THE BLACK HAND FORUM

I would imagine so too.

funkster wrote: ↑Fri Jun 06, 2025 11:48 am That would make sense, I always got a slimy used car salesman vibe from Fratianno in his interviews. I think Sammy also claimed he got an introduction to him in NY in the 70s and he was acting like he was a boss? Though one never knows what’s true with Gravano either.

Gravano is probably lying about this

Fratianno had been demoted from acting underboss by February 1977 and in his story, Sammy is introduced to Fratianno by Gregory DePalma who only became a Gambino member in June 1977 - though in my view, he probably never even met him and was just throwing out a name to build up to a fabricated story about Roy DeMeo for clicks/views

That would make sense, I always got a slimy used car salesman vibe from Fratianno in his interviews. I think Sammy also claimed he got an introduction to him in NY in the 70s and he was acting like he was a boss? Though one never knows what’s true with Gravano either.

funkster wrote: ↑Fri Jun 06, 2025 10:11 am Such an odd situation. Is there any indication why Giancana would go to any such length to have Fratianno transferred? Just buddies?

I’m not at home so I can’t check right now, and don’t recall offhand what Fratianno said about it in his book exactly. But my understanding is that Fratianno wanted the transfer due to problems he was having with the LA admin in the early 60s and had Roselli arrange the meeting with Giancana. Fratianno was a slick guy and I’d assume would’ve persuaded Giancana that the transfer would have brought some lucrative business interests under Giancana’s control. That this wasn’t handled properly is further demonstrated by the fact that several years later, Frank LaPorte claimed to have had been totally unaware of this when it was happening. LaPorte was Roselli’s capodecina and himself spent much of his time in California (hence his close relationship to Bompensiero). Obviously, Roselli should not have been going around engaging in such matters directly with the boss behind LaPorte’s back. I’d suspect that this was one of several marks against Roselli that eventually tallied up to him getting hit, as I can’t imagine that LaPorte, Accardo, or Ricca were happy to have found out that Roselli was involved in secret dealings that the rest of Chicago’s admin were kept in the dark about.

Such an odd situation. Is there any indication why Giancana would go to any such length to have Fratianno transferred? Just buddies?

"The Weasel" was the the perfect nickname for him.

Thanks Tony!

Cosmik_Debris wrote: ↑Fri Jun 06, 2025 7:15 am

PolackTony wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 2:11 pm

funkster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 12:58 pm Sorry probably a dumb question, but is this in the Mary Ferrell files?

Not a dumb question at all. Offhand, I don't recall that this report was in one of the files on the MF site, but may rather have instead been in a file released under FOIA. B should remember, as he was the one who initially found the report in question.

On the subject of Alderisio, in an earlier FBI report filed in June of 1968 (this one is on MF), Bompensiero had also previously claimed at that time that he understood Alderisio to hold the rank of soldier. Bomp further reported back from a meeting that he had with LaPorte, who had raised the issue of Fratianno's abortive membership transfer to Chicago to Accardo and Ricca. It's evident that the 1969 meeting meeting between Alderisio, Bompensiero, and Fratianno was consequent to this, as the Chicago Consiglio clearly sent Alderisio out to LA to follow up and resolve the matter. It should be noted also that while Fratianno had been personally acquainted with Alderisio for some time, per Bompensiero, the two had never been formally introduced as amici nostri, necessitating Bomp's presence as the third party to make those introductions, as Bomp already knew Alderisio as an LCN member.

This is interesting. So are we led to believe here that Fratianno never was actually a member of the Chicago family and his transfer request was denied?

In The Last Mafiaso, he makes it pretty clear he thought he was a member of the Outfit. Seems like that actually isn't true, no?

We’ve discussed this before but the search function here leaves much to be desired, so it may not be easy for you to locate.

Fratianno seems to have sincerely believed that he was a Chicago member for a period, later claiming to Alderisio that Giancana had personally told him that he was being transferred and was to report directly to Giancana. The issue was that this transfer, evidently, was not handled properly by Giancana with respect to both the Chicago and LA Families. When Nick Licata became boss in LA, he refused to recognize the transfer on the grounds that he had been unaware of it (Roselli and Fratianno having claimed that it was approved by prior LA boss Frank DeSimone, but if that were the case, then DeSimone seemingly hadn’t informed anyone else in the LA outfit), while it’s clear that the Chicago Consiglio had never been informed at all about the matter. If all that Fratianno had was Giancana’s word, that meant nothing once Giancana was off the scene. From a July 1968 report, where Bomp was reporting to the FBI immediately on the heels of the report that I cited above:

chin_gigante wrote: ↑Fri Jun 06, 2025 7:09 am The ‘Consignu’ memorandum is available on the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Looking for it using the Advanced Search function is useless because the text is so faded, but it can be found using RIF Search under Record Number 124-10290-10497.

