The Chicago Outfit (discussion)

[SonnyBlackstein]

And the few knuckleheads on these forums arguing over membership numbers of organizations of cities they have never stepped foot in, or talked to people involved in those orgs ruin the discussions for the reader and the researcher alike.

So questioning a basic assertion of a LCN families size (which contradicts offical figures by double), on a mafia forum board, with the word 'discussion' in the thread title, is 'ruining the discussion for the reader...''?

I look forward to seeing a list of topics that I'm allowed to discuss, and which side I will be taking.

Argue your point, don't make it personal, bring some facts, or a well researched hypothesis.

So for example the ONE point I'm arguing I present official FBI numbers which contradict SB's (so far unsubstantiated) claims by more than double?
Would they be the facts you're referring to?

... and handles BS like this pretty well..... Some of you guys are like Youtube commentators.

I read a really good line once; "Argue your point, don't make it personal, bring some facts, or a well researched hypothesis..."

[Angelo Santino]

I've had personal dealings with Scott B. He's not out to burn anybody or deceive anyone. He writes it to the best of his ability. You think it's easy writing a book in today's climate and getting it published? Why do you think he allowed Sam Giancana to have his name first as an author and take what I believe was 60% of the profits. And Scott's Jewish! Culturally Jewish but still you know how much money means to those people and Scott had to weigh national exposure with SG's name with the loss of % he would come with receiving it. He wrote the entire fucking book, I'm not even sure SG even read it and then he had to fight with the publisher over the size of is fucking name under "by Sam Giancana and." He wanted to get his name known and operated at a loss. That kinda speaks of his passion and wanted longevity in this field.

I did and do have disagreements with him. He's someone I can approach and say respectfully: I think you have this wrong and here's why. He might get a little defensive "well wait a minute..." but he'll hear you out and have a debate about it. I won the phone debate with him that Detroit goes back to 1900, all those "separate gangs" thing was a newspaper rendition, everyone goes back to Giannola except for a few St Louis expats. He agreed. But he still goes on to call Zerilli Detroit's founding Godfather. That's as false as a 700 member family, but so what? He may be off on a few things but he's right on alot of others in areas that I am very weak in... Why do I forgive that? Because I know I'm not right in everything I've put down. In fact I've reconsidered many things as I've found more information. This stuff will never have a final definitive answer. But there's a difference between searchers of truth and genuine bullshit artists. We "searchers" are sometimes going to be at odds but we should have a respect for those trying honestly. Our own definitions of what's credible may not be the same, but we can respect that others are good intentioned.

end of the day he's a source, and like all the others (as well as anyone who puts themselves out as a source) are right on some things, off on others. 30 or 80 made guys- all those guys exist. Maybe their position is overstated, have a conversation with him about it.

If Scott B had a "I'm The Next Capeci, I Know everything, fuck youse" mentality I could understand and even partake in the character bashing. But he's an honest guy trying his best. He's not one of the big guys, he's a little guy who made connections. Anastasia liked him so well that he became almost George's pupil. Leonetti went to George for the book who connected him with Burnstein. That has to speak for something.

Anastasia is near retirement and in the last several years, he admitably has lost interest in covering the LCN. He finds other ethnic OC to be more interesting and would prefer to follow that. If GA releases another Mafia book (not based on his articles like Mobfiles) I will be very surprised. But there's a good chance that if he does put one out, it will be with SB. Burnstein brought GA on for a book on the Chaldean Mafia, they were all set to go but the informant backed out and the project died.

[SonnyBlackstein]

If Scott B had a "I'm The Next Capeci, I Know everything, fuck youse" mentality I could understand and even partake in the character bashing.

Character bashing?!?!

This discussion is absurd.

I question a source which contradicts offical federal figures BY DOUBLE and the entire board, or large segments of it scream 'character bashing/knucklehead/YouTube comments' etc etc. Even the moderators jump in to defend him for chrissake.

Conversely in a not too distant thread the leadership of the Luchesse family was up for debate and the board couldn't pull official statements out of its arse fast enough.

What a subjective, vested interest, cherry picking joke.

You'll hear no more from me on the subject. I do so hope poor Mr Burnsteins feelings will recover.

