Joaquin Garcia and the Gambinos

[bert]

On a side note respect for DePalma never giving up on his son. Even after he flipped and he hang himself and becoming a vegetable he took care of him in a nursing home and never abandoned him.
There are plenty of regular parentes that arent scumbag criminals that would give up and abandon the kid.

Yea , But he did use his invalid son as a tool to evade detection and hold meetings over his comatose son's body which his wife despised and had some choice words for him over what he did and what he was doing

He had meetings everywhere, since he wanted to stay with his son as much as he could he had some guys meet him there, Garcia made it like they talked over the body on purpose. The man stuck to his son through everything.

[Bklyn21]

On a side note respect for DePalma never giving up on his son. Even after he flipped and he hang himself and becoming a vegetable he took care of him in a nursing home and never abandoned him.
There are plenty of regular parentes that arent scumbag criminals that would give up and abandon the kid.

Yea , But he did use his invalid son as a tool to evade detection and hold meetings over his comatose son's body which his wife despised and had some choice words for him over what he did and what he was doing

He had meetings everywhere, since he wanted to stay with his son as much as he could he had some guys meet him there, Garcia made it like they talked over the body on purpose. The man stuck to his son through everything.

Yea but he did use it as a tool for evasion also , His wife went ballistic on him for it lol

[bert]

On a side note respect for DePalma never giving up on his son. Even after he flipped and he hang himself and becoming a vegetable he took care of him in a nursing home and never abandoned him.
There are plenty of regular parentes that arent scumbag criminals that would give up and abandon the kid.

Yea , But he did use his invalid son as a tool to evade detection and hold meetings over his comatose son's body which his wife despised and had some choice words for him over what he did and what he was doing

He had meetings everywhere, since he wanted to stay with his son as much as he could he had some guys meet him there, Garcia made it like they talked over the body on purpose. The man stuck to his son through everything.

Yea but he did use it as a tool for evasion also , His wife went ballistic on him for it lol

You know his wife? Or did you witness it.

[Bklyn21]

On a side note respect for DePalma never giving up on his son. Even after he flipped and he hang himself and becoming a vegetable he took care of him in a nursing home and never abandoned him.
There are plenty of regular parentes that arent scumbag criminals that would give up and abandon the kid.

Yea , But he did use his invalid son as a tool to evade detection and hold meetings over his comatose son's body which his wife despised and had some choice words for him over what he did and what he was doing

He had meetings everywhere, since he wanted to stay with his son as much as he could he had some guys meet him there, Garcia made it like they talked over the body on purpose. The man stuck to his son through everything.

Yea but he did use it as a tool for evasion also , His wife went ballistic on him for it lol

You know his wife? Or did you witness it.

No , But his wife testified against him and wanted nothing to do with him for numerous things including bringing his son into his business against her wishes and using they're son as a Meeting place , Gathering spot for Lcn matters

[Wiseguy]

Thats what I'm saying , I don't know whos right or wrong ? Is Garcia right or wrong ? Did Depalma lie , Or was he stating the same as Dileonardo about the 260 member cap for the family history by , Was Depalma 100% correct telling Garcia that there were presently 26 Capos and crews at that time and Garcia arguing with his superiors that they're charts were wrong and they were missing 5 Capos and potentially dozens of members and refused to acknowledge this for whatever reason ? Is it just all BS and hot air ? So , I look at other cases if this is true ? One being Buffalo , Were the Feds blowing smoke , Or was there really no viable family and only remnants ? I don't know whos lying, Or no one is lying and Garcia has it all wrong , The Feds repressing Information for whatever reasons and Agendas ? I believe the figures are somewhat correct for those years and times . Will it come out that Buffalo was alive and Viable over the last 20 years ? I don't know , But that investigation is ongoing and a few people hold the answers

It comes down to differentiating between general trends and outliers. As well as looking at the collective evidence as opposed to just a single source. Has the general trend been the Gambinos growing larger, with more crews, over the past nearly 30 years?

Garcia used to be a member of RD, so he's probably still on social media. He always made himself available to answer questions, so if someone contacted him in a friendly manner he probably would give a response.

I also don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that the FBI is mistaken with Buffalo. The FBI doesn't have all the answers and doesn't have informants everywhere. Agents often don't ask the right questions and tend to only seek info that leads to prosecution. Sometimes offices don't share information, and data can be misfiled and mislabeled. Sometimes the Bureau will stick with a narrative because of a past prosecution, and changing the story could mean undoing convictions. In other words, we should be skeptical about all sources, including the FBI.

It's certainly out of the realm of probability. How likely is it that the FBI is wrong about the state of an LCN family in the 21st century? How likely is it that the family largely flew under the radar, from its last significant case (Local 210) to the 2017 drug bust over 20 years later? Moreover, how likely is it that a family like Buffalo did go defunct and then reorganized and became active again? When has this ever happened? There's little reason not to give the feds the benefit of the doubt.

[Pogo The Clown]

From the mid-1980s, when Gotti took over, to the early 1990s, the Gambinos were said to have 21 crews and around 250 members.

