Vito Genovese the worst boss?

Forum rules

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
BBCode is OFF
Smilies are OFF
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by bert » Fri Jan 31, 2020 10:35 pm

B. wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:48 pm Another things from the tapes -- Vito Genovese became boss via election. Not a surprise, as this is the protocol, but it shows there was some political finesse involved and he had support beyond his own immediate faction.
Was his becoming boss a deal made to satisfy the crews he was closest to, or do you think it was more just about him? Luciano was not from an area that far away in New York, but there were different Genovese crews in both neighborhoods, plus Harlem and the Bronx. I think Genovese had a closer relationship to the Little Italy crew than Luciano.
Also, after seeing what happened to Luciano (Trail ending in 40 year sentence) it could have been that a few strong candidates who could have challenged him for the spot decided to let him have it. Considering that he wound up in and out of prison, and finally dying there, they made the right decision if that was the case.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by Villain » Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:32 am

bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:43 pm
Villain wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:37 am
HairyKnuckles wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:25 am
bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier,
He was very trigger happy. He´s up there with Albert Anastasia. Read somewhere that Vito Genovese was the only man Anastasia was afraid of.
I think that it depends from the time period....for example Capone and his gang were quite trigger happy but that was the only way to take control of the second largest city at the time and Capone unknowingly "sacrificed" himself because of that. As for the 40s and 50s, i think that it was too late for such methods...and thats why bosses like Costello and Ricca were well regarded in those days, both from the underworld and upper class
A question Villain, do you think the wars between the Irish and Italian mobs over rackets, plus the groups of mixed mobs also in the picture contributed to the crazy amount of killings in Chicago as opposed to New York? Thinking about it now, New York and a few other cities did good job of working together with other gangs, or at least better than Chicago. Chicago of the 1920's -1930's was worse than Philadelphia in the 1980's.
You might be right, although I personally think that the whole mixed racial thing had nothing to do with the high body count. For example, one Jewish faction from the West Side area supported the Sicilian Mafia, including the O'Banion/Drucci gang, while on the other hand we have another Jewish group but from the South Side which supported the non-Sicilians or the Capone Mob. Same story goes for all of the Greeks, Germans, the Irish and English, Pollacks etc.

So all of these ethnicities, including the Italians who were in the middle, had to choose between the two most powerful and largest crime organizations in Chicago at the time, which in fact was the main reason behind the large body count. I also believe that the whole massacre which occurred in the city, was simply a bloody political war created by two of the most powerful New York crime families at the time, meaning they continued or started the conflict on a different turf. Dont forget that almost all of the main Chicago players from that era arrived from or at least passed through the Brooklyn area

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by maxiestern11 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:50 pm

And Vito WAS a deadly guy. One of the most deadly and treacherous....official underboss for decades. It WAS his for the taking.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by maxiestern11 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:48 pm

It didn’t happen overnight. Lucky and Costello had a ton of influence and were very liked by the rank and file. But Vito stayed close to the men, with his ear close to the sidewalk. And slowly but surely gained traction.

THAT is how it happened.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by maxiestern11 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:46 pm

Vito swung the entire Napolitano faction. Which in the Genovese crew is large (included Calabrian’s and Barese also)....by the time he made his move, NOBODY was crazy enough to buck him! He had the power. It was Suicide.... but it took years for Genovese to position himself that way.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by B. » Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:48 pm

Another things from the tapes -- Vito Genovese became boss via election. Not a surprise, as this is the protocol, but it shows there was some political finesse involved and he had support beyond his own immediate faction.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by MichaelGiovanni » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:37 pm

B. wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:49 pm Magaddino's praise and trust in Vito Genovese also confirms something from some of his other transcripts -- in several conversations, he spoke about someone he called "tempesta" (storm) whom he despised and was incredibly disruptive among the national mafia leadership in the 1950s (hence the nickname). "Tempesta" was closely associated with Costello and I had narrowed it down to either Vito Genovese or Albert Anastasia. It's clear now that "tempesta" is Albert Anastasia and his comments about "tempesta" make much more sense now that we can rule out Genovese.
I hate to quote Ernest Volkmam from a documentary but similarly to ‘tempesta’ he claims Anastasia was also given the nickname ‘Il terremoto’ which means ‘the earthquake’

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by B. » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:49 pm

Magaddino's praise and trust in Vito Genovese also confirms something from some of his other transcripts -- in several conversations, he spoke about someone he called "tempesta" (storm) whom he despised and was incredibly disruptive among the national mafia leadership in the 1950s (hence the nickname). "Tempesta" was closely associated with Costello and I had narrowed it down to either Vito Genovese or Albert Anastasia. It's clear now that "tempesta" is Albert Anastasia and his comments about "tempesta" make much more sense now that we can rule out Genovese.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by bert » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:46 pm

B. wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:41 pm Antiliar has some great insight into Luciano's relationship with the FBN. Maybe he'll weigh in if he sees this.

There are, I believe, at least three examples of Luciano sending word to the US about someone informing to the FBN and requesting their murder. I recently saw reference to a lesser known example of this. Personally I believe there was a two-way street between Luciano and his FBN contact(s) in that they exchanged information. Luciano's prior cooperation with the government during WWII lends itself to this.

