 1992 and 1998 as part of an inquiry into possible misconduct by Connolly; these reports covered FBI and DEA interviews with Bradley, Boston police officer Frank Dewan, and attorneys James Hamrock and John Kiernan.
For the section on John Morris leaking the Baharoian wiretap to Flemmi and Bulger, we relied on the sworn testimony at the Wolf hearings of John Morris, April 22, 23, 28, 29, and 30, 1998; Stephen Flemmi, August 20, 1998; government documents and FBI reports released as part of the Wolf hearings as exhibits 93 and 229; and
Globe
articles about Baharoian and Puleo.
It is interesting to note that Judge Wolf found that at the time Bulger and Flemmi gave the FBI information about Vanessa’s “the LCN in Boston was diminished and in disarray. This created a vacuum which, according to their plan, Flemmi and Bulger sought to fill by expanding their own criminal activities.” The FBI’s focus on prosecuting the Boston Mafia, the judge ruled, “provided an opportunity for Bulger and Flemmi to take over criminal activities in Boston that had previously been controlled by the LCN. With the protection of the FBI, Bulger and Flemmi could operate very profitably” (“Memorandum and Order,” p. 260).
In the month following the 1989 FBI bugging of the Mafia initiation ceremony in Medford, Massachusetts, a number of Mafia figures were arrested on charges of extorting Sagansky, including Ferrara, Russo, and Carrozza. Mercurio was charged but fled and avoided arrest. Eventually the mafiosi were convicted of this and other charges in federal court and sent to prison.
It is also worth noting that no known action resulted from the internal inquiry the Boston FBI conducted in 1992 into John Connolly’s meeting in 1986 with Brendan Bradley of the Boston Police Department. In February 1992 the special agent in charge of the Boston office, Tom Hughes, notified the investigating agent, John Gamel, that he was concerned that the inquiry into possible misconduct was against a retired agent (Connolly retired in December 1990) and that the “statute of limitations may have run.” After conducting the interviews, Gamel submitted his report to Hughes on February 24, 1992, and that was the apparent end of the matter. In July 1997 FBI agents questioned Bradley again as part of an Office of Professional Responsibility inquiry into Connolly’s activities. Bradley was scheduled to testify at the Wolf hearing during 1998, but he was one of a number of witnesses who were dropped after the judge urged both sides to trim the witness list. In an interview with a DEA agent in May 1998, in anticipation of his court appearance, Bradley apparently pulled back from what he’d reportedly told investigators originally in 1992 and 1997. In 1998 Bradley told the agent that he thought Connolly was just trying to put in a “good word” for a family friend, not trying to squash a subpoena. This change occurred just when Bradley was embroiled in a dispute with his own department. He was facing departmental charges after he was picked up during a department sting involving prostitution in Boston. Bradley said he had done nothing wrong; he resigned from the police department before his case was ever adjudicated. Finally, Mark Estes, the man whom police believed murdered Tim Baldwin outside Triple O’s in 1986, was himself fatally shot early in the morning of June 12, 1995, on a South Boston street.
During a brief interview in January 2000, Connolly denied ever meeting Bradley for coffee to discuss the O’Neil subpoena. “That’s an abject lie, like so many of the other nonsensical fabrications in this whole matter.”