Gravano's most insane lie

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: Gravano's most insane lie

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Makelaiusiwk » Sat Jul 29, 2023 7:06 am

Everything he says is a lie

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by B. » Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:36 pm

Well I'd wager Tommy Gambino wouldn't have supported the faction who wanted to kill Paul even if they approached him. If there were serious misgivings between relatives it might be different.

Gravano's take on Tommy Gambino says it all about him. He tried to make Gambino out to be a pansy because he was working on a dress at his garment business when Sammy visited. Contrast that with DiLeonardo who says Tommy was a great man and widely respected as a businessman. DiLeonardo likely understood it takes all types of members and there were always members like Gambino. For Gravano his only measuring stick was being a tough guy.

Don't know if a direct source ever confirmed what happened with Marino and Failla beyond them being part of a faction opposed to Gotti. I've always found it crazy DeCicco allegedly assured Failla he'd be safe in Sparks right after the hit. Why basically admit to it? If it's true he said that to Failla, he basically signed his own death warrant.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by SonnyBlackstein » Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:58 pm

B. wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:37 pm However if a significant anti-Gotti faction went to Gambino and told him "We're going to kill John" he might well quietly put his political support behind them.

Be curious if Failla/Marino ever secretly said anything to Gambino. Obviously Gotti wasn't worried about Tommy Gambino staging a coup on his own.
1. If a significant faction wanted to overthrow any boss, and "Gambino" was to benefit, Im sure every proposal would be considered.
2. Do we KNOW Failla and Marino were in an actual, talked about, planned, go forward plot? My understanding is Chin would have likely pushed for them if Gotti was clipped. Hell of a different story than Failla and Marino actually usurping Gotti.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by B. » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:37 pm

The Tommy Gambino/Gotti situation is a good example of how these things work. Someone's relative is killed and he takes the path of least resistance with the new regime, but the new regime also doesn't terrorize him just expects him to fall in line. However if a significant anti-Gotti faction went to Gambino and told him "We're going to kill John" he might well quietly put his political support behind them.

Be curious if Failla/Marino ever secretly said anything to Gambino. Obviously Gotti wasn't worried about Tommy Gambino staging a coup on his own.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Southshore88 » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:24 pm

Southshore88 wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:21 pm B. - thanks for your response. I guess my question was more directed at Castellano as he had made Tommy G. but not his brother Joseph. But then again, he may have been less incentivized to make Joseph just to continue the family tradition as neither of his sons were made but his sons were similar to Joseph in that they were financially successful in affiliated businesses and didn’t need the obligation of being made.
My last post just reminded me to that I remember reading something that Castellano’s son - as well as Tommy Gambino - made sure to kick up and pay Gotti the proper respect after Paul was whacked. I wonder if Paul would have made his nephew and sons if he had any idea that he’d be deposed and that they would not have the protection of the boss (& family member).

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Southshore88 » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:21 pm

B. - thanks for your response. I guess my question was more directed at Castellano as he had made Tommy G. but not his brother Joseph. But then again, he may have been less incentivized to make Joseph just to continue the family tradition as neither of his sons were made but his sons were similar to Joseph in that they were financially successful in affiliated businesses and didn’t need the obligation of being made.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by B. » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:18 pm

I am glad you're pushing on this, as it makes me think about it and you know I need no excuse to go off.

- No clue what the earliest recruitment practices were like, but from what's available it looks like blood/marriage formed the nucleus and those members formed relationships based on general association, which expanded the network to include non-relatives. Those non-relatives could be inducted (though they or their children might intermarry with other members), bring their own friends/associates in and membership could get further removed from the nucleus though in Sicily it doesn't look like they ever strayed too far.

- What makes Sicily significant is everyone in the village would be compaesani so virtually the entire membership of a Sicilian Family would be either related or paesani with few exceptions. Go to the early US, we can see early recruitment was heavily based around relation or specific sets of Sicilian villages which makes sense given that's how the Sicilian mafia formed its membership/associations, but an early aspect of Americanization is that men from different villages/regions now comprised one Family which you wouldn't see in Sicily to a significant degree. These guys formed a greater range of relationships because their Family was no longer based in one Sicilian village/district/region and this sped up the changes we see later.

- You can look at the Bonanno Family as a good example of how a Family gets modernized. The majority of the Family were either interrelated and/or from specific sets of Sicilian towns. Carmine Galante was from one of those towns (likely related to older figures as well, though we don't know for sure) and recruited heavily from the local criminal element. We can see a majority of non-Sicilian or even non-Trapanese/Agrigentino Bonanno members on that 1963 chart have roots in the Galante crew, but his crew is exceptional when we look at the chart. Those guys then brought in their own associates who were even further removed from the nucleus and you end up with Joe Massino bringing in his people.

- Contrast that with the Asaro group. 5 generations of direct father>son membership and many other relatives. Vinny Asaro was a prolific criminal who ran with Jimmy Burke and the Gottis, but showed a heavy preference for bringing in his relatives. Gene Borello complained about Asaro bringing in his nephew who he felt was less tough than him, but that's just one example of the Asaros preferring to induct from their clan even though they had a big range of criminal associates. The Asaros are Americans but they've stuck to the approach of their ancestors.

