SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 3:42 pm
Chris Christie wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 3:30 pm
I think it shows the limitations of a non-member's knowledge on the organization. He belittled Franzese for acting like a 1940's gangster for using the word "caporegime" because no one ever used it in front of him so he assumed it was never used when indeed it was and still is.
I think this is a point worth discussing.
Surely associates would have to know who was made and who wasnt?
They must knw who they can put hands on, fuck with etc.
No?
I would think most of the time, who was made and who wasn't was pretty common knowledge for those associated and they may even hear a thing or two on who occupies what position. But that information filters down, Gene Borrello likely wouldn't get much luck if he walked up to a member and asked who his captain is and who the new whatever is. He's not a member, he don't need to know the inner workings to work with, socialize and make money with members. Which goes into what chin gigante pointed out:
chin_gigante wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:39 pm
I read that book about Borrello a while ago (which definitely needed a proof read to fix some spelling and formatting issues) and noticed a lot of stuff that he got flat out wrong or was inconsistent with other things he's said. Not sure how much that was Borrello or how much was the author. Some of the biggest things I noticed:
- The book incorrectly states Vincent Asaro was briefly consigliere under Massino and re-appointed to the position when DiFiore was acting boss (though it claims he had to be talked into taking the position)
- We know from the Asaro indictment and detention memo and Gasper Valenti's testimony that Asaro was offered the consigliere position but turned it down and instead was a captain on the committee
- In the Borrello Q&A in the Mugshots section, he was asked if Giallanzo was acting captain for Vincent Asaro or Jerry Asaro, Borrello replied, "Ronnie g was acting capo for Jerry Vinny didn’t have. A crew he was on the committee"
- The book states Vincent Asaro was inducted in 1969, whereas Valenti testified that Asaro told him he'd been made around 1977/ 1978
- Borrello makes the very strange claim that the five families were formed in 1965 and prior to that there were several more families, the bosses of which became captains after they got consolidated down to five (he says Vincent Asaro's father and grandfather were the bossses of their own families)
- The book states that a couple of months after an April 2015 Gang Land article (so around June 2015), that Borrello was visited in Rikers by Frank Caputo, who told him that Giallanzo and Anthony Pipitone were looking to take over the family as acting boss and acting underboss respectively, to replace DiFiore
- We know however by that point DiFiore had been in jail since early 2014 and had been replaced by John Palazzolo and then again by Joe Cammarano Jr who got voted into the position in March 2015
- We also know from Peter Lovaglio that Giallanzo was at that March 2015 meeting where Cammarano was elected
First one is interesting, but not true in regards to the Asaros or 1965. We can't rule out that there were other Families before 1920 in NYC, maybe Bagheria and a Sciaccatan faction that might have fallen under the Gams before D'Aquila took over in 1912. But there's no evidence for it and I see NY's history as the mafia expanding rather than consolidating between 1900-1925.
But in re. to Borello and the next one- being visited by Frank Caputo and informed what Giallanzo and Pipitone were allegedly attempting. Again, he wasn't a member, why does he need to know this? One thing that our boy Pennisi does better than most other informants is explain the protocol and politics to being a mafia member and one distinction he made was that between made and not, and how those who aren't have to leave the room when 'family business' (mafia politics) are discussed. What Pennisi demonstrates, for all the hype about how degenerated the mafia has become, is that it still follows the protocol.
I'm an associate whose involved in something with two members. We'd likely discuss splitting income, business opportunities, how to to approach something. I may be asked to do something by them. These members likely will not discuss whose a captain and who isn't or who they feel should have been promoted to this or that in my presence. I, as the associate can gauge whose what, but I can't flat out ask and expect an honest answer.
