SJC Waxes Poetic, Refers to Whitey Bulger in Rejecting Appeal

Why is South Boston's gangster past so captivating? Bostonist can't say. Sensible people should look upon Whitey Bulger and his ilk with nothing but scorn for all their killing and mayhem, but somehow, between Whitey's intriguing life on the lam and the awesome, wide-collared shirts that all those guys used to wear, the imagination is captured. Apparently, even the usually staid justices of the Supreme Judicial Court are not above this, as the first three sentences of a decision released today reveal:

Although James J. Bulger, Jr. (alias, "Whitey"), has long evaded the grasp of pursuing domestic and international law enforcement officers seeking to bring him to account for crimes too numerous and too craven to be summarized here, his malevolent tentacles have once again reached into the Commonwealth and have led to the grant of a motion for a new trial for the defendant, Frederick Weichell, who was convicted by a jury of murder in the first degree and whose conviction was affirmed by this court in Commonwealth v. Weichell, 390 Mass. 62 (1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1032 (1984). The ground for the grant of the new trial motion is encapsulated in the bizarre circumstances that we shall describe below (material worthy of a crime novella).

The case, Commonwealth v. Weichel, is rather riveting, involving the possibility of a wrongful conviction, threats by Bulger and Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi, and a letter in which another man confesses to the murder that has Weichel behind bars. (While it's really no crime novella, it is worth a read. We can't find it on the 'net just yet, but expect it to show up here pretty soon.) It also contains an interesting and ironic ruling:

Weichel, currently in prison for murder, argues that he should get a new trial because of newly discovered evidence (the confession letter). It turns out, though, that the evidence isn't really "newly discovered." Weichel knew about the letter years ago, but didn't say anything because Whitey Bulger had threatened him and warned him not to. The general rule is that when evidence could have been brought forward at an earlier time, it is inadmissible, but Weichel says that Whitey's threats should create an exception.

The SJC rejects that argument, saying Weichel "could have sought protection for himself and his family from the government." But in the same decision, the high court notes a lower court's finding that "Bulger and Flemmi were ruthless killers who used fear, intimidation, coercion, threats, and murder to hold the community of South Boston hostage. Their gangs worked with virtual impunity as the FBI protected and even aided Bulger." So Weichel should have gotten the government to protect him from Bulger, even though the government was helping Bulger to commit crimes? Weird.

Image from the FBI's Ten Most Wanted website: Apparently, the experts at the FBI think that the only way Whitey Bulger manifests his age is through his moustache.