U.S. v. Salemme

Decision Date15 September 1999
Docket NumberNo. Cr. 94-10287-MLW.,No. Cr. 97-10009-MLW.,Cr. 94-10287-MLW.,Cr. 97-10009-MLW.
Citation91 F.Supp.2d 141
PartiesUNITED STATES of America v. Francis P. SALEMME, et al. United States of America v. John Martorano
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

MaryEllen Kellejer, Law Office of Richard Egbert, Boston, MA, Anthony M. Cardinale, Boston, MA, John Mitchell, Law Office of John Mitchell, New York City, for Francis P. Salemme, Sr.

Martin G. Weinberg, Oteri, Weinberg & Lawson, Boston, MA, Anthony M. Cardinale, Boston, MA, Francis J. DiMento, DiMento & Sullivan, Boston, MA, for John V. Martorano.

Randolph Gioia, Boston, MA, for Robert P. DeLuca

Kenneth J. Fishman, Fishman, Ankner & Horstman, LLP, Boston, MA, Kimberly Homan, Sheketoff & Homan, Boston, MA, for Stephen J. Flemmi.

A. Hugh Scott, Choate, Hall & Stewart, Boston, MA, for James A. Ring.

Jonathan M. Albano, Thomas J. Hennessey, Bingham, Dana & Gould, Boston, MA, for Globe Newspaper Co., Shelley Murphy, Kevin Cullen.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

WOLF, District Judge.

                  I. SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 148
                      1. The Facts Concerning Defendant Stephen Flemmi's Motion to Dismiss
                          Based on Immunity .................................................................................... 148
                      2. The Motion to Dismiss Based on Immunity ............................................................... 163
                
                      3. Flemmi's Motion to Suppress the 1984-85 Electronic Surveillance ....................................... 166
                      4. DeLuca's Motion to Suppress Concerning the LCN Induction Ceremony ..................................... 170
                      5. Conclusion of Summary ................................................................................. 172
                 II. FINDINGS OF FACT .......................................................................................... 175
                      1. The Standards Applied ................................................................................. 175
                      2. Rico and Flemmi ....................................................................................... 176
                      3. Flemmi as a Fugitive .................................................................................. 183
                      4. The Development of Bulger as an Informant ............................................................. 185
                      5. The FBI Forges the Flemmi-Bulger Partnership .......................................................... 186
                      6. Attorney General Levi's Memorandum on FBI Informants .................................................. 188
                      7. Bulger and Flemmi Begin to Perform as a Team .......................................................... 197
                      8. Morris Becomes Chief of the Organized Crime Squad ..................................................... 198
                      9. The Race-Fix Case ..................................................................................... 199
                     10. The FBI Does Not Investigate Bulger or Flemmi ......................................................... 201
                     11. The Lancaster Street Garage and 98 Prince Street ...................................................... 202
                     12. Sarhatt Extends Bulger and Flemmi As Informants ....................................................... 207
                     13. The Wheeler, Halloran, and Callahan Murders ........................................................... 208
                     14. The FBI Identified Other Informants for Flemmi and Bulger ............................................. 213
                     15. The South Boston Liquor Mart .......................................................................... 215
                     16. Greenleaf Becomes SAC and Ring Becomes Supervisor of the Organized
                          Crime Squad .......................................................................................... 216
                     17. The 1984-85 Electronic Surveillance ................................................................... 220
                     18. Morris Tells Bulger and Flemmi That They Can Do Anything They Want
                          as Long as They Do Not "Clip" Anyone ................................................................. 242
                     19. Dining with "Donnie Brasco" ........................................................................... 244
                     20. Vanessa's ............................................................................................. 244
                     21  Flemmi Becomes A Top Echelon Informant Again .......................................................... 248
                     22. Raymond Slinger ....................................................................................... 250
                     23. Bulger and Flemmi Are Protected From Investigation In the Hobart
                          Willis Case ......................................................................................... 254
                     24. The Guard Rails at the South Boston Liquor Mart ...................................................... 255
                     25. Joseph Murray ......................................................................................... 256
                     26. John Bahorian ......................................................................................... 258
                     27. The Leak and the Threat to The Boston Globe ........................................................... 259
                     28. Flemmi and Salemme .................................................................................... 262
                     29. Mercurio as an Informant .............................................................................. 263
                     30. The LCN Induction Ceremony ............................................................................ 269
                     31. Mercurio as a Fugitive ................................................................................ 289
                     32. The Investigation of Flemmi and Bulger ................................................................ 293
                     33. The Indictment of Bulger and Flemmi and Its Aftermath ................................................. 301
                III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ........................................................................................ 315
                      1. Flemmi's Motion to Dismiss or Suppress Based on Immunity .............................................. 315
                        A. The Court is Now Considering Only the Issue of Immunity ............................................. 315
                        B. The Applicable Standards Concerning Immunity ........................................................ 317
                        C. Dismissal of This Case Is Not Now Justified Because Flemmi Was
                              Not Promised Immunity From Prosecution ........................................................... 321
                        D. The Issues of Use and Derivative Use Immunity ....................................................... 325
                           (1) Flemmi Does Not Have An Agreement Providing Use Immunity
                                  Generally For His Statements to the FBI ...................................................... 326
                            (2) The Promise of Confidentiality Means Statements to the FBI
                                 Which Have the Effect of Identifying Flemmi as an Informant
                                 Cannot Be Used Against Him Unless His Defense Makes Them
                                 an Issue ...................................................................................... 326
                            (3) Flemmi Had an Enforceable Agreement Relating to 98 Prince
                                  Street, Vanessa's, and 34 Guild Street ....................................................... 329
                            (4) A Hearing Will Be Necessary to Determine If This Case Must Be
                                  Dismissed and, If Not, Whether Any Evidence Must be Excluded
                                  at Trial ..................................................................................... 341
                
