Chicago Outfit Lineage Chart 1928-2017

[Snakes]

I understand, but in none of those were they specifically called underboss. That's my only problem with using them as underbosses in a succession line. I'm very aware of the links you posted and we can assume all we want but until there is something out there that says "this guy was underboss" then we can only guess at it.

With that said, here is what I wrote for "underboss." I've been taking some of the things I said above into consideration when making these definitions so maybe it will be a little bit easier to see where I'm coming from:

The "underboss," or #2, is traditionally given to an individual who is the #2 ranking man actively engaged in the running of the organization. On the "street", he reports only to the boss and may or may not have his own crew of men reporting directly to him. In addition, the #2 may still possess authority over a particular section of territory or may be responsible for handling things such as murders, gambling income, or police payoffs. The power of the #2 has varied within the organization over the years. For example, Jack Cerone represented the Outfit in meetings with other LCN families around the nation and contributed to major Outfit decisions, such as choosing the new Teamsters president.

[Confederate]

The same thing occurred during the late 60s when feds described Ricca and Accardo as joint bosses, Cerone as the underboss and Alderisio as the consiglieri, which we know wasnt true at all.

Yes, but this was back when they didn't have an accurate understanding of how the Outfit worked compared to other families, hence why they tried to apply the consigliere label to Alderisio. To their credit, at least, they surmised that this was only an estimate.

Again regarding the so-called underboss position, Alderisio was Battaglias number two from the moment the second became the acting boss in 65.

When Alderisio went to jail in 1970, the next year Nicoletti became the underboss by also receiving jurisdiction over the First Ward and strong-arm crews, same as his predecessors Ferraro and Alderisio, until 76 when Cerone took over. Theres a document from that same year which states that Aiuppa, Cerone and Alex were the most powerful members, with Accardo at the top.

The only problem I have with this is that they never outright said that either one (Alderisio or Nicoletti) was the underboss; merely powerful guys direct with the bosses. They used it before with Ferraro so why wouldn't they say it in the case of those two? We can certainly surmise that to be the case but do we really know for sure? If I have to be completely honest, I think the Outfit used the "underboss" position very sparingly.

Then again, this is where we agree to disagree. With a lot of the Outfit's history we have to deal with best guesses and estimations but also have to realize that by trying to make everything fit into a nice, neat line of succession we are almost trying to fit round pegs into square holes because they just did not operate that simply, purposefully or not.

Spot on assessment by Snakes in my opinion. The Outfit doesn't fit into a neat little package like New York. The more everybody tries, the more descrepancies there will be.I never read where Nicoletti was the underboss OF THE WHOLE OUTFIT. I seriously doubt it. Some of these guys seemed to be powerful street bosses who reported DIRECT.

[Confederate]

I think the term "underboss" is used very loosely by people reporting about the Outfit. One OBVIOUS example is Marcello. He was the "underboss" to Carlisi but was NOT the underboss of the WHOLE OUTFIT. The #2 OF THE ENTIRE OUTFIT was DiFronzo. Just my observation.

[Confederate]

Other examples that come to mind from reading Court Documents and the book by Ovid Demaris;
Joe Gagliano was the underboss to Cerone in Elmwood Park BUT NOT of the entire Outfit according to Demaris.
Rocky Infelise was the underboss to Ferriola BUT NOT of the entire Outfit according to Good Ship Lollipop Documents,
Tony Zizzo was underboss to Marcello BUT NOT of the entire Outfit etc.

[Frank]

Other examples that come to mind from reading Court Documents and the book by Ovid Demaris;
Joe Gagliano was the underboss to Cerone in Elmwood Park BUT NOT of the entire Outfit according to Demaris.
Rocky Infelise was the underboss to Ferriola BUT NOT of the entire Outfit according to Good Ship Lollipop Documents,
Tony Zizzo was underboss to Marcello BUT NOT of the entire Outfit etc.

Yes I have heard that term too. Like Carlisi was Aiuppas personal Underboss. What I've noticed it was basically used for the person running the crew of an administration member. I think that Infelice was just called that because the thought Ferriola was boss of the Outfit. I think he was actually a Capo. But that's just splitting hairs. Like we have stated before they might not of even used the term Capo.

[Snakes]

"Personal underboss" was just some made up term that the Don concocted over at ANP. All it was just a boss's #2.

[Confederate]

"Personal underboss" was just some made up term that the Don concocted over at ANP. All it was just a boss's #2.

Yes, or the Boss's right hand man. Same thing.

[Frank]

Underboss

Louis Campagna 1932 1939

Phil D’Andrea 1939 1943

Tony Accardo 1943 1946

Sam Giancana 1946 1956
No opinion on the above as they fall outside my area of study

Frank Ferraro 1956 1964 (Ferraro died in 1964)
Supported by numerous sources

Sam Battaglia 1964 1965 (became boss)
Supported by numerous sources

Jack Cerone 1965 1967 (became boss)
This was originally Alderisio but I think you meant to place Cerone here. He was never specifically cited as the #2 guy but evidence proves that his status was of a comparable position.