It does make you wonder what Magaddino meant when he said Luciano "double-crossed" Genovese. I can't think of any obvious ways Luciano would have double-crossed Genovese in the 1930s or 1940s unless it somehow involved Genovese going on the lam to Italy, but Genovese retained his title and influence Italy, then stepped right back into active leadership when he returned to the US. There is no clear double-cross that I can see through that period.

According to Valachi, Luciano was still the official boss until the early 1950s and retained influence over the family. I'd be curious if Luciano supported Genovese's takeover from Costello (which appears to have been supported by influential Commission members Lucchese and Magaddino as well), then played some role in Genovese's arrest. I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist here, but given Luciano's suspicious relationship with the FBN, it does make Magaddino's comment interesting in light of Genovese's narcotics arrest.
One thought on the double cross could be if Genovese thought or was led to believe he had total control of all Luciano's Captains, while instead they would oppose him on things or see what Luciano had to say on important matters?

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by bert » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:43 pm

Villain wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:37 am
HairyKnuckles wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:25 am
bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier,
He was very trigger happy. He´s up there with Albert Anastasia. Read somewhere that Vito Genovese was the only man Anastasia was afraid of.
I think that it depends from the time period....for example Capone and his gang were quite trigger happy but that was the only way to take control of the second largest city at the time and Capone unknowingly "sacrificed" himself because of that. As for the 40s and 50s, i think that it was too late for such methods...and thats why bosses like Costello and Ricca were well regarded in those days, both from the underworld and upper class
A question Villain, do you think the wars between the Irish and Italian mobs over rackets, plus the groups of mixed mobs also in the picture contributed to the crazy amount of killings in Chicago as opposed to New York? Thinking about it now, New York and a few other cities did good job of working together with other gangs, or at least better than Chicago. Chicago of the 1920's -1930's was worse than Philadelphia in the 1980's.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by B. » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:41 pm

Antiliar has some great insight into Luciano's relationship with the FBN. Maybe he'll weigh in if he sees this.

There are, I believe, at least three examples of Luciano sending word to the US about someone informing to the FBN and requesting their murder. I recently saw reference to a lesser known example of this. Personally I believe there was a two-way street between Luciano and his FBN contact(s) in that they exchanged information. Luciano's prior cooperation with the government during WWII lends itself to this.

It does make you wonder what Magaddino meant when he said Luciano "double-crossed" Genovese. I can't think of any obvious ways Luciano would have double-crossed Genovese in the 1930s or 1940s unless it somehow involved Genovese going on the lam to Italy, but Genovese retained his title and influence remotely in Italy, then stepped right back into active leadership when he returned to the US. There is no clear double-cross that I can see through that period.

According to Valachi, Luciano was still the official boss until the early 1950s and retained influence over the family. I'd be curious if Luciano supported Genovese's takeover from Costello (which appears to have been supported by influential Commission members Lucchese and Magaddino as well), then played some role in Genovese's arrest. I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist here, but given Luciano's suspicious relationship with the FBN, it does make Magaddino's comment interesting in light of Genovese's narcotics arrest.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by HairyKnuckles » Thu Jan 30, 2020 11:30 am

Villain wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:37 am
HairyKnuckles wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:25 am
bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier,
He was very trigger happy. He´s up there with Albert Anastasia. Read somewhere that Vito Genovese was the only man Anastasia was afraid of.
I think that it depends from the time period....for example Capone and his gang were quite trigger happy but that was the only way to take control of the second largest city at the time and Capone unknowingly "sacrificed" himself because of that. As for the 40s and 50s, i think that it was too late for such methods...and thats why bosses like Costello and Ricca were well regarded in those days, both from the underworld and upper class
You are right. I´m so NY oriented that the early Chicago mob history totally slipped my mind.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by Villain » Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:37 am

HairyKnuckles wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:25 am
bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier,
He was very trigger happy. He´s up there with Albert Anastasia. Read somewhere that Vito Genovese was the only man Anastasia was afraid of.
I think that it depends from the time period....for example Capone and his gang were quite trigger happy but that was the only way to take control of the second largest city at the time and Capone unknowingly "sacrificed" himself because of that. As for the 40s and 50s, i think that it was too late for such methods...and thats why bosses like Costello and Ricca were well regarded in those days, both from the underworld and upper class

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by HairyKnuckles » Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:25 am

bert wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier,
He was very trigger happy. He´s up there with Albert Anastasia. Read somewhere that Vito Genovese was the only man Anastasia was afraid of.

Re: Vito Genovese the worst boss?

by bert » Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:13 am

In NYC Mafia using cops of feds to put away rival would cause your own people to turn on you and even kill you, be it a boss or a soldier. Genovese had to be liked or respected by the captains he inherited, although his main guy Anthony Strollo was said to be hated by a lot of people. Obviously Costello did not like him and that went both ways. A later named Ianuzzi wrote a fiction book back in the 1970's where the characters were modeled after Costello and Gigante and in it the Gigante character was a bumbling idiot leader, and the bad guy. Since the author had represented a lot of Mafia members in cases, he must have heard or gotten close to a few who gave him the idea that is how they were seen. I think Genovese was too quick to kill, and in those days a boss could do it easier, no way him or Luciano gave guys up to the cops though.

Top