'Badly Fragmented' Forensic Science System Needs Overhaul

Date: Feb. 18, 2009

Contacts: Sara Frueh, Media Relations Officer
Luwam Yeibio, Media Relations Assistant
Office of News and Public Information
202-334-2138; e-mail news@nas.edu


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


'Badly Fragmented' Forensic Science System Needs Overhaul;
Evidence to Support Reliability of Many Techniques Is Lacking


WASHINGTON -- A congressionally mandated report from the National Research Council finds serious deficiencies in the nation's forensic science system and calls for major reforms and new research. Rigorous and mandatory certification programs for forensic scientists are currently lacking, the report says, as are strong standards and protocols for analyzing and reporting on evidence. And there is a dearth of peer-reviewed, published studies establishing the scientific bases and reliability of many forensic methods. Moreover, many forensic science labs are underfunded, understaffed, and have no effective oversight.

Forensic evidence is often offered in criminal prosecutions and civil litigation to support conclusions about individualization -- in other words, to "match" a piece of evidence to a particular person, weapon, or other source. But with the exception of nuclear DNA analysis, the report says, no forensic method has been rigorously shown able to consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source. Non-DNA forensic disciplines have important roles, but many need substantial research to validate basic premises and techniques, assess limitations, and discern the sources and magnitude of error, said the committee that wrote the report. Even methods that are too imprecise to identify a specific individual can provide valuable information and help narrow the range of possible suspects or sources.

"Reliable forensic evidence increases the ability of law enforcement officials to identify those who commit crimes, and it protects innocent people from being convicted of crimes they didn't commit," said committee co-chair Harry T. Edwards, senior circuit judge and chief judge emeritus of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. "Because it is clear that judicial review alone will not cure the infirmities of the forensic science community, there is a tremendous need for the forensic science community to improve."

Strong leadership is needed to adopt and promote an aggressive, long-term agenda to strengthen forensic science, the report says. To achieve this end, the report strongly urges Congress to establish a new, independent National Institute of Forensic Science to lead research efforts, establish and enforce standards for forensic science professionals and laboratories, and oversee education standards. "Much research is needed not only to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of current forensic methods but also to innovate and develop them further," said committee co-chair Constantine Gatsonis, professor of biostatistics and director of the Center for Statistical Sciences at Brown University. "An organized and well-supported research enterprise is a key requirement for carrying this out."

To ensure the efficacy of the work done by forensic scientists and other practitioners in the field, public forensic science laboratories should be made independent from or autonomous within police departments and prosecutors' offices, the report says. This would allow labs to set their own budget priorities and resolve any cultural pressures caused by the differing missions of forensic science labs and law enforcement agencies.

The report offers no judgment about past convictions or pending cases, and it offers no view as to whether the courts should reassess cases that already have been tried. Rather, the report describes and analyzes the current situation in the forensic science community and makes recommendations for the future.

Certification and Accreditation Should Be Mandatory

Many professionals in the forensic science community and the medical examiner system have worked for years to achieve excellence in their fields, aiming to follow high ethical norms, develop sound professional standards, and ensure accurate results in their practice. But there are great disparities among existing forensic science operations in federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. The disparities appear in funding, access to analytical instruments, and availability of skilled and well-trained personnel; and in certification, accreditation, and oversight. This has left the forensic science system fragmented and the quality of practice uneven. Except in a few states, forensic laboratories are not required to meet high standards for quality assurance, nor are practitioners required to be certified. These shortcomings pose a threat to the quality and credibility of forensic science practice and its service to the justice system, concluded the committee.

Certification should be mandatory for forensic science professionals, the report says. Among the steps required for certification should be written examinations, supervised practice, proficiency testing, and adherence to a code of ethics. Accreditation for laboratories should be required as well. Labs should establish quality-control procedures designed to ensure that best practices are followed, confirm the continued validity and reliability of procedures, and identify mistakes, fraud, and bias, the report says.

Setting standards for certification and accreditation should be one of the responsibilities of the new National Institute of Forensic Science recommended in the report. The institute should work with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, government and private labs, Scientific Working Groups, and other partners to develop protocols and best practices for forensic analysis, which should inform the standards.

Existing data suggest that forensic laboratories are underfunded and understaffed, which contributes to case backlogs and makes it hard for laboratories to do as much as they could to inform investigations and avoid errors, the report says. Additional resources will be necessary to create a high-quality, self-correcting forensic science system.

