NYT covers for Bill Delahunt; Boston Herald… won’t.

First, the NYT (via AoSHQ).  While discussing the latest insanity* coming from Amy Bishop (a ‘herpes bomb,’ apparently), the Times manages to discuss Bishop’s shooting of her brother without:

• Mentioning just what political circles the Bishops were active in;
• Mentioning just who the prosecutor was that dropped the charges; and
• Mentioning just where that prosecutor is now.

The answers are, of course: Democratic political circles; William Delahunt; and representing the MA-10 Congressional district.  It’s a shame that the Times decided that such information was superfluous to requirements, but it’s not like who-what-when-where-why is all that important, surely?

Meanwhile, the Boston Herald is gearing up for a full-court press on Delahunt:

Between the mid 60’s and 1985, [convicted art thief Myles] Connor spent 11 years in jail.  He was convicted of ordering the murder of two Quincy women, after Connor gave Delahunt information on locating their bodies.

So what happened when Connor was tried for the double murders?  Guess who testified on his behalf?  District Attorney Bill Delahunt.  I am not joking.  Instead of prosecuting him, Delahunt released Connor and testified on behalf of this career criminal.    The deal stunk so bad that the U.S. Attorney’s office requested an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the killer’s release.

At the trial Delahunt said that he didn’t think that Connor was involved in the killings even though Connor had lead Delahunt to the bodies.

Italics mine, although to be completely fair this is from the Boston Herald’s blog section, not its print edition; and that the details are a little murky, there.  Nonetheless, it is eminently fair to say that questions have now been raised on what the heck Bill Delahunt was up to as a district attorney…

Moe Lane

*Non-professional assessment; I suspect that the woman will be judged competent enough to stand trial.

Crossposted to RedState.