- Smaller Families around the US stuck to the Sicilian model much more closely. Their membership stayed small, interrelated, and from specific towns, operating more like Sicilian Families. This was not sustainable in the US, but we can see it does work for certain factions of larger Families that did sustain themselves.

- We don't know if the early Sicilian mafia had explicit rules excluding certain people. In Sicily they would have recruited overwhelmingly from relatives/paesan by default. We do know they had preferences and sources on the early US show they had strong guidelines if not rules -- a source said early members had to be Sicilian-born and changed this to allow American-born Sicilians, later expanding to include non-Sicilians. Morello said a proposed member's compaesani had to be contacted in the early 1900s. There is no evidence the mafia came to the US and immediately opened its doors/ranks to everyone but we don't know how strict the rules/guidelines were.

- We have non-Sicilian Genovese leaders talking among themselves about how blood/marriage formed the early membership and specifically the leadership as well. It's not just that members had this perception, it's that data supports it. It's why I have reservations about someone being called a boss by early LE/newspapers just because of perceived criminal authority. The politics included crime but weren't oriented around a single criminal operation.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by bronx » Mon Feb 28, 2022 7:54 pm

modica, grillo, riccobono, capra,martino, gallo, there some more ,these bloodlines will end soon

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Angelo Santino » Mon Feb 28, 2022 7:02 pm

B. wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 7:50 am-Sources stating the importance of relationships over the years-
I'm not saying its not important or changing my stance, not at all. I'm just stating that for all these examples, there's likely the same amount of examples for guys who DIDN'T come in this way. By 1960 it was split down the middle. I'm curious how far it goes back?

Let's go back to 1810-1830 when the whole thing started... I would imagine after the Mafia's initial startup, a member would move/go back to his town and start his own Family. I would imagine family and friends were the first to be brought in, but then at some point they had to open it up to regular criminals. Fast forward 150 years and Calderone mentioned the issues that Catania had with the up and coming criminal world and the discussion over whether to bring them in as a means of control or whether to omit them because they were too low for CN standards.

We know they were doing this in Sicily, the question is did they immediately start doing this in the US and if so to what extent.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Shellackhead » Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:42 pm

I’m starting to get into Calabdra’s stories even though he was a low level associate, he would have stories of other neighborhood guys who most didn’t make it far into the mob or induction at all and some who did, also having incidents with Georgie Goggles and those guys from that area in the 80s & early 90s. Gravano should do the same but when he was growing up in the 60s & 70s.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by B. » Mon Feb 28, 2022 10:27 am

I apologize for the tone of my earlier post -- we have different views on some of this but you were talking specifically about 3+ generation members we can confirm and I agree they're not the ones filling out the ranks today.

A big part we're missing is the IDs of members from the 1900s-1930s. There would have been higher numbers of Sicilians and interrelation was a big influence which adds probability to more fathers/uncles/etc. being members but the data isn't available. If DiLeonardo hadn't talked about it we never would have heard his grandfather and great-grandfather were early members or that so many guys from that crew were multi-generation. If some of the guys made in the 1940s/50s spoke about their backgrounds who knows what would turn up -- can't assume either way.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Pogo The Clown » Mon Feb 28, 2022 9:34 am

Here is my old post on this topic.

Two generation involvement and interrelated members is not that uncommon. You see the same thing in street gangs and drug cartels. It is natural for people to marry other people within their own social circle be they criminal or legit. That is not unique to LCN.


Third and fourth generation membership is really rare. Talking about Philly the only third and fourth generation members are Tory Scaifidi, Joey and Anthony Pungitore and Dom Grande. So 4 out of 40+ current members.


It is even more rare in NY. The Gambinos have the most with the various Gambinos, Inzerillos', the Francos' and and Vinny Corrao.


For the Bonannos you have Vinny and Jerry Asaro, Joseph Grimaldi, Antonino and Jack Bonventre and Anthony DiGregorio if they are related to the others with those names. I forgot if James Galante is third generation or not.


I can't think of any for the Genovese or Colombos and only 1 in the Lucheese family (Nicky Scarfo Jr). Maybe a few in the Colombos if any of the young third generation Persico associates ever got made.


So what maybe 2 dozen or less out of the 700+ members in the 5 families.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by B. » Mon Feb 28, 2022 9:28 am

I count thirteen or fourteen living 3+ generation members in the Gambino Family based on confirmed relations and currently available info (could be some unknowns). A minority for sure but more than two hands in one group. When combined with second gen guys and guys from the same gen who are related we still see echoes of the role blood/marriage has played.

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Pogo The Clown » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:27 am

B. wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:26 am I'm surprised Pogo's point impacted your view -- I remember his post and for someone who tracks these guys so closely, he seemed oblivious to how many guys actually are related to one another and how far they go back.

We were talking about multi generational members in the US. While father-son and uncle-nephew members are pretty common they are still very much the minority among the current membership. Current third and fourth generation members are so rare you can count them on two hands among the hundreds of made members in NY.


Pogo

Re: Gravano's most insane lie

by Little_Al1991 » Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:16 am

RamshackleMan wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:38 pm Hasn't someone ever tried writing Massino or others "care of" the WPP and seeing what happens? I'd be surprised if someone hasn't.
It would have been great to see Al D’Arco start his own channel but his son Joseph D’Arco from what we know is still alive
Joseph definitely should start his own channel.
Massino for sure

Top