FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

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: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Rat » Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:30 pm

Wiseguy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:18 am
Rat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:00 am Wasn't there the California organized crime report in 2002? Could that of stemmed from an FBI investigation into LCN in San Fran
Yes. That report covered organized crime in general, not just LCN. And that report said San Francisco was dormant.

Yeah I wasn’t suggesting they were active just saying that’s might of been where the investigation came from

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Snakes » Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:05 am

All it takes is for a known made guy to live or even stay in a city for a certain period of time. The field office normally responsible for monitoring him asks San Fran to keep an eye on him and they open up a case.

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Wiseguy » Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:18 am

Rat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:00 am Wasn't there the California organized crime report in 2002? Could that of stemmed from an FBI investigation into LCN in San Fran
Yes. That report covered organized crime in general, not just LCN. And that report said San Francisco was dormant.

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Rat » Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:58 am

Snakes wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:26 am
Rat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:00 am Wasn't there the California organized crime report in 2002? Could that of stemmed from an FBI investigation into LCN in San Fran
Not sure but it could have went something like this:

FBI HQ: Is there (still) LCN activity in these cities (lists Houston, Dallas, San Fran)?

Field Offices: Not sure, let's open an investigation and check

**six months later**

Field Offices to HQ: No evidence of activity; cases closed
I would guess that's what they were

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Patrickgold » Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:11 am

Ron Sacco and Giovanni Toracca were under investigation during that time and were both in San Francisco. I think it came out later that Sacco was an informant

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Snakes » Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:26 am

Rat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:00 am Wasn't there the California organized crime report in 2002? Could that of stemmed from an FBI investigation into LCN in San Fran
Not sure but it could have went something like this:

FBI HQ: Is there (still) LCN activity in these cities (lists Houston, Dallas, San Fran)?

Field Offices: Not sure, let's open an investigation and check

**six months later**

Field Offices to HQ: No evidence of activity; cases closed

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Rat » Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:00 am

Wasn't there the California organized crime report in 2002? Could that of stemmed from an FBI investigation into LCN in San Fran

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by NJShore4Life » Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:31 am

I “bet”the investigations in some of the cities like Dallas, Houston, San Francisco, etc were bookmaking probes were the networks from NY/NJ extended out to these cities. I know Texas is a huge sports bookmaking market due to their love and passion for Football. Texas still to this day doesn’t have legal sports betting I believe.

The Feds were busting mob bookmaking rings left and right pre 9/11 across America because they were such easy cases to make, there would be headlines, a couple mob guys would go to prison for a few years, there would be seizures of cash/cars/guns/etc , the Feds would get their OT, and everyone would go home happy.

After 9/11 you can’t justify investigating mob bookmaking cases from a Federal Law Enforcement perspective.

-Dante

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by eboli » Mon Jan 11, 2021 3:43 am

Wiseguy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:14 pm Atlanta family? This Canarsie guy needs to grow a brain.
Unlikely. After all, he was reading a mafia fiction wiki page and presenting it as fact.
https://mafia-fiction.fandom.com/wiki/A ... ime_family

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by JoeCamel » Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:18 am

What’s Jeff Lowman saying now?

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Antiliar » Sun Jan 10, 2021 10:57 pm

Good info, guys

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Wiseguy » Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:14 pm

Of course, an investigation can be any number of things.

Atlanta family? This Canarsie guy needs to grow a brain.

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Tonyd621 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:06 pm

Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:00 pm
Snakes wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:48 pm
Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:41 pm
Dallas (2 to 1)
Houston (1 to 0)
Phoenix (1 to 0)
San Fran (1 to 0)

So in 2000 there were 1 or 2 LCN investigative cases opened in these cities? Am I reading this right?


Who could possibly have been investigated in those cities in 2000?
Yes, that is correct. Chicago had a presence in Phoenix at that time so that one is not surprising. I am not sure about the others. Perhaps some time of bookmaking network? Another guess may be that LCN investigations were opened in those cities to determine what, if any, presence existed. If they discovered none or a minimal amount, the case was probably closed quickly.

Thanks. The Atlanta one would have been Gambino Soldier Tony Trentacosta who was active there and would be indicted soon after. Curios about Houston, Dallas and SF.


Pogo
According to Jeff Canarsie the Atlanta family is thriving. The fbi should put more resources into fighting that

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Pogo The Clown » Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:00 pm

Snakes wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:48 pm
Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:41 pm
Dallas (2 to 1)
Houston (1 to 0)
Phoenix (1 to 0)
San Fran (1 to 0)

So in 2000 there were 1 or 2 LCN investigative cases opened in these cities? Am I reading this right?


Who could possibly have been investigated in those cities in 2000?
Yes, that is correct. Chicago had a presence in Phoenix at that time so that one is not surprising. I am not sure about the others. Perhaps some time of bookmaking network? Another guess may be that LCN investigations were opened in those cities to determine what, if any, presence existed. If they discovered none or a minimal amount, the case was probably closed quickly.

Thanks. The Atlanta one would have been Gambino Soldier Tony Trentacosta who was active there and would be indicted soon after. Curios about Houston, Dallas and SF.


Pogo

Re: FBI reduction in LCN investigation from 2000 to 2003

by Snakes » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:50 pm

Wiseguy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:12 pm Some more stats...


LCN prosecutions

1995 - 579
2000 - 339
2010 - 135


In September 2005, a report was released on the "External Effects of the FBI's Reprioritization Efforts" following the September 2001 attacks. From 2000 to 2004, the total number of field agents investigating the LCN in the U.S. was reduced from 437 to 261 (40% decline). Also, new case openings were reduced from 233 in 2000 to 90 in 2004 (61% decline).
The disparity in numbers between the two reports may be that the ones I listed were major investigations (crews or families) and the ones you cited may be more general.

Top