B. wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:20 pmIt's similar to the Carmine Galante issue. He declared himself boss of the Bonanno Family and had a significant faction who considered him the boss, but he was not formally recognized by his peers as the rappresentante officiale. We have sources who called him the boss and he was the defacto boss but he was not officially the boss. A defacto Commission is not the same as the formal Commission, which may be where Massino is coming from when he marks November 1985 as the cut off.
That's a good comparison. Leaders today perhaps effectively acting as a defacto Commission but not necessarily in the formal or strictest sense. I have a hard time picturing Bellomo, Cefalu, Mancuso and (until recently) Russo all in the same room. And Amuso isn't available anyway.
- Did Todaro reach out to a specific Family that was designated as his official point of contact in NYC, or did he just reach out to whoever he knew in NYC when it came to promoting Violi? It was obviously important to him that NYC condone the promotion of a Canadian underboss but whether he casually asked their opinion or followed some kind of established process is important to this discussion. After Buffalo lost their Commision seat the Genovese Family served as their avugad, so if Todaro reached out to "the Commission" via the Genovese that'd be telling.
- When Philly met with the Gambino Family in 2010 to air their grievances with other Families and make introductions, was there a formally designated relationship for Philly to contact the Gambinos for assistance with those issues? Or was there just a circumstantial relationship and they happened to reach out to the Gambinos for help?
- What about Joey Merlino's close relationship with Genovese leaders? If Merlino had a problem with other Families or needed guidance, would he reach out to the Gambinos like Ligambi did or the Genovese because he's close to them?
- In the late 1980s John Gotti dressed down John Riggi at a wedding or funeral in order to control the DeCavalcantes. Stango said more recently the DeCavalcantes still "run under" the Gambinos and phrased it like it was a bad thing. Historically you would never have seen a Family boss approach another Family and say "We're your avugad now whether you like it or not", it was a formal relationship and mutually beneficial. Does the Gambino Family serve as the avugad for the DeCavalcantes today, or is it just a relationship based on defacto influence/power?
So far I've seen nothing about these relationships being formalized the way they once were but we're also missing many details.
More often than not, for the last 30 years or so it seems other families appealing to NY has basically involved them going to the Genovese or Gambino families.
B. wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:20 pm
This is a semantic argument, though, so without semantics there's no discussion.
Ok if its semantics then why did Massino use the specific term 'commission' when referring to his '91 ascension?
Why would Violi, who is of unquestionable mafia lineage (therefor assumed understanding of LCN terminology) use the specific term 'commission' when referring to his appointment?
Why would Gravano cite a 1988 meet as a commission meeting?
If the commission was to a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families, and this (Restivo meet) was a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families then if not a commission meeting, what was it?
Oh, it was just a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families....
B. wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:20 pm
This is a semantic argument, though, so without semantics there's no discussion.
Ok if its semantics then why did Massino use the specific term 'commission' when referring to his '91 ascension?
Why would Violi, who is of unquestionable mafia lineage (therefor assumed understanding of LCN terminology) use the specific term 'commission' when referring to his appointment?
Why would Gravano cite a 1988 meet as a commission meeting?
If the commission was to a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families, and this (Restivo meet) was a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families then if not a commission meeting, what was it?
Oh, it was just a meeting to discuss LCN business by representatives of the families....
I think there’s been valid points made by both sides and it appears the truth exists somewhere in between the points.
Regarding Violi’s mafia lineage - wasn’t his father killed when he was a young child? So while the lineage is unmistakable, he didn’t have the chance to learn from his father. Also, while the Bonnanos had a Montreal crew, they weren’t intimately involved with US mafia politics. So I don’t know if your argument on Violi’s lineage actually carries the weight you want it to.
Southshore88 wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 11:22 am
Regarding Violi’s mafia lineage - wasn’t his father killed when he was a young child? So while the lineage is unmistakable, he didn’t have the chance to learn from his father. Also, while the Bonnanos had a Montreal crew, they weren’t intimately involved with US mafia politics. So I don’t know if your argument on Violi’s lineage actually carries the weight you want it to.
A fair point regards lineage. Disregard. Or perhaps I could clarify by rephrasing that he grew up in an LCN saturated environment.
I would disagree that the Montreal crew werent involved in US politics.
I would still state Violi was educated enough in LCN to understand the term and deliberately decide to use it. So I still stand by the Violi reference.
Southshore88 wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 11:22 am
Regarding Violi’s mafia lineage - wasn’t his father killed when he was a young child? So while the lineage is unmistakable, he didn’t have the chance to learn from his father. Also, while the Bonnanos had a Montreal crew, they weren’t intimately involved with US mafia politics. So I don’t know if your argument on Violi’s lineage actually carries the weight you want it to.
A fair point regards lineage. Disregard. Or perhaps I could clarify by rephrasing that he grew up in an LCN saturated environment.
I would disagree that the Montreal crew werent involved in US politics.
I would still state Violi was educated enough in LCN to understand the term and deliberately decide to use it. So I still stand by the Violi reference.
I used the wrong terminology on Montreal/mafia politics - my point is they never had a boss (or even UB/consig) in Montreal and with the physical distance plus autonomy that they operated within, one could infer they were unlikely to be involved with the Commission politics.
Even if you look at the 3 capos murder, Massino received approval from Castellano & Persico, that was an issue within the Bonnano family that they were called upon to assist. The Montreal shooters were levels removed from Massino’s conversations with the other NYC families.
