Trial 4 (2020): Season 1, Episode 5 - Hidden Link - full transcript

[mellow music playing]

I made a phone call
to a friend of mine from West Roxbury

that same area was close,

and he says to me…

I says, uh, "They're doing
a documentary about Mulligan."

"What did you think?"
He says, word for word,

"He's in a place
he should have been a long time ago."

Nobody liked him, you know what I mean?

Because all the street people
didn't like him.

[police siren blaring]

This here's a cop
that was getting-- making more money



than the governor and--
and the mayor of Boston at the time.

Driving a Corvette, brand-new Corvette.

How can this guy afford
and cover eight condominiums

and a Corvette?

If you couldn't see the corruption…

and the way he dressed and…

Oh, I couldn't stand the motherfucker.

[reporter] Mulligan's lifestyle
has also served to fuel the speculation.

His expensive taste in cars.

He owned this Corvette and Acura Legend.

His love of real estate.

At one time, he owned eight units
in this luxury condominium in West Roxbury

and was reported to be heavily in debt.

It should have been obvious
to anybody that was, um, looking at him



that he was living well beyond his means.

He had to be getting
extra money somewhere.

There's no question
he was getting extra money somewhere,

and I've just got to prove it.

Sean's still serving time in jail.
He's still sitting in a jail cell.

Now we have to do the investigation.
We have to figure it all out.

I know they're hiding stuff,

and when I have someone
who's actually innocent,

I'm gonna do everything I can

to make sure that I have
every single document that they have

to help prove his innocence.

[dramatic theme music playing]

[somber music playing]

[birds chirping]

[Elaine Murphy] I had developed
a really deepening relationship with Sean

over the years.

The two of us really became close
through my prison visits.

That first prison visit way back in 1998,

um, you know,
I was afraid he wouldn't even remember me,

but of course he did remember me.

And he told me at that time,

he said, "Mrs. Murphy,
I think your finding out about my case,"

when I got The Boston Globe in Montreal
quite by accident,

uh, he said, "I think it was
an act of divine intervention."

That's what he thinks, so that's
one of the reasons he calls me Godma.

That's his word for me.

He calls me Godma and his mother Earthma.

So, I first actually met Rosemary
in the very first month of 2007.

And she said,
"I think those guys were all corrupt,

and they were all corrupt together,
Mulligan, Acerra, and Robinson."

I was just completely floored
because I thought…

I said, "Oh, my God,
I have had this theory."

"I call it my lid theory,
that they put the lid--"

"These surviving guys
put the lid on the investigation

because they must have
all been mixed up in drugs together."

There's no way Mulligan
would pass up that kind of easy money

that his friends were making,
and he needed money all the time.

He was over, um, his head in mortgages.

I think he owned,
like, five condos total in that building.

[Rosemary] Five or six?
I thought it was six.

Yeah, I think--
So, I'll see if 115 was one of them.

[Rosemary] Didn't he have them
in his sister's name?

For like a dollar or something like that?

It looks like Acerra also owned
in West Newton and Braintree

at the same time.

So, I think we have to do, uh,
a real-estate search for all of them.

-Yeah.
-Acerra, Brazil, Mulligan, Robinson.

I'm gonna put this
with the mortgage stuff,

um, so that we can try
and connect that all together.

The reason it was so important
for us to connect

Robinson, Acerra, and Mulligan

is because when the first motion
for new trial was presented to the court,

they presented it with evidence

that Acerra and Robinson
had been ripping off drug dealers.

The judge refused to consider

that their corruption had anything at all
to do with the Mulligan case.

I was just dumbstruck.

These guys were liars and perjurers,

and why would we believe
any of the evidence that they touched?

And they touched so much
of that evidence in Sean's case.

Key evidence.

[Rosemary] Everything I was doing
was to try to convince the judge

that there is enough here

to suggest that-- that maybe
this defendant didn't get a fair trial.

We wanna create
the best record that we can,

so that the judge can make
a fair and informed decision

at the end, uh,
of the evidentiary hearing.

[melancholy music playing]

[Edward McNelley] John Brazil,
Acerra, Robinson and John Mulligan

were all lead detectives from District 5.

You gotta understand, if Anti-Corruption,
were they investigating anybody,

they would not tell me.

It isn't that they call and say,
"Don't put these guys in your task force

'cause we're looking at 'em."

You don't get the call
from Internal Affairs.

If they were investigating me,
they wouldn't call and tell me.

