General Chicago Outfit Info Dumping Ground

[B.]

Here's more info on DiGiovanni from a few months back. Based on FBI bugs, they suspected he was capodecina of a separate Chicago Heights crew:

https://theblackhand.club/forum/viewtop ... 39#p221839

Between DiGiovanni's close relationship to the Costellos and the marital relation to a Costello, it's very possible DiGiovanni was the capodecina Joe Costello reported to. The Costello/Giancana conversation makes it clear (to me at least) his capodecina wasn't Frank LaPorte and there was another captain with a presence in the area.

The FBI's bugs picked up other evidence indicating an "old time capro" (ph) was active in Chicago Heights who wasn't Frank LaPorte and they deduced it was DiGiovanni though it doesn't sound like they had explicit confirmation.

I think this info should make everyone question Chicago's lineage of captains -- the succession of leaders may not be the most obvious figures. We see this in other Families as well, though we have far more inside information on them whereas we have virtually no inside sources who can name formal ranks in early Chicago outside of top admin ranks.

[Antiliar]

The succession of capos in Chicago Heights is pretty well set since the Capone era. Dominic Roberto-Jimmy Emery-Frank LaPorte, etc. I think it's more likely that Sam DiGiovanni was an old capo under Phil Piazza and possibly Tony Sanfilippo back when Chicago Heights was a separate Family. Matt Luzi notes in his book that the DiGiovannis, Costellos, Guzzinos and others all went back to Sanfilippo.

[B.]

I know the LaPorte crew's succession is understood that way, but this would be a separate crew that overlaps in territory. Whether it was DiGiovanni still in the position circa 1960s, Joe Costello was a Heights-based member who reported to a different captain. Was his captain a known captain in another territory who happened to have a member in the Heights, or was it a previously unidentified captain in the Heights as the FBI suspected?

I haven't seen any inside info that confirms there was only one crew (i.e. LaPorte) in the Heights but we also don't have confirmation there were multiple crews beyond hints from the Costello/Giancana tape and other FBI conjecture linked above. Is there any inside info that conclusively rules out multiple Heights captains?

We also have Bompensiero's information about three made members under LaPorte who requested a formal transfer to another decina. This doesn't seem to have happened, but it'd be helpful to this discussion if we knew whether they would have been assigned to a captain in another territory or if there was another captain in the Heights area they would have reported to had the transfer happened.

Can't rule out Pinelli either given he had operations in nearby Gary.

[Snakes]

So, I was looking for more info on DiGiovanni and all of the shit I posted was already on Gavin's site lol

[Antiliar]

I know the LaPorte crew's succession is understood that way, but this would be a separate crew that overlaps in territory. Whether it was DiGiovanni still in the position circa 1960s, Joe Costello was a Heights-based member who reported to a different captain. Was his captain a known captain in another territory who happened to have a member in the Heights, or was it a previously unidentified captain in the Heights as the FBI suspected?

I haven't seen any inside info that confirms there was only one crew (i.e. LaPorte) in the Heights but we also don't have confirmation there were multiple crews beyond hints from the Costello/Giancana tape and other FBI conjecture linked above. Is there any inside info that conclusively rules out multiple Heights captains?

We also have Bompensiero's information about three made members under LaPorte who requested a formal transfer to another decina. This doesn't seem to have happened, but it'd be helpful to this discussion if we knew whether they would have been assigned to a captain in another territory or if there was another captain in the Heights area they would have reported to had the transfer happened.

Can't rule out Pinelli either given he had operations in nearby Gary.

The only confusion about capos in that area that I'm aware of is with Jimmy Catuara. He lived in Oak Lawn for a while, sort of in between the Chinatown and Chicago Heights crews. As I've noted before, in one file he was subordinate to Toots Caruso and in another he was under LaPorte. Red Wemette insists that he was a capo. However, there is a strong history of the DiGiovanni brothers with the Roberto-Emery-LaPorte group. Haven't seen anything associating the DiGiovannis with Gary either. The FBI file reports that he was associated with LaPorte, Bacino, Zarante, and Pilotto - all Heights guys. The only possible non-Heights association was Catuara.

