Ignoble day for Finneran

The outcome of the case may hinge on mountainous statistical analysis of voter trends, city population, voting age population, registered voter population, and who knows what else.

The politics are less mysterious. When lawmakers redrew their legislative districts in 2001, as they are required to do every 10 years, the number of districts in which people of color comprise the majority of voters fell from six to five. This despite the increase in minority population, especially in the city of Boston.

As Finneran testifies, there will be an unseen presence in the courtroom: former state representative Kevin W. Fitzgerald, who until last year represented Mission Hill and parts of Roxbury and Jamaica Plain.

It was Fitzgerald's indecision about seeking reelection that led lawmakers to scrap a map that would have increased the number of minority districts and kept everyone out of the courtroom. Despite reasonable claims that the representation of people of color did not top Finneran's list of concerns, the scheme lawmakers eventually passed was, at heart, an Incumbent Protection Act. When Fitzgerald's district, which was 54 percent minority, had to be kept intact, whatever good intentions the redistricting committee began with went up in smoke.

That is too bad for many reasons, but here's one Finneran might not be asked to testify about. Kevin Fitzgerald wasn't remotely worthy of the protection he got.

Fitzgerald, a genial old-school pol, was once a highly regarded liberal stalwart in the House -- spoken of as a potential speaker, or even mayor. But he is best known for relieving Mary Guzelian, a bag lady he had befriended, of $200,000 in 1991.

Guzelian, a sometimes homeless woman of dubious mental health, sought Fitzgerald's help on a housing matter in 1981. She was befriended by Fitzgerald and his top aide, and when she died, she left them $400,000 in her will. Ultimately, a Norfolk County probate judge invalidated the will, finding that Guzelian didn't know what she was doing and had been taken advantage of. The State Ethics Commission ruled that taking the money had constituted a conflict of interest, and Fitzgerald resigned his leadership post, after a committee recommended that he be stripped of it.

He had a modest renaissance in the House after backing Finneran for speaker in 1996, meaning that his office wasn't in the basement any more. But his career never recovered.

At various times last year, Fitzgerald was leaving office, seeking reelection, and then leaving for sure. When he finally made up his mind to leave, Finneran gave him a job as House sergeant-at-arms, a largely ceremonial post -- but one with control over Beacon Hill court officers. By then, though, the map that would have added a minority district had been scrapped in favor of the one that led to a federal suit.

Not everyone believes lawmakers want to win this case. In this view, losing could mean another chance to draw the map. Judges would have the option of drawing their own map, or ordering the Legislature to do it with all the rich potential for mischief that implies. The original map was designed to punish some of Finneran's political enemies by forcing them to run against one another, a notion that could reemerge.

But that's down the road, maybe. Tomorrow, Finneran will take the stand and try to persuade a skeptical courtroom that he did not know this scheme hurt minority voters, that he didn't intend for it to, that it all came as a big surprise. It will not be an especially noble moment. Somewhere in the back of his mind, he may wonder if Fitzy was really worth it.

Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at walker@globe.com.