The Boston Globe has the amazing story, ‘He’s not like that,’ some Bulger jurors said.

A juror in the James J. “Whitey” Bulger trial says the defense argument that the government was also on trial resonated with jurors as they deliberated for five days on the 32 counts against the former gangster.

“It worked!” said Scott Hotyckey in an interview at his Framingham home. “It actually worked for a few days. There [were] people that were shouting about that.”

Some people in the government may have been corrupt and should have also been on trial (I thought some of them are already in prison for what they did).  However, unless you can come up with some reason that says the behavior of the government lessens Bulger’s culpability, then the government corruption does not change the facts of what Bulger did.

Are we to tell organized criminals that if they can corrupt someone in law enforcement that they won’t be held liable for what they do when they come before a jury?

Do people on juries really want to live in a society like that?

This whole business about it is more important not to be a snitch than it is to not be a murderer would be beyond my comprehension if I didn’t know people who teach their children that it is better to put up with bullying than it is to go the teacher and ask for help.  After all, nobody likes a tattletale.  Fortunately some children have a stronger moral sense than some of their parents.

I suppose this may be the same factor that has some people more concerned about Bradley Manning reporting war crimes than they are about the commission of or the covering up of war crimes.  I wouldn’t think you would need religion to tell you what is right and what is wrong in cases like these.  But then again, I guess I would be mistaken, when evidently even religion can’t make it clear to some people.