THE BLACK HAND FORUM

by **Frank** » Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:59 pm

Also being consistent to the Harry Knuckles school of thought that Funzie was the boss, the real boss. Its possible that Lombardo was a powerful capo that was viewed.by some as being at least as powerful as Tieri. Maybe Tieri asked for Lombardos advise alot and this was misconstrued. On Salerno was it ever confirmed that he was ever consiglieri?

by **Frank** » Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:29 pm

I guess we all agree on the Genovese administration after Funzie. One thing I find confusing about Cafaro is his statement that Lombardo had been acting way back in the Catena days.

by **Frank** » Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:19 pm

Pussy Russo also stated Lombardo was the real boss.

by **SonnyBlackstein** » Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:17 am

I would disagree that front = acting.

Front is a lie. This is our boss. When they are not. They may have no capacity at all but are diversionary for LE. Poor example but Uncle Junior, Sopranos.
Acting is on behalf of ie If an official is incapacitated (health/imprisonment) the acting carries out his duties within certain parameters.

One may have capacity/authority whilst the other may not.

I think there is a discernable difference.

by **Wiseguy** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:04 pm

To complicate things further, let's not forget Salerno was caught on tape saying "Benny" and "that guy" put him in place to do a job and if they didn't like it they could have it back. "Benny" was Lombardo and "that guy" was Gigante. This was after Chin had taken over as the official boss and Fat Tony was the acting boss. Even at that point, Benny Squint apparently still wielded a lot of influence.

by **cesare borgia** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 8:08 pm

Yeah, but the FBI didn't seem to have any problem with Cafaro's testimony either since it's pretty much formed the basis of the believed Genovese leadership timeline post Genovese, pre Gigante(whether the timeline is accurate is another matter.),and I don't think the FBI or journalists in modern times have called his claims into dispute either. My doubts about Cafaro are the claims he makes about the leadership in the 60s and before he was made, things he would of been too low ranked to be accurate about.

My main hang up on Lonardo's testimony is Salerno as boss and Gigante as consigliere, which could of been the case for a few months in '81 (though usually he's believed to have been underboss) but by '84 (when Lonardo flipped) Gigante would have been established as boss. If Lonardo was up to date on the inner workings he would have knew this right?.

by **eboli** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:26 pm

cesare borgia wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 3:08 pm Front boss, acting boss, they seem to have the same roles and responsibilities(attending meetings, relaying orders ,taking LE pressure, ect)no? I mean what is the role acting boss if the real boss if the real boss is still on the streets? I guess acting boss implies more power and autonomy, while front boss implies he's just a stooge but it seems like semantics argument

Also Lonardo's info seems pretty iffy too. He refers to Gigante as a consigliere and Salerno as the boss and Lombardo as an advisor in the early 80s, and it seems like Salerno is the only high ranking member he met with frequently with so how reliable can he be on the inner workings?

The FBI considered Lonardo very reliable. The Genovese represented Cleveland before the Commission, and the Cleveland family administration was in tune with the inner workings of the Genovese family's administration ever since Scalish took over. Genovese crime family soldier George Barone also confirmed that Fat Tony was acting boss in the late 1970s, and he was very close with him. Barone was Salerno's 'personal hitman' and knew him longer than Fish did.

Now, if you really want to go into the rabbit hole with the whole Tieri/Lombardo business, there were a few memos from the late 1970s based on information provided by NYPD and FBI sources, which advised that Lombardo deferred to Tieri and was his acting boss in 1979.

43524.jpg

by **cesare borgia** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 3:08 pm

Front boss, acting boss, they seem to have the same roles and responsibilities(attending meetings, relaying orders ,taking LE pressure, ect)no? I mean what is the role acting boss if the real boss if the real boss is still on the streets? I guess acting boss implies more power and autonomy, while front boss implies he's just a stooge but it seems like semantics argument

Also Lonardo's info seems pretty iffy too. He refers to Gigante as a consigliere and Salerno as the boss and Lombardo as an advisor in the early 80s, and it seems like Salerno is the only high ranking member he met with frequently with so how reliable can he be on the inner workings?

by **TonyBombassolo** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:14 pm

eboli wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:11 pm
cesare borgia wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 12:49 pm Yes, but Cafaro's assertion that Salerno was a front boss for Gigante is taken as fact ,so why is his statement that Lombardo was boss taken as East Harlem bias but his view of Salerno is considered accurate ?
Front boss = acting boss. It's a term Cafaro made up for some reason. Salerno was the family's acting boss. In such a capacity, he attended commission meetings. Cafaro's claim that Salerno acted for Gigante is a fact because other Genovese informants confirmed his info, while nobody confirmed it for Lombardo's alleged role as the boss in the 1970s. Quite the opposite - major informants like Angelo Lonardo dismissed Cafaro's info completely. At the time, Lonardo attended high-level Cosa Nostra meetings as Cleveland's underboss. He dealt with the Genovese top brass directly.