[Angelo Santino]

And I'll commend him on his trying to cover the lesser known families. That's almost impossible because there isn't enough news to warrant it. We once spoke on the phone and he told me he was waiting for Ligambi to get indicted so he could write a book about him called "The Unlikely Don." I shared my opinion that there isn't enough to warrant a book. Besides the 2000's with the Merlino indictment and what's his face's murder, Ligambi's tenure was very quiet. It's 5 chapters at best. I may be wrong and he may prove it. I give him credit for trying.

On one hand we bitch and complain there is no news. On the other hand we criticize shit other people put out. I think we've just all become too accustomed to debating this stuff "publicly" on a forum. This shit pays no money, if you got the luxury time to do, money/time to invest and think you can do better. Well step the fuck up!

Again, he's approachable. We're the Black Hand Forum, if we can influence wisely an up and coming author, why not? He's not out to have his ass kissed, he likes a conversation, but he also doesn't want to be slandered. There's a way to counterargue a point and there's a way of telling someone to go fuck themselves without specifically stating it, and being told: "You are quite simply, a fanboy trying to inflate things to suit your own agenda when you have no bearing on the truth and are, simply overstating things." Shit like that is an insult. Those are fighting words. That's not a specific quote, but it's close enough to what some were implying.

I do so hope poor Mr Burnsteins feelings will recover.

They will.

[Pogo The Clown]

Not to rehash this again but what bearing does him being a nice guy or passionate about the subject have do with the claims he is making? Scott being a nice guy or passionate is a non issue.


I'm sure Volkman is a nice guy too but that doesn't make his claims about the Lucchese family being the last great Mafia empire and then breaking up into a bunch of uncoordinated street gangs in the 1990s any more credible. Likewise Scott being nice doesn't make his claims about Detroit being this ultra hierarchical multi crewed 55 made member organizaion that controls 25% of the drug trade in Detroit and is active in 7 states any more credible.


Pogo

[SonnyBlackstein]

And that's the point.

One is an argument about a gross distortion of the facts, the other, about ones feelings.

I hope your feelings will also Chris, with time....

But maybe I can apply a salve with an apology for not abstaining.
My apologies.

[Wiseguy]

When the FBI states "x" amount of made members for this family or that family is that of only known members or do they include strong candidates in those numbers? Commonsense tells me there has to be a 5% plus or minus with their figures but with all their research, informants and other whatnot tactics the FBI's numbers have to be fairly close.

Compared to other law enforcement or government bodies, who are aren't as stringent, the FBI is rather strict in who they consider made. Typically they have to have the independent verification of two other made members that a guy is made. It's why I've always given their estimates the most weight.

Now, that said, I do agree that common sense would suggest that it's certainly possible that not every single member in a family (especially in the larger ones in NY) has been identified. But I've never believed those flying under the radar in any family were in big numbers. 5-10% would be a guess on my part.

So, going back to the original point of debate - if the FBI knew of 28 made members back in 2007, it's possible there are a few they didn't know about. But not 10, 15, or 20.

--------------------------------------------------------------

As for Scott, I have nothing personal against him. He has provided some info about Detroit that would otherwise not be available and I did enjoy his Leonetti book. And I don't think he intentionally lies but, at times, can be somewhat sloppy.

I think what Pogo and I are saying is, if Pete or whoever wants to believe there are 40 or 50 made members in the Outfit, go ahead. But you can't use Scott to support your argument.

[B.]

I've never had an issue with Scott's work and am not in a position to comment on his claims one way or another. I respect his passion and give support to someone like him who is trying to keep the story of the American mob going at this point because there are really so few of us interested anymore. On a gut level, though, I wouldn't call him a hack given that he does engage in dialogue about his subjects. The real hacks like Phil Carlo would never do that (well, Carlo can't exactly say much these days anyway, but you know what I mean).

I do get a laugh out of Scott's Detroit lists with all of the crazy titles and nicknames. Either Detroit is the most grandiose, ridiculous mob family in the US or he has some exaggerated information in there. But what do I know, maybe Bobby "Dapper Two-Guns" DiTullio is the "consigliere di tutti consiglieri" and "street underboss" of Detroit's crew in the Bahamas.

