Justice for Chuck Turner

People that follow my editorials here on Open Media Boston will recall that there are times when I say that I've had a hard time writing about a particular issue. This is one of those times. Chuck Turner got sentenced to three years in prison this week by US District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock after being convicted of taking a $1,000 bribe in 2007 and ostensibly lying about it to federal agents who interrogated him about the incident in 2008. I'm really not sure how to respond to that. I mean to anyone that knows the former Boston city councilor, his community and his work, it's clear that this is a terrible verdict and a grave miscarriage of justice. The question is: what to write about it that will make matters better?

So I guess I can start by writing the obvious.

The government's case was always paper thin - relying primarily on some lousy video footage and still photos shot by a paid FBI informant in 2007 during a meeting with Turner in the latter's Dudley Square office. To Turner's supporters, like me, this "evidence" never proved anything other than a gut-level reaction. Like ... is this the best the feds can do when they're looking to entrap somebody?

Get some shady guy to shake Turner's hand, and demonstrate that something green was handed from one person to the other. A "greenish lump" was how it was described in much of the local media.

Spend $30,000 just to pay off this informant for ensnaring Turner and former state senator Dianne Wilkerson as part of an operation that was originally supposed to land much bigger - and much whiter - fish in the deep murky waters of the political pond that is Boston.

[At least according to Ron Wilburn, the government informant in both cases. Asute observers may recall that at one point Wilburn was going to refuse to testify against Turner because he was furious that what he had thought was going to be an extensive federal move against many politicians in Massachusetts for corruption only netted two black politicians. The feds have since settled on the story that the main target of the sting initiated by Republican former US Attorney Michael Sullivan was Wilkerson.]

And then say it's just coincidence that the only politicians that fell from grace were some of the Commonwealth's very few black politicians.

And call Turner - as Judge Woodlock did on Tuesday and much of local media and political class has essentially done since his arrest - "ludicrous and surreal" for suggesting that race was a factor in testimony about his entrapment by the federal government. Really? What else is one to think when reviewing the facts of Turner's case. Are supporters to believe that this man - who was over $100,000 in debt from keeping his Dudley Square office open throughout his tenure just to better serve his constituency - took a thousand bucks to help some guy get a permit for a nightclub? Why would a man who would put his personal and campaign finances at risk to help his community throw it all away for 1K? What possible good would it do him? And, green blob aside, the feds had nothing else on Turner.

Also, let's not forget the circumstances of Turner's arrest. At 6 a.m. on the morning of Nov. 21, 2008, Turner's house was surrounded by federal agents - who eventually realized that their target is a hard working grassroots politician and had already gone to work. They then proceeded to Boston City Hall, arrested Turner at 6:30 a.m., put him in cuffs and marched him out of the building. Then they put him in a van and took him (still in cuffs) ... wait for it ... not across town to the our own federal district court, but all the way to Worcester federal court - an hour away from his friends, supporters, and, of course, lawyers - to be arraigned in front of Judge Timothy Hillman.

Now I challenge any of you to show me one white politician arrested for corruption in recent memory here in the Bay State that was treated like that.

Flaherty? Finneran? DiMasi? How about Tierney's wife recently? Are you freaking kidding me? No way. I mean Flaherty, Finneran and DiMasi just got to speak in front of the the very legislature whose name they so sullied as corrupt speakers of the house. And got an ovation from the admiring throng of their former peers. It remains to be seen if DiMasi will get away with his crimes, but Flaherty and Finneran certainly did.

Which makes one wonder if Turner's name was O'Turner or DiTurner and his skin was a few shades lighter would this pathetic excuse of a government operation even happened at all?

And how about the local media? Surely my friends in fourth estate wouldn't hang a man out to dry before he had his day in court. Well, if you think that would be the case, then you would be very wrong. The local media by and large treated Turner like he was some "bad boy" on COPS from word one. When Sullivan released the photos and video of Turner allegedly taking a bribe from Wilburn did the press do the right thing - the ethical thing - and refuse to air it for fear of prejudicing Turner's case? And dress down Sullivan for improperly releasing the visuals? Hells no. They ran them day and night for a couple of days. And referred to them in many future segments and articles.

Now why might that be? Just a coincidence that they didn't treat Turner (and Wilkerson) the same way as Finneran, Flaherty or DiMasi? Or something else. Something much worse.

Something called institutional racism. Racism so ingrained, so automatic, that its partisans aren't even aware they have a problem.

And naturally, such racism on the part of the media and justice system feed off each other. So when Turner did what any good progressive activist would do in a similar situation and mobilized his community against an obvious injustice, they mocked him. Many in the local media adapted a confused tone when covering the many rallies held in Turner's support. Like "what are these silly black people up to now? Don't they know this guy is guilty?"

Turner eventually had a gag order slapped on him for speaking out against what he justifiably saw as a pattern of government legal action against black politicians in recent years that looked all too much like earlier pogroms against black political leaders in American history - and worst of all, for marshalling his community in its own defense.

Yet such was the level of community support for Turner that he was reelected to office in 2009 in the midst of all the very public attacks against him.

But after his conviction last fall, the city council removed him from office - despite it being highly unclear that they had the power to do that. Making Turner the first, and so far only, sitting Boston city councilor to be removed from his seat by his colleagues. A complete joke given the many real criminals that have served in that institution over the last several decades ... lily white to a one.

So now Turner is going to jail. Sent up for three years for an offense that - even if real - wouldn't get the average white politician or white business person a stern talking to from a judge like Woodlock.

So what can I say about this fiasco, having said what I think are the obvious facts about the Turner affair?

I can say this ...

Progressives and all people of good conscience in the Boston area need to fight to get some justice for Chuck Turner. They need to join Turner's supporters if they haven't already, and figure out how to put so much heat on the politicians and the courts and the press that he gets probation and doesn't serve a day in jail.

I mean, seriously, take a page from the playbook of that old conservative warhorse of a a lawyer Chester Darling if you don't know what to do here. Darling did his damndest in the last few weeks to help Turner get his council seat back. Unfortunately, now that Turner has been sentenced, that can't legally happen. But it will still be very interesting to see how Judge Mark Wolf rules on Turner's suit on that issue. And why did Darling do it? Because Turner's plight struck him as unjust. He came out of retirement just to help Turner - a guy that he probably doesn't see eye to eye with on most things.

If Darling can go the extra mile for Turner, then I bet there are a whole lot of people who can spare some time, money and expertise to keep Turner out of jail.

And I expect you all to step up. Because if you let Turner go all the way down, then you are complicit in the perpetuation of institutional racism in our city and our state.

And just in case you think that I'm blowing smoke on this one, I am putting the resources of Open Media Boston at the disposal of any movement that develops to win justice for Chuck Turner.

We've done our best to support him all along as a news weekly. But the three year sentence was the last straw. If people are holding events to support Turner, we'll co-sponsor them. If people are raising money for the cause, we'll run fundraising appeals in our pages. If there are demonstrations held to put pressure on various big bads and events being held to drum up community support, I will speak at them if asked. Breaking my normal journalistic reserve in doing so. But for what I believe are the right reasons.

Now you know what I'm doing.

So. Tell me. In these pages or in personal communication to me at info@openmediaboston.org. What are you doing to win justice for Chuck Turner?

Because I really want to know what people are doing to stop a good man from getting a raw deal.

And I want to know now. Time is of the essence. Turner is slated to start serving his prison sentence in March.