                            (5) If Morris and Connolly Were Not Authorized to Promise Flemmi
                                  that the Evidence Intercepted at 98 Prince Street, Vanessa's
                                  and 34 Guild Street Would Not Be Used Against Him, Flemmi's
                                  Statements to the FBI Relating to Those Interceptions
                                  May Have Been Involuntary and, In Addition, Use of Any
                                  Evidence Intercepted At Those Locations May Violate Flemmi's
                                  Right to Due Process ......................................................................... 346
                      2. The Motion to Suppress the 1984-85 Electronic Surveillance ............................................ 351
                        A. Summary ............................................................................................. 351
                        B. Suppression is Not Justified Based on the Alleged Violation of 18
                            U.S.C. § 2616(1) .............................................................................. 353
                        C. The Standards to be Applied in Deciding Whether to Suppress for a
                            Failure to Satisfy the Requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 2518(1)(c)Concerning
                            the Necessity for Electronic Surveillance .......................................................... 358
                        D. The Necessity Provision of Title III, § 2518(1)(c), is Constitutional in
                            Origin ............................................................................................. 364
                        E. The Motion to Suppress the 1984-85 Surveillance is Meritorious ...................................... 369
                        F. A Hearing is Necessary to Identify the Evidence Which Must be
                            Suppressed Because of the Government's Unlawful Conduct Concerning
                            the 1984-85 Electronic Surveillance and to Determine if
                            Any Other Remedy is Required ....................................................................... 380
                      3.
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
67 cases
  • McIntyre v. U.S., Civil Action No. 01-CV-10408-RCL.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • September 5, 2006
    ...organized crime syndicate Cosa Nostra,2 also known as the Mafia. Since this relationship was brought to light in United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 141 (D.Mass.1999), rev'd in part, 225 F.3d 78 (1st Cir.2000), cert denied sub nom. Flemmi v. United States, 531 U.S. 1170, 121 S.Ct. 1137, ......
  • Limone v. U.S., Civ. Action No. 02cv10890-NG.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • July 26, 2007
    ...notorious criminals in Boston history, James J. "Whitey" Bulger and Stephen J. "The Rifleman" Flemmi, surfaced during proceedings in United States v. Salemme before now-Chief Judge Mark Wolf.13 On July 3, 1997, as a result of the Salemme disclosures, the deputy attorney general ordered that......
  • McIntyre v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • September 30, 2004
    ...assigned to a different ASAC." (emphasis added)); Fitzpatrick's admission is consistent with the findings in United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 141, 225 (D.Mass.1999) (Wolf, J.) (identifying Fitzpatrick as the FBI Boston Office ASAC in 1984 "with responsibility for relations with the DE......
  • U.S. v. Flemmi
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • July 5, 2000
    ...was returned. In 1969, Flemmi and Salemme were charged in state court with the murder of William Bennett. See United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 141, 182 (D.Mass.1999). That state case, however, was later dismissed. Id. at 151, 154, The murders of the Bennett brothers were the subject o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
  • Privilege and work product
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Handling Federal Discovery - 2014 Contents
    • August 5, 2014
    ...133 . F,3d 1159, 1165-71 (9th Cir. 1998); Black v. United States , 62 F.3d 1115, 1118-19 (8th Cir. 1995). United States v. Salemme , 91 F. Supp. 2d 141 (D. Mass. 1999) (only identity of informant is privileged; content of communications with informant is not unless it would tend to reveal t......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Evidence Handbook
    • January 1, 2016
    ...F. Supp. 2d 36 (D.D.C. 2006), 276, 278, 285 United States v. Saimiento-Rozo, 676 F.2d 146 (5th Cir. 1982), 17 United States v. Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d 141 (D. Mass. 1999), 163 United States v. Salerno, 108 F.3d 730 (7th Cir. 1997), 225, 227, 228, 229 United States v. Salerno, 499 F. App’x 1......
  • The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Evidence Handbook
    • January 1, 2016
    ...but see United States v. Dudden, 65 F.3d 1461, 1467 (9th Cir. 1995); United 164 Antitrust Evidence Handbook States v. Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d 141, 316 (D. Mass. 1999) (government may grant varying degrees of immunity in an informal agreement). But, as to use immunity, the Supreme Court has ......
  • Privilege and work product
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Handling Federal Discovery - 2016 Contents
    • August 8, 2016
    ...133 . F,3d 1159, 1165-71 (9th Cir. 1998); Black v. United States , 62 F.3d 1115, 1118-19 (8th Cir. 1995). United States v. Salemme , 91 F. Supp. 2d 141 (D. Mass. 1999) (only identity of informant is privileged; content of communications with informant is not unless it would tend to reveal t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT