Hey, there! Log in / Register
City Council puts off any action on Chuck Turner
By adamg on Mon, 11/24/2008 - 1:10pm
City Council President Maureen Feeney just announced the council will postpone a meeting on Councilor Chuck Turner, to prevent Turner and his backers from turning it into "a stage for the political theater" and because Turner has yet to be indicted.
"We will take no action based on a mere arrest," she said. "Let's all pray there isn't an indictment. But if there is, we will all need to take further action."
Instead, a council committee and city lawyers will take a look at what to do if Turner is indicted. That could include censure or voting to ask Turner to quit. She is also establishing a new committee on ethics to address such issues for the future, because the city charter doesn't explicitly state what to do in a case like that.
Feeney denied shutting down Turner's phones or computers on Friday. "My interest is to ensure the residents of City Council District 7 continue to receive representation and access to city services."
She also denied putting off action because of lawsuit threats from Turner. "We are not easily intimidated, I can assure you." She said today's meeting was not to try to force Turner out, but to figure out what to do in coming weeks.
However, she did acknowledge stripping Turner of his chairmanship of the education and human-rights committee. She said this allows the committees to continue their work "unfettered" and not "distracted" at a time when the School Department is looking at significant restructuring.
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Turner support site
Support Chuck Turner. With an RSS feed, even.
Oops.
...to prevent Turner and his backers from turning it into "a stage for the political theater"...
Too late!
Ethics. Boston City Council.
An important matter of ethics at our Boston City Council is the deflecting of citizens' enquiries for public information about our Council. Too often the hundred of so staff budgeted to Council offices deflect citizens' enquiries dismissively with no dignity or respect for the people interested, concerned about municipal government.
Now with this technology there are many resources to get Council public information on the web right away. That means getting council staff more familiar with this technology, the web's varied templates.
Also around the municipality... Boston Public Librarians' blogs!
Boston Public Librarians' blogs!
http://dudleybr.blogspot.com/
can't anyone at City Hall speak English proper?
From the Boston.com article:
"We are not easily intimated, I can assure you of that," Feeney said at the press conference.
What?
What exactly are you intimidating about their English ability, Ron?
She said it right
Hello, sweetheart, get me rewrite!
Fixed
I didn't e-mail the Globe, but maybe someone else here did, because they edited the story.
pray for what?
let's all pray there isn't an indictment
If he *is* guilty, why would we be praying for that?
We will take no action based on a mere arrest
How about taking action based on a photograph from a video taken by the FBI, showing him palming cash?
Whether he is fit to serve on the council, and whether he is guilty in criminal proceedings against him, are distinct issues.
Not Enough
We were jokingly taking "Chuck Turner" pictures with cell phone cameras, handing over cash for the tab and not getting our faces in the frames.
Don't know what else they have, but the photo alone might not be enough. People hand each other cash all the time ... but they don't always shove it under their bras!
Do what?
That pictures is a still frame from a video and audio tape taken by an FBI operative acting covertly to bribe Turner.
Unless you're calling the FBI liars, then the evidence is foolproof. Turner isn't going to argue that he never took money for political deed. He's going to argue they trapped him, they coerced him, they blew their evidence chain of possession...any technicality that might get him free of the charges, but ultimately that photo is of him taking money and promising political action in return.
It's not like that photo stands alone. Read the entire affidavit.
Ohhhhkay ...
I didn't realize it was a still from a video ... even so, I hope the entire thing is a bit better quality with recognizable features because it is really easy to make pictures that look like that cash hand off, but have entirely different and legitimate context. With Wilkerson, we got a bunch of stills, not just one, of her acting rather odd. In either case, a jury will have to have a bit more than just pictures to go on, and certainly will.
Wilkerson evidence
You must not think too highly of the FBI. The Wilkerson "bunch of stills" were taken from the video and audio tapes they made of her as well. They just had more contact and willingness from her than Turner. Yes, that also means somewhere out there is a homemade softcore movie of Wilkerson actually fully reaching up under her shirt with a wad of cash and shoving it into her bra and then straightening herself up again.