So, as far as us knowing, or me knowing,

or anybody, uh,
there would have no knowledge

because the last thing
in the world they do

is they don't tell you.

[Thomas Nolan] I was there in '91 and '92.

There was word on the street,

there was word
that we would get informally,

through police channels that we had,

that would make us aware
that there is, um, some need

for attention to be paid out
to the night detectives in E5.

We did have a pretty good handle
on what was going on,

and we followed Detective Mulligan.

He was a notorious rogue.

[indistinct chatter over radio]

He'd have a handle on what corruption is

and engaging in, um, inappropriate
and potentially unlawful activities

with drug dealers.

Could we prove a lot of the stuff?
We knew who the bad cops were.

We knew where they lived.

We knew where they worked.

Um, could we put a case
together against them?

Most often not,
but it wasn't for lack of trying.

[police siren blaring]

[indistinct chatter]

The drug dealers
are not gonna cooperate with the cops.

Particularly,
we found it, uh, a chronic problem

with people
not wanting to cooperate with us

when they knew the subjects
and the targets of our investigations

are police officers.

[Steven Davis] I didn't choose my life
of drug dealing.

I mean, I don't like to hurt anybody,

but it was handed to me.

My father pulled me out
in the sixth grade.

No education.

All I knew was survival.

And, uh…

today, I despise corruption.

[indistinct chatter]

He was a corrupt cop.

You know,
he used to take from drug dealers,

running down Mass Avenue
down to combat zone.

He was always with young--
picking up young Black chicks.

A lot of prostitutes are right in front
of the Playboy Bunny Club.

[indistinct chatter]

He'd just pick 'em up,
ride 'em in the car,

and just--
He'd do it right in the car with them

and throw them out of the car after.

Real young, too. They was--

I mean, I forget how old he was,
maybe in the forties,

and, uh, he'd be with girls
like 18, 17, 18 years old.

You're surprised.

He had a girlfriend
that was, like, half his age

and, you know, "Oh, wow, yeah,"

but in the back of your head, you're
saying, "This fucking piece of shit."

Young girl like that? Pervert, you know.

[indistinct chatter]

He had a lot of young girls chase him
because, back then, they were all addicts.

Mulligan took advantage of that.

He'd take from a small-time dealer,
like, cocaine or something,

and he'd be feeding it to these
young girls that wanted the coke.

Now, back then, you're selling coke,

the girls loved it, you know?

I had coke.

I had access to the best coke
in [stutters] Boston.

A corrupt cop is worse
than the worst criminal you can imagine

because he's-- he's doing both sides.

He's covering both sides of the fence

and [stutters] that's scary.

[Nolan] We thought, at the time,

"Well, the government got Al Capone
for income tax evasion,"

so our approach was
to go with what we could prove,

go with what we had,
you know, had definitive proof of,

and that was this-- this overtime scam.

[indistinct chatter]

[Toni Locy] The Boston Police Department
had an odd sort of management

or lack thereof.

And then you had the detectives,

you know, 300 or so,

and they had absolutely no supervision.

And they did whatever they wanted,

and one of the things that they--
that they did…

There was a core group of them, you know,

who used to use
what they called paid details

and court overtime.

Two different things, but quite lucrative.

And there were cops in Boston
and detectives

who more than doubled their base salaries.

John Mulligan,
odd ways of doing things at times.

He didn't always strictly adhere
to the rules and regulations,

and used to get in trouble
for double-dipping.

Like, we'd get paid four hours for court

whether you were there
ten minutes or four hours.

He was always
getting in trouble for doing that.

I think I saw him in courtrooms
more than I ever saw him on the street.

Whenever I saw him,
he was always in plain clothes.

I would see him sometimes in court,

he'd just come in,

like in flip-flops and stuff like that.
[chuckles]

He was always in court.

With the flip-flop sandals on,
shorts, T-shirt, and, of course,

the cops who were sitting there
waiting to get their court cases called

are not happy with this.

And he comes in,
and he's got a cardboard container

with a half a dozen coffees
for the sergeant,

and there's a police officer working there
and "Here's the coffee,"

and they're happy to see him.

And then 15 minutes later,
he's walking out the door.

And it wouldn't be unusual
for him then to go to another court

and get another four hours for that.

We looked at a calendar year,

and we determined

that this Detective Mulligan had submitted
overtime vouchers, overtime slips

for court dates

for more dates
than the court was in session.

And we would start looking
at the court slips,

and we would see these courts,
some of them didn't even exist.