It's also possible - and we've seen it happen before - that portions of the conversation are transcribed wrong. To me, this would be more likely than the existence of multiple crews operating in the Heights (with the exception of Catuara).

[B.]

Costello is the Heights member who reported to a captain who wasn't LaPorte. No way to determine if there's a transcription error as there's nothing to compare it to except FBI summary reports (which reflect the same conclusion) though it's open to interpretation. I interpreted the transcript as Costello reporting to someone who wasn't LaPorte and when I saw the FBI summaries later they agreed Costello was referring to a different capodecina. The FBI then combined this info with references to an "old time capro" in the Heights (which came from a different recording) and wiretaps from LaPorte's short-lived office bug to speculate about DiGiovanni holding that position referred to by Costello (whose family obviously had a long history with DiGiovanni).

There was clearly association between DiGiovanni, LaPorte, and all other members who lived/operated in the area, though as we know this doesn't always reflect formal assignments within the organization. When you refer to DiGiovanni's history with the Roberto-Emery-LaPorte group, does that include inside sources stating he was a member of that decina, or are you talking about general association?

Whatever the case, there's evidence that raises questions about jurisdictional crossover and suggests LaPorte didn't have lone authority over all members operating in the Heights even if they all associated with him and his crew.

If we had member informants actively reporting on the inner-workings in and around the Heights I'd feel more comfortable dismissing the FBI's findings, but I have yet to see anything that rules out their informed speculation. I've also seen nothing confirming it.

[Antiliar]

Costello is the Heights member who reported to a captain who wasn't LaPorte. No way to determine if there's a transcription error as there's nothing to compare it to except FBI summary reports (which reflect the same conclusion) though it's open to interpretation. I interpreted the transcript as Costello reporting to someone who wasn't LaPorte and when I saw the FBI summaries later they agreed Costello was referring to a different capodecina. The FBI then combined this info with references to an "old time capro" in the Heights (which came from a different recording) and wiretaps from LaPorte's short-lived office bug to speculate about DiGiovanni holding that position referred to by Costello (whose family obviously had a long history with DiGiovanni).

There was clearly association between DiGiovanni, LaPorte, and all other members who lived/operated in the area, though as we know this doesn't always reflect formal assignments within the organization. When you refer to DiGiovanni's history with the Roberto-Emery-LaPorte group, does that include inside sources stating he was a member of that decina, or are you talking about general association?

Whatever the case, there's evidence that raises questions about jurisdictional crossover and suggests LaPorte didn't have lone authority over all members operating in the Heights even if they all associated with him and his crew.

If we had member informants actively reporting on the inner-workings in and around the Heights I'd feel more comfortable dismissing the FBI's findings, but I have yet to see anything that rules out their informed speculation. I've also seen nothing confirming it.

The information I have from CIs just name associations. The term "street crew" or anything similar wasn't used in the media until 1982, and then sporadically until the trials of Frank Calabrese Sr and Lenny Patrick. The Chicago people weren't recorded using terms like "regime," "decina" or "crew." The closest they got was something like being "with" someone, but that's vague. Definitive answers don't exist because the FBI didn't follow up with good questions about organization and history. Some of the best information comes from an outsider - Frank Bompensiero - not anyone within the Outfit itself.

As for the FBI making mistakes, we have many examples. "La Causa Nostra" as the name for the organization only to later discover that the term was "Cosa Nostra." Early intel is often error-prone and the bureau updates and corrects it as newer and better info comes along.