Not to nitpick but it was 22 Crews. There are the 21 listed in this famous 1991 chart but in his debriefings he also IDed LoCascio as still holding a Capo rank with his son Salvatore as his Acting Capo.



The 1991 chart.

https://www.google.com/search?q=gambino ... xnooMZwLPM


His debriefings listing 22 Crews.


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/sammy ... gs?page=26


Pogo

[StandUpGuy]

On a side note respect for DePalma never giving up on his son. Even after he flipped and he hang himself and becoming a vegetable he took care of him in a nursing home and never abandoned him.
There are plenty of regular parentes that arent scumbag criminals that would give up and abandon the kid.

Yea , But he did use his invalid son as a tool to evade detection and hold meetings over his comatose son's body which his wife despised and had some choice words for him over what he did and what he was doing

He had meetings everywhere, since he wanted to stay with his son as much as he could he had some guys meet him there, Garcia made it like they talked over the body on purpose. The man stuck to his son through everything.

Garcia said after DePalma died that he really loved his son and that DePalma was he was proud of him being part of that life. https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/ ... e-1.154820

[Wiseguy]

From the mid-1980s, when Gotti took over, to the early 1990s, the Gambinos were said to have 21 crews and around 250 members.

Not to nitpick but it was 22 Crews. There are the 21 listed in this famous 1991 chart but in his debriefings he also IDed LoCascio as still holding a Capo rank with his son Salvatore as his Acting Capo.



The 1991 chart.

https://www.google.com/search?q=gambino ... xnooMZwLPM


His debriefings listing 22 Crews.


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/sammy ... gs?page=26


Pogo

Fair enough but the point stands. The Gambinos go from 22 crews in 1991 to 26 crews over a decade later? At one point during the 1990s, the FBI had the Gambinos at only 10 fully active crews as a result from all the indictments.

The point being, whether we're talking about the Gambinos 15 years ago or Buffalo today, one can figure out what's going on by looking at the collective evidence rather than getting sidetracked by a single point.

[Antiliar]

Garcia used to be a member of RD, so he's probably still on social media. He always made himself available to answer questions, so if someone contacted him in a friendly manner he probably would give a response.

I also don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that the FBI is mistaken with Buffalo. The FBI doesn't have all the answers and doesn't have informants everywhere. Agents often don't ask the right questions and tend to only seek info that leads to prosecution. Sometimes offices don't share information, and data can be misfiled and mislabeled. Sometimes the Bureau will stick with a narrative because of a past prosecution, and changing the story could mean undoing convictions. In other words, we should be skeptical about all sources, including the FBI.

It's certainly out of the realm of probability. How likely is it that the FBI is wrong about the state of an LCN family in the 21st century? How likely is it that the family largely flew under the radar, from its last significant case (Local 210) to the 2017 drug bust over 20 years later? Moreover, how likely is it that a family like Buffalo did go defunct and then reorganized and became active again? When has this ever happened? There's little reason not to give the feds the benefit of the doubt.

I think you mean that "It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility." How likely is it? I don't know. I give the FBI less benefit of the doubt than you do. I have hundreds of FBI files and probably dozens of autobiographies from ex-FBI agents and histories of the Bureau. I've seen how the FBI gets bad intel then sticks with it because they trust the informant, only to find out later that the informant was mistaken or lying. I've seen a lot of mistakes taken as fact. The 302s are often too short because important follow-up questions aren't asked. As for Buffalo specifically, contemporary Buffalo isn't something I've researched so I can't give all the answers. One issue where we disagree is (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that if there's no arrests or cases, then nothing's there. I see other options: Maybe they haven't been caught. Maybe they've changed their M.O. Both are also within the realm of possibility.

Take Chicago, for example, since it's a city I'm more familiar with. It has always been a mystery and law enforcement sources have often gotten it wrong. According to some LE sources, Frank Nitto was the boss after Capone went to prison, but certain insiders say he was never a boss. The same with Ferriola decades later. What was John DiFronzo's role up until his death? Who's in charge today? Andriacchi, DeLaurentis, Vena, or someone else? Is it defunct? The fact is, we just don't know a lot and we need to admit that we don't. And by "we" I include LE sources.

[Wiseguy]

I think you mean that "It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility."

Yes, that's what I meant.

How likely is it? I don't know. I give the FBI less benefit of the doubt than you do. I have hundreds of FBI files and probably dozens of autobiographies from ex-FBI agents and histories of the Bureau. I've seen how the FBI gets bad intel then sticks with it because they trust the informant, only to find out later that the informant was mistaken or lying. I've seen a lot of mistakes taken as fact. The 302s are often too short because important follow-up questions aren't asked

Would these be like the MF files from 50 years ago? The FBI's stance on Buffalo doesn't just come from some questionable informant. It's been the position of federal, as well as local law enforcement, for years now.

As for Buffalo specifically, contemporary Buffalo isn't something I've researched so I can't give all the answers. One issue where we disagree is (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that if there's no arrests or cases, then nothing's there. I see other options: Maybe they haven't been caught. Maybe they've changed their M.O. Both are also within the realm of possibility.

