Hey, there! Log in / Register

Man paroled last year on murder conviction charged with road-rage stabbing on Boylston Street at the Muddy River

State Police report a man on parole for a second-degree murder is back behind bars after his arrest for stabbing somebody during a traffic altercation where Boylston Street crosses the Muddy River at the Bowker Overpass.

State Police say Joseph Irizarry, 41, paroled just last year for fatally shooting a rival gang member in Lawrence in 2000, was driving an Acadia SUV outbound on Boylston when he ran the red light at Charlesgate East and Boylston Street and almost struck another vehicle, around 7:30 p.m. on Nov. 17.

The vehicles stopped prior to the intersection of the Bowker Overpass and Boylston Street where the driver of the Arcadia, later identified as Irizarry, and the victim and his relative got out and began to argue. Irizarry then allegedly punched both occupants of the other vehicle in the face, then got back into the driver’s seat of the Acadia, retrieved a knife, and stabbed the victim, who was standing next to the open driver’s side door.

The suspect then sped away. The victim and his relative got back into their car and followed the suspect onto Commonwealth Avenue and several side streets before losing him. The victims called 911 and the man who was stabbed was transported by Boston EMS to Tufts Medical Center. He is expected to recover from his stab wound.

State Police report their investigation into the incident led them to obtain an arrest warrant for Irizarry, on charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, assault and battery and driving without a license. He is now locked up again for violating parole as he awaits arraignment on the new charges, police say.

Irizarry had been sentenced to life, but with the possibility of parole, following his conviction in 2001 for shooting a rival gang member twice in the abdomen outside a Lawrence pizza place on April 16, 2000, following a beef over marijuana sales.

In 2016, the state parole board rejected his parole request, in part because of a prison record that included "inciting riots and abusing correctional officers," according to the board's decision that year - which acknowledged he had seemed to turn away from prison gang life in 2009, after his mother fell ill, which made him realize how pointless the gang life was.

Four years later, on June 1, 2020, the board voted unanimously to grant parole, because of his age at the time of the murder, his "substantial rehabilitative progress" and letters and testimony on his behalf.

The board pointed to his readiness to participate in "available work, educational and treatment programs" while in prison, in its decision. Also:

Throughout the hearing [in March], he was able to articulate as to how he has been rehabilitated often providing concrete examples of it. Mr. Irizarry presented a strong parole plans and has significant amount of support in the community.

He was released to a home in Dorchester, with several conditions, including a 10 p.m. curfew and that he wear a GPS monitoring device.

Innocent, etc.


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!


Just an SUV, a knife and a red light.

Nothing to see here folks.


Typically Massachusetts.


Don’t anybody make a big deal. Or else they’ll take away our SUVS too and ticket us for running red lights.

POSTED JULY 12, 2021



I guess he isnt a great example for their cause


Or maybe he actually is.

Hei s back in jail for stabbing someone after being paroled for a murder conviction. .


So very deep.

thru impulse control class during prison rehabilitation? He just needs a few more breaks DA Rollins


You think Rollins had something to do with his parole? Where do you get that?




Read the post again.
However she may have a say in how the suspect is charged.
Given how her alleged South Bay road rage incident was handled there is an expectation that she may be prone to wear karmic kid gloves when handling cases of this nature.


This guy stabbed someone.


Or he took these classes at South Bay Plaza parking lot


Yet another reason we need red light cameras. They would have had his face and license plate on camera so he would have been caught without the victim following him and the gps bracelet.

Again, the biggest threat to the safety of people around here is Boston drivers so let’s do everything possible to reduce them in numbers. Fewer people behind the wheel means less death and crime.


… we had far fewer drivers on the road which was great for air quality and noise control. But there were more deaths and injuries due to increased speeding.
We also need infrastructure that prevents speeding.
We need smaller vehicles made for safety.
Traffic cameras so drivers can be identified are definitely called for!!!


Bikes also need a unique identifier like license plates, and also get tickets if they blow red lights.

I’m with you that horrible drivers and a lack of consequences are a huge problem. But don’t for a second pretend cyclists and pedestrians that do whatever the hell they want aren’t part of the problem too.


Thousands of pedestrians are killed every year after being flattened by 2-ton Schwinns traveling at 60 mph!


Because that’s the only potential problem with a cyclist running a light.

But also, I actually ended up with a sprained ankle a few years back thanks to a cyclist running a red light and almost taking me out in a crosswalk. So you can stuff your turkey with this take.

Anyway, it blows my mind how the anti-car crowd refuses to put any of the traffic safety onus on anyone but cars. I’ve been a cyclist, pedestrian, and driver in this city for a long time and all 3 camps act like entitled clowns in one way or another.


Exactly. The purpose of a traffic light is to establish right of way and safe travel through an intersection. That applies to bikes, too. A bike running a red light can cause an accident just as a car can. Too many cyclists want all the privileges of riding without the responsibilities.




The ground was wet, slipped moving out of the way when the guy came barreling through. Granted it was a freak thing, but still caused by a cyclist running a red light into a crosswalk.

I guess one of us needs to show some tact, so I’ll leave my response at that.

Why not wheelchairs, strollers and walkers too?

They are the killers just waiting in the shadows.


but if one of them entered a crosswalk against a signal, or just walked out into the road as they pleased, and got hit by someone with right of way who couldn’t stop in time; or, a cyclist blows a red at a 4 way intersection and gets clipped by traffic in the opposite direction, that’s on them. Tragic, but avoidable by everyone obeying traffic laws.