Our investigation
probably wrapped up in 1992,

and what, um, we presented
to our superiors at the time

is that we have sufficient information

that we would like to involve, um,

the Suffolk County
District Attorney's Office in this

and move for an indictment,

and possibly we had grounds
to make an arrest,

um, for this, um, you know,
essentially larceny of public funds.

But the case, you know, frankly,
the case had been taken away from us

prior to that happening,
prior to his death.

The determination was made

to take this case, um, away
from Anti-Corruption and a criminal case

and to make it into an administrative case

and to give it to Internal Affairs.

If it stayed with us,

there would have been
a criminal prosecution,

and a criminal prosecution of
this detective would've been in the media.

And so, uh, my belief is

that there was, um, an effort
to just do an end run around that,

and to avoid any kind of negative
media exposure for the department.

[eerie music playing]

-Did you see, um, the prosecutor's e-mail?
-Yeah.

Okay, and then I've looked
at all these anonymous letters

about Mulligan not doing his job.

Okay, yeah.

I don't know where to go with that.
It seems to me they're police officers.

Do you get the sense
that they're police officers?

Because it seems like they're pissed
that Mulligan's making a lot in overtime,

and he's not working.
It seems to me that they've known that.

I don't think it's news to anyone.

They didn't seem to look into that.

They didn't seem to--

They probably did,
they just didn't tell us they did.

So, to me, you'd have someone
write a police report regarding that.

I haven't seen any police reports.
I haven't seen any letters regarding it,

so I think we have to follow up and ask.

To me, it's a puzzle.
I need to sort of solve the puzzle,

put all those pieces together,
make sure they fit.

And so our first set of FOIA requests
was looking for Internal Affairs documents

about Acerra, Robinson,
Mulligan, and Brazil.

The purpose of FOIA is supposed to be
a freedom of information request

so that theoretically anyone,
you or me or anybody,

should be able to get access
to any public document at any time

based on a simple request.

But in reality,
that's not the way it works.

So, in reality, there are all these,
you know, sort of pitfalls that happen

when you do FOIA requests.
So, you have to be specific,

to have the permission of the person
you're looking for information about.

If they're dead, you have
to provide information that they are dead.

But they'll fight you
on every little thing.

And so, when you file your request
asking for information,

we filed them
with the District Attorney's office,

with the police department,
with the State Crime Lab,

with anybody who had their hand
in on the investigation into Mulligan.

We wanted to know
what they had, when they had it,

and how many documents it was.

One of the things
that I think is the most frustrating

is that there're all these impediments
to getting these documents,

and I think that the system is set up,

and so it's easy to let dates slip by,

it's easy to say,
"Okay, maybe there isn't anything there."

And what I've found over the years

is the harder they fight you on the FOIA,
the more there is to-- to hide.

But this is a situation

where the Boston police
had the bulk of the information

in their own files,

and so they're never giving that up
without a fight.

Years, it takes years.
Let me tell you what happens.

Internal Affairs never investigated it.

Instead, it was investigated
by Anti-Corruption.

And then we started looking
for the Anti-Corruption files,

and we were told
by the Boston Police Department,

which is the most ironic thing,

is that even though
Internal Affairs records are public,

uh, when they break a police rule,
the Anti-Corruption records are not,

and you needed a court order
in order to get them.

[indistinct chatter]

Can you imagine how many people
are sitting in jail now

based on the fact they wouldn't give them
the information that they wanted?

It's enraging.

It's enraging that, uh,
their lives barely changed,

and-- and they turned
other lives upside down.

It's-- it's enraging.

Just to get the documents,
it was-- [stutters]

I want to say like ten years' time.
Like, there was a lot of back and forth.

People within
the Boston Police Department,

like, playing games, so to speak,

saying, "Yeah, we have that,"
or, "No, we don't have that,"

or, "You gotta contact this department,
contact that department, um…"

It's a flawed system.

[somber music playing]

[Elaine Murphy]
I think I got a phone call from Rosemary.

She said, "The materials
are starting to trickle in."

[Rosemary] From the Feds,
we got a bunch of information

about investigations that were pending
regarding Mulligan, prior to his death,

for extortion,
for shaking down prostitutes,

for, uh, you know, uh,
a bunch of different things.

It's powerful.

I remember reading it, saying, "Oh my God,
I didn't realize it was this bad."

"Where does it end? I mean, how much?"

This went back
years before I ever realized

that there was something going on.

And, you know, to investigations
that were way more far-reaching

than I had ever anticipated
when I started this litigation.