Evidence Base Often Sparse, Varies Among Disciplines

Nuclear DNA analysis has been subjected to more scrutiny than any other forensic discipline, with extensive experimentation and validation performed prior to its use in investigations. This is not the case with most other forensic science methods, which have evolved piecemeal in response to law enforcement needs, and which have never been strongly supported by federal research or closely scrutinized by the scientific community.

As a result, there has been little rigorous research to investigate how accurately and reliably many forensic science disciplines can do what they purport to be able to do. In terms of a scientific basis, the disciplines based on biological or chemical analysis, such as toxicology and fiber analysis, generally hold an edge over fields based on subjective interpretation by experts, such as fingerprint and toolmark analysis. And there are variations within the latter group; for example, there is more available research and protocols for fingerprint analysis than for bitemarks.

Nuclear DNA analysis enjoys a pre-eminent position not only because the chances of a false positive are minuscule, but also because the likelihood of such errors is quantifiable, the report notes. Studies have been conducted on the amount of genetic variation among individuals, so an examiner can state in numerical terms the chances that a declared match is wrong. In contrast, for many other forensic disciplines -- such as fingerprint and toolmark analysis -- no studies have been conducted of large populations to determine how many sources might share the same or similar features. For every forensic science method, results should indicate the level of uncertainty in the measurements made, and studies should be conducted that enable these values to be estimated, the report says.

There is some evidence that fingerprints are unique to each person, and it is plausible that careful analysis could accurately discern whether two prints have a common source, the report says. However, claims that these analyses have zero-error rates are not plausible; uniqueness does not guarantee that two individuals' prints are always sufficiently different that they could not be confused, for example. Studies should accumulate data on how much a person's fingerprints vary from impression to impression, as well as the degree to which fingerprints vary across a population. With this kind of research, examiners could begin to attach confidence limits to conclusions about whether a print is linked to a particular person.

Disciplines that are too imprecise to identify an individual may still be able to provide accurate and useful information to help narrow the pool of possible suspects, weapons, or other sources, the report says. For example, the committee found no evidence that microscopic hair analysis can reliably associate a hair with a specific individual, but noted that the technique may provide information that either includes or excludes a subpopulation.

In addition to investigating the limits of the techniques themselves, studies should also examine sources and rates of human error, the report says. As part of this effort, more research should be done on "contextual bias," which occurs when the results of forensic analysis are influenced by an examiner's knowledge about the suspect's background or an investigator's knowledge of a case. One study found that fingerprint examiners did not always agree even with their own past conclusions when the same evidence was presented in a different context.

Court Testimony Should Be Grounded in Science, Acknowledge Uncertainties

The committee was not asked to determine whether analysis from particular forensic science methods should be admissible in court, and did not do so. However, it concluded that the courts cannot cure the ills of the forensic science community. "The partisan adversarial system used in the courts to determine the admissibility of forensic science evidence is often inadequate to the task," said Edwards. "And because the judicial system embodies a case-by-case adjudicatory approach, the courts are not well-suited to address the systemic problems in many of the forensic science disciplines."

The committee also concluded that two criteria should guide the law's admission of and reliance upon forensic evidence in criminal trials: the extent to which the forensic science discipline is founded on a reliable scientific methodology that lets it accurately analyze evidence and report findings; and the extent to which the discipline relies on human interpretation that could be tainted by error, bias, or the absence of sound procedures and performance standards.

The report points out the critical need to standardize and clarify the terms used by forensic science experts who testify in court about the results of investigations. The words commonly used -- such as "match," "consistent with," and "cannot be excluded as the source of" -- are not well-defined or used consistently, despite the great impact they have on how juries and judges perceive evidence.

In addition, any testimony stemming from forensic science laboratory reports must clearly describe the limits of the analysis; currently, failure to acknowledge uncertainty in findings is common. The simple reality is that interpretation of forensic evidence is not infallible -- quite the contrary, said the committee. Exonerations from DNA testing have shown the potential danger of giving undue weight to evidence and testimony derived from imperfect testing and analysis.

Strong, Independent Leadership Needed

The existing forensic science enterprise lacks the necessary governance structure to move beyond its weaknesses, the report says. The recommended new National Institute of Forensic Science could take on its tasks in a manner that is as objective and free of bias as possible -- one with the authority and resources to implement a fresh agenda designed to address the problems found by the committee. The institute should have a full-time administrator and an advisory board with expertise in research and education, the forensic science disciplines, physical and life sciences, and measurements and standards, among other fields.

