Daniel Renaud's 2018 book on Vito Rizzuto

[antimafia]

I gotta point out, there is already a little bias showing here...." Bonnanos, biggest in NY"..?

That is just an error on Renaud's part, and I'm sure his more knowledgeable readers have already pointed it out to him.

[CabriniGreen]

Aaah, okay. I wont make a big deal then....

[antimafia]

So it seems Nicolo Rizzuto really became capo of the Montreal crew.

Interesting how Renaud now also suggest they became independent yet in his previous book he states that Montagna regurarly traveled between Montreal and New York in the years that followed, with Domenic Cicale adding he did in order to collect tribute.

So even though they were basically acting independent they officially continued as a Bonanno crew.

Nothing especially new here except the confirmation that Nick Rizzuto indeed became capo of the Montreal crew, something Andrian Humphreys and Lee Lamothe ignored in their book. They made it seem as if there was no successor installed as capo.

There's actually quite a lot new here. We had all come to accept that, in relation to the subject of Massino asking Vito Rizzuto to become captain of the Montreal crew, Vitale travelled once to Montreal in 2001, per The Sixth Family..., when in fact Vitale travelled there just a few weeks after Sciascia's murder in 1999 and then a second time some six months later. We had also forgotten that in all three editions of The Sixth Family..., Humphreys and Lamothe write that before Vitale and Urso travelled to Montreal in 2001, Massino had previously sent to Montreal both Frank Lino and, later, consigliere Anthony Spero.

Organized-crime reporters and authors can't ignore what they didn't previously know. When Renaud wrote his 2016 book, Cellule 8002 vs mafia, did he know about Vitale's travels to Montreal in 1999? I don't think so but I can't be sure. Did Lamothe and Humphreys know about those travels? If those co-authors did find out at some point after the first edition of i]The Sixth Family...[/i], the revision would have been made in the second or third edition. I'm treating this new information from Renaud's book as very significant, and of course the new information raises more questions than answers: Did Lino and Spero actually travel to Montreal? When did each of them go, relative to Vitale's visits in approximately April 1999 and October 1999? Why does Cicale recount to Ed Scarpo that Montagna went to Montreal circa late 2004 / early 2005 to collect a tribute of $100,000 from Vito instead of Nick Sr., given the latter was the captain of the Montreal crew? Why does the Montreal Mafia "hierarchy" split the tribute from underlings five ways between Nick Sr., Vito, Francesco Arcadi, Paolo Renda, and Rocco Sollecito? What else did the Montreal Mafia do that was out of the ordinary for a Bonanno crew that was possibly one in name only? Given that the timeline about Massino's entreaties to Vito Rizzuto is now a little messed up, was Vitale a reliable informant? Or is Vitale's information actually more reliable than Cicale's? I could go on and on but I'll stop here.

[Lupara]

So it seems Nicolo Rizzuto really became capo of the Montreal crew.

Interesting how Renaud now also suggest they became independent yet in his previous book he states that Montagna regurarly traveled between Montreal and New York in the years that followed, with Domenic Cicale adding he did in order to collect tribute.

So even though they were basically acting independent they officially continued as a Bonanno crew.

Nothing especially new here except the confirmation that Nick Rizzuto indeed became capo of the Montreal crew, something Andrian Humphreys and Lee Lamothe ignored in their book. They made it seem as if there was no successor installed as capo.

There's actually quite a lot new here. We had all come to accept that, in relation to the subject of Massino asking Vito Rizzuto to become captain of the Montreal crew, Vitale travelled once to Montreal in 2001, per The Sixth Family..., when in fact Vitale travelled there just a few weeks after Sciascia's murder in 1999 and then a second time some six months later. We had also forgotten that in all three editions of The Sixth Family..., Humphreys and Lamothe write that before Vitale and Urso travelled to Montreal in 2001, Massino had previously sent to Montreal both Frank Lino and, later, consigliere Anthony Spero.

