THE BLACK HAND FORUM

Ivan wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 5:22 pm

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 5:18 pm To be fair there is evidence. There's people claiming it, second or third hand but that's still evidence.

Yeah but it's not conclusive. Many of the things in that thread have some form of evidence to some extent, it's just not enough to prove the claims.

More like a "beliefs without proof" thread I guess.

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 5:18 pm To be fair there is evidence. There's people claiming it, second or third hand but that's still evidence.

Ivan wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 5:15 pm

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:56 pm Understand your point of view but i don't find that comment that compelling personally. I think the "you wouldn't believe me" comment was to point away from himself. He was a CI not a CW (or do I have them backwards? lol) it wasn't like he was testifying in court and could be charged with any murders he didn't mention. Surely he wouldn't mention him personally killing someone, that comment makes perfect sense to me I could see myself saying something like that to point away from myself. The LaPietra comment is more interesting to me since it was to another mobster and also because it's definitely referring to Accardo, even if Butch's comment was genuine it could be about someone else.

The "wouldn't believe" comment on its own isn't compelling; combined with LaPietra's comment it is. Just my opinion. My view on this (i.e., leaning toward Accardo doing it personally) is something for the "beliefs without evidence" thread I suppose.

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:56 pm Understand your point of view but i don't find that comment that compelling personally. I think the "you wouldn't believe me" comment was to point away from himself. He was a CI not a CW (or do I have them backwards? lol) it wasn't like he was testifying in court and could be charged with any murders he didn't mention. Surely he wouldn't mention him personally killing someone, that comment makes perfect sense to me I could see myself saying something like that to point away from myself. The LaPietra comment is more interesting to me since it was to another mobster and also because it's definitely referring to Accardo, even if Butch's comment was genuine it could be about someone else.

Ivan wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:54 pm

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:46 pm I still find it very convoluted unless it was about Accardo feeling he had to do it for personal reasons like PolackTony suggested but it's still hard for me to buy personally.

It is hard to buy, at least upon first hearing the idea; that's why I find Blasi's "wouldn't believe" comment so compelling. That's just me though.

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:46 pm I still find it very convoluted unless it was about Accardo feeling he had to do it for personal reasons like PolackTony suggested but it's still hard for me to buy personally.

Ivan wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 4:33 pm

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:47 pm I believe there was an earlier claim that Accardo was the actual gunman and it was discussed here.

I think you might be mixing me up with Tony? I said I was leaning toward it because of LaPietra's "You're never too old to do work like JB" comment ("work" to me sounds like more is going on with Accardo than murder conspiracy involvement) and Blasi's comment that the feds "wouldn't believe" him if he told them the truth, combined with the various circumstantial and other evidence Goudie et alia compiled. And I'm only slightly leaning toward Accardo doing it, not certain that he did it; we will probably never know for sure.

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:47 pm I believe there was an earlier claim that Accardo was the actual gunman and it was discussed here.

PolackTony wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:42 pm

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:34 pm

PolackTony wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:22 pm

chin_gigante wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:01 pm It would make sense for an administration member to be present if his presence would cause the target to lower their guard.

I'm reminded of the Sonny Black murder, where official Bonanno consigliere Steve Cannone came along to the house to put Napolitano at ease and left immediately after he was shot.

According to Sal Vitale, official boss Phil Rastelli was standing by at a diner when Caesar Bonventre was killed. Bonventre was lured to his death under a pretence of attending a meeting with Rastelli, so they had him nearby if for whatever reason the murder could not go ahead then the meeting could still take place so as not to arouse Bonventre's suspicion.

Vic Amuso may have already been the official Lucchese boss when he was present for the murder of Buddy Luongo.

Even in Chicago, Sam Carlisi and John DiFronzo were both present for the faux-initiation ceremony set up to kill the Spilotro brothers. Carlisi would have been the boss at that time and DiFronzo was probably the underboss.

All great examples to illustrate this point. While we don’t know — and likely never will for sure — who the actual gunman was in the Giancana hit, the idea that Accardo, then consigliere, very likely played some direct role in the event is not far fetched in the least and as you note, it would not be unique in the history of the American mafia by any means if he did. On top of his position in the admin at the time — and one which is specifically focused on protecting the interests of the membership — the longstanding and likely very personal relationship of the two men in question adds another layer of plausibility.

That we now know for a fact that Nick told the Feds that LaPietra told him that Accardo was involved is the news here. Otherwise, the idea that Accardo was involved shouldn’t come as much of a surprise at this point IMO.

Is there any other example of a Boss (or any admin member) personally killing someone because they felt personally responsible for them? Genuinely asking as i don't think i've heard that before.

My issue is Butch Blasi is already in the perfect position to kill him and would be the person keeping him at ease, feels unneccessary to me to include someone else especially an old Boss. None of the above examples have the Boss personally killing the person and i don't think any were as old as Accardo or in such a risky situtaion with the cops watching him. You did say the claim isn't necessarily that Accardo personally pulled the trigger so i'm not debating with your view here more saying that the thing i have issue with is the idea of Accardo personally killing him, if someone said Accardo was at a diner down the street like Rusty to make sure it went off i'd be able to accept that more. Just my view anyway not trying to change anyones mind but i still see it as farfetched. I believed Accardo was involved before i heard any of these claims, it's just to me his involvement was giving the order.