[Elaine] I started-- I helped Rosemary
and her team organize all the files,

you know, 'cause they were busy.

And I thought
that I could help them do that.

So, we continued to trying
to find the link

between Mulligan, the victim,
and Acerra and Robinson.

So, when I finally
got into the federal documents,

looking desperately
to find Mulligan's name,

uh, I was just appalled at what I read

of the cruelty and the brazenness
of these guys

to go in and say, "Where's the drugs?
Give us the drugs. Give us the money."

Uh, I was furious and angry

and quite almost titillated

by all of the incredible details,

but I couldn't find Mulligan,
and I came up empty.

There were many cases

where they'd describe
a bunch of different guys,

and they'd name Acerra, name Robinson,
name one or two others.

And they'd say, "Well, then, there was
a paunchy gray-haired guy around 50."

Several times I found that,
which I think fit Mulligan's description,

but his name was never there.

So, I thought,
"Damn, I know he's in there somewhere."

"You know what?
I'm just going to read it all again."

So, I sucked it up,
and I just went through it all again,

and then I came upon
the Robert Martin case.

And it was like, "Eureka!"

[eerie music playing]

The federal documents revealed

that Mulligan was indeed
a partner in crime

with Kenneth Acerra,
Walter Robinson, and John Brazil.

[Rosemary] One of the people that
Mulligan, Acerra, Robinson,

and Brazil ripped off
is a kid by the name of Robert Martin.

He was a marijuana dealer.

He testified in front of the grand jury
about being ripped off.

And what he said was, uh,
Acerra and Robinson took his keys

and were going through his house,
stealing his drugs and money,

and Mulligan was guarding him in the car.

[Elaine] It was just gold.

That was just one of the most
exciting moments of my life, I think.

We finally have linked this guy
with his corrupt friends.

They were all
in the drug-stealing business together.

[William Dwyer] He was friendly with them,
but they could have said,

"Hey, we're going to do a drug run.
Why don't you come over?"

And Mulligan, "You got a warrant?"

"Let me see it. Okay, I'll go with you.
Okay, stick 'em up. Police!"

Does he-- Does Mulligan know
that they're robbing the drug dealers?

I-- I-- Listen, I wasn't with
John Mulligan 24 hours seven, like that.

In my opinion,
from what I know of John Mulligan,

I don't believe he was corrupt.

I certainly don't believe this nonsense
that he was shaking people down.

I don't believe it. I just don't.
Could I be naive and wrong?

I suppose so, but I don't believe it.

I--

You know, from my understanding

is that even in all of these cases
with Acerra and Robinson,

Mulligan's name shows up on one case.

You know, Mulligan is not implicated.

Actually, Robinson and Mulligan
didn't like each other.

So, Acerra and Mulligan
had this kind of strange relationship,

so to even suggest
that he was part of a group

that they didn't like each other
doesn't even make sense.

[reporter] Detective Walter Robinson
mourns for his friend John Mulligan.

He was a general-- generous man.

He was-- he was--
he was very compassionate toward people.

I never saw him abuse anybody.
I never saw him treat anyone harshly.

And I've been with him
when he's made arrests,

and I've seen him
bring people in under arrest.

[Elaine] Mulligan's participation
in the Robert Martin case

happened just 17 days before the murder.

So, now you have the surviving detectives
Acerra, Robinson, and-- and, um, Brazil,

uh, investigating the homicide.

There's lots of people
would've had a motive to kill Mulligan,

very unhappy people,
because of his police tactics

and his robbing--
Drug dealers that he robbed and so on,

who might have had
a revenge motive against him.

So, any one of those guys
might have talked.

Had the investigation gone deep,

some of these drug dealers
that we now know about

might have revealed
that Mulligan was part of the story

and might have revealed the crimes

of the investigators
Acerra, Robinson, and Brazil.

[Rosemary] I remember going down
to the jail to tell Sean

that we have this connection now
that we never had before,

and this is a good piece of information
that we had been searching for for years,

that it was important
for him to know that we found it.

We got it, and it's here.

Um, and-- and I remember his face,
saying, "Rosemary, what does this mean?"

Um, and I'm saying, "It's good, Sean."

"This is good.
This gives us the connection."

And his response is, "Is it enough?"

Because when you get ready
to file your motion for a new trial,

there's always that pit in your stomach
of you think it's enough,

but you think "Am I missing something?
Is there something else I can be doing?"

"Is there anything else we can put
in here to make it stronger?"

[Sean] I remember
when I was first shown the documents.

