Confirmation of Chicago Consiglio 1969

[Antiliar]

- This is from 1969 so Giancana may have lost his title more recently than 1967.

- No question to me proper protocol wasn't followed when Fratianno tried to transfer and it was ultimately rejected after a period of confusion. Fratianno insisted it went through and that's the main discrepancy.

- For Fratianno and Alderisio meeting previously, they had met but hadn't been formally introduced as amico nostra. Bomp provided the formal introduction on this occasion.

- With regard to sources, in this case we have one of the most reliable member informants of the era (Bomp) receiving info direct from Alderisio. The "chain of custody" goes Alderisio>Bomp>FBI in a very short period which makes this info of higher value than most of what's available. Accepting random FBI reports at face value without knowing the source and "chain of custody" of the info is less reliable but this particular report/source is about as good as it gets (often we don't know who the informant was or who told him the info).

- It's possible, but the docs Snakes referred to from the early 1970s seem to suggest otherwise, which complicates things. Did they remove Giancana's title then give it back? It's possible, just not sure about the likelihood of that scenario.

- Yup, we all agree that protocol wasn't followed.

- Fratianno in The Last Mafioso doesn't give the details on when he was reintroduced to Alderisio as a made member, so that's very possible. Fratianno said he gave him $15K in 1966 or 67, so whenever they were reintroduced it probably took place before that transaction (unless the money was passed on by an intermediary). It does seem weird to me though that if Bomp reintroduced them that he wouldn't bring up Fratianno having been transferred to Chicago by Giancana. "Hi Phil, you two haven't seen each other since Russian Louie, so Jimmy, here's Milwaukee Phil as a made man. Phil, here's Jimmy as a member of your own brugad. Sam transferred him." I can imagine Phil then saying, "Really? Sam never told me. Nobody told me. It's good to see you, Jimmy, but I'm going have ask Joe about this." Whatever they said, the conversations must have been interesting.

- Chain of custody is important, so I don't dismiss the debatable statements out of hand. I take them seriously, but like I wrote even with this chain of custody is doesn't remove the fact that there are conflicts - and some of those conflicts come from the same source (Bomp). We can't get in the head of Alderisio to perfectly understand what he said nor Bompensiero's to perfectly understand what he understood. There could have been a bit of equivocation in the word meanings. That's why it's important to look at each document within the totality of information that we have.

Do you have the link to the source so we can see the full context?

[B.]

Sure thing: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... elPageId=1

He also follows up on Joe Zerilli's plan mentioned in a previous report to step down and become "consigliere of power". He was told by Moceri that Zerilli felt his son was too unpopular and the Family election would likely go in a different direction, so he decided to stay on as boss.

For Fratianno/Alderisio, this was in 1969 after Licata had already settled the issue and asserted that Fratianno was still an LA member so Bompensiero wouldn't have introduced him as a Chicago member here. It sounds like it only came up because Alderisio wanted to hear the story straight from Fratianno after the fact. By this time nobody was confused about Fratianno's affiliation, though.

[B.]

Regarding “consignu”, I believe that “Consiglio” in Sicilianu is “Cunsigghiu”. Bomp otherwise doesn’t use the term when discussing his own family, so I think we can assume that Alderisio told him that the body in Chicago was called Consiglio. Also, if Consiglio/Commissione here was just referring to the typical family administration, why did Bomp not say that his own family was run by a “Commissione”?

I think you're right. I noticed it had the Sicilian dialect "u" at the end, which brought to mind SAC Hegarty's 1980s testimony where he used Sicilian dialect terms to refer to Chicago's admin positions. Makes me wonder if they similarly overheard Sicilian dialect for other positions/duties. DeRose did insist the consiglio was mostly made up of Sicilians (even though he was mistaken on Cerone).

[PolackTony]

Sure thing: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... elPageId=1

He also follows up on Joe Zerilli's plan mentioned in a previous report to step down and become "consigliere of power". He was told by Moceri that Zerilli felt his son was too unpopular and the Family election would likely go in a different direction, so he decided to stay on as boss.