I have spoken to Matt Luzi about the Heights in the past since he has access to family history and maintains connections to other relatives (in addition to him being a researcher for many years), and the idea of a second capo in that same territory never came up. As an alternative, what could be possible is that DiGiovanni was sort of middle man between some of the Mafia old-timers (such as the Costellos and Zarantes) and Frank LaPorte, sort of like Nick Gentile representing the Agrigento faction of the Gambinos while technically being only a soldier. At any rate, the Joseph Costello in the MF document was Joseph Lawrence Costello, the son of Charles Costello, who was an important person in the Heights. Joseph L. probably wasn't a made member, and his "gabrochino" was likely the made soldier that he operated under. Instead of "gabrochino" meaning capodecina, it might be a form of goombah or something similar. Later on they used the term "rabbi" in Chicago for sponsor and protector, but this could be an earlier term.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... D%20clique

[B.]

That's exactly the issue -- a lack of inside Chicago sources. That's why when information presents itself I'm not sure we can afford to dismiss it without significant counter evidence. I don't see much counter evidence in this case that would allow us to dismiss the FBI's informed speculation outright without delving into even deeper speculation as to why they were wrong. As I said, it doesn't confirm anything either but there's reason to be open-minded about organizational arrangements in the Heights.

I'm aware of Matt Luzi's work but from what I've seen he didn't have a lot of inner organizational info. He's done great work but would he have insight into the ranks and hierarchy?

It's a major stretch to interpret "gabrochino" (ph) as anything other than capodecina in my opinion, which is phonetically almost identical and makes sense in context. The recording suggests that Joe Costello was a member asking the Family boss about protocol concerning his capodecina and another capodecina (LaPorte) regarding an issue with another member. "Goombah" or some word we don't know doesn't make sense in context nor is it phonetically close. Personally I think interpreting it as something else is far more speculative than believing it to be capodecina.

There is also the additional wiretap reference to an "old time capro" (ph) in Chicago Heights which in context with "gabrochino" (ph) adds to the argument that they were referring to capo / capodecina. We all agree Chicago had captains and the term capodecina goes back to at least the 1870s and was used internationally by most Families, so easy to imagine these terms were familiar to Chicago even if they weren't used as casually. In this case, Joe Costello used the term when talking with the Family boss and it was caught on tape, thus it's evidence that those terms were in use (at least by a second-gen Sicilian member).

Personally I believe there is evidence that Chicago Heights had more going on politically / organizationally than everyone simply reporting to Frank LaPorte. I don't completely understand the resistance and rationale, as I don't consider any of the info 100% definitive one way or another, but I respect you and your work so I won't belabor it further.

[PolackTony]

Relevant sections of the Costello-Giancana sit-down wiretap text.







FWIW, I arrived at the same reading here as B independently. Costello is clearly using a “dialect” pronunciation of “capodecina”. The rendering as “Gobrogina” is fully consistent with Sicilian “dialect” phonetics; interpreting thus usage as such seems entirely unremarkable and uncontroversial to me. Costello’s direct usage of the term occurs twice in the text. I’m not aware of any derivative of “compari/cumpari” that would be readily confused with “gobrogina”. Also note that Costello refers to Giancana as “avvocato”, and Giancana reminds Costello of what his own role and responsibility as the boss of the family is in terms of advocating for the membership and resolving intra-family disputes (which fits with a 1970s CI account for Aiuppa which states that as the boss, Aiuppa was “available” to the membership). Giancana also confirms Fusco’s membership to Costello (“Joe’s in the clique”), something that he presumably would not state to a non-inducted associate.

The most reasonable reading of this exchange here is that Costello was indeed made; he tried to resolve the issue with Fusco by attempting to have LaPorte mediate the issue (as LaPorte controlled liquor licensing in the Heights), and followed the proper channel and chain of command by going through his own capodecina, who was clearly not LaPorte. In that he was unable to resolve the issue in this fashion, Costello than appealed to Giancana as the boss of the family, the literal “advocate” and representative of the entire family, as was his right to do as a member.