[Five Felonies]

On one hand we bitch and complain there is no news. On the other hand we criticize shit other people put out.

i think this is a very good point. you can't have it both ways and regardless of whether the information being presented is 100% accurate doesn't mean we should just throw the baby out with the bathwater as some would say. maybe a few pieces might plug holes in the gaps that others may have and help us to reach a consensus on a particular issue. even some of the more controversial statements could help shed light on certain things if we weren't so dead set on the "all or nothing" mindset, examples...

-take the "detroit is is involved with 25% of the drugs" statement that people have criticized. personally, i don't believe that to be true. i think that the drug world in detroit is just too big and too violent for that number to even be close. the thing is, rather than just poo poo it and move on, why not ask for clarification? i'd be interested to know where the number came from with more specific details about possible connections with other criminal elements. if you haven't seen the detroit gangland episode, scott was involved and seems to know some stuff about the local gang scene as well so perhaps there is some info to be learned.

-another one, the family having operations is several states. i don't believe that the detroit lcn has large scale crews operating anywhere besides the city and surrounding suburbs, but that doesn't mean that a few guys here or there don't have a few things going on. i'd rather hear what may or may not be going on in a certain area as opposed to being told that there is no fbi sources on record to back things up.

-the "membership" numbers for detroit. sure, a bunch of guys where listed as "members", including a bunch of non-italians. this comes down to terminology again, so unless the list stated that everyone was 100% made, confirmed by multiple fbi sources, then maybe taking a step back and asking for clarification is a better option then just shit-canning the whole list. christie said all the names are real people, so it's not like they were just pulled off some gravestones. again, maybe some of the guys here who do a great job of researching things can take some of those names and run with them, shedding light on stuff that has been previously unknown.


as for the chicago numbers, it seems like the # of made guys in particular is what causes the most contention because of the issues with the formal ceremony, structure ect, not so much the size or scope of the criminal organization as a whole, although there are still issues with that as well. the latest numbers are 30 or so made guys with a little over 100 associates for a total manpower of around 150, which isn't in nearly as much dispute. i've always though along these lines... perhaps there are 50 or so guys who are either made or have made guy status, far from an insane observation. for all we know, they could have made 5 or 6 guys this morning and we likely wouldn't find out for years, if at all.

[JerryB]

...the FBI is rather strict in who they consider made. Typically they have to have the independent verification of two other made members that a guy is made.

No sure where you came up with that, Wiseguy. It may be the criteria for any given geographical OC unit supervisor, but it certainly IS NOT in the MIOG.

[Wiseguy]

-take the "detroit is is involved with 25% of the drugs" statement that people have criticized. personally, i don't believe that to be true. i think that the drug world in detroit is just too big and too violent for that number to even be close. the thing is, rather than just poo poo it and move on, why not ask for clarification? i'd be interested to know where the number came from with more specific details about possible connections with other criminal elements. if you haven't seen the detroit gangland episode, scott was involved and seems to know some stuff about the local gang scene as well so perhaps there is some info to be learned.

-another one, the family having operations is several states. i don't believe that the detroit lcn has large scale crews operating anywhere besides the city and surrounding suburbs, but that doesn't mean that a few guys here or there don't have a few things going on. i'd rather hear what may or may not be going on in a certain area as opposed to being told that there is no fbi sources on record to back things up.

-the "membership" numbers for detroit. sure, a bunch of guys where listed as "members", including a bunch of non-italians. this comes down to terminology again, so unless the list stated that everyone was 100% made, confirmed by multiple fbi sources, then maybe taking a step back and asking for clarification is a better option then just shit-canning the whole list. christie said all the names are real people, so it's not like they were just pulled off some gravestones. again, maybe some of the guys here who do a great job of researching things can take some of those names and run with them, shedding light on stuff that has been previously unknown.

This is a good answer to Pete's challenge about Scott's information about Detroit (other than his inflated numbers.) I don't remember if it was Scott that said it specifically but anyone who claims the Detroit LCN is involved in 25% of the city's drug trade is either flat out lying or is simply delusional. It's demonstrably false. You won't find the Detroit LCN in any recent HIDTA report of the region and the drug cases involving the Detroit LCN in recent decades are almost non-existent.

Then there is the claim about the family having any significant operations outside Michigan. Little to no evidence of this.