Phil Alderisio 1967 1969 (imprisoned)
Very powerful guy. If there is original source material referencing him as #2, I haven't seen it, but if we qualify this position as "most powerful guy besides the top bosses" he is fine here.

Charles Nicoletti 1969 1975 (acting under boss who by the mid 1970’s was semi-retired or shelved)
Powerful guy during this time period, although his influence waned as the decade went on. I would almost place Aiuppa as the underboss for 1969-1971(ish) with Accardo as the boss and Ricca as the top boss. Either way, Nicoletti is probably the best option here.

Jack Cerone 1975 1986 (imprisoned in 1986)
Cerone did not immediately return to power upon his release from prison. It didn't take him long to return there, however. I'd say he was #2 again by 1975. Look at the "Last Supper" photo: Cerone was there and Nicoletti wasn't, which makes me believe that Cerone outranked him by that time.

John DiFronzo 1986 1992 (became boss)
I almost want to place Ferriola here for a year or two but the evidence isn't overwhelming enough for me to do so.

Joe Andriacchi 1992 2009
This is a weird time period for me. I see Andriacchi as the true #2, holding that position and that of acting boss simultaneously. I think he was content with running EP and allowing Monteleone to become boss but the Frank Sr. wiretaps almost make it sound like Andriacchi jumped him (Monteleone). I really don't know. I can also see Marcello as underboss with various guys acting for him on the outside, including Tornabene and Zizzo. Anyone else want to chime in?

Salvatore Cataudella 2009 present

So what are we gonna due about Frank Calebrese saying Addriacchi is boss. That seems logical in a way, but hasn't it been confirmed that Monteleone and then Tornabene preceeded Marcello. Or did Addriacchi have the spot till Marcello came out of prison after Monteleone died.

[Pete]

Heres one doc which states that by the end of 1964 Alderisio took over the Loop area (Ferraros old territory) and was very close to Battaglia, the current underboss who was about to become the acting boss since at the time Giancana began having legal troubles which were about to land him in prison

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... risio_1965

So i really dont care on how you look or label the underboss or second in command who came after Giancana, but still this is a good evidence that Alderisio took Ferraros position, which means that we dont need any kind of label to confirm this. If someone took Giancanas position, that guy was the boss or was simply acting, no doubt about it.

Next document describes Alderisio as Goancanas "possible" successor

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... risio_1965

Although we know that in 65/66 Battaglia became the acting boss, but still it confirms that Alderisio was near the top.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... risio_boss

The next documents show Alderisios high level dealings...

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... risio_boss

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... risio_1966

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... hicago_lcn

Any more dilema?

As for Nicoletti, he was described as being up.there with Accardo, Alex and Aiuppa (top boss, adviser and boss) during the first half of the 70s in numerous files..here are at least three of them

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... letti_alex

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... letti_alex

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... letti_alex

No offense but many documents said ferriola was boss and he wasn't. In my opinion those documents don't prove anything. Not saying it's right or not right just that those documents specifically aren't gospel. There's tons of stuff that has been proven wrong in many government docs. If there is something in a gov doc that I have never seen supported by anything else I would be hesitant to believe it as I am hestitant to believe Nicoletti was the underboss as I had never heard that before. If you guys are comfortable with that though by all means go with it

[Villain]

Sorry guys but i already said that this chart is going to be backed only by gov files, informer statements, court transcripts and newspaper clips. So until some "new" info comes up regarding the 60s and 70s (which i highly doubt), until then, these files are going to be considered as "GOSPEL".

Im tired of ppl coming around here and inventing stuff and say that Giancana was their grandmother or constantly writing that Ricca died in 71 and Nitti was always the boss. No thanks, Ill stick to the files and my statements until someone proves me wrong regarding the old days (again i highly doubt)

In the end i also want to say this....pls stop teaching me that everything should be take with few grains of salt since im quite aware about it but if you only want to think that way, then lets drop this thing since we're not 100% sure that even Capone was the boss, since the files arent "gospel" and even though they say he was the boss, still its not very "clear"

And another thing, some of you went into fantasy land by being carried away with things such as "Chi was completely different" or "there was no underboss position" or whatever...well the truth is that by the end of the day the Outfit was an LCN family. Period.

So im saying this for final...if someone thinks that the feds were always wrong, or the Outfit never had an underboss position or an adviser role or consiglieri (yeah i said it) or Ricca died in 71 and Nitti was the boss, than im off the chart and i dont want to have anything with it since it conflicts with my personal long time research on the syndicate and ill send my own personal project to Chris (in fact was his first and greatest idea), which out of respect will be quite different than this one

Lets vote...democracy right?! I vote for me leaving this chart and make my own since im tired of people coming in the last moment and say something completely different or change their minds in the last minute like we gonna get a million dollars for this. Im going solo, good luck with the chart guys

[Pete]