For Fratianno/Alderisio, this was in 1969 after Licata had already settled the issue and asserted that Fratianno was still an LA member so Bompensiero wouldn't have introduced him as a Chicago member here. It sounds like it only came up because Alderisio wanted to hear the story straight from Fratianno after the fact. By this time nobody was confused about Fratianno's affiliation, though.

Earlier Bomp told the Feds that LaPorte had went to Accardo and Ricca to confirm what the story was with Fratianno’s status, and reported that Alderisio was also present. Reasonable that once Alderisio (who at that time also badmouthed Fratianno, reportedly) was formally introduced to Fratianno as a member he’d want to query Fratianno about the issue.

[Snakes]

As far as the file I mentioned is concerned, Giancana may have been demoted from boss, but nobody was appointed as "official" boss until Aiuppa in '74 or '75. So, Battaglia, Cerone, and Accardo/Ricca were acting in that capacity.

[B.]

Bill Bonanno said Families could go years before electing an official boss. Carlo Gambino apparently had to wait around 3 years. Nick Delmore and John LaRocca had to wait a year or so. Magliocco was never official so they didn't have anyone for two years.

Seems the Luccheses went years after Lucchese died too and there's conflicting info on whether Tramunti was ever official. Genovese are confusing but they may have waited a while too when Vito died. Maybe more recently it happened between Gigante and Bellomo.

Would make sense Chicago wasn't eager to elect someone given the problems with Giancana and other leaders' legal problems. Battaglia went to prison, Alderisio didn't want it because of a sentence hanging over him. They also had a strong consiglio directing things.

We tend to assume the history of this stuff is all straightforward but there may be a lot more "official" gaps in succession. What's crazy is such a violent Family like Chicago stayed so disciplined and stable through this stuff.

[PolackTony]

We tend to assume the history of this stuff is all straightforward but there may be a lot more "official" gaps in succession. What's crazy is such a violent Family like Chicago stayed so disciplined and stable through this stuff.

I believe that it was the ‘69 informant, the one who stated that Ricca and Accardo were retired but acting as leadership in Giancana’s absence, who stated that Ricca and Accardo were primarily concerned with preventing violence within the family.

[Snakes]

Yeah, to be honest, I also think they operated without an underboss for much of their history. Ferraro, Cerone, and probably DiFronzo are the only three I can say for certain held the position. I just think that the crews were powerful enough to where the capos acted as collective underbosses, so the position wasn't necessarily as needed.

[B.]

Bomp may have also cleared up the Accardo wiretap where he says Meyer Lansky has been made "avugad of the Jews". Bomp said Lansky was a defacto Commission representative for issues that concerned the Jewish element. Fits perfectly with the Accardo tape.



He said the same/similar thing about Lansky in another interview.

[PolackTony]

Bomp may have also cleared up the Accardo wiretap where he says Meyer Lansky has been made "avugad of the Jews". Bomp said Lansky was a defacto Commission representative for issues that concerned the Jewish element. Fits perfectly with the Accardo tape.



He said the same/similar thing about Lansky in another interview.

Good find and makes perfect sense. Similar to how Gus Alex was described in terms of his relationship to Chicago’s Consiglio:



I’ve posted before, but this was how Aiuppa was described by one informant in 1974. We know from another Bomp file from that same year that Al Pilotto told Bomp that he and Joey Lombardo were also on the council at that time:



1973 summary from the FBI on current intel regarding the division of labor:

[B.]

Yep, it all falls into place. "Chairman of the board" sounds like the same thing as San Jose electing a secretary of the consiglio (we even know the succession of it). Detroit also had Priziola chair their consiglio, maybe the same position. Curious if Ricca initially had this title and it passed to Accardo in the 1970s. In practice there's no question they were co-chairmen. The secretary of San Jose had the authority to go to NYC on behalf of the consiglio to request Joe Cerrito be taken down so it was very powerful.