Who said that Accardo was the guy who actually shot Giancana? I didn’t say that. In the excerpt from his 302, Nick Calabrese didn’t say that.

The claim that Accardo was “involved” in some direct way with the hit is not the same as the claim that Accardo was the actual gunman. Nick Calabrese’s vague statement to the FBI, based on an account that he received from Angelo LaPietra (who we can presume was not extravagantly detailed about the matter, to say the least), adds support for the former claim, not the latter.

Camo wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:34 pm

PolackTony wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:22 pm

chin_gigante wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:01 pm It would make sense for an administration member to be present if his presence would cause the target to lower their guard.

I'm reminded of the Sonny Black murder, where official Bonanno consigliere Steve Cannone came along to the house to put Napolitano at ease and left immediately after he was shot.

According to Sal Vitale, official boss Phil Rastelli was standing by at a diner when Caesar Bonventre was killed. Bonventre was lured to his death under a pretence of attending a meeting with Rastelli, so they had him nearby if for whatever reason the murder could not go ahead then the meeting could still take place so as not to arouse Bonventre's suspicion.

Vic Amuso may have already been the official Lucchese boss when he was present for the murder of Buddy Luongo.

Even in Chicago, Sam Carlisi and John DiFronzo were both present for the faux-initiation ceremony set up to kill the Spilotro brothers. Carlisi would have been the boss at that time and DiFronzo was probably the underboss.

All great examples to illustrate this point. While we don’t know — and likely never will for sure — who the actual gunman was in the Giancana hit, the idea that Accardo, then consigliere, very likely played some direct role in the event is not far fetched in the least and as you note, it would not be unique in the history of the American mafia by any means if he did. On top of his position in the admin at the time — and one which is specifically focused on protecting the interests of the membership — the longstanding and likely very personal relationship of the two men in question adds another layer of plausibility.

That we now know for a fact that Nick told the Feds that LaPietra told him that Accardo was involved is the news here. Otherwise, the idea that Accardo was involved shouldn’t come as much of a surprise at this point IMO.

Is there any other example of a Boss (or any admin member) personally killing someone because they felt personally responsible for them? Genuinely asking as i don't think i've heard that before.

My issue is Butch Blasi is already in the perfect position to kill him and would be the person keeping him at ease, feels unneccessary to me to include someone else especially an old Boss. None of the above examples have the Boss personally killing the person and i don't think any were as old as Accardo or in such a risky situtaion with the cops watching him. You did say the claim isn't necessarily that Accardo personally pulled the trigger so i'm not debating with your view here more saying that the thing i have issue with is the idea of Accardo personally killing him, if someone said Accardo was at a diner down the street like Rusty to make sure it went off i'd be able to accept that more. Just my view anyway not trying to change anyones mind but i still see it as farfetched. I believed Accardo was involved before i heard any of these claims, it's just to me his involvement was giving the order.

PolackTony wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:22 pm

chin_gigante wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:01 pm It would make sense for an administration member to be present if his presence would cause the target to lower their guard.

I'm reminded of the Sonny Black murder, where official Bonanno consigliere Steve Cannone came along to the house to put Napolitano at ease and left immediately after he was shot.

According to Sal Vitale, official boss Phil Rastelli was standing by at a diner when Caesar Bonventre was killed. Bonventre was lured to his death under a pretence of attending a meeting with Rastelli, so they had him nearby if for whatever reason the murder could not go ahead then the meeting could still take place so as not to arouse Bonventre's suspicion.

Vic Amuso may have already been the official Lucchese boss when he was present for the murder of Buddy Luongo.

Even in Chicago, Sam Carlisi and John DiFronzo were both present for the faux-initiation ceremony set up to kill the Spilotro brothers. Carlisi would have been the boss at that time and DiFronzo was probably the underboss.

All great examples to illustrate this point. While we don’t know — and likely never will for sure — who the actual gunman was in the Giancana hit, the idea that Accardo, then consigliere, very likely played some direct role in the event is not far fetched in the least and as you note, it would not be unique in the history of the American mafia by any means if he did. On top of his position in the admin at the time — and one which is specifically focused on protecting the interests of the membership — the longstanding and likely very personal relationship of the two men in question adds another layer of plausibility.

That we now know for a fact that Nick told the Feds that LaPietra told him that Accardo was involved is the news here. Otherwise, the idea that Accardo was involved shouldn’t come as much of a surprise at this point IMO.

PolackTony wrote: ↑Sat May 17, 2025 3:22 pm hile we don’t know — and likely never will for sure — who the actual gunman was in the Giancana hit, the idea that Accardo, then consigliere, very likely played some direct role in the event is not far fetched in the least and as you note, it would not be unique in the history of the American mafia by any means if he did.