Um, it was brought up to the prison,

but I remember asking, like, "So, what?
Everyone knew-- knew what was going on?"

And I was told,
"Yeah, everyone except you."

Like, "You're the only one [stutters]
that didn't know what was going on

in the whole scheme of things."

[car honking]

[Rosemary] In 2013,
after we got the Martin information,

we filed a motion for new trial
with the superior court.

Um, and we were basically saying

that we could now connect,
um, Mulligan to the corruption.

Um, and we had this other suspect
out there.

That was really the crux

of what we believed
was newly discovered evidence

and withheld evidence,

um, to try to open the door
for the evidentiary hearing.

[indistinct chatter]

You know, everybody in the can
is looking for a new trial.

Everybody.

Some lawyers,

there's got to be
some credible stuff there.

Some people don't care
if it's credible or not.

They're just gonna take a shot.

And, you know, in his particular case,
that's what they did.

Rosemary Scapicchio
puts the motion in for a new trial.

If she can demonstrate
that he did 20 or 25 years

for a crime he didn't commit,

that's a big payday.

[reporter] Lawyers are expected
on the witness stand this morning

to decide whether a Boston man,

who spent 19 years in prison
for the murder of a police officer,

deserves another trial.

It would be the fourth trial
for Sean Ellis.

[melancholy music playing]

[Sean]
I was excited to be back in a courtroom

because, to me,
what that represented was-- was hope.

It represented a, um, chance to me.

But I also didn't know,
like, what to expect.

[indistinct chatter]

The connection, I think, is overwhelming

between Mulligan, Acerra,
Robinson, and Brazil in this case.

Had we known at the time

that Acerra and Robinson
and Brazil and Mulligan

were all involved
in ripping off drug dealers

[stutters]
and instituting phony search warrants,

robbing people…

How could that not have made a difference

in terms of whether or not
that information got suppressed?

How could it not have?

And certainly,
if it didn't make a difference then,

it absolutely would've made a difference
in front of the jury.

That's the reason, judge, in a nutshell,
that we need a new trial

because you cannot trust the investigation

that was done by members
of this "best and brightest, uh, team"

that had their own ulterior motives
for doing what they did,

and most of what they did

was to make sure
that no shadow was cast upon them,

and their illegal activities
were kept secret.

And I would suggest that that alone

is enough to grant a new trial
in this case to Sean Ellis.

-Norman Zalkind, please.
-[bailiff] Please face the court

and raise your right hand.

Do you solemnly swear the evidence
that you should report

shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?

I do.

[Rosemary] Do you believe
you reviewed all of the discovery

that was provided by the Commonwealth?

Absolutely.

[Rosemary] I'm gonna focus your attention
on the Robert Martin information.

Did you have a copy
of these grand jury minutes

before you filed, um,
the motion for a new trial in 1998?

No.

[Rosemary]
Had you ever seen that connection

between Detective Mulligan
holding Mr. Martin against his will

in his car

while Acerra and Robinson robbed him?

We didn't have this.

We had some Globe articles
that talked in-- about something,

but we didn't have this report.

We always thought these were bad cops.

We always thought all of them were bad.
Those three cops were bad cops,

Acerra, Robinson and Mulligan,

but we didn't have material.

We didn't have any
of the criminality that was going on

between these three bad cops.

If I had this
during my examination of Robinson

in the-- in the trials of this,

I don't think we'd be here today.

[indistinct chatter]

-[bailiff] Judge Broker, can you hear me?
-Yes.

[Sean] I remember Phyllis Broker back
when the case first happened in the '90s.

I kind of thought that, you know,
she was going to try to do the right thing

because she was questioning
the identification.

She was questioning, uh, the evidence
that was being produced by the dirty cops.

And so when I seen her, um,
on the, you know, video,

I thought that she was going
to take that opportunity

to, like, clean her slate,
to level up moral wise

because there's a part of me that believed
that she had a problem with it back then.

Did you ask the Boston Police Department

to take Kenny Acerra or Walter Robinson
off of the Mulligan investigation?

I have a memory
of specifically Kenny Acerra, yes.

And why was that?

I had no use for him.

Why?

I thought he was incompetent.

Anything else?

I didn't want anybody incompetent
anywhere near any of my cases.

And why did you
think he was incompetent, Judge Broker?

I had seen his incompetence in the past.

In this case?

No.

So, there was a point in this case

where you had him
take a statement under oath

as to Rosa Sanchez, remember that?

I think so.