If the only opposition to this reading is that the FBI may have mistranscribed the exchange, by that same token we can then disregard a great deal of our information on LCN. Much of the info that we get from FBI files on the mafia is not even a transcription of the actual statements of an informant, but comes in the form of SA summaries; it’s “reported speech”, and we often can’t actually assess what the source originally stated in their own words, which I think is considerably more problematic than interpreting this sit-down transcription here. Further, the FBI’s initial misinterpretation of “cosa nostra” as “causa nostra” is irrelevant to interpreting Costello’s use of capodecina. It’s clear from their summary at the end of the document that the FBI hadn’t even yet realized that “gobrogina” was actually capodecina (they apparently thought it meant “consultant” at that point). But any of us, with a basic understanding of the organization of the mafia and a familiarity with Sicilian/Southern Italian vernacular language use, will be able to readily grasp that Costello is stating capodecina, the meaning of which is also clear to us all.

[B.]

Sums up my take well. Keep in mind I saw that transcript 2+ years ago and interpreted it that way, but didn't come across the FBI summaries from Frank LaPorte's file until this year (thanks to Gavin Schmitt) where the FBI confirmed they came to a similar/same conclusion and actually had more evidence there were different organizational arrangements in the Heights than what can be observed through outward association.

[Antiliar]

While "gabrichina" might be a dialect translation of capodecina, Joseph L. Costello might not have been using the word literally, but figuratively. That's what a meant as an equivalent to "goombah." Whoever was his supervisor was his "gabrichina" whether or not that supervisor was a literal capodecina.

My bringing up the "La Causa Nostra" wasn't irrelevant to my point that the FBI has made errors. It wasn't brought up as evidence for this specific instance. That's reading too much into what I wrote. I only wrote that a transcription error is possible, not that it necessarily or probably is the case. For sake of argument, a single transcription error wouldn't mean throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Regarding Joseph L. Costello himself, I could ask around about him. Currently, I can neither confirm nor deny that he was made, so I think it would be better to keep an open mind. As I wrote above, I have my doubts. Fusco was pulling his weight around as a made guy, but who was technically a low-ranking soldier. It wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility that Giancana knew his father and that Joseph knew him through his father, and could use that connection for his assistance. It's speculation, of course, but would fit the context.

As for the document, I previously read it the same way as both of you, but knowing what I know about the Heights I soon had my doubts. Then as I learned more about Joseph L. Costello those doubts increased. Although I'm open to the possibility that he was made, in good faith I have to strongly lean that he wasn't. So we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Snakes]

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but the FBI's general consensus on the Heights succession appears to have been LaPorte >> Pilotto, at least by the time the 90s rolled around. Doesn't really disclose the existence of other crews in the area, but doesn't disclose it earlier on, either:

[B.]

Yeah, I believe the simplest explanation based on the evidence is Joe Costello was an amico nostra talking to his rappresentante about how to go about including his capodecina (not LaPorte) in an issue involving another amico nostra that required consultation with another capodecina (LaPorte). I've never seen a made member or anyone else use "capodecina" figuratively when talking to another member, let alone his boss, so I've got no idea what the basis would be for that interpretation. Other internal organizational language is used by Costello as well, i.e. "avugad".

With the "old time capro" statement (apparently from a different tape) that the FBI suspected was a reference to Sam DiGiovanni, I haven't seen the original transcript only the summary but I don't think that was figurative either.

Happy to respectfully disagree -- my opinion is simply that it's worth discussing and exploring based on the FBI's information, which will hopefully open future leads. I appreciate you providing counterpoint.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but the FBI's general consensus on the Heights succession appears to have been LaPorte >> Pilotto, at least by the time the 90s rolled around. Doesn't really disclose the existence of other crews in the area, but doesn't disclose it earlier on, either:

I don't think the wiretaps indicate this other capodecina was part of the succession of the LaPorte crew, but rather a separate group that may have roots in the original Chicago Heights Family (this would describe both DiGiovanni and Costello). If this other crew did exist, I'd expect it to have been merged with the LaPorte crew as Heights activities began to wind down.

[B.]

