Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Discuss all mafia families in the U.S., Canada, Italy, and everywhere else in the world.

Moderator: Capos

Post Reply
Nasabeak
Straightened out
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2022 10:04 pm

Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Nasabeak »

Looking back over the peak period of Chicago Family’s power and influence, they seem to have been a much more violent Family (and host, also, to many more unstable men on average) than the New York families.

Yes, in NY, you had guys like Casso, Tommy Karate, Roy DeMeo, etc - but these seem to have been the exception rather than rule. Even guys like Dellacroce or Tony Plate didn’t seem to go in for torture, just had brutal tempers and were feared.

Paul Ricca I am led to understand on the other hand, while alive, wouldn’t let Mad Sam DeStefano be touched. The guy had like a 40 odd year career before being killed in 1973.

But you read of incidents like them hanging a guy up by his asshole on a hook and torturing him for three days, blowtorching his dick off; then later on wiretap are laughing about that; or the famous eyes in a vice scene by Tony Ant depicted in Casino, or Petrocelli being both shot and having his throat slit, then his body set ablaze, or Tony Ant and his brother being beaten so as to almost be unrecognisable as human-

It seems that use of torture and (over the top methods of) murder were less the exception than the rule in Chicago, as compared to other families.

My question, I suppose which can’t be truly answered is: Why?
User avatar
Ivan
Full Patched
Posts: 4087
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:33 am
Location: The center of the universe, a.k.a. Ohio

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Ivan »

This is really subjective but I wanted to just go ahead and pipe in that I agree with your perception.

Not so much more violent in terms of overall assaults and murders, but there is something much more "ghoulish" and serial-killer esque about them. Like when I think of New York mob hits, I just think of people getting shot. When I think of Chicago hits, I think of some guy being tortured for hours, then strangled and (just to be sure!) his throat slit.

Again, this is totally subjective, and it maybe possible that if you analyze this more objectively across families there's nothing especially egregious about Chicago in this way. I suppose someone could argue that Roy DeMeo alone balances out the Chicago horror-movie shit. But it's definitely how I perceive them, or the impression that I've always gotten from them, in a way I don't get from other families other than isolated cases.

(Just a note, I think recalling someone on here saying the Action Jackson "meathook" episode was grossly exaggerated by Roemer and it was a more conventional torture-murder than claimed, but I can't remember exactly.)
Cuz da bullets don't have names.
Coloboy
Straightened out
Posts: 457
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:45 pm

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Coloboy »

I’m not so sure that perception is accurate, I think any family could be gruesomely violent in certain situations depending on who they used for the murder and the reason for it.

What I will say, however, is that the primary difference I see between hits in Chicago and on the East Coast is the motivation for the murder. There are seemingly many more “ego “or “beef” type murders on the east coast. Such as somebody said something wrong to a made guy, Said something inappropriate to someone’s daughter or wife, or insulted somebody. Chicago seems to have generally been more tolerant of these kind of transgressions, but more deadly when it came to the actual bottom line. Meaning, if you in anyway threatened or messed with business operations and revenue, you were gone. It seemed very business like in that sense. Seemingly, nothing was allowed that fucked up the flow of money.

It’s like Rimo Gagi in Casino (who was portraying a version of Chicago boss, Joey Aiuppa), when he says, “why take a chance?”
User avatar
Pogo The Clown
Men Of Mayhem
Posts: 14241
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:02 am

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Pogo The Clown »

This perception of Chicago goes back to at least the 1960s. In the Godfather novel the NY families viewed Chicago as mad dogs that they (NY) had had given up trying to civilize.


Pogo
It's a new morning in America... fresh, vital. The old cynicism is gone. We have faith in our leaders. We're optimistic as to what becomes of it all. It really boils down to our ability to accept. We don't need pessimism. There are no limits.
User avatar
Ivan
Full Patched
Posts: 4087
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:33 am
Location: The center of the universe, a.k.a. Ohio

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Ivan »

Turns out we did this already (stumbled across this while searching for something else): viewtopic.php?p=221363
Cuz da bullets don't have names.
User avatar
SonnyBlackstein
Filthy Few
Posts: 7769
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 2:21 am

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by SonnyBlackstein »

Was Chicago formed from a particular area of Italy (the Bonannos were Sicilian for example)?