You remember why you asked,
um, the Boston Police Department

to have Detective Acerra
give a statement under oath?

I don't know what the motivation behind
it was. I don't have a memory of it.

But you remember
asking for a statement under oath

from Detective Acerra?

I don't have a particular memory of that,

but if you say that it's true,
I accept that.

Okay.

She did remember
taking Acerra off the task force,

but she didn't remember
that it was because of any misconduct

or suspicion of misconduct.

"Just because of his incompetence"
is how she put it.

And so she pulled Acerra from--
from the investigation,

and, uh, the union went wild.
The police union went wild.

And were they, in fact,
taken off the investigation,

Acerra and Robinson?

I don't think so.

And-- and do you remember whether or not

the, um, Boston Police Officers Union
representative

sent a letter
to the District Attorney's office

asking that you be
taken off the investigation?

Yes.

[Elaine]
The Police Union was all over her.

This guy named Tommy Montgomery
was the head of the union,

and he was criticizing her.

He called for her head.
He wanted Broker fired,

but she-- she survived,
and she rode it out,

and she remained on the case.

So, do you think your relationship
with the Boston police, in particular,

Kenny Acerra and Walter Robinson,
was strained the entire investigation?

I think it was a very difficult time.

And why is that?

A police officer had been killed.
There was, uh, an election.

My boss was standing for election.

There were strained relations
between our office and the Boston police.

And I think all of those
created the perfect storm.

Okay, great.

So, you had indicated as well

that you had reviewed a report
authored by Sergeant Detective Keeler,

and you indicated that,
to the best of your recollection,

you hadn't seen that document.

I'm quite certain
I never saw that document.

Let me see that.

[Rosemary] So, they've just handed me
documents I've never seen before.

Apparently, Mr. Linn ran over
and got them this morning

and didn't think
it was important to hand it to me

before I directly examined Mr. Duncan.

-So could I--
-Do you deny this, Mr. Linn?

What happened is

that we did not anticipate this--
this document would be relevant

until we heard the testimony this morning.

So, I'm at a tremendous loss, Mr. Linn,

to understand how this stuff
was just turned over this morning

in the middle of the hearing.

My-- my brief reading of the documents,

and there were several hundred pages,
um, that I looked through,

but these are documents
that were generated

by the Suffolk County
District Attorney's Office,

tape-recorded statements.

-In connection with this case?
-In connection with the search warrants

in West Roxbury, uh,
I believe for Acerra and Robinson,

that I've never seen before.

When?

This was on February 23rd, 1994.

I've never seen it before.

-And you just got it a few minutes ago?
-Right.

-Ten minutes ago.
-Yeah.

[Carol Ball sighs]

I can't believe we have to take a break
and get nothing done before lunch,

while material
is just getting turned over to her.

-So, how do we solve this problem?
-[Lin sighs] I-- I-- I--

This is not helping
the Commonwealth's credibility, Mr. Linn.

In my defense,

I want to say that we had some trouble
with [stutters] the scanning machine,

so I sent them in two batches.

It turns out that the Boston police
had stonewalled the trial lawyers

for 21 years,

and Rosemary after them,

and never would release those documents.

Rosemary got to review-- She suddenly got
I think 500 pages of internal documents

that had been withheld all those years.

This piecemeal discovery is just--

You know, they don't understand.

I don't think they comprehend
that someone's life is on the line here.

Every day that-- that someone
stays locked up in a prison cell

for a crime he didn't commit

is a day
that you shouldn't be able to sleep

as a prosecutor.

If there's even this much possibility
that that could be true.

So, what we found out
from the Anti-Corruption file

is that before Sean's first trial,
first trial--

The victim, John Mulligan,
had been accused,

along with Walter Robinson,
one of the lead investigators,

of robbing a drug dealer together in 1991.

The commissioner received a report

that both Robinson and Mulligan
had ripped off a drug dealer in Brighton,

two drug dealers actually, in Brighton.

They had been assigned
an Anti-Corruption investigator.

The investigator interviewed a witness
who was a business owner in Brighton

who gave them the information.

And one of the things that they had to do
after the interview is to--

As a police officer,
they had to sort of gauge,

is this guy credible,
is he crazy, is he… you know?

What is he?

And so, this police officer indicated
that he thought the witness was credible,

um, thought the information was credible,

um, and then
the investigation went nowhere.

Like, when I say nowhere,

there's not another piece of paper
in that file.

It's kind of like, "Oh, thanks,
put it over there in that pile,"

and that's what happened.