Another aspect of this is DeRose's mention of Chicago Heights supporting the Benevento / Northside faction in the 1940s Cheese War. Nick DeJohn was part of that faction and Sam DiGiovanni was apparently a relative (paternal uncle?), so if it's true there were members in Chicago Heights supporting Benevento we could infer this was an older Sicilian element, especially given the Benevento / Northside faction appears to be heavily Sicilian. DiGiovanni would be an obvious candidate based on the relationship to DeJohn and his history as a Sicilian mafioso.

If DeRose was right about Heights members being involved, it could suggest there was a political divide in the Heights between those who supported the official leadership (i.e. the Roberto-Emery-LaPorte element) and those who favored the rebel faction (i.e. the old time Sicilians). If that's not the case and the Roberto-Emery-LaPorte group supported Benevento that would be interesting in its own right, but I think we can speculate otherwise based on what we know of these relationships and the backgrounds of members. DeRose made it a point to mention "some individuals" from Chicago Heights supporting Benevento / Northside, that's all we know for sure.

Now whether that political divide was significant enough to warrant distinct crews in the area is hard to say, but we also don't know what sort of concessions were made when the Chicago Heights Family disbanded. It's possible that Costello reporting to an unknown capodecina (not LaPorte) who may or may not be the "old time capro" (DiGiovanni?) draws from an arrangement made when the Chicago Heights Family disbanded. Everyone in the Heights associated but we have no inside info except these wiretaps to help clarify the organizational / political set-up in the Heights between the late 1920s and early 1960s, plus DeRose's reference to an element in the Heights who supported Benevento.

[Antiliar]

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but the FBI's general consensus on the Heights succession appears to have been LaPorte >> Pilotto, at least by the time the 90s rolled around. Doesn't really disclose the existence of other crews in the area, but doesn't disclose it earlier on, either:

Definitely no fight here. Just a little brainstorming. Every now and then we're going to run into a few disagreements, but who better to disagree with than B and Tony, whose opinions I respect. Both of them are skilled researchers and great thinkers (as you are too, Snakes). I appreciate the back and forth since iron sharpens iron.

Yeah, I believe the simplest explanation based on the evidence is Joe Costello was an amico nostra talking to his rappresentante about how to go about including his capodecina (not LaPorte) in an issue involving another amico nostra that required consultation with another capodecina (LaPorte). I've never seen a made member or anyone else use "capodecina" figuratively when talking to another member, let alone his boss, so I've got no idea what the basis would be for that interpretation. Other internal organizational language is used by Costello as well, i.e. "avugad".

With the "old time capro" statement (apparently from a different tape) that the FBI suspected was a reference to Sam DiGiovanni, I haven't seen the original transcript only the summary but I don't think that was figurative either.

Happy to respectfully disagree -- my opinion is simply that it's worth discussing and exploring based on the FBI's information, which will hopefully open future leads. I appreciate you providing counterpoint.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but the FBI's general consensus on the Heights succession appears to have been LaPorte >> Pilotto, at least by the time the 90s rolled around. Doesn't really disclose the existence of other crews in the area, but doesn't disclose it earlier on, either:

I don't think the wiretaps indicate this other capodecina was part of the succession of the LaPorte crew, but rather a separate group that may have roots in the original Chicago Heights Family (this would describe both DiGiovanni and Costello). If this other crew did exist, I'd expect it to have been merged with the LaPorte crew as Heights activities began to wind down.

Yes, it's worth discussing and I appreciate your perspective. Something I forgot to mention is the photo on page 36 of Matt Luzi's book The Boys from Chicago Heights. The group photo taken in 1927 was to commemorate the consolidation of the Chicago Heights bootleggers under Dominic Roberto. The photo includes the DiGiovanni and the Costello brothers. That photo plays an important role in my (tentative) conclusion. To me it wouldn't make sense to pull out DiGiovanni (or someone else) and make them a capo in the Heights when a capo already exists and everyone swore fealty to him. I can't rule it out as impossible, just not seeing it as likely. Anyways, that's my take. On to new things.