BEFORE READING THIS, LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR:
I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT JAMES BULGER WAS A CRIMINAL
As Americans, we know that the FBI has had, and protected, corrupt agents from its inception to the present.
The recent and on-going release of the FBI's informant file on James "Whitey" Bulger is indeed curious. As a juror in the trial of US vs. James J. Bulger, I heard testimony first hand. The FBI informant file was brought up MANY times during the trial -- yet there was nothing in deliberations regarding it.
Why did the Boston US Attorney's Office (namely Assistant US Attorney Fred Wyshak) feel the need to drive the point to the jury that Bulger was an informant?
In my estimation, hearing, -- in real time -- the testimony surrounding the file, I felt it was a fake file created by 2 corrupt agents, the John's Morris & Connolly.
Why would they create this file?
Firstly, to have a reason for why they were with Bulger as much as they were -- could the file have been a cover to protect them? And, rather than obtaining information from Bulger, could they have been selling information to him?
Secondly, to obtain large bonuses from the FBI for claiming Bulger was their informant -- and they had to have a file to prove that claim, right?
Jim Bulger stated to his death that he was never an informant -- he said he bought information from Morris and Connolly to the tune of one million dollars ($500,000.00 to each). Information that these agents understood might lead to the death of certain individuals.
The file itself is not a typical informant file -- it lacks standard, basic information. And, if Bulger were indeed an FBI informant, it would be a much, MUCH larger file!
Numerous former FBI agents testified at the trial that Morris and Connolly had lifted information directly from their own informant files (information from other legitimate informants) and placed it into this "Bulger file' verbatim -- changing only the date and identity of the informant to make it appear that Bulger had given the information when in fact it was their informants that did.
Consider this -- John Morris discovered he was under investigation (he said so at the trial). He ran to the Boston Globe and told the eager journalists Bulger was an informant (an FBI agent is NEVER supposed to reveal the identity of an informant). The Globe printed Morris's claim (unethical on so many levels). A judge later called Morris and the journalists on the carpet and basically stated that the printing of such information was wrong and it's purpose could only be to have Bulger murdered by the Mafia or one of his own gang members.
Problem was -- at the time, the Mafia didn't believe Bulger was an informant, nor did the other members of the Winter Hill Gang.
Both Morris and Connolly were found to be corrupt. Morris actually admitted from the witness stand that he was an accessory in 2 murders by giving Bulger information that lead to the deaths of Brian Halloran and Michael Donahue. Regardless, the media held to the story that Bulger was an informant (based on the word of these 2 corrupt agents!). The Boston US Attorney's Office used the corrupt FBI duo's claim and media support that Bulger was an informant to later turn some of his former friends against him and offer testimony to save themselves from the electric chair and long prison sentences. (Namely Martorano, Flemmi, Weeks, and let's not forget Nee).
Because of the immoral deals given to these criminals -- whose combined body count was close to 100 souls, and combined federal crimes far outweighed those of Bulger --almost half the jury rejected their testimony unless corroborated with evidence. We asked ourselves the question -- if we were facing the electric chair, and we never thought Bulger would be captured, and if he maybe was an FBI informant -- would we say anything we had to to save ourselves? It didn't have to be true. It just had to please the Boston US Attorney's Office (namely AUSA Fred Wyshak).
The Boston media clung to the stories of these witnesses as though Gospel truth... Many Boston journalists went on to write their own books about Bulger totally based on these stories -- never, ever talking to or corresponding with Bulger himself.
All of it based on John Morris claiming Bulger was an informant...?
The curious thing about these supposed FBI files coming out now?
Bulger was set up to be murdered in the federal prison in West Virginia. There is no doubt of that. His health was poor -- he was supposed to be sent to a medical prison. In transit, the Bureau of Prisons stated his health had "suddenly improved." It was a lie. His health could not improve without major surgeries. How do I know this? I have letters in which Bulger describes in detail his heart and hip issues. When I spoke to him, face-to-face, I visually saw and assessed his situation and health (I am a nurse).
(This information/letters were offered to the Boston Globe. They weren't interested. I wonder why?)
Following the lie of the Bureau of Prisons, Bulger, at the age of 89 and wheelchair bound, was sent to a federal prison with a history of violence. He was sent to a prison where former New England Mafia members were incarcerated -- now believing the long and well-spun tale of the witnesses against him in his trial -- now believing the journalists who based their writing on the claims of these many criminals who received immoral deals for the information given -- including John Morris. They sent him to this prison unguarded and in general population.
Of course he was dead within 12 hours of arriving. Brutally murdered. And though the federal government has camera images of the men entering Bulger's cell, no one has been indicted.
What if it's true and Bulger never was an informant? How should we view the Boston US Attorney's Office (namely AUSA Fred Wyshak) for using Morris's story and highly immoral deals to turn Bulger's former friends against him to offer testimony very likely riddled with lies.
Why, and who exactly decided that Bulger needed to die and ordered the transfer to the federal prison in West Virginia?
We know that Bulger was experimented on by the CIA with high doses of LSD over a long period of time. He was 26 -- his brain was just coming to full formation.
We know that this CIA experiment was to modify human behavior -- and that a portion of it was looking toward seeing if individuals could be made violent or homicidal.
What if Bulger was finally coming to understand exactly what the CIA did to him? What if he was planning to do a national interview and talk about it?
Could that be why it was decided that he needed to die?
We know Bulger and Ted Kaczynski (Unabomber) were part of this CIA experiment. We know Charles Manson had connections to operatives in San Francisco and may very well have been made part of it himself.
How many others? How many people died because of this CIA experimentation? How many people still suffer the effects?