Sicilians can be brutal fucks. Corleonessi.
Don't give me your f***ing Manson lamps.
User avatar
PolackTony
Filthy Few
Posts: 6023
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 10:54 am
Location: NYC/Chicago

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by PolackTony »

Coloboy wrote: Sat Nov 23, 2024 10:12 am I’m not so sure that perception is accurate, I think any family could be gruesomely violent in certain situations depending on who they used for the murder and the reason for it.

What I will say, however, is that the primary difference I see between hits in Chicago and on the East Coast is the motivation for the murder. There are seemingly many more “ego “or “beef” type murders on the east coast. Such as somebody said something wrong to a made guy, Said something inappropriate to someone’s daughter or wife, or insulted somebody. Chicago seems to have generally been more tolerant of these kind of transgressions, but more deadly when it came to the actual bottom line. Meaning, if you in anyway threatened or messed with business operations and revenue, you were gone. It seemed very business like in that sense. Seemingly, nothing was allowed that fucked up the flow of money.

It’s like Rimo Gagi in Casino (who was portraying a version of Chicago boss, Joey Aiuppa), when he says, “why take a chance?”
Not sure that I’d agree. Chicago could also be very personal and uptight about “honor” stuff as well.

Two of the prominent murders of the Aiuppa period, Petrocelli and John Fecarotta, were both at least in part precipitated by them bragging/talking stuff (“in part” in that only rarely is a guy killed for a single infraction; it’s typically a series of compounding events). Part of what led to Petrocelli getting whacked, apart from running his mouth too much, was, allegedly, him being a spaccone (show off) who liked throwing slick parties in the Loop. Chicago didn’t like spacconi. Part of what led to Fecarotta getting whacked, allegedly, was him sleeping with his dead brother’s wife.

The latter reminds one of the incident with Chicago member “Pizza Joe” Aiello in the 1930s, who was ordered to commit an honor killing on his unfaithful wife, refused, and then had to flee Chicago and transfer to the Madison outfit for protection.

In his book, Frank Calabrese Jr claimed that Aiuppa ordered a hit on Calabrese Jr’s uncle, Ed Henley (a major union figure), after word got back to the Chicago admin that Henley had been drunkenly disparaging Italians at a Loop bar.

Allegedly, at least, Chicago member Sam Cesario was murdered (blown away by shotgun in front of his home) because he had been messing around with the former “comare” of Felix Alderisio after the latter was incarcerated.

The Jackson murder brutality was at least also, allegedly, in part motivated by Jackson having had violently sexually assaulted a girl that another guy was involved with (forget who ATM). One would think there was more to that story anyway, as plenty of other guys were suspected of talking to LE and were just dispatched quickly rather than tortured.

Now, these are not really “personal beefs” between members, but rather, likely examples of guys who got whacked, again, at least on part, for inappropriate or dishonorable conduct. Word gets back to the Chicago admin that someone has been publicly conducting themselves in an inappropriate manner? You would not want to be this guy (I actually believe that Sam DeStefano was the exception to the rule and he was also eventually killed when Accardo and Aiuppa got sick of his antics).

Beyond this, as we’ve discussed before, by all appearances Chicago took the “secret” part of “secret society” deadly serious. This is a Family where a captain and member (Prio and DiBella) would talk openly of committing felony crimes to each other at a restaurant but then slink away to a back room and whisper words like “avugad” that related to the mafia organization.

I very much do not believe that men like Accardo, Ricca, and Aiuppa were comparatively tolerant of insults (let alone to a member’s female relatives). These were men who I would have been on my very best behavior around, if I wanted to avoid a hole in the back of my head, to say the least.
"Hey, hey, hey — this is America, baby! Survival of the fittest.”
Uforeality
Straightened out
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:59 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca

Re: Why did Chicago seem much more violent than New York?

Post by Uforeality »

It always seemed to me that the spirit of LCN were worlds apart from city to city. New York LCN and, for example, Chicago LCN handled internal affairs so differently it was almost comical. Maybe because New York was so much bigger and had upwards of seven mafia families. Chicago had one family and one voice from the top. The Outfits message was clear to everyone who had business with them, fuck around and find out.
Post Reply