I agree that Violi had an LCN education. I think a convincing argument can be made that with him growing up in Canada, he undoubtedly heard about the Commission. It also needs to be acknowledge that with the Montreal crew distancing itself from the Bonanno’s in the last 20 years (especially after Sciascia is murdered), that he would unlikely have an up to date knowledge of the Commission’s status which could be an explanation for him saying that Todaro ran it by the “commission”. I also think you could argue that he was trying to brag during that conversation - if you argue Massino likes to minimize, it’s also well established that LCN members (and people in general) will overstate their importance to portray themselves in a good light (which is your point as to why Massino is consistently minimizing his involvement)
B./Pogo. Any thoughts on Joe Defed testifying there were EIGHT different COMMISSION meetings between 94 and 98?
Joe's word still indisputable?
DeFede should have written a book like his predecessor Al D’Arco.
He has an interesting story.Would have liked to hear about those 8 commission meetings
Southshore88 wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 12:29 pm
It also needs to be acknowledge that with the Montreal crew distancing itself from the Bonanno’s in the last 20 years (especially after Sciascia is murdered), that he would unlikely have an up to date knowledge of the Commission’s status
Violi is with Buffalo. Not the Montreal crew of the Bonannos. So Im not sure I follow your point.
Southshore88 wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 12:29 pmI also think you could argue that he was trying to brag during that conversation - if you argue Massino likes to minimize, it’s also well established that LCN members (and people in general) will overstate their importance to portray themselves in a good light (which is your point as to why Massino is consistently minimizing his involvement)
I would agree. Violi could be bragging. Just as Massino may be intentionally minimizing. Both are speculation with no way of confirming without
corroboration. I would GUESS Massino is minimizing as the circumstantial evidence contradicts his testimony. With Violi he could be bragging, but there is no circumstantial evidence to contradict his statement.
Should point out Massino's inconsistencies with Galante as well. In his testimony he says Galante was "the boss" many different times, but he also clarifies how Rastelli explained that Galante was not the official boss and usurped the title without approval hence the murder. When he's casually referring to Galante he just says "the boss" because he's not going to go in-depth on the formalities every time and on a practical level Galante was the final authority on the street with most of the Family.
Seems like Massino referred to the Commission similarly, where post-1985 he considered it an "unofficial Commission" but still used the term in his testimony for convenience like he did with Galante even though he was not officially "the boss".
You could really do this with just about every CI, CW, or wiretap.
Question....If 3 of the 5 meet... do they need to consult the other 2? Does a quorum of bosses have the authority to overrule a single families internal edicts?
Or is this forbidden as constituting a direct threat to an individual families authority?
Does this dynamic get altered if a particular boss is extremely charismatic or feared? Would his " word" be equivalent to a ruling from a ratified Commision?
If Barney says, " I want this...." would the other families just go along because he's so respected?
If Mancuso wanted something, and he had the backing of the 2 weaker families, the Colombos and Luchesse, would the Gambinos, or Barney oblige? Or would they exert their privilege as the stronger families?
They pretty much stopped the killing, not as many joint union rackets, not as many reasons for the bosses to meet up it seems....
A big role of the Commission was to determine official recognition of bosses. If there's still a Commission of some kind, how do they reconcile a Family like the Luccheses refusing to recognize the Bonanno and Philly bosses while other Families do recognize them?
The Commission's primary function was to establish concensus among different Families when it came to rules, protocol, and formalities (all of which helped ensure peace and cooperation), so if there isn't concensus with some of these details it's hard to envision a functioning Commission.
B. wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 7:36 pm
The Commission's primary function was to establish concensus among different Families when it came to rules, protocol, and formalities (all of which helped ensure peace and cooperation), so if there isn't concensus with some of these details it's hard to envision a functioning Commission.
There would be several circumstances one could imagine requiring inter-family resolution and a body ruling.
Violi's appointment for one. This was a unique situation which it appeared required consensus of a quorum at least, that the majority of NYC families would recognize him.
So no, its not hard at all to imagine current circumstances whereby a quorum of families make a ruling.
NYC doesn't have authority over who a boss promotes, so he just wanted to make sure there was no formal rule against naming an underboss in another country. What would be important to know is who exactly he reached out to -- was it one representative of a predetermined NYC Family who spoke on behalf of Cosa Nostra or did Todaro make contact with multiple NYC bosses? Did multiple NYC Families communicate with each other about it?
It could have been like Scarfo reaching out to Bobby Manna before promoting Leonetti because he was worried about naming such a young underboss. Manna just told him if he schooled Leonetti and thought he was qualified that was good enough. Manna technically represented NYC and the Commission and Leonetti could have turned around and said "the Commission approved of me becoming underboss" (no question it existed at that time) but the interaction was pretty casual and just about clarifying a rule concerning age, much like Todaro appears to have clarified a rule about geography.
Excerpt from one of the conversations Massino recorded with Basciano in January 2005:
VB: Right, right. Vic sent me a message.
JML (Sniffs)
VB: The message I got from Vic.
JM: Which Vic now?
VB: Juliano. He told me that you put me there and that the commission approved me.
JM: There ain’t no commission.
VB: Well, that’s what he told me.
JM: No.
VB: That’s what…
JM: No.
VB: … that’s what he told me.
JM: There, no, you know that, there’s no commission.
VB: Yeah, I know, but that’s what he told me.
JM: There’s no commission.
VB: This is what Vic Juliano told me.
JM: There hasn’t been a commission…
VB: I know that, but how…
JM: … since…
VB: … but listen …
JM: … since Paul got killed.
'You don't go crucifying people outside a church; not on Good Friday.'
Massino in conversation telling his acting boss there's no Commission. Basciano / Juliano seem to have been using it simply to refer to the other bosses approving of Basciano.
Just for some perspective this literally changes nothing. Massino is wearing a wire. He's cooperating. Stating something when youre cooperating or on the stand is literally the same thing. He knows the G will hear it. If Massino was caught on tape saying this before he flipped, that may carry more weight. But I dont see how this is any different from saying it on the stand which is the point of contention.
