Understanding Chicago

[Villain]

- Los Angeles member CI Salvatore Piscopo, a close friend of John Roselli, advised that Anthony Pinelli had been a "caporegime" in the Chicago family, the same term Bompensiero and Fratianno both used to describe Frank LaPorte.

- Piscopo identified the leadership of the Chicago "brugad" (borgata, a term he uses for all of the families including his own LA family) as the following circa 1930s/40s:

Boss - Paul Ricca Delucia
Other Leadership:
- Anthony Accardo
- Charles Gioe
- Louis Campagna
- Frank Diamond Maritote
- Philip D'Andrea

He also identified Frank Nitti, Nick Circella, and John Roselli as members of the Chicago "brugad".

- Piscopo said that the Los Angeles family also referred to itself as the "outfit", just like Chicago, Detroit, Kansas City, St. Louis, and Milwaukee.

- Piscopo said the consigliere could vary from "minor" to "very powerful". (I may have confused Valachi's FBI interview with Piscopo in the original post -- either way it's a member source describing the range of influence the consigliere can have)

- Jimmy Fratianno's book describes Gus Alex as a "non-Italian associate" of the Chicago family. Fratianno says he was told by John Roselli that Alex is "as close as you can get to Accardo for an outsider." He said that Alex traces his involvement with the outfit to Jake Guzik, who "even Capone" listened to. Roselli told Fratianno that the Chicago family has "had a bunch of outsiders doing big jobs." This is a well-balanced description of Alex and other non-Italians: they are clearly identified as "outsiders" (non-members) but also have important duties. That is much different from having a ranking/formal position in the Chicago organization.

- Fratianno's book describes Joseph Glimco and Joseph Lombardo both as "capo" in the Chicago family. "Capo" is used interchangeably with "caporegime" by Fratianno and Bompensiero.

-

Both Bompensiero and Piscopo, who had close contact with and a high degree of knowledge of Chicago figures spanning decades, describe the Chicago Cosa Nostra family in terminology consistent with the way they describe other Cosa Nostra organizations across the US. Aside from pointing out the importance of non-Italian associate "outsiders" in performing specific duties, none of them to my knowledge describe the Chicago Cosa Nostra organization in any fundamentally different terms, structure, or other description.

In addition to his friendship with capodecina Frank LaPorte, Bompensiero traveled to Chicago in both the early 1930s with Jack Dragna, when they met with Capone and other mafia figures, as well as in the late 1960s when he traveled to Chicago with St. Louis boss Tony Giardano and met with Chicago Cosa Nostra members Felix Alderisio and Joe LNU.

Piscopo was Roselli's closest friend and trusted with the details of Roselli's true identity and family in Boston. It would appear Roselli provided Piscopo with inside information on Chicago.

Fratianno's ties to Chicago are well-known and include friendship with both Roselli and Giancana, as well as an attempt to transfer membership to Chicago that was stopped by Nick Licata.

While it has been a few years since I read the Family Secrets book, I recall Chicago member CW Nick Calabrese's testimony being fairly consistent with our general understanding of Cosa Nostra structure and membership. In fact, it was my reading of Family Secrets that first made me question much of the lore surrounding Chicago.

Everything which is mentioned by Piscopo is explained in our project.

Regarding Fratianno on Alex....outsider means the same thing which i already told you, meaning he wasnt recognized as CN member by other families but instead he was recognized as an outsider with a huge influence both on national and international levels BUT if we talk about Alex and his stature in Chicago, the situation was quite different...

First example, when the Outfits boss Sam Giancana was fucking Caifanos wife, it was Alex who was sent and told Giancana to stop. This was pure CN or internal problem

Second example, you can read about two made guys such as Pat Marcy and Fred Roti being afraid of Alex and they told other made guys such as D'Arco to watch out

Third example, when Louie Arger and Jimmy Allegretti (made guy and a crew boss) were fighting over prices in the prostitution racket, Alex called both of them and settled the problem by fixing the prices and penalties. He ruled that for one sucker, cabdrivers were to get $2. For each additional chump, the cabbies should receive an extra dollar up to a maximum of $5. Under no circumstances should the taxi payoff exceed $5. For the operators who violated Alex’s order were penalized by the Outfit. For the first offence, the fine was $1,000 and the second offenders were stripped of their holdings in the clip joints.

