Feds: Boston just making stuff up in casino allegations
The convoluted legal maneuverings around the proposed Wynn casino in Everett got more interesting this week when the US Attorney's office denied the city's claims that two former state troopers, working on the side as private eyes for Wynn, got a look at what were supposed to be private documents related to Wynn's purchase of the land from three men now under federal indictment for the way they allegedly tried to hide that one of them was a convicted felon.
The filing by the US Attorney's office came yesterday in the criminal case against the three men, not in the civil lawsuit by the city against Wynn - in response to a demand by the three to cough up information related to the private eyes' work - which they say Wynn used to force them to lower their asking price by $40 million.
Balderdash, the US Attorney's office replied:
Without a shred of evidence, and despite having been warned that the "alleged incident" never happened, the defendants seized on a rumor spewed and spun by the City of Boston in a vicious civil lawsuit against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (the MGC) and filed a Brady motion questioning the integrity of this criminal prosecution. Had the defendants simply asked Joseph F. Flaherty and Stephen G. Matthews about the rumors, they would have learned that Flaherty and Matthews did not review any files at the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office (the AGO) in 2013. In fact, they reviewed documents at the AGO in March 2014 in a matter completely unrelated to this case, and they never had access to investigative files or any other materials at the AGO related to this case.
Because there was no unauthorized access to files concerning the state or federal investigation of the defendants, the Court should deny the Motion. The government further notes that the only real effect of the defendants’ frivolous Motion was to publically disclose grand jury transcripts produced pursuant to the Protective Order, which materials made their way to the City of Boston and the media within hours of the filing of the Motion.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
Defendants' request for private-eye info | 58.9 KB |
Government's reply | 62.86 KB |
Ad:
Comments
Everybody knew Mobster Charles Lightbody was involved
CLEARLY Wynn's group knew the convicted felon mobster Charles Lightbody would benefit! Everybody knew...Just look at this story from the Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/11/everett-landowner-resists-casino-disclosure-pledge/
... The story from APRIL 2014 when the owners of the land refused to sign a promise that no secret owners would profit from the sale. Everyone knew Lightbody was involved. This story was 5 months before the Mass Gaming Commission awarded them the license over the Suffolk Downs application
Wynn's group concealed it because it should have disqualified them or at least hurt their proposal. Only a corrupt Gaming Commission and shady character like Wynn would act like they didn't know...and for Gaming Commission Chairman James McHugh to say Wynn "Clearly" had no wrongdoing is a joke.
Wynn can read the paper.
We all found out that light body was involved at the same time. The question is whether Wynn knew it beforehand, and there is no evidence of that. Yes, there was an interim between when we all found out and the license was awarded. You can't just sit up and say "Wynn must have known, we all knew". It's a little more complicated than that.
FEDS
After the Bulger fiasco do the Feds have any credibility when it comes to organized crime in Boston?