The committee carefully considered whether such a governing body could be established within an existing agency, and determined that it could not. There is little doubt that some existing federal entities are too wedded to the current forensic science community, which is deficient in too many respects. And existing agencies have failed to pursue a strong research agenda to confirm the evidentiary reliability of methodologies used in a number of forensic science disciplines.

The report was sponsored by the National Institute of Justice at the request of Congress. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies. They are private, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a congressional charter. The Research Council is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering.

Copies of Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward are available from the National Academies Press; tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu. Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above). In addition, a podcast of the public briefing held to release this report is available at http://national-academies.org/podcast.

###

[ This news release and report are available at http://national-academies.org ]

Drinan: Lawmaker, priest, and target of FBI scrutiny

Drinan: Lawmaker, priest, and target of FBI scrutiny
By Michael Paulson, Bosto Globe, January 28, 2009

It remains one of the stranger episodes in the annals of congressional-FBI relations: In the winter of 1975, US Representative Robert F. Drinan was touring the FBI headquarters when he broke away and opened a drawer to find a set of index cards under his name.

A three-month battle ensued between the Massachusetts Democrat and the federal law enforcement agency over access to the file. When Drinan finally got a redacted copy of his own record, he pronounced it garbage, filled with news clippings in which the names of people already published in the newspapers were carefully blacked out by federal officials.

Now, on the second anniversary of his death, a copy of Drinan's FBI file, obtained by the Globe through a Freedom of Information Act request, provides a bookend to the story.

The file is unlikely to reshape history's view of the only Jesuit priest to serve in Congress, but it provides a backstage look at the dispute between the congressman and the agency and a reminder of how much the FBI changed over the second half of the 20th century.

In the 1970s and before, the FBI clearly viewed the congressman as potential trouble. At one point, when Drinan was quoted by a news service denouncing Attorney General John N. Mitchell as "the most dangerous attorney general that we have ever had," an FBI official scribbled on a document, "This fellow Drinan is like McGovern + Anderson - anything to get publicity."

The document does not make clear who McGovern and Anderson are, but the references seem likely to be to Senator George S. McGovern and either US Representative John B. Anderson or Jack Anderson, a syndicated newspaper columnist.

But by 1994, when the FBI was asked to do a background check on Drinan for a possible federal appointment, the tone was completely different. The file is packed with testimonials from Drinan's colleagues describing him in highly laudatory terms.

"Twenty-seven persons . . . were interviewed," the FBI reported. "They provided favorable comments concerning Father Drinan's character, associates, reputation, and loyalty."

Drinan, born in Boston in 1920, had served as a professor and dean at Boston College Law School from 1956 to 1971, when he began a decade in Congress after being elected in 1970 as an antiwar candidate. Drinan was an outspoken liberal, a critic of the Vietnam War, a forceful advocate of civil liberties, and, to the dismay of church officials, a supporter of abortion rights. He was also the first member of Congress to call for the impeachment of President Nixon.

Drinan announced he would not seek reelection in 1981 after Pope John Paul II decreed that priests should not serve in elective office. Drinan then taught at Georgetown Law School from 1981 until his death in 2007.

The file indicates that the FBI had run its first check on Drinan in 1960, a decade before his election to Congress; upon his election, a note indicates that the bureau's files "reflect that the Reverend Drinan has been active in civil rights matters."

In 1971, a suspicious nun wrote FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, saying, "I had doubted Father Drinan's authenticity as a Catholic priest because I had read of certain views he expressed that seemed to be un-American, as well as unorthodox, from a religious standpoint. If he is someone who has been 'planted' in the church, he could do great harm."

In 1975, the FBI investigated an anonymous death threat against several public figures, including Drinan, from someone purporting to represent "antiliberal and anti-Communist groups."

But the heart of the file is the history of the dispute that began in February 1975, when Drinan took a congressional tour of the FBI and discovered 20 to 30 3-by-5 cards with his name on them in a file. Drinan demanded to know how the FBI could justify collecting information on private citizens, and said, "I assure you I shall work to prevent the FBI from further engaging in the practice of attaching a stigma to persons whose political or social views may be at variance with the temporary majority of the nation."

"I have never at any time been involved in anything related to criminal prosecution," Drinan wrote to the FBI. "Consequently I was astonished and chagrined to discover the surveillance of a political nature."