And so, they knew,
even before this whole thing happened,

before that first trial,

that there was a problem
with Mulligan and-- and, um, Robinson.

And to Rosemary's point,

still Robinson, Walter Robinson,
was put on the Mulligan task force

and made an instrumental role [stutters]
in the investigation of the case.

And when you look at the evidence
that was marshaled against Sean,

they had a hand in
just about every piece of it.

Um, so, clearly,

the Boston Police Department
knew he was involved,

and so, when there is
an anti-corruption investigation going on,

it gets handled at the highest level.

You're dealing at the top echelon,
commissioner, you know,

all of those, like, higher-ups.

Um, they have access
to all of this anti-corruption stuff.

They had to have known, uh,
that these drug rip-offs were happening

because they were being investigated
by anti-crime,

and then you hide that

from a man who's serving a sentence
for a crime he didn't commit

for 22 years?

How do you sleep at night?

How do you look yourself in the mirror
and say, "Hey, I'm good"?

Like, I just can't.

I can't even imagine that.

Mulligan happened about 18 months
prior to Detective Mulligan's homicide.

And can you tell me whether or not,
before Sean's first trial,

if you had any information

that Detective Mulligan
and Detective Robinson

were being investigated
by the Boston Police Department

for robbing a drug dealer in Brighton?

No, [stutters] I didn't have that.

This would have been
the most dynamite material of all

because, like I said, Rosa Sanchez
was such a critical witness of this

and the relationship
between Robinson, Acerra, and Mulligan

was-- was such a focus of
[stutters] our examination.

It just would have been an--

[stuttering]

This would be incredible,
[stutters] this information.

[Rosemary] I had been doing a FOIA request
in a completely different case.

I was actually looking for information
on a detective by the name of Foley.

[Elaine Murphy] Detective George Foley
was actually on the Mulligan task force,

and it was a few days after the murder
that he came forward,

and said, you know,
"I got a tip from Ray Armstead Junior,

a corrections officer in Boston,

that his father, Ray Armstead Senior,
who's a police officer in Boston,

had a beef against Mulligan."

The story was that Detective Armstead
had a young daughter,

that Detective Mulligan
was screwing around with his daughter.

[Jillese McDonough]
She was about 13 or 14 at the time,

which goes along
with some of the information

that Mulligan was messing
with younger girls.

Ray Armstead Junior's claim
was that his dad had said,

"Mulligan's going to be found
shot between the eyes

in front of Walgreens."

"We've cased the place.
We know he sleeps there."

"We've shaken the car.
He doesn't wake up."

And so, it's very interesting
that a month later,

Mulligan was shot between the eyes
in front of Walgreens.

[gun firing]

[Rosemary] Now we know all the players,

and now we're trying
to figure out what the story is.

And I remember making a phone call
to the District Attorney's office,

saying, like, "Something's up here,"
like, "What's going on?"

And they were like, "Pff."

We're asking, "Give me every document
you have regarding this Foley interview,"

and there's none.
[stutters] There's nothing there.

And so one of the things that struck me
is A, we didn't get the Foley report

and B, why is there no follow-up
to the Foley report?

Your Honor, good morning.
Good afternoon, I should say.

My name is Daniel Keeler.

That's spelled K-E-E-L-E-R.

I'm a Sergeant Detective
with the Boston Police Department.

Were you part of the 50-man task force

that was investigating the homicide
of Detective Mulligan?

I was.

And who asked you
to become part of that task force?

I was assigned to homicide at the time.
I was a backup team.

I responded that night to the hospital.

[indistinct police chatter over radio]

[Elaine] Keeler, at one time,
was known as "Mr. Homicide" in Boston

because of his prowess as an investigator.

Evidently,
he was a very effective investigator

and did a lot of good work
for the department,

but it was a mixed bag
because he also fudged evidence

and was found
to have fudged evidence in some cases.

Detective Keeler, Detective Brazil, um…

Detective Acerra, Detective Robinson,

all of those detectives
were involved in the case,

um, and all of them,
um, had a history of-- of wrongdoing.

[Rosemary] Now, Detective Keeler
thinks everyone he investigates is guilty.

Um, and he and I go back a long way.

Um, he-- he used to be Mr. Homicide,

and he's not Mr. Homicide anymore.

Uh, and it's because he lied
in a case that I had him on,

and we caught him in that lie.

Do you remember Detective Foley indicating

that Armstead Junior had said
that his dad has a beef with Mulligan?

"That he, Mulligan,
won't leave my 14-year-old sister alone."