From the affidavit, it appeared that Turner's staff was more on the ball than he was and basically dragged him into playing by the rules, but that was already *after* the damage was done...AND he didn't report the money as if it were a campaign contribution so he's removed that as a potential excuse for his actions ("I thought it was legit..$500 from that guy and his wife each! Honest!"). You do it once, you're guilty. They're both as guilty of the crime as the other...it's just that Wilkerson was guilty for a much longer period and far more comfortable in her culpability than Turner's one offense.
Evidence Released vs. Evidence for Trial
I haven't seen all the relevant evidence that the FBI has amassed - nor have you, nor has anyone outside of the court case. What I have seen are some photos released to the public that are intended as justification for the indictments being handed down.
That doesn't mean that I doubt the FBI and the case it intends to make, it means that I simply haven't seen everything that I would need to render judgement were I (heaven forbid) stuck in court as a juror for weeks on end staring at it.
It looks bad for both of them, granted. It sounds like the FBI set up the sting quite well, and I seriously doubt there is a case for entrapment. However, what they have released could be a bad party joke, as explained above, absent other evidence, and maybe isn't enough for the City Council to act in the matter until more is available.
If he *is* guilty, why would
If he *is* guilty, why would we be praying for that?
That was political speak, her way of saying she hopes the charges are not true without actually saying she hopes the charges are not true. Its like if a mother were to say "I hope I will not have to take away your dessert tonight" when she really means "dont do anything bad."
Maureen Feeney's complete statement
Read Feeney's statement.
Chuck Turner statement to Globe Magazine, 10/31/08
Chuck Turner on race, ethics. This was in response to an e-mail question from Boston Globe Magazine writer (and former City Council member) Tom Keane. Turner sent it on October 31, three weeks before his arrest.
Feeney's successor on Turner
This just in from Mike Ross, who will become city council president in January:
I support the decision to cancel today's meeting as it is premature to take further action against Councilor Chuck Turner at this time. Despite the disturbing revelations of the last few days, Councilor Turner is entitled to due process, and the Council rules must allow for that.
While the Council appears to have the power to remove its members, it has never done so, and has no guidelines in which to act. The Council must now develop internal rules in which to exercise that power, and as such I support the decision by Councilor Feeney to refer this matter to the Council's Rules Committee.
Councilor Turner has been an important figure in his community, and the support of his constituents is testament to that. That said, it is our duty to consider the long term impact of this - or any other - corruption allegation, and we need to be ready to act both deliberatively and decisively when necessary.
Thats true, he hasnt had his
Thats true, he hasnt had his day in court yet, no need to kick him off the council.
Chuck Turner may be smarter then we all give him credit for. The council is damned if they do, damned if they dont. He has staged this in a way that makes himself look like the hero and victim to his consituients so any action taken is seen as racist and against Chuck for his "record". If they kick him out then they are kicking him out without him getting due process and it will be seen as them being corrupt. If they keep him around and just try to avoid doing business with him he can then turn around and claim that everyone at City Hall is out to get him, and you guessed it they are being racist. I dont know what the solution is, hes made it impossible for them to get out of this without someone being embarrased.
And somewhere, Freddy Langone is smiling
This is good enough that the Globe is actually covering the city council again.
I'm not sure due process applies here
I agree with you that it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. It's a very sticky situation for the City Council - glad I'm not there....
I've been giving this "due process" argument a lot of thought. It's a very convincing argument from Chuck (and Diane, too) that he should have his day in court before the city council removes him. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that. However, I'm not buying it in this case. You simply cannot allow a person to continue their political responsibilities when they have been accused of abusing their power by taking bribes. This is possibly the worst offense a politician could commit, and you cannot let him/her continue as if nothing has happened. The council would get nothing done, or anything it did do would be tainted. Fugly situation.
Let's take it to extremes. Would these Chuck Turner supporters still bring their child to day care even if one of the employees had just been arrested, but not tried yet, for child molestation? If not, what happened to innocent until proven guilty?
good point merlin
I mean, if Chuck really wanted people to believe that this was some sort of mistake, he could have explained to us how.
Any intelligent citizen should see that he should be removed from office untill this gets sorted out.