Example number four, Alex was seen having meetings in Italy and talking to local oc figures

Example number five, Giancana, Battaglia, Ferraro, Humphreys, Alex and Kruse were the ones who carried on the negotiations with Cleveland mobster Moe Dalitz, regarding the Outfit’s interests or takeover on the Las Vegas casinos. Also on November 5 and 6, 1960, Dalitz had a meeting in Chicago with Giancana, Alex and Kruse regarding the Vegas interests

Number six, whenever Joe Corngold had problems with some of Alex’s associates and capos such as Louis Briatta or Frank Caruso, he always asked for Alex’s back up and he always received it.

Les Kruse used to brag on how the Outfits underboss Ferraro was weak and couldve been a possible informer

Charles DiCaro, made guy, took orders from Ralph Pierce and acted as his chauffeur

And i can go on like this all day long....

[Villain]

For a non-LA perspective closer geographically to Chicago, Milwaukee member CI Maniaci's accounts of Chicago are also consistent with the Los Angeles member CIs:

- Maniaci describes Frank LaPorte as a "capodecina" of the Chicago family. Former Milwaukee member Frank LaGalbo transferred membership to Chicago, joining the decina of LaPorte.

- Maniaci described the hierarchy of the Chicago outfit as follows circa 1960s:
Boss - Sam Giancana
Underboss - Sam Battaglia
Capodecina:
- Felix Alderisio
- Marshall Caifano
- Frank LaPorte
- Tony Maccalucci (ph)
- Ross Prio (replaced Jim DiGeorge)

In light of the above, he described Jack Cerone as a potential successor to Giancana.

The important part of this hierarchy info is the terminology and structure. As a Milwaukee member with close ties to Illinois, we can see that his understanding of Chicago is consistent with the Los Angeles member CIs' understanding of Chicago.

- Maniaci stated that the Chicago family had become greedy over the years, focusing on earning money for a select group of leaders. However, this does not challenge the structure and fundamental nature of Chicago as a Cosa Nostra family.

- He described Battaglia and Alderisio as the go-betweens for the Chicago and Milwaukee leadership. Based on Bompensiero's info, Alderisio was also the point of contact for the St. Louis leadership and Chicago.

Caifano was never official capo, although he controlled some people both in Chicago and Vegas.

Maccalucci never existed or maybe its sone alias, i dunno

When Giancana was the boss, until 64 Ferraro was his underboss but that same year Ferraro died and was replaced by Battaglia, while Alderisio became one of the four major capos and ruled the west side. When Giancana went to jail in 65, Battaglia became the boss and Alderisio was his unserboss.

Cerone became the boss after Battaglias imprisonment and replaced Alderisio with Buccieri

[Confederate]

I think guys like Confederate are saying men like Guzik or Humphreys arnt like, say... Burt Kaplan, or the Jewish guy Casso replaced Pappadio with, or these other associates the mob makes money with and does business with.

Hes saying a Humphreys could give a murder order to a made Italian, and that guy HAD to follow the order. He couldnt go," Who the fuck are you, you Welsh prick, I'll check with my capo first"....

B. is saying, there is no way a Humphreys would ever be allowed in a High Level Cosa Nostra sitdown between made men within the greater structure of Cosa Nostra nationally.

To my eyes, both are true. Is this what the clarifications are?

Humphreys was an Outfit member. He wasn't just some "High Level Associate" who did business with the Outfit. He was an actual full fledged member of the Outfit along with Gus Alex, Ralph Pierce, Les Kruse, Lenny Patrick etc. These guys were no different than any Italian made guy EXCEPT that they were NOT members of the "National La Cosa Nostra". That's it.
These guys committed murder for the Outfit, had men working under them, were in charge of areas & a top level guy like Humphreys gave orders to made men like the example that was given when he "ordered" Joe Gagliano to do something about a Juror. Humphreys didn't have to have an "Italian" give the order to Gagliano. Gagliano didn't care if Humphreys belonged the "National Cosa Nostra".