The FBI accused Drinan of having ignored instructions and "delved into a file drawer containing index cards" and refused to honor Drinan's timeline for releasing his files, saying that would amount to special treatment for a congressman.

After considerable back-and-forth and for a fee of $8.10, the FBI released a redacted version of Drinan's file three months after his tour; he quickly made it public and denounced it.

"In his view, they had stepped across the line into violating the civil liberties of citizens by keeping track of what he was doing," said Arthur D. Wolf, a law professor at Western New England College School of Law in Springfield. Wolf was a special counsel to Drinan from 1973 to 1978. "He thought the FBI should concentrate on crime and not worry about people exercising their right to speech."

By the time the FBI next scrutinized Drinan, in 1994 with his consent, the tone had completely changed. The agency reported two minor issues: In 1975, there had been an unsubstantiated complaint that Drinan had improperly solicited disabled veterans for a campaign, and in 1985 he had been arrested for protesting apartheid in front of South Africa's embassy.

But the file is overflowing with praise from Drinan's co-workers, supervisors, and fellow Jesuits, all of whom were asked about Drinan's loyalty to the United States, a standard question in background checks.

"No derogatory or negative information was revealed," the Newark office reported to FBI headquarters, while the Kansas City office said simply, "All made favorable comments regarding the candidate."

Source URL: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/01/28/drinan_lawmaker_priest_and_target_of_fbi_scrutiny?mode=PF

Domestic Surveillance: FBI Files

On this Martin Luther King holiday, it's appropriate to recall the controversial surveillance of the civil rights leader by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the 1960s. From 1963 to his death in 1968, the FBI wiretapped King and conducted a intensive campaign to discredit him. The Bureau amassed a huge amount of material on King and almost 17,000 pages of his file have been made public through the Freedom of Information Act.

The FBI's FOIA website displays only about 200 pages of information -- essentially a 1977 report on the government's surveillance of King and its suspected role in his assassination. (But you can find the complete file in the Internet Archive.) In addition to the King document, the site provides access to surveillance files on many other celebrities, including Frank Sinatra, John Lennon, Cesar Chavez, Marilyn Monroe and Albert Einstein.

Ever wonder if the FBI has a file on you? Through FOIA, you can request a copy of your file or that of a deceased relative. The FBI's instructions are here. For help composing a FOIA request, try the Get My FBI File and Get Grandpa's FBI File web sites.

Rogue FBI agent breaks silence

Rogue FBI agent breaks silence
From Rich Phillips
CNN Senior Producer

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- Former FBI agent John Connolly, whose fall from celebrated mob-buster to paid gangland flunky captivated a South Florida courtroom for weeks, broke his long silence... at his [December] sentencing hearing.

Connolly, 68, denied having any role in a 1982 mob hit, telling the family of slain businessman John Callahan: "It's heart breaking to hear what happened to your father, and to your husband ... My heart is broken when I hear what you say."

Later, under a spirited cross-examination, Connolly explained that rubbing elbows with killers and gangsters and winning their confidence was part of the job. His attorney argued, "He did what the FBI wanted him to do and now all of a sudden, he's responsible for all these heinous acts."

Connolly did not testify at his trial. The prosecutor, Michael Van Zamft, asked for a life sentence, saying the 30-year minimum sentence is too little because "Mr. Connolly abused his badge."

Judge Stanford Blake postponed the sentencing until January 15. He said he needed time to consider a defense motion challenging the second-degree murder conviction.

Connolly was convicted last month in the 1982 slaying of Callahan, an executive with World Jai-Alai. Callahan's bullet-pocked body was found in the trunk of a Cadillac parked at Miami International Airport.

Connolly's testimony followed that of several other witnesses, including Callahan's son and a former FBI agent.

Callahan's son, Patrick, read letters that he, his sister, and his mother wrote. He said that his mother considered his father "the love of my life" for 23 years.

Former FBI agent Billy Reagan told the judge: "John had nothing to do with these murders, your honor."

During the two-month trial, jurors heard that Connolly had told his mob connections that Callahan, 45, was a potential witness against them, setting him up for the gangland-style execution.

Connolly previewed his denials in a jailhouse interview published Thursday in The Boston Globe. He faces 30 years to life at his sentencing.

"I did not commit these crimes I was charged with," Connolly told the newspaper. "I never sold my badge. I never took anybody's money. I never caused anybody to be hurt, at least not knowingly, and I never would."