Organized-crime reporters and authors can't ignore what they didn't previously know. When Renaud wrote his 2016 book, Cellule 8002 vs mafia, did he know about Vitale's travels to Montreal in 1999? I don't think so but I can't be sure. Did Lamothe and Humphreys know about those travels? If those co-authors did find out at some point after the first edition of i]The Sixth Family...[/i], the revision would have been made in the second or third edition. I'm treating this new information from Renaud's book as very significant, and of course the new information raises more questions than answers: Did Lino and Spero actually travel to Montreal? When did each of them go, relative to Vitale's visits in approximately April 1999 and October 1999? Why does Cicale recount to Ed Scarpo that Montagna went to Montreal circa late 2004 / early 2005 to collect a tribute of $100,000 from Vito instead of Nick Sr., given the latter was the captain of the Montreal crew? Why does the Montreal Mafia "hierarchy" split the tribute from underlings five ways between Nick Sr., Vito, Francesco Arcadi, Paolo Renda, and Rocco Sollecito? What else did the Montreal Mafia do that was out of the ordinary for a Bonanno crew that was possibly one in name only? Given that the timeline about Massino's entreaties to Vito Rizzuto is now a little messed up, was Vitale a reliable informant? Or is Vitale's information actually more reliable than Cicale's? I could go on and on but I'll stop here.

Fair enough. And yes there are lots of questions and this new information doesn't particulary help to fit those missing peaces. It would be great if we could actually do a Q&A with Renaud similar to what we've done with DiLeonardo. I'm sure that if we could ask him specific questions he may be able to provide better answers.

[Lupara]

Tapatalk is being weird. Suddendly getting blank pages when writing. I had already lost a pretty big piece of text in another thread this way and had to re-write it from the top of my mind again. This time I copied that 'blank text' and pasted it somewhere else in order to be able post it here again.

Anyway, I was adding:

What I meant with nothing new is basically what you already stated, that the Montreal crew remained a Bonanno crew in name only, at least between 1999 and 2009. This has been my interpretation for a long time now instead of them breaking off as has been stated by Humphreys, Lamothe and repeated by others. Breaking off and becoming an independent family is something that needs to be sanctioned and recognised by all the other Mafia families. If that had been the case Montagna wouldn't have been able to try and restore the Bonanno regime in Montreal. Besides, as has been used as an argument plenty of times; Nick Rizzuto wouldn't have needed to sent back word to New York that he didn't recognise Montagna as his boss, as that would've been obviously understood had they been an independently recognised family.

[Lupara]

And yet have to continue in a new post to continue writing...

So even though Nick apparantly became the official head of the Montreal crew everyone already knew who was really in charge, which is why Vitale offered Vito the position in the first place. So this can explain why Montagna (allegedly) collected tribute from Vito who acted on his father's behalf.

Something tells me B. might jump into this thread anytime soon. [emoji2]

[antimafia]

Fair enough. And yes there are lots of questions and this new information doesn't particulary help to fit those missing peaces. It would be great if we could actually do a Q&A with Renaud similar to what we've done with DiLeonardo. I'm sure that if we could ask him specific questions he may be able to provide better answers.

Given posts from just a few weeks ago, what incentive would there be for a Canadian organized-crime author or journalist to come on a board like this one? To first be treated in a fawning, sycophantic manner and then later be scorned and held in contempt after they provide answers to posters' questions?

And yet have to continue in a new post to continue writing...

So even though Nick apparantly became the official head of the Montreal crew everyone already knew who was really in charge, which is why Vitale offered Vito the position in the first place. So this can explain why Montagna (allegedly) collected tribute from Vito who acted on his father's behalf.

