The gallery director refused to say whether he believes Walsh is guilty.

Controversy

The fallout over the art exhibit and Walsh'sactions has continued, even though it is half ayear after the incident.

Walsh was convicted in March 1994 on 41 federalcounts of bank fraud, conspiracy and making falsestatements. But the controversial fiveterm citycouncillor refused to resign his seat, and wasonly removed from office in November after hissentencing, as mandated by Massachusetts statelaw.

Walsh was sentenced in November to 18 months inprison and two years' probation, but the sentencewas stayed pending his appeal.

If convicted in the arts case, he could faceadditional jail or probation time.

But Walsh said he would remove the dildos againif he had to.

"I take my stands and I fight my battles,whether it be rent control or the U.S. Attorney'soffice or this situation," he said, referring tohis bankfraud trial and rent control, of whichWalsh was one of the most outspoken opponents. "IfI believe I'm right I play all the way."

The former councillor disputed both the chargesand the extent of the damage to the exhibit.

"If you walk into somebody's house and removedildos from their house, that's a crime," he said."I had the power to look after the constituents ofthe city. This was something that should not havebeen on city property."

Walsh added that the dildos--which Walsh hadripped when tearing them from the artwork--cost$19 and $25 each and that no other damage wascaused.

Walsh said the case is a waste of taxpayers'money. "The problem with law enforcement today isthat instead of using those forces to work for thepeople, they use them for catchy, politicalcauses," he said.

Walsh's attorney said Evers was exploiting thecase to advance his personal career as an artist.

"Mr. Evers is looking to improve his standingwithin the arts community," said James J.Rafferty, a former School Committee member who isrepresenting Walsh. "It's become needlesslysensationalistic and is an absolute waste ofgovernment resources."

Rafferty has subpoenaed several City Hall Annexemployees who complained about the exhibit andCity Manager Robert W. Healy.

The controversy over the use of Gallery 57 hasalso continued. Use of the space is regulated bythe Cambridge Arts Council, which selectsthree-member juries from the community, which inturn pick which artists exhibit their work.