Families tell Bulger he's a 'punk,' 'Satan,' 'terrorist'
BOSTON — The families of people killed by South Boston crime boss James “Whitey” Bulger and his gang finally got the chance Wednesday to tell Bulger how his long reign of terror damaged their lives, calling him a “terrorist,” a “punk” and even “Satan.”
A stone-faced Bulger refused to look at them, again declared his trial a sham and didn't take his opportunity to address the judge.
Bulger, his back to the families, stared straight ahead and scribbled on a legal pad as a dozen relatives stood one by one in a packed courtroom and poignantly described the loss of their loved ones and their contempt for Bulger.
The son of a man who was gunned down by Bulger in 1974 addressed Bulger as “Satan” and described how his father, a member of a rival gang, first disappeared in 1974 but wasn't found until decades later when his body was discovered in a watery grave.
Sean McGonagle was 11 when his father, Paul, disappeared. He said Bulger called his family's house the following year and said, “Your father won't be coming home for Christmas.” When he asked, “Who's this?” Bulger responded, “Santa Claus,” Mc-Gonagle said.
“You're a domestic terrorist fueled by greed and sickening evil,” McGonagle said.
Several family members blasted corrupt FBI agents for protecting Bulger for years.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Supreme Court’s health care law ruling worries 34 states
- Homeland Security panned for passing on bio-threat technology
- Huge, ancient quasar could alter theories on black holes
- Paul edges Walker in CPAC straw poll
- Buffet: Berkshire’s built to last
- Most young Republicans back legal marijuana
- Gene making human brains bigger found
- Monarch butterflies find milkweed supply dwindles
- Florida fisherman’s high court win spurs call for legal reform
- Congress approves 1-week funding measure for Homeland Security
- Perceived slights have some New Yorkers longing for Pennsylvania