Again, this is an argument about everyone being accountable. Yes, we have terrible drivers here and it is a major problem. Probably some of the worst, and some of the worst enforcement in the country to boot.

But if your argument is that pedestrians and cyclists don’t have to obey signals because they don’t weigh a few tons…well today I’m thankful I can walk away from this conversation and just talk to my in-laws’ cat instead.


ALWAYS has the right of way. ( the "fairy tale" driver's manual from RMV). Of course they risk a maximum $1 "jaywalking" ticket which the Legislature refuses to increase. Hint: You could risk it and give your alias, it may not be an arrest able offense. I believe that Santa Claus has the most "jaywalking" tickets in the Commonwealth followed closely by the Easter Bunny. "Jaywalking Culture" is a local custom that does not apply to others states.

If you want pedestrians to obey traffic signals, then first let's get rid of the "don't walk / no reason" lights. All over the city, there are pedestrian signals that show "don't walk" during long portions of the light cycle during which no vehicle traffic could cross the crosswalk.

For example, a one way street enters an intersection with a "no turn on red" sign. There is absolutely no reason for pedestrians crossing that street to be shown a "don't walk" light when the vehicle traffic light is red. But, often, they are.

People aren't going to stand for enforcement of 'jaywalking' laws until the pedestrian control lights are brought into alignment with reality.


…. putting crosswalks in safer spots, like mid block rather than intersections, the most dangerous place to cross a street, putting crosswalks where people actually cross streets and at regular intervals rather than expect people will walk a quarter of a mile out of their way to get to a crosswalk, raising crosswalks, not allowing right on red and putting an end to the speed up to and run a red light mentality that current street infrastructure encourages.

… as much as it is about identifying those who don’t and cause accidents. Which are… can you imagine …. drivers!!! Ding, ding,ding.

If you want to see the licensing thing extended to cyclists (and therefore reducing dramatically the number of cyclists on the road just like helmet laws do) then you, as the cyclist you claim to be, would know that that these type restrictions come in stages. First you ask for the most logical understandable thing, then when you get it, you go for the next thing you want, which in your case seems to be restricting bike riding to licensed vehicles only.
If you honestly want something done about the rampant red light running, you would be in favor of cameras at intersections.
You could also use the cameras showing cyclists you claim endanger lives as evidence to push your licensing agenda.
I don’t believe you are a cyclist though. I think you just don’t want to get caught running red lights in your car.

Never said I wasn’t. Never said there weren’t a lot of really bad drivers out there. Just saying there should be accountability all around. But every time a vehicle related incident comes up, there are a certain few people here who remind us all that all drivers are the devil and their sole intent is to take out as many cyclists and pedestrians as possible.

And you know what, the whole bikes endangering lives argument is a moot point. Cyclists want to be traffic, you obey traffic laws. Point blank. You don’t get to say “well I can run this red light because I don’t weigh 2 tons.” It’s hypocritical.

As for the rest of your baseless accusations–which, lets be fair, are as common as a turkey sighting around here–

I won’t be caught running a red light, because I don’t run red lights. It’s extremely rare for me to drive into the city at all to begin with, but when I do (or when I drive anywhere) I *gasp* obey lights and signs, and even stop at crosswalks. I know you don’t believe a single driver in the Boston Metro Area does this things, but hey, I guess unicorns exist.

And yeah I don’t pull my bike out as much as I’d like anymore (due to the whole living in Eastie and MBTA peak hours thing), but do still ride in the city when I can and rode to work daily prior to living across the harbor.

But hey, we all know you have a flair for the dramatic when it comes to cars, so you do you and live your best life. Walking away from this pointless back and forth now, which I regret taking part in almost as much as the amount of food I ate on Thursday.

There are two conflated issues here: Going through a red light and a stabbing. When has a bicyclist ever stabbed someone at a red light ? Setting up a whole bureaucracy for something that has never happened seems like a waste of resources.

If you have photos of the person blowing the intersection on a bicycle, you'll literally have a picture of the person - you're very visible when riding a bicycle. IF there's ever actually an instance where a person runs a red on their bike and causes actual damage, it would be very possible for investigators to look at that picture and figure out who it is.

No, red light cameras would not have prevented this murder.

This man murdered before without being in a car. Meanwhile, there are over 100,000 drivers in Boston who have never harmed a soul.

But you keep on being the troll you are.


“ Meanwhile, there are over 100,000 drivers in Boston who have never harmed a soul.”

Awww! Such a touching show of support and blind allegiance to Massholes.

You and your myths.

And your delusions.

Meanwhile, I would say the fact that this man was previously convicted of shooting someone to death shows that your anti-car insanity doesn’t apply in this case.

Assholes are assholes, be them drivers or non drivers. You constantly remind us of this.



He was a local activist, advocating for the end of life without parole with a group called “ End life without parole MA.”

His action clearly make a strong argument against said position.



You realize that we can still end Life Without Parole as an option either all of the time, or most of the time - and still decline to parole those who haven't demonstrated that they've earned that privilege.

The same with the anti-Rollins brutality apologists who blame violent crime on bail reform. The goal is to save the state money for locking people up for non-violent misdemeanors. Nothing in that movement suggests that accused rapists, muggers, and aggravated assault suspects should be set free without repercussions.

But some people want to look at the world as black and white, and either can't comprehend or can't bother to learn about anything that falls into a gray area.


Fool me once, . . .


People come out of jail even angrier at the world. He was one of them.