According to testimony at his trial, Connolly was co-opted by the very gangsters he was supposed to be pursuing -- members of South Boston's notorious Winter Hill gang. His story is said to be the inspiration for the character played by Matt Damon in the 2006 Martin Scorsese movie, "The Departed."

Connolly's sordid tale has been closely followed in New England, where he grew up in Boston's "Southie" neighborhood, the same area long dominated by the Winter Hill gang and its notorious leader, James" Whitey" Bulger. Sought in 19 slayings, Bulger is the FBI's second most-wanted fugitive.

During the first two decades of his FBI career, Connolly won kudos in the bureau's Boston office, cultivating informants against New England mobsters. Prosecutors said Connolly was corrupted by his two highest-ranking snitches: Bulger and Stephen ''The Rifleman'' Flemmi.

Connolly retired from the FBI in 1990 and later was indicted on federal racketeering and other charges stemming from his long relationship with Bulger and Flemmi. He was convicted of racketeering in 2002 and was serving a 10-year federal prison sentence when he was indicted in 2005 in the Callahan slaying.

During testimony, jurors heard that Connolly was on the mob payroll, collecting $235,000 from Bulger and Flemmi while shielding his mob pals from prosecution and leaking the identities of informants.

The prosecution's star witnesses at the Miami trial were Flemmi, who is now in prison, and mob hit man John Martorano, who has admitted to 20 murders, served 12 years in prison and is now free.

Callahan, who often socialized with gangsters, had asked the gang to execute Oklahoma businessman Roger Wheeler over a business dispute, according to testimony. Martorano killed Wheeler in 1981 on a golf course, shooting him once between the eyes, prosecutors said.

After Connolly told Bulger and Flemmi that Callahan was going to implicate them in the slaying, Martorano was sent to do away with Callahan, prosecutors said.

But one star witness did not testify -- the former FBI agent who inspired the 1997 film "Donnie Brasco." He refused to take the stand after the judge denied his request to testify anonymously.

Everything Secret Degenerates: The FBI's Use of Murderers as Informants

Congressional Reports: H. Rpt. 108-414 – Everything Secret Degenerates: The FBI's Use of Murderers as Informants
Vols. 1 & 2
November 20, 2003

This Report by the House Committee on Government Reform discusses the consequences of the FBI's use of murderers as informants in New England. It focuses mainly on the 1965 murder of Edward ‘‘Teddy’’ Deegan,and the actions of federal law enforcement officials to protect cooperating witnesses and informants.

Volume 1 (57.4MB, 1,802 pages) and Volume 2 (73.8MB, 1,716 pages ) of the Report are available as a ZIP files.

Front Material
I. Executive Summary
II. Why the Committee Investigated These Matters
III. Joseph Barboza and the Deegan Murder Prosecution [6.9 MB PDF file]
IV. The Use of James "Whitey" Bulger as an Informant... [1.3 MB PDF file]
V. Institutional Reluctance to Accept Oversight
VI. Conclusions and Recommendations
Full Text of Report [9.6 MB PDF file]

More

Timeline of the FBI’s four-decades long cover-up of complicity in Edward Deegan’s murder, and the agencies frame-up of four innocent men

Timeline of the FBI’s four-decades long cover-up of complicity in Edward Deegan’s murder, and the agencies frame-up of four innocent men

By Hans Sherrer
Justice:Denied magazine, Issue 27, Winter 2005, page 24



1964 – Boston FBI agent H. Paul Rico wrote in an October 19, 1964, memorandum that an informant reported Edward “Teddy” Deegan, a local hoodlum, was marked for a mob hit. “A memorandum from the Boston Office of the FBI to the Director of the FBI [J. Edgar Hoover] dated March 10, 1965, disclosed an informant’s report that [Vincent “Jimmy The Bear”] Flemmi and [Joseph] Barboza had contacted [Raymond] Patriarca to get his “OK” to kill Deegan. That same day, another informant told Rico that Flemmi believed Patriarca approved the “hit” and that a “dry run” had been made. Neither Rico, Condon, Handley, nor any other FBI agents warned Deegan or took steps to prevent their informants, Flemmi and Barboza, from carrying out the plan.” 1

1965 - Edward Deegan was shot to death in a Chelsea, Massachusetts alley on March 12th – two days after FBI Director Hoover had been informed he was marked for death, and did nothing to warn him or otherwise protect him.