Something tells me B. might jump into this thread anytime soon. [emoji2]

Part of the problem with Cicale's information is that it was received second-hand and then conveyed to Scarpo. Vito Rizzuto was imprisoned on January 20, 2004. Montagna could not have met him in person to collect the tribute in late 2004 / early 2005. On the other hand, Rizzuto was also in prison in 2005 when surveillance of his phone conversations revealed that he was spearheading the corruption of the massive Strait of Messina Bridge project in Italy, which the Italian mainland 'ndrangheta asked him to to do. For all we know, he could have spoken with Montagna on the phone. Or Vito's displeasure was conveyed to someone else who in turn relayed it to Montagna. Or Montagna did collect $100,000 but from Nick Sr., and Nick Sr. was the one who was very upset about having to pay it.

Anyone and everyone should feel free to jump in. The more viewpoints, the better.

[B.]

The Vitale Meetings

This is big news to me about Vitale visiting Montreal multiple times after the Sciascia hit. From other testimony, I recall him saying that when Vito Rizzuto turned down the promotion to captain and suggested his father Nicolo, Vitale didn't accept this and later referred to Vito Rizzuto as a defacto "acting captain" to the FBI because he didn't know what else to call him. There was an FBI chart I've seen where Vito Rizzuto is even listed with that title.

If this is true about the multiple meetings and naming Nick Rizzuto the official captain, it completely re-routes and even destroys some of the narratives in other books and articles, not to mention most of our Montreal discussions in the boards over the years.

Assuming that this info somehow slipped under the radar and we didn't have Vitale's full information on Montreal post-Sciascia (which makes me wonder what other info we don't have), here are my thoughts:

- Vitale saying that the crew seemed disappointed he didn't appoint Sciascia's replacement tells us that the title still held some importance to them at the time beyond protocol.
- The above point would seem to go against the idea of them "laughing" at Vitale later and just going along for the sake of protocol (though them going along with protocol is meaningful in its own way, too).
- Since it was just Vitale's own feeling that they were disappointed and/or "laughing", with seemingly no direct comments or behavior to back that up, we can't assume Vitale's impression was fact. Keep in mind too that Vitale was in poor standing in the organization despite his title, his influence undercut and his popularity low with the membership. Even if Montreal didn't depend on New York, they were probably still interested in organizational gossip. It's possible that any lack of respect he picked up on from them was a reflection of him personally and not necessarily the entire New York group.

Cicale's Information

Cicale claimed to have heard the info about Montagna collecting tribute from Rizzuto/Montreal from Baldo Amato while the two were in prison. Amato was very close to Montagna, the two attending the Sciascia wake together among other close association. Amato was also very close to Sciascia and associated with the Montreal-based members as well. Baldo Amato traveled to Montreal in the 1980s, attended the Bono wedding which was attended by Rizzuto/LoPresti/Sciascia, and according to Vitale wept openly over the murder of his "compare" Sciascia. Apparently Sciascia was asked to bring Montreal shooters into NYC for an early 90s murder, but instead of recruiting them, he offered soldier Baldo Amato for the job. This was a violation of protocol as Amato had a different capodecina, but it shows the closeness of Amato to Sciascia and that decina. All of this also tells us that Amato may have been more knowledgeable of Montreal activities/gossip than other Bonanno members, so if Cicale is telling the truth, he heard it from perhaps one of the closest NYC members to both Montagna and Montreal.

Also, I have to point out that Cicale did not say that Rizzuto had a problem paying tribute, but was unhappy that NYC was asking for a larger tribute than usual. That is a crucial distinction and shows that Montreal likely had no issue with tribute itself, only the demand for more money, which he says they did in fact pay. I also took Cicale's mention of "Rizzuto" loosely to mean that it was Rizzuto's people in Montreal who paid the tribute, not necessarily Vito's own hand. It is common with these groups to refer to the leader even if he isn't the one directly involved, i.e. "Montreal paid tribute to Massino" wouldn't mean that a Montreal member put the money in Joe Massino's hand, but as with anything in the mafia, sent it through representatives.

Cicale is also the first public source to have talked about Montagna's connections to George Sciascia, which appear to have been true. I saw Montagna's widows social media profile and she is connected on there to Sciascia's immediate relatives. Cicale identified Montagna as being under Sciascia, then after the Sciascia murder Montagna was transferred to DeFilippo to keep an eye on him. Cicale also said Vincent Basciano, a major drug dealer, had been close to Sciascia and was called into a similar meeting with Massino to test Basciano's reaction to the Sciascia murder. Cicale also says that Basciano continued to participate in drug deals with the Rizzutos/Montreal after Sciascia's murder.

