The DeCicco truth

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: The DeCicco truth

Re: The DeCicco truth

by SonnyBlackstein » Wed Nov 13, 2024 2:54 pm

jmack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:46 am
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:48 am
jmack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:14 am
I’m not aware of sclafani’s information ever being proven wrong and he was getting information straight from the Southern District of NY where his mother in law worked. She was actually indicted in a rico case because of it.
This poses more questions to yours than it answers. Surely only VERY few specialized FBI agents would know the identity of CI's. Especially one such as important as DeCicco.

I have no idea what position she had but I'd have thought only 2/3 agents on the squad and their supervisor would know DeCicco was a CI.
I don’t disagree, but she had information on other informants that proved to be correct in the past. Again, it’s not hard facts, but I lean toward it being true.
Concur. It is looking more likely than not considering the above.

Do we have a possible reason/motivation for DeCicco being a CI? Was he ever caught up in large drug deals, murders he was looking at walking from. I don't know much about his history. Usually it takes threat of serious time to roll.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by jmack » Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:46 am

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:48 am
jmack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:14 am
I’m not aware of sclafani’s information ever being proven wrong and he was getting information straight from the Southern District of NY where his mother in law worked. She was actually indicted in a rico case because of it.
This poses more questions to yours than it answers. Surely only VERY few specialized FBI agents would know the identity of CI's. Especially one such as important as DeCicco.

I have no idea what position she had but I'd have thought only 2/3 agents on the squad and their supervisor would know DeCicco was a CI.
I don’t disagree, but she had information on other informants that proved to be correct in the past. Again, it’s not hard facts, but I lean toward it being true.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by SonnyBlackstein » Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:48 am

jmack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:14 am
I’m not aware of sclafani’s information ever being proven wrong and he was getting information straight from the Southern District of NY where his mother in law worked. She was actually indicted in a rico case because of it.
This poses more questions to yours than it answers. Surely only VERY few specialized FBI agents would know the identity of CI's. Especially one such as important as DeCicco.

I have no idea what position she had but I'd have thought only 2/3 agents on the squad and their supervisor would know DeCicco was a CI.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by jmack » Wed Nov 13, 2024 9:14 am

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 10:19 am
jmack wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 2:28 am
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 7:20 pm
jmack wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm
Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.
This may sound dumb, happy to concede if it is, but why couldn't the 84 commission meet have been discovered due either a tail, a phone tap or a wire???

Why does it 'have' to be through a rat.

There's 3 VERY plausible alternatives which are completely ignored.

And when you take the 84 meet out of the equation, what's left that DeCicco was a rat? Salfani?
The informant gave the information to FBI agent Joseph F. O’Brien, who was on the Gambino squad. Unlike the bug in Castellano’s house, there was no need to shade the truth to protect trade secrets. Is it definitive, not at all. For me it does have a ring of truth though.
Good info. Cheers j.
Absolutely, brother. Again, it’s not a sure thing, but this coupled with the Sclafani information is suspect. I’m not aware of sclafani’s information ever being proven wrong and he was getting information straight from the Southern District of NY where his mother in law worked. She was actually indicted in a rico case because of it.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by SonnyBlackstein » Tue Nov 12, 2024 10:19 am

jmack wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 2:28 am
SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 7:20 pm
jmack wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm
Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.
This may sound dumb, happy to concede if it is, but why couldn't the 84 commission meet have been discovered due either a tail, a phone tap or a wire???

Why does it 'have' to be through a rat.

There's 3 VERY plausible alternatives which are completely ignored.

And when you take the 84 meet out of the equation, what's left that DeCicco was a rat? Salfani?
The informant gave the information to FBI agent Joseph F. O’Brien, who was on the Gambino squad. Unlike the bug in Castellano’s house, there was no need to shade the truth to protect trade secrets. Is it definitive, not at all. For me it does have a ring of truth though.
Good info. Cheers j.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by jmack » Tue Nov 12, 2024 2:28 am

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 7:20 pm
jmack wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm
Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.
This may sound dumb, happy to concede if it is, but why couldn't the 84 commission meet have been discovered due either a tail, a phone tap or a wire???

Why does it 'have' to be through a rat.

There's 3 VERY plausible alternatives which are completely ignored.

And when you take the 84 meet out of the equation, what's left that DeCicco was a rat? Salfani?
The informant gave the information to FBI agent Joseph F. O’Brien, who was on the Gambino squad. Unlike the bug in Castellano’s house, there was no need to shade the truth to protect trade secrets. Is it definitive, not at all. For me it does have a ring of truth though.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by SonnyBlackstein » Mon Nov 11, 2024 7:20 pm

jmack wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm
Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.
This may sound dumb, happy to concede if it is, but why couldn't the 84 commission meet have been discovered due either a tail, a phone tap or a wire???

Why does it 'have' to be through a rat.

There's 3 VERY plausible alternatives which are completely ignored.

And when you take the 84 meet out of the equation, what's left that DeCicco was a rat? Salfani?

Re: The DeCicco truth

by Snakes » Mon Nov 11, 2024 6:09 pm

gohnjotti wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 3:07 pm
Little_Al1991 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:55 pm Would a FOIA request about DeCicco clear things up?
In my experience, they wouldn't concede whether he is a cooperating witness. Worth a shot though.
Yeah, there would be a lot of redactions but there may be something in there somewhere that allows us to discern an identity. They have been extremely pedantic about redactions lately, though.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by Brovelli » Mon Nov 11, 2024 4:23 pm

I like this one as a debate between street guys and the history nerds lol. Every street guy seems adamant there is no way whereas every historian says it’s a possibility maybe even a likelihood. Would be great if it was ever verified/dismissed

Re: The DeCicco truth

by gohnjotti » Mon Nov 11, 2024 3:07 pm

Little_Al1991 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:55 pm Would a FOIA request about DeCicco clear things up?
In my experience, they wouldn't concede whether he is a cooperating witness. Worth a shot though.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by Little_Al1991 » Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:55 pm

Would a FOIA request about DeCicco clear things up?

Re: The DeCicco truth

by gohnjotti » Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:50 pm

jmack wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm
Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.
True. A lot of cooperating informants lie to their FBI handlers because if they notify the FBI about anything violent, the FBI has to take them off the street. Greg Scarpa and Frankie Sparaco are two great examples. Sal Miciotta also claims he was told "Keep doing what you have to do," words to that effect, implying that he can continue committing violence (particularly in relation to his loansharking enterprise) so long as he kept it under wraps. Greg Scarpa is, of course, an extreme example because it involved the FBI being somewhat complicit, but it's somewhat representative of the overall dynamic.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by jmack » Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:52 pm

Cheech wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.
Eh, debatable. Exhibit 1 is Scarpa and all of his nonsense while being a CI. Exhibit 2 is the 84 Commission meeting location being given up. He organized that meeting and is one of the few who could give up the location. Exhibit 3 would be Gus Salfani. He gave reliable information in the past. He made an allegation that he know could have got him killed. I doubt he took it lightly. I’m not saying he certainly was a CI, but I think the odds lean that way.

Re: The DeCicco truth

by Cheech » Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:06 am

If Decicco was a rat you would think the Castellano murder gets thwarted.

Re: What evidence is there that DeCicco was an informant?

by TSNYC » Mon Nov 11, 2024 7:18 am

Gus Sclafani accused him of being an informant. Sclafani through his mother in law had previously been on point with other accusations/court/case information.

There was an informant that gave up the 1984? Commission meeting in Staten Island. Apparently DeCicco was responsible for coordinating the security of the meeting. Never revealed who the informant was for that information.

Top