G. Jeffrey MacDonald, USA TODAY 10:39 a.m. EST November 13, 2013
This June 23, 2011 booking file photo provided by the U.S. Marshals Service shows gangster James "Whitey" Bulger.(Photo: AP)
BOSTON — The sentencing hearing for notorious mobster James "Whitey" Bulger began Wednesday with a judge ruling that family members of eight people Bulger was acquitted of killing can testify.
When a jury in August found Bulger guilty of 11 murders and 31 racketeering counts, the verdict left eight families hungering for more justice. Their loved ones' deaths, the jury found, couldn't be tied to Bulger.
Now, as Bulger's sentencing hearing began Wednesday in federal court here, these frustrated survivors might get the last word.
Judge Denise Casper on Wednesday ruled in favor of the prosecution request to permit "all victims" to give impact statements at the upcoming hearing.
It is "beyond dispute that the criminal enterprise was responsible for the murder of all the victims specified in the indictment," says an Oct. 11 prosecution filing with the court. "Family members of the murder victims clearly have a right to be heard at Bulger's sentencing."
Bulger's attorneys had fired back, urging the court to "reject the United States Attorney's Office's invitation to disrupt the findings of the jury." Meanwhile, Bulger trial juror Janet Uhlar has asked the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate what she calls "a threat to U.S. jurisprudence."
"The verdict we carefully, dutifully, and painfully deliberated is being mocked by the U.S. Attorney's Office," Uhlar said in an e-mail to USA TODAY. If all are permitted to speak despite the jury's findings, she said, "U.S. jurisprudence will be dealt a fatal blow."
Legal experts say Casper has discretion to permit a narrow or wide range of impact statements. They add that no matter who's permitted to speak, 84-year-old Bulger is all but certain to spend the rest of his days in prison. Prosecutors are asking for two consecutive life sentences, plus five years, in accordance with sentencing guidelines.
To allow victim impact statements from those not linked to the defendant's crimes would be extremely rare, according to Michael Coyne, associate dean of Massachusetts School of Law in Andover. He's never seen a case when it was permitted, he said, adding that it could cast aspersions on the sentence.
"The appeals court could end up sending it back to her for having made a mistake," Coyne said, if the higher court finds the sentencing hearing was improperly managed.
But Casper had to weigh competing factors, according to David Frank, editor of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, a newspaper that covers legal affairs in the commonwealth. Among the possible concerns: Be sure no one who might count as a Bulger victim in this super-complex racketeering case is denied an opportunity to speak.
"By law, victims of crime have an absolute right to address the court before sentencing," Frank said. "The judge has a difficult decision to make" as she considers, in light of conspiracy and other racketeering findings, how to define who is and who isn't a Bulger victim.
The ruling provides a boost for the government's image might among those who were hurt, especially during the 1970s and '80s by Bulger's Winter Hill Gang, Coyne said. Such victims have long resented how the government did little to bring the gangsters to justice, instead taking bribes and agreeing to generous deals with Bulger associates.
Yet their might be a prive to be paid.
The ruling could "reduce the sentencing hearing, to large extent, to a circus," said Robert Bloom, a criminal procedure expert at Boston College Law School. "It has absolutely no meaning other than some sort of cathartic relief for some of the victims."
This June 23, 2011 booking file photo provided by the U.S. Marshals Service shows gangster James "Whitey" Bulger.(Photo: AP)
BOSTON — The sentencing hearing for notorious mobster James "Whitey" Bulger began Wednesday with a judge ruling that family members of eight people Bulger was acquitted of killing can testify.
When a jury in August found Bulger guilty of 11 murders and 31 racketeering counts, the verdict left eight families hungering for more justice. Their loved ones' deaths, the jury found, couldn't be tied to Bulger.
Now, as Bulger's sentencing hearing began Wednesday in federal court here, these frustrated survivors might get the last word.
Judge Denise Casper on Wednesday ruled in favor of the prosecution request to permit "all victims" to give impact statements at the upcoming hearing.
It is "beyond dispute that the criminal enterprise was responsible for the murder of all the victims specified in the indictment," says an Oct. 11 prosecution filing with the court. "Family members of the murder victims clearly have a right to be heard at Bulger's sentencing."
Bulger's attorneys had fired back, urging the court to "reject the United States Attorney's Office's invitation to disrupt the findings of the jury." Meanwhile, Bulger trial juror Janet Uhlar has asked the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate what she calls "a threat to U.S. jurisprudence."
"The verdict we carefully, dutifully, and painfully deliberated is being mocked by the U.S. Attorney's Office," Uhlar said in an e-mail to USA TODAY. If all are permitted to speak despite the jury's findings, she said, "U.S. jurisprudence will be dealt a fatal blow."
Legal experts say Casper has discretion to permit a narrow or wide range of impact statements. They add that no matter who's permitted to speak, 84-year-old Bulger is all but certain to spend the rest of his days in prison. Prosecutors are asking for two consecutive life sentences, plus five years, in accordance with sentencing guidelines.
To allow victim impact statements from those not linked to the defendant's crimes would be extremely rare, according to Michael Coyne, associate dean of Massachusetts School of Law in Andover. He's never seen a case when it was permitted, he said, adding that it could cast aspersions on the sentence.
"The appeals court could end up sending it back to her for having made a mistake," Coyne said, if the higher court finds the sentencing hearing was improperly managed.
But Casper had to weigh competing factors, according to David Frank, editor of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, a newspaper that covers legal affairs in the commonwealth. Among the possible concerns: Be sure no one who might count as a Bulger victim in this super-complex racketeering case is denied an opportunity to speak.
"By law, victims of crime have an absolute right to address the court before sentencing," Frank said. "The judge has a difficult decision to make" as she considers, in light of conspiracy and other racketeering findings, how to define who is and who isn't a Bulger victim.
The ruling provides a boost for the government's image might among those who were hurt, especially during the 1970s and '80s by Bulger's Winter Hill Gang, Coyne said. Such victims have long resented how the government did little to bring the gangsters to justice, instead taking bribes and agreeing to generous deals with Bulger associates.
Yet their might be a prive to be paid.
The ruling could "reduce the sentencing hearing, to large extent, to a circus," said Robert Bloom, a criminal procedure expert at Boston College Law School. "It has absolutely no meaning other than some sort of cathartic relief for some of the victims."