Basciano and Montagna's Relationship to Montreal

Given that Montagna was a Sciascia soldier/associate and Basciano was close to Sciascia and Montreal, it opens up some ideas I don't see brought up. If Montreal's relationship to NYC was soured under Massino, was it then strengthened again when Montreal's allies Basciano and then Montagna took over as acting bosses in the post-Massino era? It's important to separate Montagna's relationship to Montreal when he was acting boss in NYC with Montagna's relationship to Montreal when he was living in Montreal. We also have to factor Mancuso in, who has no known connections to Montreal but was acting boss between Basciano and Montagna and then the official boss. The key point I want to stress though is that we can't necessarily think of "Montreal's relationship to NYC" as if 1999-2009 is going to be one static image... by 2004 the administration changed and was led almost consistently until 2009 by men that had deeper, ongoing relationships to Montreal than the previous Massino regime, who alone were responsible for Sciascia's murder.

On the topic of Montagna going to Montreal -- he had the choice of going to Italy or Montreal and chose Montreal, supposedly because of his blood family there. It's clear from his immediate actions that he chose Montreal equally if not mostly because there was a Bonanno crew he fully intended to get involved in. If Nick Rizzuto was named official capodecina by Massino/Vitale, then that gives us a new look at Montagna's alleged meeting with Rizzuto. Was Montagna asking Rizzuto to step down as captain, to be replaced by Montagna? Montagna didn't necessarily lose his position in the administration when he passed over the Canadian border, so was he still acting as the highest ranking Bonanno member at that point? If so, was he going to let Rizzuto keep the position as capodecina with Montagna above him as some kind of Canadian street boss? Was Mancuso in charge, defacto or official, and backing Montagna?

Violi's Ties to NYC Bonannos

Then there is the Violi / Morena situation. Violi was not yet made into the Buffalo family until recent years, but by the time of the Morena induction Violi was already formally introduced to the visiting Bonanno members from NYC and we don't know of any Montreal-based Bonanno members attending. All of this suggests that Violi, who had reason to dislike the Rizzuto regime, maintained or developed a relationship with the Bonanno family's NYC membership and welcomed a new Canadian Bonanno member in his area. I'm too ignorant to comment on what that says about his relationship to the original Montreal group and the war there, but it does stand out to me that he was at least acquainted with NYC Bonanno members.

--

Until we have information directly from Joe Massino on Montreal in the 1990s and early 2000s or one of the few living high-ranking Montreal members from that era flips, I don't feel confident in anything but this is my take on what I've read over the years even if some of it is a broken record. Thanks to Antimafia for sharing excerpts from this book -- more room for thought, even if it "only" leads to more speculation.

[B.]

Since one of the excerpts gives some brief biographical info on Sciascia, it also brings up a question I've been meaning to ask...

When was Sciascia inducted into the Bonanno family? He was a member by the late 1970s but LCNBios hasn't posted any specific info mentioning his induction during the known 1970s ceremonies. Sciascia looks to have predated the Rizzutos in Montreal and it's my understanding that it would be many decades after he emigrated to the United States that he would be barred from entering Canada. Nick Rizzuto either transferred or was inducted into the Bonanno family by the 1970s. I'd be curious if Sciascia had been inducted in the 1950s or early 1960s in Montreal (the 1960s ceremonies are believed to have been without Commission approval) or if Sciascia, as a well-connected "zip", may have even been a transfer himself. Too much speculation to hang onto anything but some things to consider.

[Lupara]

Fair enough. And yes there are lots of questions and this new information doesn't particulary help to fit those missing peaces. It would be great if we could actually do a Q&A with Renaud similar to what we've done with DiLeonardo. I'm sure that if we could ask him specific questions he may be able to provide better answers.

