Posted on 01/04/2007 3:19:42 PM PST by NormsRevenge
BOSTON (AP) -- A former Massachusetts House speaker accused of lying during his testimony in a voting rights lawsuit plans to plead guilty Friday to obstruction of justice, a person familiar with the agreement said Thursday.
The lawsuit had claimed that a 2001 state law that redrew legislative district boundaries discriminated against minorities in Boston while protecting incumbents, including the now-former House speaker, Thomas Finneran. A federal court panel eventually tossed out the legislative map, finding it "sacrificed racial fairness."
Finneran's trial on perjury and obstruction charges had been scheduled to start Jan. 16.
The former speaker said Wednesday that discussions were ongoing, but he wouldn't confirm a plea deal, and Finneran attorney Richard Egbert declined to comment Thursday. A change-of-plea hearing was listed on Friday's U.S. District Court docket, though.
Under the deal, Finneran won't face prison time, and federal prosecutors will drop the three perjury counts, the person familiar with the agreement told The Associated Press. He will serve probation, pay a fine and agree not to seek political office for five years.
Finneran, 56, has agreed to admit to some, but not all, of the allegations in the obstruction charge, which accuses him of obstructing justice by lying during the trial and in a deposition, according to the person, who asked not to be identified because the deal has not yet been finalized in court.
Separately, Finneran still faces a possible suspension of his law license or disbarment by the state Board of Bar Overseers.
During his eight years as speaker, Finneran was considered the state's most powerful lawmaker. Known for his authoritarian style, he was once dubbed "King Tom" for pushing through a rules change that eliminated term limits for House speakers.
He resigned as speaker in September 2004 and was indicted nine months later on charges that he lied under oath.
In testimony related to the voting rights lawsuit, Finneran had said that he had no role in drafting the new legislative map, except for appointing members of a redistricting committee, and that he did not see the redistricting plan until after the committee distributed it to the full House.
The indictment cites several meetings Finneran conducted before the formal release of the redistricting map, including one in which he reviewed a redistricting plan for each district in the state, including his own.
Finneran did not return several calls Thursday to his home and office at the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council where he is president. In a statement issued Thursday, the council said it was "premature and inappropriate" to comment.
U.S. attorney's spokeswoman Christina DiIorio-Sterling declined to comment Thursday.
Finneran had previously vehemently denied the charges and suggested the case against him was politically motivated, referring to the "questionable motives and machinations of the U.S. attorney's office."
"I'm not going to lose any sleep over it," he told reporters the day the indictment was handed down.
Egbert has said Finneran never claimed he was totally uninvolved in the redistricting process and that he acknowledged in his testimony having about "half a dozen" conversations with leaders of the redistricting committee. Under state law and House rules, Finneran was free to help draft the legislative map before it was released.
The state Board of Bar Overseers, which investigates complaints against lawyers, has been awaiting the outcome of the criminal case against Finneran before considering disciplinary action.
"Usually, a felony conviction of this type of crime would either result in disbarment or a lengthy suspension, absent mitigating circumstances," said Constance Vecchione, acting bar counsel for the board.
---
Associated Press Writers David Weber and Steve LeBlanc contributed to this report.
Good job, AP.
Bet that little oversight wouldn't have occurred if this was involving a Republican.
Wouldn't want to rain on the Dems big victory celebrations in DC and upset the children, now would we?.
Silly. Ethics are for Republicans.
As a Bostonian I can only respond LOLOLOLOL!
I know, just having a little fun with it.
What's with dems and perjury and obstructionism anyway?
Too bad there isn't a gene that we can identify that can help them in getting help for their self-serving ways.
Bet he still gets his pension?
Silly. Ethics are for Republicans.
---
Ain't that the truth. ;-)
I'll tell you that Finneran (a Social Conservative DINO) was the last sane legislative leader on Beacon Hill. When he went, the radical left took over for perhaps a very long time to come.
Of course not, the political machine will protect his sorry behind.
I can hear the Dem chant now.
"US Govt., out of my oath of office and sworn testimony."
Mitigating circumstances=laws do not apply to Democrats.
You would make serious money if you could bet that the AP/CNN/ABC/NBC ad nauseum would not ID the democrat party affiliation of an indicted politician.
You have to give the democrats credit though. It is amazing how they control the J schools and the media.
Don't mention that he's a Dem, but in Mass you've gotta assume any politician is either a Dem or a Rino.
CORRECTION: No party affiliation mentioned in such a story *always* means that HE/SHE/IT is a RAT. (this is MA we're talking about)
I agree FieldMarshall, call him Tommy Taxes if you like but he did draw the line on gay marriage and that is why they got him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.