What Snakes said would make sense too, that it gradually became informal or fell apart. That's what happened to most consiglio around the US in the 1960s-70s. Difference is those Families were falling apart and Chicago stayed strong. Detroit kept their consiglio intact for a long time after the others.

Going back to the Alderisio / Fratianno formal introduction, it took place in 1969 so if Alderisio loaned him money earlier it would have been after having been socially introduced but not as members. Bomp said they each knew the other was made, just nobody had made the introduction. Indicates they interacted and associated earlier.

[PolackTony]

Yep, it all falls into place. "Chairman of the board" sounds like the same thing as San Jose electing a secretary of the consiglio (we even know the succession of it). Detroit also had Priziola chair their consiglio, maybe the same position. Curious if Ricca initially had this title and it passed to Accardo in the 1970s. In practice there's no question they were co-chairmen. The secretary of San Jose had the authority to go to NYC on behalf of the consiglio to request Joe Cerrito be taken down so it was very powerful.

What Snakes said would make sense too, that it gradually became informal or fell apart. That's what happened to most consiglio around the US in the 1960s-70s. Difference is those Families were falling apart and Chicago stayed strong. Detroit kept their consiglio intact for a long time after the others.

Going back to the Alderisio / Fratianno formal introduction, it took place in 1969 so if Alderisio loaned him money earlier it would have been after having been socially introduced but not as members. Bomp said they each knew the other was made, just nobody had made the introduction. Indicates they interacted and associated earlier.

We don’t know exactly what Alderisio reportedly said about Fratianno to LaPorte and Ricca/Accardo, just a vague claim that he disparaged Fratianno as “a conniver”, suggesting that he had reason to dislike Fratianno. That was reported in ‘68, so obviously prior to Bomp’s account of them being formerly introduced as amici.

If, as Bomp reported from Alderisio, Giancana had been officially demoted from rappresentante to soldier due to having absconded, than it’s worth wondering whether the Chicago Consiglio could do that on their own accord or if they would’ve needed to get permission from the Commission as well. My instinct is that they would’ve made their edict and then informed the Commission as to where the situation stood. It’s an interesting question to think about, however.

[B.]

Like when most bosses get deposed or killed, a case was probably being made against Giancana for a while even if one thing broke the camel's back. Just from what we know he didn't carry out his duties well.

I imagine the Commission technically had to approve it but it was more a matter of Ricca or Accardo telling the Commission about the decision and assuring them things were under control, not something the Commission need to take a heavy hand in. They had a strong seat and the main concern of the Commission was preventing war.

[PolackTony]

1964 CI’s account of Ricca/Accardo as akin to treasurers for the family’s pool of investment capital:

[B.]

Now the question is who all sat on the consiglio. There are multiple references to Ross Prio being a consistent part of this body in addition to Ricca and Accardo.

A lot of the Family consigli around the country seem to have had five seats (admin plus two captains and/or soldiers) which makes sense given these bodies voted and the mafia often favored odd numbers so there'd be a tie-breaker (Valachi says this was why the joint-consiglio in NYC/NJ had 7 seats).

Chicago was a bigger Family than a lot of these small or dwindling Families who had 5-member consigli so maybe theirs was 7 members, no idea myself.

DeRose said these men were on the "committee" who advised Sam Giancana:

- Paul Ricca
- Tony Accardo
- Fifi Buccieri
- Sam Battaglia
- Jack Cerone
- Ross Prio (possibly)
- Presumably Giancana was on it, making 7.

DeRose pointed out that most of them were Sicilian (he mistakenly thought Cerone was Sicilian but was right that Ricca and Buccieri weren't while the others were).

Ricca and Accardo were technically not in the pyramid hierarchy but this made them consiglieri and at least one was the chairman / secretary. None of the references I've seen suggest every captain had a seat but rather select ones did. If Alderisio was actually a consiglio member in 1969 he could have been a soldier who sat on it for a period or was at least included in the process.