1965 - An FBI memo dated March 19, 1965 (seven days after Deegan’s murder), notes: “Informants report that Ronald Casessa, Romeo Martin, Vincent James Flemmi, and Joseph Barboza, prominent local hoodlums, were responsible for the [Deegan] killing. They accomplished this by having Roy French, another Boston hoodlum, set Deegan up in a proposed ‘breaking and entering’ in Chelsea, Mass. French apparently walked in behind Deegan when they were gaining entrance to the building and fired the first shot hitting Deegan in the back of the head. Casessa and Martin immediately thereafter shot Deegan from the front. The State and Chelsea Police Departments had reports similar to those discussed above.” 2

1965 - FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was sent a memo dated June 9, 1965 by the FBI agent in charge of he Boston office identifying Flemmi as the murderer of seven men, including Deegan. The memo stated, “From all indications, (Jimmy The Bear) is going to continue to commit murder. ... The informant’s potential outweighs the risks.” 3

1967 - Six men were indicted in Suffolk County, Massachusetts (Boston) for Deegan’s murder, however the FBI informant known by the bureau to be one of the actual killers – Vincent Flemmi – was not indicted.

1968 – On July 31st Louis Greco, Henry Tameleo and Peter Limone were convicted of Deegan’s murder and sentenced to death. Joseph Salvati was sentenced to life in prison after being convicted as an accessory to Deegan’s murder and two counts of conspiracy. The jury didn’t believe multiple witnesses who testified that Greco was in Miami at the time of Deegan’s murder – which the FBI knew was true. The prosecution’s star witness was Joseph Barboza, an FBI informant and one of the people known by the FBI to have been present at Deegan’s killing.

1968 - On August 1st, FBI agent Rico bragged at a mob party in Boston about how easy it was to convict the “four pigeons” - Greco, Tameleo, Salvati and Limone - and he thought “it was funny” that Greco was sentenced to death when the FBI knew he was over 1,500 miles away in Miami when Deegan was murdered.

1972 - Greco, Tameleo and Limone’s death sentences are commuted to life in prison in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Furman v. Georgia (1972) decision.

1977 - Attorney John Cavicchi began efforts to clear Greco. Those efforts continued until Greco’s death 18 years later in 1995. Cavicchi then began aiding Limone.

1983 – In August the Massachusetts Advisory Board of Pardons recommended gubernatorial commutation of Limone’s sentence. Limone’s petition was supported by Deegan’s family, who believed he was innocent. However, “FBI agents … then channeled false information to the office of the Governor to dissuade him from approving the commutation petition. It worked. On September 20, 1983, Governor Dukakis denied Limone’s petition.” 4

1985 - After the FBI funneled false information to the governor’s office, Governor Dukakis denied Greco’s commutation that had been recommended by the Massachusetts Advisory Board of Pardons.

1985 - Henry Tameleo died in prison of respiratory failure in August. He had been imprisoned for 17 years. Tameleo was 84, and the oldest prisoner in the Massachusetts state prison system at the time of his death.

1986 - After the FBI provides it with false information, the Advisory Board of Pardons rescinds its vote approving a commutation hearing for Salvati.

1993 - The Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office ignores information provided by a Massachusetts’ State Trooper that Salvati had been framed for Deegan’s murder.

1993 - After the FBI funneled false information to the governor’s office, Governor Weld denied Greco’s commutation that had been recommended by the Massachusetts Advisory Board of Pardons.

1995 - Greco dies in prison from colon cancer and heart disease after 27 years of incarceration.

1997 - Louis Greco Jr., one of Greco’s sons, commits suicide by drinking a bottle of Drano.

1997 - Salvati is released after 30 years of incarceration when Massachusetts’ governor commutes his life sentence to time served. Salvati’s wife Marie visited him every week he was imprisoned, and she was waiting when he was released.

2000 - In December a Justice Department investigation into FBI corruption uncovers secret FBI informant files that contain information concerning the FBI’s prior knowledge that Deegan was marked for a hit by FBI informants, that the FBI didn’t try to warn or otherwise protect Deegan, that Deegan’s murder was carried out by FBI informants, and that four men known by the FBI to be innocent – Greco, Limone, Tameleo and Salvati – were framed for the murder with the complicity of the FBI. The FBI documents show that Limone had actually tried to protect Deegan by warning him that he was in danger.

