Billy's moral failings still aren't criminal

by Thomas Keane Jr.
Friday, June 20, 2003

It wasn't one of the commonwealth's better days.

William Bulger, 35 years a state legislator, 18 years the Senate's president and now president of the University of Massachusetts, spent yesterday on the defensive.

Before a congressional committee that was on occasion flat-out hostile, he remained mostly composed, stammering at times, qualifying his remarks (``I don't believe,'' ``I assume'' and ``I don't recall'') too frequently, but largely holding his own. Yet the other 49 states in the union must be wondering: What is wrong with Massachusetts?

For the tale that was told, as U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-South Boston) put it, was ``a 40-year sinkhole.'' Or a story of ``corrupt law enforcement, political corruption and organized crime,'' in the words of Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.).

For years, the Boston office of the FBI took bribes, sent innocent people to jail and protected Bulger's brother - James ``Whitey'' - as he allegedly murdered, dealt drugs and ran an extensive organized crime empire. And Whitey's younger brother, Billy, seemed part of that sordid mix. Whitey helped Billy in his rise to power, intimidating others or delivering a key favor when the politician needed it. And for his part, Billy protected his brother - going after law enforcement officials who threatened Whitey or handing off state jobs to those who helped him.

Billy denied it all. He spoke under a grant of immunity (prompting an outraged Shays to say he was ``stunned'' it took such an action to get the president of a major university to tell the truth).

Bulger, with lawyer Thomas Kiley by his side, arrived well-prepared and well-coifed. The two men had a slew of affidavits which they offered up at seemingly every turn in the questioning, each exculpating Bulger of any wrongdoing.

Bulger set the tone with his opening remarks: ``(My brother and I) led different lives and should be judged separately.'' He was unambiguous in saying he had no idea of his brother's whereabouts. He said the last time they spoke was in 1995 (shortly after Whitey was indicted). Repeatedly, he denied dealings with his brother - he didn't know Whitey's friends, he hadn't helped them, he was never aware of anything untoward. If viewers were looking for any bombshells, they were disappointed. He stuck to his story despite fierce efforts by Shays and Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) to shake him.

Two other striking items emerged as well. One was the extent of the FBI's malfeasance and its continued, apparent unwillingness to change a deeply corrupt and secretive culture. Under incredulous questioning from Rep. William Delahunt (D-Quincy), Bulger testified that the first time anyone from the FBI asked him about his brother's whereabouts was in 2001 - an amazing six years after Whitey had fled. And several members of the panel were aghast that Herald reporters were able to unearth a potential Whitey hiding place in the Caribbean, while the FBI still seemed completely unaware. And then Bulger told of a visit to his home last week from two FBI agents. The two talked to one of his daughters, asked to see Billy's wife, threatened that they would tear South Boston apart and said that if someone from the Bulger clan would reveal Whitey's whereabouts, they would restore Billy's reputation. The intimidating crassness of the visit and the apparent implication that the FBI was behind personal attacks on Bulger were appalling.

The second striking item has to do with Bulger himself. For all of the denials (and there are many who simply will think he was lying yesterday), the former Senate president didn't get himself off the hook. The criticism of Bulger, most sharply made by Attorney General Thomas Reilly, is that he made a ``choice'' between the public good and the good of his brother. If anything, Bulger's testimony bolstered that criticism.

Committee members frequently asked Bulger about 1995, the last time he spoke to his brother. The phone call was set up in advance to come into a house in Quincy. By then, Bulger knew the extent of his brother's wrongdoing - Whitey had been indicted and was on the run. Yet the then-Senate president did not alert the authorities so they could trace the call. Nor, during the call, did he ever tell Whitey to turn himself in (although he denied published reports that he urged Whitey not to). And even now he couldn't bring himself to say that he hoped the FBI would capture Whitey.

Why not?

The UMass president made a choice - on behalf of his brother - and it was the wrong one. Still, while that may have been a moral failing, it wasn't criminal. The often-riveting testimony revealed an appalling case of the FBI abusing its authority and the public trust. But for the most part, Billy Bulger made it through the day unscathed.

Talk back to Tom Keane at tomkeane@tomkeane.com.