Given posts from just a few weeks ago, what incentive would there be for a Canadian organized-crime author or journalist to come on a board like this one? To first be treated in a fawning, sycophantic manner and then later be scorned and held in contempt after they provide answers to posters' questions?

And yet have to continue in a new post to continue writing...

So even though Nick apparantly became the official head of the Montreal crew everyone already knew who was really in charge, which is why Vitale offered Vito the position in the first place. So this can explain why Montagna (allegedly) collected tribute from Vito who acted on his father's behalf.

Something tells me B. might jump into this thread anytime soon. [emoji2]

Part of the problem with Cicale's information is that it was received second-hand and then conveyed to Scarpo. Vito Rizzuto was imprisoned on January 20, 2004. Montagna could not have met him in person to collect the tribute in late 2004 / early 2005. On the other hand, Rizzuto was also in prison in 2005 when surveillance of his phone conversations revealed that he was spearheading the corruption of the massive Strait of Messina Bridge project in Italy, which the Italian mainland 'ndrangheta asked him to to do. For all we know, he could have spoken with Montagna on the phone. Or Vito's displeasure was conveyed to someone else who in turn relayed it to Montagna. Or Montagna did collect $100,000 but from Nick Sr., and Nick Sr. was the one who was very upset about having to pay it.

Anyone and everyone should feel free to jump in. The more viewpoints, the better.

Not sure what you're referring to and why this is seemingly directed to me.

[B.]

Antimafia is a good man who doesn't snipe at people -- I think he was commenting on some of the attitudes toward Adrian Humphreys recently, and if not that, there are plenty of other examples of members here trying to tear down journalists like Capeci, Schratweiser, and Scott/Detroit. Let's not dig into that, though, as this is a good thread. Can't imagine you have anything to worry about, Lupara, you're a good man as well. Personally I think it is more than appropriate to criticize journalists and authors in constructive way, but no reason to try and tear them down unless they are on a Phil Carlo level.

[Lupara]

Antimafia is a good man who doesn't snipe at people -- I think he was commenting on some of the attitudes toward Adrian Humphreys recently, and if not that, there are plenty of other examples of members here trying to tear down journalists like Capeci, Schratweiser, and Scott/Detroit. Let's not dig into that, though, as this is a good thread. Can't imagine you have anything to worry about, Lupara, you're a good man as well. Personally I think it is more than appropriate to criticize journalists and authors in constructive way, but no reason to try and tear them down unless they are on a Phil Carlo level.

Yeah I figured that's what he meant.

Now we're all reasonable and good men here. Ofcourse we don't have to give each other assurances as if we were lawyers.

What I envision as a Q&A with Renaud is that someone (and I think Antimafia would be in the best position to do this if he would reconsider and with the assurances as if we were lawyers that Renaud would not be scorned) is that he wouldn't be sent the questions and then, if he wants to participate, returns the answers. And as far as I know, the only Canadian journalists that were ever "questioned" here are Humphreys and Lamothe. I've always held Renaud in high regards because he never showed any biasm concerning the relation between the Canadian and American mafias. I'm sure he will be treated with respect by most, if not all, posters here and not scorned for his answers (as long as he wouldn't make statements saying that the Rizzutos eclipsed the New York families even during their prime). [emoji39]

[Lupara]

I made an error in above text (wouldn't should be would) but can't edit because I get a blank page again when I try to.

[CabriniGreen]

@B.

I was waiting for you to jump in....

Rest assured, without giving away too much, too soon, ( we are literally TWO pages in, and the convo is already heating up, lol) I can tell you EVERYTHING, you posted about Sciascia in the Montreal mafia status post Rizzuto, thread, page 38 was just about 100% backed up by Renaud.

Cicale info, despite what anyone might th hink about the guy, looks like it was very accurate...

[B.]

Great to hear the book may clear up and confirm some things. I should hold back on the runaway train posts until more info from the book gets shared. Looking forward to it.