In short, if it wasn't for certain posters who try to stick to the known, demonstrable facts - and we all just went with Scott's info on Detroit - our image of that family would be 50-60 members, a boss, underboss, street boss, at least a few "emeritus" leaders, at least a half dozen captains/crews, with activity in several states, including significant involvement in the drug trade and labor racketeering.

That's simply not reality.

That's said, I take the same approach to Scott that I do with other things regarding OC and try not to "throw the baby out with the bathwater."

...the FBI is rather strict in who they consider made. Typically they have to have the independent verification of two other made members that a guy is made.

No sure where you came up with that, Wiseguy. It may be the criteria for any given geographical OC unit supervisor, but it certainly IS NOT in the MIOG.

I've read it in a number of places, one being below -

18. The FBI keeps an inventory of individuals who are associates or members of Organized Crime. In order for the FBI to categorize a person as a member or associate of Organized Crime, certain requirements must be met. Generally, those requirements are that two known made members are heard on a wiretap discussing another person as a made member; or that two known made members are heard discussing a third person as a made member, in the presence of an undercover FBI agent; or that two reliable organized crime informants independently identify a person as a made member.
http://www.ipsn.org/orourke_affidavit.php

[Antiliar]

Getting back to Chicago, don't forget that one of Scott's sources is Jim Wagner, who was an FBI agent in Chicago for 31 years and went on to head the Chicago Crime Commission.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010 ... y-watchdog
https://www.niagarafoundation.org/james ... ommission/
http://prev.dailyherald.com/story/?id=240184

[Lupara]

greedy white collar criminals, and Wall Street bankers stealing billions.

What's the difference?

[JCB1977]

Pogo is right. What Scott reports often doesn't match up with the feds. Saying as much isn't trolling. It's sticking to the known facts and not being gullible like certain people who never learn. And I'll believe Scott's Outfit charts when they're verified by other sources or the feds themselves.

Agreed he's not perfect but besides exaggerating numbers and things of that nature what leadership has he not been in line with the Feds? See you can't just throw out these general statements if your questioning his information give an example I asked pogo and he confirmed what I said by discussing the numbers exaggerations so I'll ask you what else?

Keep in mind that some of Scott's sources may have "different" information than other sources. When we say the Feds, who are we implying? FBI, U.S Justice Department, IRS, DEA, ATF or INS? The Feds could be any source who works towards building a case against organized crime members. With that being said, does anybody actually believe the FBI is sharing everything with the USDOJ? Or the IRS? The government also sends more smoke screens to the general public, they're not sharing a fraction of the truth with the media. I don't believe Scott would intentionally misrepresent his journalism profession, which is career suicide if you are found to be a liar and/or intentionally misrepresent. Sources are sources, some better than others. FBI agents are still lying to protect their asses in the Boston office. They're the punch lines up here in Massachusetts, and I guarantee there are more out there. It's the nature of the beast.

[JerryB]

I've read it in a number of places, one being below -
18. The FBI keeps an inventory of individuals who are associates or members of Organized Crime. In order for the FBI to categorize a person as a member or associate of Organized Crime, certain requirements must be met. Generally, those requirements are that two known made members are heard on a wiretap discussing another person as a made member; or that two known made members are heard discussing a third person as a made member, in the presence of an undercover FBI agent; or that two reliable organized crime informants independently identify a person as a made member.
http://www.ipsn.org/orourke_affidavit.php

Thanks, Wiseguy. The statement does give credence to your allegation that the FBI generally requires corroboration from two other made members that a third person is a made member in Chicago: Retired Agent O'Rourke worked OC in Chicago and was a field instructor on LCN.

Also, to put it into context, that quote comes from an affidavit written by O'Rourke, a now retired (20 years ago) FBI agent, to qualify himself as an expert in an administrative hearing for the Laborers' International Union of No. Amer., not a current day affidavit used to qualify an active FBI Agent in obtaining a search warrant or an arrest warrant. Also, I don't recall necessarily seeing that language in any of the several indictments we've all shared in the past; those that identified made members of certain New York families. Thus, my reticence.

I tried looking up the FBI's LCN "Program Implementation Guide" before typing this. I couldn't find it and believe it may be "classified." Perhaps we have an Agent on this board who can look up the PIG and confirm that the aforementioned requirement is a bureau-wide policy?