James ‘Whitey’ Bulger had been convicted on 31 counts last year, including costs associated with his involvement in 11 murders. That was enough to make the former mastermind that is criminal FBI informant two consecutive life terms in prison and a cell at the United States Penitentiary in Tucson, Arizona.

But if anyone thought that Bulger was going down without having a fight, he’s intending to show them to be incorrect.

Attorneys for Bulger are asking a federal appeals court to overturn their conviction for playing those 11 murders, arguing that the judge in the event ‘constitutionally deprived Mr. Bulger of his right to present an effective protection.’

That argument is laid out in a 201-page filing that had been sent to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit by attorneys Hank Brennan and James Budreau.

Bulger Wanted to Testify

According to attorneys, Bulger desired to take the stand in his very own protection during the trial. But, US District Judge Denise Casper had barred Bulger from telling the jury he had been guaranteed immunity from all crimes by a now-dead prosecutor that is federal.

‘The court ruled that the defense could maybe not raise the immunity defense at trial in any form, including the defendant’s very own testimony at test,’ Bulger’s appropriate team penned. ‘This error effected the fairness that is fundamental of Bulger’s trial and his convictions should be automatically reversed as a result.’

Bulger, that is now 84 years old, planned to inform jurors that prosecutor Jeremiah T. O’Sullivan had guaranteed him complete immunity in exchange for Bulger’s vow to guard ‘his life.’ But Judge Casper would not allow that defense, saying that Bulger had no documentation to support his claims, and that even if such an agreement had taken spot, O’Sullivan had no authority to offer such a promise.

The defense in turn argued that as the mind of the brand New England Organized Crime Strike Force, O’Sullivan could indeed make such a deal.

With no cap ability to bring up this defense, attorneys say that Bulger was left with no explanation to testify in their own defense at last summer’s trial.

Prosecutors Dispute Claims

Prosecutors, however, tell yet another story about exactly what occurred during the sensational trial. According to former assistant US attorney Brian T. Kelly, several judges had given Bulger the opportunity to provide an immunity defense ahead of the trial it self, but he had made the tactical decision to decline that opportunity.

‘no license was had by him to destroy or just about any immunity agreement, and he repeatedly failed to take the chance to present it,’ Kelly said.

Instead, prosecutors claim, Bulger likely didn’t take the stand to avoid a cross-examination in which he would have experienced to answer endless questions about his roles in crimes, including the 19 murders he had been accused of participating in.

Ultimately, the jury found that Bulger participated in 11 murders, while finding that prosecutors had failed to provide enough evidence to convict him on seven other people. On the count that is final which involved the murder of Debra Davis in 1981, the jury was not able to achieve a verdict.

Bulger’s lawyers defended their client by attempting to refute much of what appeared in Bulger’s FBI informant file, which alleged which he served as an informant from 1975 to 1990. In their appeal, the lawyers say that Bulger desired to testify to ‘the systemic corruption that existed into the federal government during the 1970s through 1990s and the political and institutional motivations that led Jeremiah O’Sullivan while the Strike Force to provide immunity to James Bulger.’