Document ID 92055 (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=92055) contains the full memorandum, though there are a couple of redactions and unfortunately some pages are so faded as to be unreadable.

Document ID 172714 (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=172714) contains the unredacted first page, which confirms that Bompensiero (SD 1064-C-TE) was the informant.

The memorandum also details discussion within Chicago about making Alderisio the boss:

Alderisio told them that the Chicago Family was discussing appointing a new Boss and had talked to Alderisio about taking the position. Alderisio is reluctant because it might adversely effect the pending appeal of his felony conviction. He believed he could stall on this appeal for another year or two.

There is a lot of other information within the document, including references to Detroit serving as the buffer between Los Angeles and the commission, Nick Licata planning to induct Peter Milano, how Frank Gruttadauria transferred his membership from Cleveland to LA, the identification of some St Louis members, a dispute over the election of John Scalish as boss of Cleveland, Leo Moceri wanting to transfer to LA, and Joe Zerilli staying on as boss of Detroit because he feared his son would lose an election to succeed him.

Thanks for following up on this. IMO an important document.

PolackTony wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 2:11 pm

funkster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 12:58 pm Sorry probably a dumb question, but is this in the Mary Ferrell files?

Not a dumb question at all. Offhand, I don't recall that this report was in one of the files on the MF site, but may rather have instead been in a file released under FOIA. B should remember, as he was the one who initially found the report in question.

On the subject of Alderisio, in an earlier FBI report filed in June of 1968 (this one is on MF), Bompensiero had also previously claimed at that time that he understood Alderisio to hold the rank of soldier. Bomp further reported back from a meeting that he had with LaPorte, who had raised the issue of Fratianno's abortive membership transfer to Chicago to Accardo and Ricca. It's evident that the 1969 meeting meeting between Alderisio, Bompensiero, and Fratianno was consequent to this, as the Chicago Consiglio clearly sent Alderisio out to LA to follow up and resolve the matter. It should be noted also that while Fratianno had been personally acquainted with Alderisio for some time, per Bompensiero, the two had never been formally introduced as amici nostri, necessitating Bomp's presence as the third party to make those introductions, as Bomp already knew Alderisio as an LCN member.

This is interesting. So are we led to believe here that Fratianno never was actually a member of the Chicago family and his transfer request was denied?

In The Last Mafiaso, he makes it pretty clear he thought he was a member of the Outfit. Seems like that actually isn't true, no?

The ‘Consignu’ memorandum is available on the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Looking for it using the Advanced Search function is useless because the text is so faded, but it can be found using RIF Search under Record Number 124-10290-10497.

Document ID 92055 (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=92055) contains the full memorandum, though there are a couple of redactions and unfortunately some pages are so faded as to be unreadable.

Document ID 172714 (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=172714) contains the unredacted first page, which confirms that Bompensiero (SD 1064-C-TE) was the informant.

The memorandum also details discussion within Chicago about making Alderisio the boss:

Alderisio told them that the Chicago Family was discussing appointing a new Boss and had talked to Alderisio about taking the position. Alderisio is reluctant because it might adversely effect the pending appeal of his felony conviction. He believed he could stall on this appeal for another year or two.

There is a lot of other information within the document, including references to Detroit serving as the buffer between Los Angeles and the commission, Nick Licata planning to induct Peter Milano, how Frank Gruttadauria transferred his membership from Cleveland to LA, the identification of some St Louis members, a dispute over the election of John Scalish as boss of Cleveland, Leo Moceri wanting to transfer to LA, and Joe Zerilli staying on as boss of Detroit because he feared his son would lose an election to succeed him.

With the underboss, often the underboss is the one directing the operational side of the Family on the boss's behalf. That seems to be the case with Ferraro in Chicago. We don't know the full picture but his office was extensively wiretapped and Ferraro was primarily concerned with supervising the Family's high level business and political interests. He comes across somewhat aloof from organizational matters, his knowledge of the Rockford Family somewhat hazy and there not being much evidence he was directly involved in what was going on within individual crews. That makes sense too given Chicago's decine were tight-knit, highly-disciplined, and the captains acted with full authority. It wouldn't have been necessary in most cases for the underboss to concern himself with the daily issues within a given decina.