52453.jpg

This is the kind of quality post that makes me like this forum already.

by **eboli** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:11 pm

cesare borgia wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 12:49 pm Yes, but Cafaro's assertion that Salerno was a front boss for Gigante is taken as fact ,so why is his statement that Lombardo was boss taken as East Harlem bias but his view of Salerno is considered accurate ?

Front boss = acting boss. It's a term Cafaro made up for some reason. Salerno was the family's acting boss. In such a capacity, he attended commission meetings. Cafaro's claim that Salerno acted for Gigante is a fact because other Genovese informants confirmed his info, while nobody confirmed it for Lombardo's alleged role as the boss in the 1970s. Quite the opposite - major informants like Angelo Lonardo dismissed Cafaro's info completely. At the time, Lonardo attended high-level Cosa Nostra meetings as Cleveland's underboss. He dealt with the Genovese top brass directly.

52453.jpg

by **TonyBombassolo** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:10 pm

cesare borgia wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 12:49 pm Yes, but Cafaro's assertion that Salerno was a front boss for Gigante is taken as fact, so why is his statement that Lombardo was boss taken as East Harlem bias but his view of Salerno is considered accurate? Did he even know Lombardo personally?

Huge fan of this question both specifically and in general. One of my biggest struggles with information about organized crime is how much of the information is uncorroborated. A lot of what is documented as fact may have come from one source which, as a history major, is hard to accept without an incredible amount of skepticism.

I'd love to offer my data analysis work to start a public database where we put a "Veracity %" on some of the claims out there. I certainly feel far more confident believing Tommaso Buscetta's testimony over Sammy Gravano or Anthony Casso's. People like Valachi and Scarpa make up a huge chunk of early information that the FBI (who we know are liars) pushed as irrefutable fact. At some point as a community, we ought to sit down and go over ALL of the testimony that's out there and put a community confidence number around some of those claims. It would be cool to be able to see actual testimony with community notes around that stuff, given history's ability to look back.

by **cesare borgia** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 12:49 pm

Yes, but Cafaro's assertion that Salerno was a front boss for Gigante is taken as fact ,so why is his statement that Lombardo was boss taken as East Harlem bias but his view of Salerno is considered accurate ? Did he
even know Lombardo personally?

Also why would Cafaro even need or want to hype up the East Harlem faction? Cafaro was never a capo (I don't believe) so how does making the faction look good reflect on him? Who was he trying to impress, the feds? The FBI were most likely aware of the power the faction allegedly possessed. Salerno had occupied all three admin positions at different times. Santora was underboss(allegedly), Buckaloo was consigliere(allegedly),Bellomo was the prodigy who was most likely to succeed Gigante. I'm sure the feds didn't need the "Lombardo was boss all along" to consider the faction heavy hitters.

by **HairyKnuckles** » Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:47 am

cesare borgia wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 1:53 pm "Capeci, Raab etc based their belief on what Cafaro said. And on this particular topic, front boss and all that crap, Cafaro lied or twisted the truth to make FBI look good. And just like Lenehan, Cafaro may have been an East Harlem fan boy, proud of what mobsters that neighborhood had produced."

Seems highly unlikely ,Cafaro testified that Salerno(an East Harlem alumni) was a front for Gigante(a Greenwich based leader). Why would he hype up Lombardo but not Salerno.

Cafaro had a falling out with Salerno prior to his cooperation. It could be that he wanted to degrade, or possibly even humiliate him, by saying Salerno was just, what he called, a "front boss". However, his hyping up of Lombardo (who was no punk by any means, he clearly had power and influence), Ferro and other Genovese members with East Harlem origins was misleading. The quote above was written when Lenehan (Pic/Lucky7/whatever username he used on the Real Deal site) was being discussed (in other threads on here) and his claims that the most powerful Genovese members were actually the ones who were from the Newark area, Lenehan´s neigborhood.

by **Frank** » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:36 pm

Thats a nice piece of information and tells the Who's Who of the Outfit

by **TonyBombassolo** » Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:58 pm

Also, I think the fact that Chicago and the Genovese had a shared connection explains a lot of their similarities between "front" vs "street" boss. Both groups utilized this to confuse LE and others as to who was really in charge. I suspect Genovese had a similar setup. Squint was probably mostly retired but anything the others couldn't handle on their own, they'd go to Benny.

Per Ralph Pierce CI to Roemer -

After Paul Ricca died of natural causes in 1972, Pierce updated the FBI on the new Outfit hierarchy.

Prior to his death, Ricca had jointly shared final decision-making responsibilities with Accardo.

Accardo told Pierce that he was now sole leader of the Outfit and Ricca's position wasn't going to be replaced. To help him manage the Outfit, Accardo appointed Joseph Aiuppa to operate as something like a street boss with Gus Alex as his top advisor. The FBI called the new ruling panel the Triple A group.

Accardo told Pierce that he would set policy and make all the big decisions himself, but he would leave the day-to-day operations to Aiuppa and Alex. Accardo became the "Chairman of the Board," while Aiuppa was the "managing operator" of the Outfit. Aiuppa would be the face of the ruling panel and the point of contact for Outfit members.

THE BLACK HAND FORUM

I almost hate to say it....

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....

Re: I almost hate to say it....