As explained in other threads, the Outfit never used the "title" Consigliere. Nobody in the Outfit ever referred to Accardo as a "Consigliere" even when he stepped back. That was a "Title" given to him by other people to try and explain his role in the Outfit. Other fine posters who also researched the Outfit said the same thing.

[Villain]

The answer is simple, in Chicago they had high statures while in other CN cities those same fellas were looked upon as outsiders or associates....thats it.

[Villain]

Two main things about the pre 70s Chicago Outfit which made them different from the rest of the CN families...one, they had different structure and two, they had non-Italians in their own ranks

[Villain]

Back to the Aiello / Capone situation.

As mentioned, both Gentile and Maniaci agree that Capone was inducted into the Masseria family and given permission from the NYC leadership to murder Aiello. Maniaci described how Aiello hid out in Wisconsin following the St. Valentine murders and was helped by Milwaukee figures, who as a result got in "trouble" with "the Mafia". This reinforces the idea that Aiello's murder was sanctioned by the mafia leadership. If Aiello was backed by the mafia, members would be encouraged to aide him in Wisconsin, not get in trouble for it.

The Capone situation reminds me of Joey Merlino on a larger scale. Non-members Mike Ciancaglini and Merlino were a force to be reckoned with in Philadelphia and arguably had more muscle than the Stanfa regime. Their faction could have eventually ruled South Philadelphia as an "Italian gang".

When Stanfa decided to induct Merlino and Ciancaglini, his consigliere Tony Piccolo was recorded cautioning him not to do it. Inducting them as members would legitimize them. Sure enough, when Stanfa left the streets Merlino inducted his closest allies and they took over the organization. He made Ralph Natale the boss, but Merlino carried more weight and eventually became boss. Capone was a force to be reckoned with in Chicago and Masseria legitimized him by bringing him in and allowing him to induct his close allies. Gentile described Capone as the power behind LoVerde and he, too, eventually became boss.

The comparison drops off pretty quick between Merlino and Capone, but internal mafia politics have stayed consistent. When you induct someone, their defacto power becomes legitimate and the door is open. Capone received formal recognition as a mafia boss from the top bosses around the country. Merlino's acting boss could meet with the Gambino leadership 10+ years after Merlino went to prison and tell them, "Joey sends his regards." No matter how the Gambino leaders felt about Merlino, they understood what that meant.

Perfect comparison? No. But are the similarities a coincidence? No. The same mafia framework and politics are in play. Capone and Merlino both could have been "gang leaders" in the short term but they appear to have understood that mafia membership was a currency they could use to their advantage.

I agree

[Villain]

https://books.google.co.nz/books?redir_ ... do&f=false

In the book “Busting the Mob”, there are excerpts from Angelo Lonardo’s testimony. He says he went with Maishe Rockman to Chicago to talk to Aiuppa and Cerone about who would be the new head of the Teamsters.

When they sat down to talk, Aiuppa told Rockman to leave and he did. Turns out he thought they were there to talk about “family business” so didn’t want Rockman to hear. When he found out they were talking about the Teamsters, Rockman was allowed back.

I assume it was the same situation with non-Italians in the Outfit. There was criminal business and then there was Cosa Nostra business.

Nice example but in this case Rockman belonged to another family, but if it was Guzik or Humphreys or Alex instead, believe me they wouldve been present from the start to the end of that same meeting since we have countless previous examples. Also if this occurred during the late 70s, then i completely understand Aiuppas actions

[Villain]

Heres one of the best examples on how the non-Italians used to function within Americas Cosa Nostra...

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... rdo_lansky

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... rdo_lansky

The thing is about Lansky but in the second link we have another nice example regarding Gussie (Alex) and Hump (Humphreys)

[Angelo Santino]

One thing to consider, Chicago wasn't a landing city for immigrants like NYC. Italian neighborhoods from 1880-1910 were different with each city, NYC had homogeneous ghettos whereas Chicago's Little Italys shared streets with other demographics who lived there. Meaning Chicago Italians were more familiarized with other ethnicities. To to be fair so was much of NYC, however if you were a Nick Gentile who lived in a Mafia bubble with little interaction with anyone outside of it, Chicago wouldn't be recommended.