2001 - Limone’s conviction is vacated in January and he is released after 33 years, 2 months and 5 days imprisonment. He is 66.

2001 - Salvati’s conviction is vacated in January.

2001 - Limone, Greco’s son, and relatives of Tameleo file separate federal lawsuits against multiple state and federal defendants for wrongful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, violation of their civil rights, etc. Limone’s suit asks for a $300 million in damages, and Greco’s asks for $75 million.

2002 - Salvati filed $300 million federal lawsuit against multiple state and federal defendants for wrongful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, violation of his civil rights, etc.

2003 – In June, Boston U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Gertner rejected a motion to dismiss filed by the defendants in Limone’s suit. The motion argued the decisions leading to Limone’s indictment and conviction were judgment calls immune from a lawsuit. In rejecting the motion, Judge Gertner wrote, “‘Obviously conduct cannot be ‘discretionary’ if it violates the constitution, federal laws, or established agency policies and regulations. ‘There can be no doubt that suborning perjury and fabricating evidence violate the constitution.’” 5

2003 – In November an almost 150-page report by the House Government Reform Committee was released after a two-year congressional investigation into the FBI and its connections to the New England Mafia. The report condemned the FBI’s use of known murderers as informants, the FBI’s shielding of those murderers from prosecution, and the FBI’s use of perjurious testimony by murderers to knowingly convict innocent people. The report concluded that the FBI’s efforts “must be considered one of the greatest failures in the history of federal law enforcement.” 6

2004 –Edward “Teddy” Deegan’s younger brother and his two daughters filed lawsuits against the federal government. They claimed damages for the government’s complicity in his murder, including Director Hoover’s being informed two days prior to his death that he was marked for death and doing nothing to stop the killers - who were FBI informants - or to warn or otherwise protect Deegan. Paul F. Denver, the attorney for Deegan’s daughters, said “The government owes the daughters compensation for the wrongful death of their father because agents knew there was a threat against their father’s life and took no steps to prevent the death of Teddy Deegan,” 7

2004 –In September a Massachusetts state judge posthumously vacated Greco’s conviction. The lawyer representing Greco’s family said, “This was an innocent man who was framed, and the most amazing part is the government knew it.” 8

2004 –Federal Judge Gertner ruled on September 17th that the federal lawsuits related to the four men can go forward, since their causes of action that began in 1968, continued after enactment of a 1974 law that eliminated the federal government’s immunity from lawsuits for wrongdoing by federal agents. In her decision, Judge Gertner didn’t mince words, “… the state prosecution of Limone, Greco, Salvati, and Tameleo was procured by the FBI and nurtured by both federal agents and state officers who knew that the charges were bogus. None of the agents or supervisors involved took steps to stop the prosecution. Indeed, they did just the opposite.” 9

-----

Sources:

FBI To Be Sued for $300 million, Talkleft.com website, August 25, 2002.
Suffolk DA clears Greco posthumously on 1965 murder rap, by J.M. Lawrence, Boston Herald, November 4, 2004
Reports: ex-trooper had information to clear Salvati, by J. M. Lawrence, Boston Herald, June 13, 2003.
Limone, et al v. United States, Civ. No. 02-10890-NG (DC MA), MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS, September 17, 2004
Endnotes:
1 Limone, et al v. United States, Civ. No. 02-10890-NG (DC MA), MEMORAN-DUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS, September 17, 2004, at 7-8.
2 Limone, Id., at 8-9.
3 Devilish deal: Probers Unveil Memo Show-ing Boston FBI Protected Killer, by J.M. Lawrence, Boston Herald, May 12, 2002.
4 Limone, supra,, at 13.
5 Judge Rules Lawsuit Alleging FBI Frameup Can Proceed, AP, July 18, 2003.
6 Report: FBI Shielded Killers, Washing-ton D.C., CBS News.com, November 21, 2003.
7 Some Wonder Does FBI Still Stand For Fi-delity, Bravery, Integrity?, Newswithviews.com, October 5, 2004.
8 District attorney’s office drops charges posthumously in frame-up related to New England mob, Associated Press, Boston Herald, November 4, 2004
9 Limone, supra, at 11.

Gov't to pay $102M for mob convictions

Gov't to pay $102M for mob convictions

BOSTON (AP) — In a stinging rebuke of the FBI, a federal judge on Thursday ordered the government to pay a record judgment of nearly $102 million because agents withheld evidence that would have kept four men from spending decades in prison for a mob murder they did not commit.

