Robert Mueller, the former FBI Director and Special Counsel whose investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election dominated headlines for years, died Tuesday at the age of 81. While much of the recent commentary focuses on his role in the Trump-era probe, a decades-old case in Massachusetts reveals a pattern of conduct that critics say foreshadowed his later actions – a willingness to pursue convictions even in the face of serious doubts about guilt. The story of four men wrongly convicted of murder in 1965 and the role Mueller played in keeping them imprisoned, is resurfacing as scrutiny of his career intensifies.
The case centers around the 1965 murder of Teddy Deegan in Chelsea, Massachusetts. Peter Limone, Henry Tameleo, Louie Greco, and Joe Salvati, all figures connected to Boston’s North Complete, were convicted of the crime. However, evidence quickly emerged suggesting their innocence and pointing to other potential perpetrators. The FBI, according to accounts detailed in a locally best-selling book published in 1973, “My Life in the Mafia,” and later corroborated by investigations, knew the four men were not responsible. Yet, the convictions stood for decades, fueled in part by the continued support of successive U.S. Attorneys, including Robert Mueller.
The initial reports from the Boston FBI office following Deegan’s murder, referred to as “AIRTELS” and sent to Washington, did not include the names of Limone, Tameleo, Greco, and Salvati, despite acknowledging the existence of other suspects. This omission, critics argue, signaled an early decision to focus on these four men, even without concrete evidence. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of what were described as “plug-ugly pets” – individuals with questionable credibility who were incentivized to cooperate with the FBI. One of the convicted men, Louie Greco, a decorated World War II veteran, was demonstrably out of state at the time of the murder, having moved to Florida. Despite this, the conviction stood.
Mueller’s Role as U.S. Attorney
Robert Mueller’s involvement began after a prior assignment in California, where a case against the Hells Angels reportedly faltered. He was brought into the Boston U.S. Attorney’s office by William Weld, then the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts. When Weld was appointed to a position in Washington D.C., Mueller succeeded him as U.S. Attorney. According to accounts from former parole board member Michael Albano, Mueller continued a practice established by his predecessors – actively lobbying against parole for the four men. Albano swore under oath that he saw a letter from Mueller specifically demanding that the men remain incarcerated.
This practice wasn’t limited to Mueller. Both Weld and his successor, Frank McNamara, routinely wrote letters to the parole board urging against the release of Limone, Tameleo, Greco, and Salvati. The U.S. Attorney’s office even dispatched FBI agents to the Massachusetts State House to lobby members of the Governor’s Council, which considers pardons and commutations, to maintain the status quo. These agents, John “Zip” Connolly and John “Vino” Morris, were later revealed to have been on the payroll of rival mobsters, creating a clear conflict of interest and further undermining the integrity of the case. Connolly and Morris were later convicted of crimes related to their corruption.
The Long Road to Exoneration and a $107 Million Settlement
By the late 1990s, the cracks in the case began to widen. FBI documents surfaced revealing the agency’s initial knowledge of the true perpetrators of the Deegan murder and their deliberate decision to pursue the wrong men. The four men, or their estates, filed a lawsuit against the FBI, alleging a deliberate cover-up and wrongful imprisonment. When Mueller became Director of the FBI, he initially refused to turn over exculpatory documents related to the case, a move that even drew criticism from Judge Nancy Gertner, who ordered him to comply with the discovery request. The case, Limone v. United States, ultimately led to a $107 million settlement for the men and their families.
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, commenting on the case, stated that Mueller was “the guy who kept four innocent people in prison for many years… right in the center of it.” The case highlights a troubling pattern, critics argue, of prioritizing convictions over justice and protecting the reputation of the FBI, even at the expense of individual liberties.
Echoes of the Past
The allegations surrounding Mueller’s handling of the Deegan case have resurfaced in light of his leadership of the Special Counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Critics point to perceived biases and a relentless pursuit of a narrative, regardless of conclusive evidence, as echoes of his earlier actions in Boston. Former President Donald Trump, upon hearing of Mueller’s death, posted on social media, “Robert Mueller just died. Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people!” – a statement reflecting the deep-seated resentment held by some towards his investigative operate.
Barack Obama, in a statement following Mueller’s death, praised his “relentless commitment to the rule of law.” However, for those familiar with the Deegan case, such accolades ring hollow. The case serves as a stark reminder of the potential for abuse of power within law enforcement and the lasting consequences of wrongful convictions.
The legacy of Robert Mueller remains complex and contested. While lauded by some for his dedication to public service, the case of Peter Limone, Henry Tameleo, Louie Greco, and Joe Salvati casts a long shadow, raising serious questions about his commitment to justice and the lengths to which he was willing to go to protect the interests of the FBI. The Department of Justice continues to review past cases for potential misconduct, and the Deegan case remains a cautionary tale about the importance of accountability and the pursuit of truth.
Further information regarding the Limone v. United States case can be found through the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The FBI also released a statement regarding the settlement in 2007.
This is a developing story. We will continue to update as more information becomes available.
Do you have information about this case? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