Not that it really seems to have made a difference over all, there's never been any non-Italians granted membership. Each family maintains a degree of autonomy and there's people that exist outside of the ranks. There was a Cleveland Mafia with boss down to soldier filled with Italians. But they were at the center of a wider local criminal cartel or network or group, whatever you want to call it, which included Maishe Rockman and hundreds of non-made participants involved in things major to minor. And argubaly each family is the same in that they all had non-Italian associates.

I think what makes it confusing for many is that Alex, Rockman and Lanksky don't fit the mold of what people consider "associate" which is, in theory, the lowest level. In a perfect world a boss would only deal with his under, the under with the captains, the captains with their own crews and so on, but it rarely works that way. Everyone starts out at the bottom and as they rise they carry a circle of people around them, that link usually doesn't entirely stop once someone has reached a position. I've never seen an instance where some is made boss and says: "I only eat with Italians now." Gotti said something similar upon being boss but that was in reference to captains and soldiers and who he would fraternize with.

Lastly, Bill Roemer skullfucked us all with his Chicago version for 30 years. How much of what we think we know came from him who had an almost sexual obsession with Accardo, enough to so that he wrote a fictional Accardo vs Bonanno book for control of Las Vegas, in the end Gotti tells Joe Bonanno to concede to Joe Batters, Batters in less polite terms says: "Get the fuck out of my territory!" And in the afterlife- I shit you not- he goes into Maranzano and Capone both angry at their successors for having failed them. My god. I try to remain nonbias but sweet Jesus I could not stand him based on his books that he always put himself in as 'The Author.' I remember reading The Enforcer and hoping The Author would get killed which is unusual for me. "Hey Pissant, you're a pissant, you ain't nothing but a pissant." Please Spilotro make it stop! I'm so glad Mad Sam was pissing in his coffee every time Roemer visited, he deserved a button for that one.

[Villain]

I agree on most stuff but I personally never read any of Roemers books.

[Angelo Santino]

I agree on most stuff but I personally never read any of Roemers books

You might want to and just be very very careful with them. Much of Chicago's "common knowledge" post 50's comes from him based on his own interpretations which in turn, tainted other sources who were influenced by him. I don't know if its still the case but early 2000's if you asked about any good books on Chicago the only responses you got were Roemer and if you questioned him, you were trolling or very ill-informed.

I will say this, some good charts, and even in that fictional War of the Godfathers, in the back contained a list of Chicago who's who with bios. So there is value in his books, but they are laced with bias.

[CabriniGreen]

I agree on most stuff but I personally never read any of Roemers books.

I second this... never read him....

[Villain]

I agree on most stuff but I personally never read any of Roemers books

You might want to and just be very very careful with them. Much of Chicago's "common knowledge" post 50's comes from him based on his own interpretations which in turn, tainted other sources who were influenced by him. I don't know if its still the case but early 2000's if you asked about any good books on Chicago the only responses you got were Roemer and if you questioned him, you were trolling or very ill-informed.

I will say this, some good charts, and even in that fictional War of the Godfathers, in the back contained a list of Chicago who's who with bios. So there is value in his books, but they are laced with bias.

Maybe i will but why should i when we have all of the fbi files in which he was involved in, among other agents and agencies, and we also have thousands and thousands of newspaper reports that were sometimes backed bu gov info. The only thing that he can do is exaggerate things so he can sell some copies...on top of that, he allegedly created a fictional masterpiece which says a lot regarding his credibility in his other "non-fiction" projects

[CabriniGreen]

How did the New Yorkers like Masseria view Torrio?

[Villain]

How did the New Yorkers like Masseria view Torrio?

I think that Yale was the main connection before his elimination in 1928 and i think he was with Masseria...maybe some of the guys can correct me on this...a lot of important things happened that same year