Judge Nancy Gertner told a packed courtroom that agents were trying to protect informants when they encouraged a witness to lie, then withheld evidence they knew could prove the four men were not involved in the 1965 murder of Edward "Teddy" Deegan, a small-time thug shot in an alley.

Gertner said Boston FBI agents knew mob hitman Joseph "The Animal" Barboza lied when he named Joseph Salvati, Peter Limone, Henry Tameleo and Louis Greco as Deegan's killers. She said the FBI considered the four "collateral damage" in its war against the Mafia, the bureau's top priority in the 1960s.

Tameleo and Greco died behind bars, and Salvati and Limone spent three decades in prison before they were exonerated in 2001. Salvati, Limone and the families of the other men sued the federal government for malicious prosecution.

"Do I want the money? Yes, I want my children, my grandchildren to have things I didn't have, but nothing can compensate for what they've done," said Salvati, 75.

"It's been a long time coming," said Limone, 73. "What I've been through — I hope it never happens to anyone else."

The case is only the latest to highlight the cozy relationship Boston mobsters enjoyed with FBI agents for decades. Former Boston agent John Connolly was sentenced in 2002 to 10 years in prison for his role in protecting two organized crime kingpins, including one who remains a fugitive.

Gertner said FBI agents Dennis Condon and H. Paul Rico not only withheld evidence of Barboza's lie, but told state prosecutors who were handling the Deegan murder investigation that they had checked out Barboza's story and it was true.

"The FBI's misconduct was clearly the sole cause of this conviction," the judge said.

The government had argued federal authorities had no duty to share information with state officials who prosecuted the men. Federal authorities cannot be held responsible for the results of a state prosecution, a Justice Department lawyer said.

Gertner rejected that argument.

"The government's position is, in a word, absurd," she said.

A Boston FBI spokeswoman referred calls to the Department of Justice. Charles Miller, a spokesman for the Justice Department, said officials would have no immediate comment.

Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal advocacy group that specializes in overturning wrongful convictions, said the $101.75 million award is the largest ever in a wrongful-conviction case.

Gertner awarded $26 million to Limone, $29 million to Salvati, $13 million to Tameleo's estate and $28 million to Greco's estate. The wives of Limone and Salvati and the estate of Tameleo's deceased wife each received slightly more than $1 million. The men's 10 children were each awarded $250,000.

Limone and Salvati stared straight ahead as the judge announced her ruling, but a gasp was heard from the area where their friends and family were sitting when Gertner said how much the government would be forced to pay.

At the time of Deegan's slaying, Tameleo and Limone were reputed leaders of the New England mob, while Greco and Salvati had minor criminal records.

Deegan's murder had gone unsolved until the FBI recruited Barboza to testify against several organized crime figures. Barboza wanted to protect a fellow FBI informant, Vincent "Jimmy" Flemmi, who was involved in the Deegan slaying, and agreed to testify for state prosecutors in the case, plaintiff's lawyers said.

Tameleo died in prison in 1985 after serving 18 years. Greco died in prison in 1995 after serving 28 years.

Salvati was sentenced to life in prison as an accessory to murder. He was released from prison when his sentence was commuted in 1997, after serving a little more than 29 years. Limone served 33 years in prison before being freed in 2001.

Salvati and Limone were exonerated in 2001 after FBI memos dating back to the Deegan case surfaced during probes into the Boston FBI's relationship with gangsters and FBI informants Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi, Vincent's brother, and James "Whitey" Bulger, who has been on the FBI's "10 Most Wanted" list for years.

Republican Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana, who chaired the House Government Reform Committee when it conducted an investigation of the FBI and its use of criminal informants, said he was gratified by the judge's ruling.

"This was one of the biggest injustices that I have ever seen," Burton said.

One of the agents blamed in the case, Rico, was arrested in 2003 on murder and conspiracy charges in the 1981 killing of a Tulsa, businessman. Rico died in state custody in 2004 while awaiting trial.

Attorneys for Condon did not immediately return phone messages seeking comment Thursday.

During testimony before Burton's committee in 2001, Rico denied he and his partner helped frame an innocent man for Deegan's death, but acknowledged that Salvati wrongly spent 30 years in prison for the crime.

Rico was unrepentant when asked how he felt about Salvati's wrongful imprisonment.

"What do you want, tears?" he said.