Hey, there! Log in / Register

No more legal cloud over Sean Ellis

A Suffolk Superior Court judge today effectively threw out the illegal-gun charge that was the last remaining charge against Sean Ellis for the shooting death of BPD Det. John Mulligan in a Roslindale parking lot in 1993.

Technically, Suffolk Superior Court Judge Robert Ullman agreed to Ellis's request for a new trial on the charge, after which the Suffolk County District Attorney's office would file a formal decision to not go ahead with the case.

The DA's office had earlier decided, in 2018, not to try Ellis for what would have been the fourth time for Mulligan's murder outside the American Legion Highway Walgreens, after Ellis's attorney had discovered evidence that might have implicated an investigating detective as part of a corrupt ring of cops who included Mulligan, and after Ellis had spent 22 years in prison.

In a statement, current DA Rachael Rollins said:

Today marks the end of a long and troubling chapter in Boston’s history. A tragedy on September 26, 1993 has inextricably tied two families together. The murder of Boston Police Detective John James Mulligan reverberated around our city and over the last few decades this case has had a complicated history. Corruption and deceit were exposed, as were complicity and willful indifference to constitutionally mandated protections. Through it all, the Mulligan family suffered. They asked for none of this. They knew and loved John, not as a BPD Detective, but as a brother, uncle, father, and son. Today brings no solace for them. Instead, it exposes old wounds that will now require even more time to heal.

The Ellis family has suffered in this process as well. Although their loved one is alive, he lost 22 years of his life. As Judge Robert Ullman found today, ‘Justice was not done’ in this case.

We need to continue to work together as law enforcement partners to make sure the criminal and unconstitutional behavior that infected every part of the investigation into Detective Mulligan’s death, can never happen again.




“ In court papers, Rollins acknowledged enough evidence existed to convict Ellis of the gun charges. But because her predecessor, Ralph C. Martin II, and Boston police so mishandled the investigation, she said, she could not let any of Ellis’s convictions stand.”

So basically, yes he could have been convicted of the gun charges. Which means yes he was involved.

Rollins is gutless.

Voting closed 33

It's weird that for people like you the real problem is Rachael Rollins, a Black district attorney elected in 2018, and not fatally compromised law enforcement that either had something to do with the murder of one of their own in 1993, or was so corrupt that they had to destroy the investigation and railroad a suspect to avoid punishment for their own crimes.

Yet you call Rollins "gutless" for not wanting to pursue a 1993 gun charge on someone who already served 22 years in prison because of those corrupt cops. Like I said, weird.

Voting closed 67

How did Ellis' GF's prints get on the magazine to that gun?

Why were there two witnesses (Headen & Chisholm) that stated how the gun got from her apartment and were buried in that field? Why were these two witnesses never mentioned in the documentary?

Why did Patterson park on that side street near the Walgreen's?

Why did Patterson change the appearance of the brown VW, including removing the tint, and the bra on the front hood?

Scappichio claimed that the flaw in the case was that at every turn, one of the 3 tainted detectives was involved, yet that is actually untrue, the VW was not found by any of them.

Why did Patterson confess to Det Harris?

In Trial 4, why did Ellis never give his account of what actually happened that night?

Did you know that one of the many tips that were supposedly not handed over to the defense was one that stated that Mulligan robbed Ellis' cousin, and said if she wanted the stuff back to tell her BF to come get it?

Did you also know that NONE of the allegations of Mulligan robbing dealers, and prostitutes were ever actually proven? They were all rumors. That one incident where he was noted as being with Robinson and Acerra, he was never in the apartment when the two robbed the dealer. There was another district detective present at that incident, and he was never considered dirty or connected to Robinson and Acerra.

why did Trial 4 producers interview other detectives, and then not show that footage, and instead claim that they declined to be interviewed?

Lastly, Ralph Martin initially offered Patterson a plea deal, and he was set to testify that Ellis did the shooting. He only pulled back the offer after learning that Patterson's print was on the door of Mulligan's car. Had he kept the initial deal, Ellis would still be in prison.

Why is it that it was acceptable for Rollins to go on a live event with Scappichio and Ellis, a couple of months ago, while her own team was still investigating what to do with the appeal?

Voting closed 16

why are you choking on that boot? don't you know you can just lick it like the rest of the cop apologists?

Voting closed 16

I don't think the endless sealioning of a uhub Jean Pirro is going to change the court's ruling, though.

This isn't about Rachael Rollins, Mr. Fist o' Satan, as much as you want it to be.

Voting closed 13

that might have been answered properly in court if the cops and prosecutors were doing their jobs correctly to begin with.

Voting closed 19

"Enough evidence" ≠ convicting beyond a reasonable doubt, 20+ years after the crime, with evidence poisoned by police misconduct. Our justice system is supposed to be fair to all, especially those accused of crimes. 22 years in prison for gun charges that could still go forward, from a case that was grossly mishandled at the time, he's certainly served a lengthy sentence for crimes he's no longer convicted of.

By the way, if you are going to use quotations from other news sources that were not linked to in the article here, please provide the citation so the rest of us know where it is coming from. I'll do the work for you this one time: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/05/04/metro/judge-throws-out-remaining-...

Voting closed 29

"In court papers, Rollins acknowledged enough evidence existed to convict Ellis of the gun charges"


That means that Rollins felt that she could have still convicted Ellis on the gun charges. In her mind, she felt that there was enough evidence to convict him of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

As for claims that the whole thing was tainted, I am not buying it. The witness gives you the brown VW. Another person finds the brown VW, that gives you Patterson. Patterson then gives you Ellis. The guns are found and they have the GF's prints on them.

It is just that simple.

If you want to claim that Ellis was railroaded, then you have to explain how it was that they found the guns, and planted the GF's prints. That is absurd to think that happened. Why go to the bother of solving the damn things, in the quickest fashion and then turn around and frame someone? It just does not work.

If you want to say that the Mulligan corruption evidence mattered, there are two issues. One, the homicide detectives and DA would never have known about IAD files, so they were not hiding anything. Two, again as the court initially ruled, how does that get you past the GF's prints? how does it get you past Patterson's brown VW being parked on a side street near by?

If you want to say Ellis spent 22 years for the gun and that alone means he should not face another trial, then you are acknowledging that the gun conviction was clean (it was). Then the reason to fight the appeal is so that it still stands, for the sake of the victim's family, and so that the city does not get sued. It also would also make sense to fight for the sake of upholding the damn facts and the truth.

I would love it if Rollins handed over all of the memos on this case that were produced by her office and by the initial investigation. Let's have some transparency and accountability.

But I bet you anything she won't be doing that. Why? Because it will show that her own people found that the facts of the case still held that he was guilty.

Voting closed 15

The argument you are making here is for the cops and prosecutors not fucking up the investigation and prosecution, but that ship sailed a long time ago. It will never be a "clean" conviction, because of their actions, on our behalf.

Voting closed 14

I don't agree with your assertion about the DA but regardless Ellis served 20+ years already so he's paid his debt even if he was guilty on a gun possession charge. Let it go. EHe didn't kill Mulligan and BPD was corrupt as hell then (and still is to a large extent).

Voting closed 16

they threatened to jam up his uncle's parole if he didn't say Sean Ellis had the gun.

I have zero faith he ever had that gun. They just said that. It was so easy to do.

Voting closed 11

He doesn't deserve to have a memorial dedicated to his history of false arrests earning him the nickname 'Plain view' outside the West Roxbury police station.

Voting closed 17

Replying to the first comment: Is 22 years enough? Who is serving time for the murder of Mulligan? How many years should they get?

Voting closed 25

served 11 years for Manslaughter.

Voting closed 9