-"He's going to kill him."
-Yes.

"They have checked on him at Walgreens."

"He sleeps in the car."

"They have shaken his car."

"You're gonna read about it in the paper,
shot between the eyes at Walgreens."

Is that what Detective Foley reported
to you that Armstead Junior said?

-Yes.
-[Rosemary] Okay.

Um, and in fact, in your report,

Uh, you indicated that Detective Mulligan

would be found
shot between the eyes, uh, at Walgreens.

Detective Mulligan
was shot between the eyes, wasn't he?

He had multiple wounds to his face
inflicted by your client.

I'm not sure they were between--

You don't know
they were inflicted by my client.

-You don't know anything. Were you there?
-In this investigation, forensically,

interviews with witnesses,

it became clear from co-defendants

that that man sitting at the table there,
Sean Ellis,

was responsible
for the murder of John Mulligan.

[Rosemary] Were you there that night,
Detective Keeler?

I was there.
I examined Detective Mulligan.

-Were you there when the shots were fired?
-No, but I--

[Rosemary] So, you have no idea
who fired those shots, do you?

I have a very good idea
who fired those shots.

-[Rosemary] You weren't there, were you?
-No, ma'am.

[Rosemary] Okay, so you have no idea
what happened because you weren't there.

[Rosemary] You only know
what was reported to you after the fact.

Because it did say that you indicated
that you confronted Foley

and indicated that he was lying,

and Foley insisted
he was telling the truth.

Yes.

You didn't follow up on that,
is that fair to say?

Um…

Just yes or no, sir.
Did you follow up on it?

It's not fair to say that. It's--

Did you follow up on it, yes or no?

-It's not fair--
-Did you follow up on it, yes or no?

I would have to say to you

that I was very skeptical
of what Detective Foley said to me

in the beginning.

I viewed him as unstable,

so I relieved Detective Foley
of his weapon that night.

-Detective Foley had a mental breakdown.
-[Rosemary] Are you a doctor, sir?

Excuse me, ma'am,
would you please let me finish?

-I'm asking if you're a doctor.
-Please let me finish.

-[Ball] Okay.
-[Rosemary] Are you a doctor, sir?

-[Carol Ball] Come on, you two.
-Thank you, Your Honor.

Why do I think they did that?
I think they were trying

to cover their ass. They didn't want
a report out that said a cop did this.

A cop can't kill a cop.

Were you aware, sir,
in the context of your investigation,

that at least one person
had mentioned Armstead

other than Foley?

-Were you aware of that?
-No.

Okay, and were you subsequently aware--
written exhibit 27,

that there was a tip
that used the name Armstead?

Very early on in the investigation,
on 9/26/93.

There was a tip
that also mentioned the name Armstead.

-[Keeler] I'm not aware.
-Okay.

[Rosemary] Now, you were involved
in this 50-man task force,

and you didn't realize
there were two places,

other than Foley,
that mention the name Armstead.

Is that fair to say?

Yes, ma'am.

Then no further questions.

-Okay. Thank you very much.
-Thank you, Your Honor.

[Ball] Okay.

[Ball] All right.

[Rosemary] Your Honor,
we're asking that you allow

Mr. Ellis a motion for a new trial,

um, for several reasons.

I think it was clear
from both Duncan and Zalkind's testimony

that they indicated they did not receive
the bulk of the information

that tied Mulligan into the corruption of
Acerra, Robinson, and Brazil on this case.

If the issue is "Did he get a fair trial?"
I don't think there's any question,

based on the evidence
that we have discovered here,

as to the fact
that he did not get a fair trial.

That the trial today would look
a lot different than it did back then,

and to come up to the stand
and say we had the information,

we had the opportunity, we had--

We did not have the connection.
That was the reason we were here.

We didn't have that connection.

We didn't have the opportunity to get
in front of the jury. We should've,

and that's what resulted
in the wrongful conviction of Sean Ellis.

And I ask you
to allow his motion for a new trial.

At that point,
you have advocated all you can,

um, and all you can do is wait,
and the wait kills you.

And what I told Sean is, "Listen,
you just gotta hunker down and wait."

"Like, this is-- this is what it is."

"This is-- this is the goal line
that we have to get across,

and there's nothing more
either of us can do at this point,

so we just have to wait."

[suspenseful music playing]

[Sean]
We've done the best that we could do.

We came, and we presented
the argument that we want to present,

and now the rest is up to Judge Ball.

[door closes]

[indistinct chatter]

[dramatic theme music playing]