Wilkerson denies lying in testimony on nephew

Dianne Wilkerson could face disciplinary action from Bar Counsel.

State Senator Dianne Wilkerson, who is waging a write-in campaign to retain the seat she has held for 15 years, denied yesterday that she lied under oath at a 2005 court hearing, as alleged by a state office that investigates complaints against lawyers.

In a bare-bones response to a recent petition for discipline by the Office of the Bar Counsel, the Boston senator stood by her testimony that she was present at a city police station when two homicide detectives interviewed her nephew, Isaac Wilkerson, about the 1994 stabbing death of Hazel Mack.

Another nephew, Jermaine Berry, was convicted of manslaughter in the case. But Wilkerson later testified, as part of Berry's unsuccessful motion for a new trial, that Isaac Wilkerson implicated himself during the interrogation by two detectives who repeatedly turned a tape recorder off and on.

Her testimony was challenged by the two detectives and prompted the Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society to lodge a complaint with the Bar Counsel. On Oct. 3, the Bar Counsel filed a peti tion for discipline that accused Wilkerson of violating the rules of conduct for lawyers by lying under oath at the hearing.

The petition for discipline said that Wilkerson, who joined the bar in 1981 but has not practiced in a decade, gave "intentionally false, misleading, and deceptive testimony" when she said in Suffolk Superior Court that she was present at the interview of Isaac Wilkerson.

She also lied, the complaint said, when she testified that the detectives turned a tape recorder off and on during the interview. The Bar Counsel said she also lied to the office about both matters in a 2006 letter and in testimony on Feb. 29 this year.

Yesterday, Wilkerson's lawyer, Max D. Stern, filed a three-page answer that consisted largely of one-word responses, either denying or acknowledging the veracity of the numbered paragraphs in the petition for discipline. In an interview, he then accused the Bar Counsel of bringing the disciplinary case because Wilkerson is a prominent politician.

"I don't accuse Bar Counsel of having a political agenda," Stern said. "But I do think that if Dianne Wilkerson were not a hot potato because of her status as a senator, there would have been a better vetting job of this case and there wouldn't have been a charge. She's a major politician, and nobody wants to even take the risk of being accused of favoring a politician."

Constance V. Vecchione, the chief Bar Counsel, declined to comment because the matter is pending.

Wilkerson, who lost the Democratic primary to Sonia Chang-Diaz last month, has denied requests to be interviewed. But Stern said she had no reason to make up that she was present when Detectives Herbert Spellman and Dennis Harris interviewed Isaac Wilkerson, nor to fabricate an allegation that could have helped one nephew by incriminating the other.

The Rev. Ernest Branch, an associate and onetime driver of the senator's, backed her account in an interview with the Globe on Oct. 16 and said he was present with her in the interrogation room. Branch gave that same account at the 2005 hearing.

"Whatever I said during the time is the same story I stick to now," he said during the recent interview. He also said he had not been interviewed by the Bar Counsel, which prompted Stern to question the thoroughness of the inquiry.

Detective Jack Parlon, former president of the Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society, said Wilkerson has benefited from her status as a senator and that a less prominent person might have been charged with perjury.

He also disputed that the disciplinary case will boil down to the word of the two detectives against the word of Wilkerson and Branch. Wilkerson is so well-known that other police officers would have seen her enter the interrogation room but none are backing her account, he said.

"Everybody in the building would have known she was there," he said.

The Board of Bar Overseers, which looks into complaints against lawyers, is expected to appoint a hearing officer to examine the allegations and recommend discipline, if warranted. Sanctions issued by the board range from a private admonition to disbarment.

As a result of her primary loss, Wilkerson is now waging a write-in campaign against Chang-Diaz, a former policy analyst from Jamaica Plain. When candidates' names are not printed on ballots, they can mount campaigns to persuade voters to write their names in.

Yesterday, the Chang-Diaz campaign wrote to the office of Secretary of State William F. Galvin, asking him to investigate alleged violations of state campaign laws by Wilkerson supporters. The alleged abuses included encouraging voters to request absentee ballots to avoid long lines and cold weather.

Wilkerson's campaign manager, Boyce Slayman, said an "aggressive effort" was mounted to register voters and to make sure those who could not make it to the polls on Election Day received absentee ballots.

Donovan Slack of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Jonathan Saltzman can be reached at jsaltzman@globe.com