Bulger brother stripped of pension

ADVERTISEMENT

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Judicial Court said Whitey Bulger's youngest brother violated the ''fundamental tenets'' of his office when he committed perjury and obstruction of justice, even though his lawyers had argued that he acted out of ''family loyalty'' and that his misdeeds were unrelated to his job.

''The nature of Bulger's particular crimes cannot be separated from the nature of his particular office, when what is at stake is the integrity of our judicial system,'' the court said, pointing out that Bulger's duties included administering an oath requiring witnesses to testify truthfully.

The decision reverses a September 2004 ruling by a Boston Municipal Court judge that reinstated the pension. That judge had said state retirement officials had no right to rescind the benefit because Bulger's crimes had nothing to do with his job as clerk-magistrate, which he held from 1982 until he retired in 2001.

Grace H. Lee -- general counsel for Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, chairman of the Retirement Board that rescinded the pension in 2003 -- applauded the ruling.

''It's been our position that a clerk-magistrate cannot administer an oath in one courtroom and then walk down the street and violate that same oath that he administered and still be entitled to a pension,'' she said.

John Bulger's lawyer, Paul T. Hynes, did not return phone calls seeking comment yesterday. Bulger, 68, who is known as ''Jackie,'' could not be reached for comment.

He pleaded guilty in 2003 to two counts of perjury and two counts of obstruction of justice and was sentenced to six months in federal prison. Federal authorities said he falsely testified that he had no knowledge of a safe deposit box controlled by Whitey Bulger and that he had had no contact with him.

Whitey Bulger fled Massachusetts to evade a January 1995 federal racketeering indictment and is wanted in the slayings of 19 people. He is on the FBI's list of 10 most wanted fugitives.

Yesterday's ruling is the second significant court decision in three months in a dispute over the pension of a brother of Whitey Bulger.

In November, former University of Massachusetts president William M. Bulger won a major victory in his battle to boost his pension when a Superior Court judge ruled that the state must include in its calculations his housing allowance and part of his annuity.

The decision increased the annual pension by about $29,000, to an estimated $208,000.

Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly is appealing that ruling on behalf of the Retirement Board to the state Appeals Court and plans to file his brief on March 14.

William Bulger, the former state Senate president, left his post as university president in September 2003 amid controversy over the federal probe into the disappearance of Whitey Bulger.

Yesterday Cahill brushed aside arguments made in the past by defenders of the Bulger brothers that the treasurer had sought to gain political mileage by fighting two men who have been demonized for their ties to Whitey Bulger.

''This case was never about the last name of the person involved, but rather ensuring that everyone plays by the same rules,'' Cahill said in a statement after the court ruled on John Bulger's pension.

Bulger was receiving an annual pension of $65,353. As a result of the ruling, the state Retirement Board is expected to require him to return $243,071 that he has received since his retirement, according to Neil Morrison, the state's first deputy treasurer.

The board could take up the matter as early as its March 30 meeting.

The focus of the pension dispute was a statute that bars anyone from receiving the benefit after being convicted of a crime involving ''laws applicable to his office or position.''

Bulger's lawyer, Hynes, had argued to the Supreme Judicial Court that his client's felony convictions, while regrettable, stemmed from a ''personal matter'' that had nothing to do with his official duties as clerk-magistrate.

But the court, in a decision written by Justice Francis X. Spina, disagreed.

''At the heart of a clerk-magistrate's role is the unwavering obligation to tell the truth, to ensure that others do the same through giving oaths to complainants, and to promote the administration of justice,'' the justices said. ''When Bulger committed the crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice, he violated the fundamental tenets of the code and of his oath of office, notwithstanding his contention that such misconduct occurred in the context of what was arguably a personal matter.''

Jonathan Saltzman can be reached at jsaltzman@globe.com.