"I think if there was anyone who was afterpublicity, who was going to get some kind ofmessage out, it was Walsh," he said.
Evers said in an interview Thursday that hisexhibit was intended to raise public awareness ofgender issues.
"The exhibit, as I pointed out in the past,deals with issues of gender [and] sexual identityand incorporates elements that are anatomicallyexplicit, but there's nothing lewd about them," hesaid then.
Mary Alice Monagle, an employee at theCambridge traffic office located in the City HallAnnex in which the exhibit was displayed,testified on Walsh's behalf in the trial that theexhibit was "sexually offensive."
"I was shocked and offended by the exhibit,"she said.
After the verdict was announced, she applaudedit as the correct decision.
"I think the verdict was the only right one,"said Monagle. "I do think it was a waste oftaxpayers' money that it had gone that far. It wasreally a sin. Obviously the district attorney'soffice should take a look at their priorities."
Middlesex Assistant District Attorney Alex S.Moffat had attempted in the trial to portray Walshas a man who "maliciously, intentionallydestroyed" Evers' artwork.
But Rafferty said in the trial that Walsh hadacted not out of malicious intent, but out of theinterests of his constituents, who objected to theexhibit's "pornographic" nature.
When Walsh testified in the trial, he claimedthat he acted out of civic responsibility.
"I was very disturbed that the city had allowedthis to happen with nobody being informed," hesaid. "I didn't like the artwork."
But Evers disputed the claim in an interviewlate last night. "My feeling was that it was notsomething he did to protect the citizens ofCambridge at all," he said. "But it's somethingthat's very hard to prove beyond a reasonabledoubt."
City Councillor Sheila T. Russell said she wasglad her former colleague was acquitted, andcalled the art exhibit "junk."
"It was terrible. I went down and looked atit...I was offended," she said.
Evers said that the decision would not affecthis art in the future.
"I think my art has never been about trying toshock people...so I don't think that this decisionis going to influence my art to be morecontroversial or less controversial. Mymotivations for my artwork lie somewhere else,"said Evers.
Despite being found not guilty of maliciousdestruction, Walsh is not through with the justicesystem.
He is in the process of appealing a convictionin March, 1994 on 41 counts of bank fraud,conspiracy and making false statements. He wasremoved from the City Council in November afterbeing sentenced to 18 months in prison and twoyears' probation, as mandated by Massachusettsstate law.
This story was complied with AssociatedPress wire dispatches.