That's pretty dramatic response to just regular discussion about a topic that is open for a lot of speculation based on the secrecy of the organization. I specifically said no offense but I am sorry if you took offense. I also specifically said if you guys are comfortable go with it. All I was saying was based on my years of research I had never heard nicoletti was underboss so those documents go against everything I have read. That's not a hunch or an undocumented opinion these are things I've learned from well researched books, word of informers and also government docs. Not sure why you would ask for feedback then get upset and drop the project because people give their feedback. No hard feelings though I respect your research and opinions on the topic

[Villain]

That's pretty dramatic response to just regular discussion about a topic that is open for a lot of speculation based on the secrecy of the organization. I specifically said no offense but I am sorry if you took offense. I also specifically said if you guys are comfortable go with it. All I was saying was based on my years of research I had never heard nicoletti was underboss so those documents go against everything I have read. That's not a hunch or an undocumented opinion these are things I've learned from well researched books, word of informers and also government docs. Not sure why you would ask for feedback then get upset and drop the project because people give their feedback. No hard feelings though I respect your research and opinions on the topic

Common Pete, lets be honest here, people around here dont know much regarding the 30s 40s 50s or 60s but still you wanna talk about the 70s and 80s. How can you create your opinion on something for which you dont know its history, its creation and formation and transformation during the decades or thei positions as a matter of fact?

[Pete]

That's pretty dramatic response to just regular discussion about a topic that is open for a lot of speculation based on the secrecy of the organization. I specifically said no offense but I am sorry if you took offense. I also specifically said if you guys are comfortable go with it. All I was saying was based on my years of research I had never heard nicoletti was underboss so those documents go against everything I have read. That's not a hunch or an undocumented opinion these are things I've learned from well researched books, word of informers and also government docs. Not sure why you would ask for feedback then get upset and drop the project because people give their feedback. No hard feelings though I respect your research and opinions on the topic

Common Pete, lets be honest here, people around here dont know much regarding the 30s 40s 50s or 60s but still you wanna talk about the 70s and 80s. How can you create your opinion on something for which you dont know its history, its creation and formation and transformation during the decades or thei positions as a matter of fact?

You messaged me and asked my opinion on your charts. If you think I don't know it's history and creation and formation not sure why you asked me but that's ok. The main focus of my interest for the past few years has been 70's to present day but in the 15 years or so I've researched the outfit I've read a ton of info about all the different time frames. I don't comment on those early time frames as much because I haven't gone through that info as much recently so I leave it to the guys that have. You are convinced the outfit had a consigliere even though the only made member to flip said there was no such position I can't understand that so I respond. Sounds like you aren't really open to the feedback you asked for so you probably should have done the chart on your own from the get go.

[Villain]

That's pretty dramatic response to just regular discussion about a topic that is open for a lot of speculation based on the secrecy of the organization. I specifically said no offense but I am sorry if you took offense. I also specifically said if you guys are comfortable go with it. All I was saying was based on my years of research I had never heard nicoletti was underboss so those documents go against everything I have read. That's not a hunch or an undocumented opinion these are things I've learned from well researched books, word of informers and also government docs. Not sure why you would ask for feedback then get upset and drop the project because people give their feedback. No hard feelings though I respect your research and opinions on the topic

Common Pete, lets be honest here, people around here dont know much regarding the 30s 40s 50s or 60s but still you wanna talk about the 70s and 80s. How can you create your opinion on something for which you dont know its history, its creation and formation and transformation during the decades or thei positions as a matter of fact?

You messaged me and asked my opinion on your charts. If you think I don't know it's history and creation and formation not sure why you asked me but that's ok. The main focus of my interest for the past few years has been 70's to present day but in the 15 years or so I've researched the outfit I've read a ton of info about all the different time frames. I don't comment on those early time frames as much because I haven't gone through that info as much recently so I leave it to the guys that have. You are convinced the outfit had a consigliere even though the only made member to flip said there was no such position I can't understand that so I respond. Sounds like you aren't really open to the feedback you asked for so you probably should have done the chart on your own from the get go.

Oh im open to feed back alright since i accepted almost everything which you guys mentioned regarding many periods and positions but there are some time periods for which ill obviously argue. So dont you dare say that again. I also waited for your personal opinion after everyones statement, but you rarely answered or responded. And i dont feel guilty for sending you my msg since i know that you have knowledge. And i was the one who constantly tried to maintain the peace around here since many of you are talking behind each others backs and are sending me private msgs. So believe me Im not the drama queen but instead im just one single tired guy. So Im tired of this kind of shit since we are constantly going in circles and if someone posts a document, its quickly "debunked" by empty statements. Maybe after you say something like "well 40 years later the informant said this", i should say "how many informants lied" and BAM your statement is allegedly "debunked" right? Sorry but Ill stick to the gov rec and i repeated this countless times. Thats the real reason im off, not you. Maybe Im really guilty for asking and im truly sorry for wasting your time Pete and everyone elses, from the bottom of my heart

[Snakes]

Me putting Paul Ricca's death date as '71 instead of '72 was a simple mistake. Check your messages, Villain. We are all on the same side here: we're all looking for the truth and new facts, which sometimes challenge old facts. It's the way it's always been. If we don't challenge each other in a respectful manner what's the purpose of what we are doing?