This reasoning may work in the short term but it loses credibility the more time goes by. With enough years without ongoing arrests, things start to become pretty clear. Things like "They're not a priority," or "Maybe they haven't been caught," or "Maybe they've changed their MO" have been used by others on the forums to explain away the lack of cases with multiple families the feds no longer consider active. You could use these excuses for any family if you want. Maybe Denver is still around and they just haven't been caught since the late 1970s?

Take Chicago, for example, since it's a city I'm more familiar with. It has always been a mystery and law enforcement sources have often gotten it wrong. According to some LE sources, Frank Nitto was the boss after Capone went to prison, but certain insiders say he was never a boss. The same with Ferriola decades later. What was John DiFronzo's role up until his death? Who's in charge today? Andriacchi, DeLaurentis, Vena, or someone else? Is it defunct? The fact is, we just don't know a lot and we need to admit that we don't. And by "we" I include LE sources.

I'm not sure Nitti, or even Ferriola, is a good example of modern FBI intelligence on the mob. And we not knowing doesn't equate to the FBI not knowing. Moreover, the general state of a family can be abundantly clear without knowing the exact position of every remaining member.

[TommyGambino]

I think you mean that "It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility."

Yes, that's what I meant.

How likely is it? I don't know. I give the FBI less benefit of the doubt than you do. I have hundreds of FBI files and probably dozens of autobiographies from ex-FBI agents and histories of the Bureau. I've seen how the FBI gets bad intel then sticks with it because they trust the informant, only to find out later that the informant was mistaken or lying. I've seen a lot of mistakes taken as fact. The 302s are often too short because important follow-up questions aren't asked

Would these be like the MF files from 50 years ago? The FBI's stance on Buffalo doesn't just come from some questionable informant. It's been the position of federal, as well as local law enforcement, for years now.

As for Buffalo specifically, contemporary Buffalo isn't something I've researched so I can't give all the answers. One issue where we disagree is (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that if there's no arrests or cases, then nothing's there. I see other options: Maybe they haven't been caught. Maybe they've changed their M.O. Both are also within the realm of possibility.

This reasoning may work in the short term but it loses credibility the more time goes by. With enough years without ongoing arrests, things start to become pretty clear. Things like "They're not a priority," or "Maybe they haven't been caught," or "Maybe they've changed their MO" have been used by others on the forums to explain away the lack of cases with multiple families the feds no longer consider active. You could use these excuses for any family if you want. Maybe Denver is still around and they just haven't been caught since the late 1970s?

Take Chicago, for example, since it's a city I'm more familiar with. It has always been a mystery and law enforcement sources have often gotten it wrong. According to some LE sources, Frank Nitto was the boss after Capone went to prison, but certain insiders say he was never a boss. The same with Ferriola decades later. What was John DiFronzo's role up until his death? Who's in charge today? Andriacchi, DeLaurentis, Vena, or someone else? Is it defunct? The fact is, we just don't know a lot and we need to admit that we don't. And by "we" I include LE sources.

I'm not sure Nitti, or even Ferriola, is a good example of modern FBI intelligence on the mob. And we not knowing doesn't equate to the FBI not knowing. Moreover, the general state of a family can be abundantly clear without knowing the exact position of every remaining member.

You don't get bored of arguing the same point over and over do you fair play, happy new year

[Antiliar]

Would these be like the MF files from 50 years ago? The FBI's stance on Buffalo doesn't just come from some questionable informant. It's been the position of federal, as well as local law enforcement, for years now.

No, these are subject files I personally ordered from the FBI or were shared with me by others. I also mentioned the many autobiographies and histories of the FBI.

This reasoning may work in the short term but it loses credibility the more time goes by. With enough years without ongoing arrests, things start to become pretty clear. Things like "They're not a priority," or "Maybe they haven't been caught," or "Maybe they've changed their MO" have been used by others on the forums to explain away the lack of cases with multiple families the feds no longer consider active. You could use these excuses for any family if you want. Maybe Denver is still around and they just haven't been caught since the late 1970s?

Those aren't excuses, those are facts. You could use those facts toward any Family, but if there is reliable confirmation that one no longer exists, preferably from multiple sources, then we have a fairly justified claim that to believe it's extinct. To do otherwise is to commit an appeal to ignorance fallacy, and good historians try to avoid making hard claims just because there's a lack of evidence. It's like asserting that D. B. Cooper died after jumping out the plane because we never heard from him again. That's not proper historical reasoning. He jumped out of a plane and we don't know if he survived, and if he did, we don't know if he's one of several people who claimed to be him or remains unknown. We don't always get closure, no matter how much we want it.

[Super]

any info on petey chops vincini.

Didn't he retire ? In the book he wants nothing to do with Depalma and the Mob

Sure he came and paid a week later. If your a good earner they aint letting you go.

[CabriniGreen]

anyone have any info on that Sonny Vaccaro?

[TommyGambino]

any info on petey chops vincini.

Didn't he retire ? In the book he wants nothing to do with Depalma and the Mob

Sure he came and paid a week later. If your a good earner they aint letting you go.

Not entirely true, Tore Locascio was allowed to 'retire' was probably easy for the Gambinos to let him go though with the likes of Martino and Campos still in the crew, huge earners