We know Giancana did directly participate in issues between members / crews, apparently without Ferraro's direct involvement. We have the wiretap of soldier Joe Costello and his unnamed capodecina (possibly Salvatore DiGiovanni) registering a complaint direct to Giancana about soldier Joe Fusco who belonged to another crew. Giancana listened to the complaint and was going to attempt to settle it himself but it's likely if the issue escalated further the consiglio would need to meet about it. I'm curious if Ferraro ever acted in a similar capacity or if it was typical for Giancana himself to get involved directly like this, especially given how often Giancana was traveling, tending to Commission business, and everything else he had on his plate.

Jackie Cerone was increasingly taking on more responsibility during this period. When the Rockford Family was unable to get in touch with Ferraro, it was instead Cerone who met with them and there's other evidence showing by the early-mid 1960s Cerone had relationships to other Families around the country and was assisting the admin. He was a captain on the consiglio though and someone specifically being groomed for an upper-echelon leadership role so it's no surprise we see Cerone representing the admin as a captain and filling in as needed.

The 1969 chart lists Cerone as acting underboss, it not being clear if this was speculative or based on concrete intel as it is stated definitively. Cerone's role does seem to have been akin to acting underboss during the 1960s, though, even standing in for underboss Ferraro with Rockford on one occasion although that doesn't mean he was actually Ferraro's acting underboss. If he was acting underboss in 1969 it would mean he was acting for Battaglia anyway although Battaglia isn't listed as official underboss on the chart. The same chart lists Alderisio as "possibly acting" as consigliere which isn't too far off the mark given Bompensiero said Alderisio met with and carried messages on behalf of the consiglio; however, that is different from being the "acting consigliere" and we don't really have basis for believing Alderisio himself even had an official seat on the consiglio or held any actual rank beyond soldier at that time.

Pogo The Clown wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 2:09 pm

Ivan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 12:50 pm Generative AI analysis (sorry couldn't resist).

Classic. You are the man Ivan.

Skynet thinks they're the same guy. Hope it doesn't dispatch a Terminator or anything like that!

VC2 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 05, 2025 5:20 pm so to give a hypothetical. a guy like joe andriacchi and whatever his role may have been in the 1990s 2000s, elmwood park capo at the least.
its possible a guy like that could also be a member of a council helping run the outfit.

if also andriacchi, as it has been said had some role in the operations of the grand avenue crew, especially when joe lombardo was still under parole restrictions after his nov 1992 release. in effect giving a member like joe andriacchi more influence over 2 crews then other capos at the time.
but not as much as the underboss of the family.

We have no basis for believing the consiglio as it once existed was still in place in the 90s or 2000s but there is nothing preventing someone of any rank from being elected to a consiglio. If someone was a captain at that time he could have sat on a hypothetical consiglio if it existed.

Crews can be permanently or temporarily assigned to another captain and crews can also report to an admin member. In the Bonannos for example they have temporarily assigned crews to another captain who "services" them but the original decina still exists separately and when the original captain is released from prison or someone else is appointed it stays separate. Other times a crew is disbanded or merged with another crew. No idea myself what's been going on in Chicago with this or who was under Andriacchi's direction.

--

Another note about the consiglio since this came up earlier -- while the boss sits on the consiglio in every known example we have, I don't know that the boss "must" sit on the consiglio as a rule. I imagine it's kind of a given, like how football teams always elect the starting quarterback to be team captain. If you don't elect the rappresentante to sit on the consiglio as an honorary gesture if nothing else it's indicative of far bigger problems and why is this guy even the boss if you don't want him on the council.

so to give a hypothetical. a guy like joe andriacchi and whatever his role may have been in the 1990s 2000s, elmwood park capo at the least.
its possible a guy like that could also be a member of a council helping run the outfit.

if also andriacchi, as it has been said had some role in the operations of the grand avenue crew, especially when joe lombardo was still under parole restrictions after his nov 1992 release. in effect giving a member like joe andriacchi more influence over 2 crews then other capos at the time.
but not as much as the underboss of the family.

Thanks a lot. I think i largely understand the Consiglieri postion from discussions on this forum, it's been focused on a lot here not so much Underboss because it doesn't seem like it's ever had much consistency IMO. I think it's just a personal internal conflict because i'm interested in Military History with clearly defined positions and that's obviously not the case with the Mafia.

Enough of me derailing this thread though i'll be back in a few days when i misremember something else about a Chicago guy that kicks off arguments about long gone members.