|
2 registered members (joepuzzles234, 1 invisible),
117
guests, and 14
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums21
Topics43,460
Posts1,089,935
Members10,381
| |
Most Online1,254
Mar 13th, 2025
|
|
|
Was Chicago’s Marshall Caifano an Informant?
#1118509
03/28/25 07:36 PM
03/28/25 07:36 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
NYMafia
OP
|
OP
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
|
|
|
|
Re: Was Chicago’s Marshall Caifano an Informant?
[Re: Liggio]
#1118580
03/29/25 02:55 AM
03/29/25 02:55 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
NYMafia
OP
|
OP
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
|
Was EVERYBODY an informant? Lol, sometimes it can seem that way. Especially when you hear a relatively big name like Caifano. But, fortunately for the mob, most guys stood their ground and manned up when the going got tough (especially back in the day), compared to nowadays where so many guys flip.
|
|
|
Re: Was Chicago’s Marshall Caifano an Informant?
[Re: NYMafia]
#1118967
04/02/25 03:18 AM
04/02/25 03:18 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,720
AZ
Turnbull
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,720
AZ
|
Actually, Caifano, whether or not an informant, wsas a "law abiding citizen" in a way:
His was one of the first names to be entered into Nevada's notorious "Black Book"--a list, maintained by the Gaming Board, of people who could be barred from entering, much less owning or operating, a casino because of criminal records, association with known criminals, or "unsavory reputations." Caifano flaunted it by crashing various casinos in October 1960 and intimidating the owners into letting him enjoy shows, dinners and gambling (he was finally ejected from Moe Dalitz's Desert Inn. He then filed suit in Federal court against his being listed in the Black Book, claiming it violated his right to "due process" under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
A Federal Appeals Court in 1962 rejected his suit. In a landmark decision, the court ruled that since the Nevada gaming industry was so vital to state's economy, and such a target for organized crime and other criminal elements, entry into casinos and casino hotels was a "privilege," not a Constitutionally guaranteed "right"; owners and managers could reject anyone who was in the Black Book. Caifano's lawsuit, in effect, validated the Black Book and helped the Gaming Board keep out OC figures.
BTW: Your driver's license is a "privilege" extended to you by the state, not a "right" protected by the Constitution. That's why you can be convicted of DUI on the arresting officer's testimony alone, even if there's no empirical evidence against you because you refused to walk a straight line, or take a blood or breathalizer test.
Ntra la porta tua lu sangu � sparsu,
E nun me mporta si ce muoru accisu...
E s'iddu muoru e vaju mparadisu
Si nun ce truovo a ttia, mancu ce trasu.
|
|
|
Re: Was Chicago’s Marshall Caifano an Informant?
[Re: Turnbull]
#1118969
04/02/25 03:22 AM
04/02/25 03:22 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
NYMafia
OP
|
OP
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
|
Actually, Caifano, whether or not an informant, wsas a "law abiding citizen" in a way:
His was one of the first names to be entered into Nevada's notorious "Black Book"--a list, maintained by the Gaming Board, of people who could be barred from entering, much less owning or operating, a casino because of criminal records, association with known criminals, or "unsavory reputations." Caifano flaunted it by crashing various casinos in October 1960 and intimidating the owners into letting him enjoy shows, dinners and gambling (he was finally ejected from Moe Dalitz's Desert Inn. He then filed suit in Federal court against his being listed in the Black Book, claiming it violated his right to "due process" under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
A Federal Appeals Court in 1962 rejected his suit. In a landmark decision, the court ruled that since the Nevada gaming industry was so vital to state's economy, and such a target for organized crime and other criminal elements, entry into casinos and casino hotels was a "privilege," not a Constitutionally guaranteed "right"; owners and managers could reject anyone who was in the Black Book. Caifano's lawsuit, in effect, validated the Black Book and helped the Gaming Board keep out OC figures.
BTW: Your driver's license is a "privilege" extended to you by the state, not a "right" protected by the Constitution. That's why you can be convicted of DUI on the arresting officer's testimony alone, even if there's no empirical evidence against you because you refused to walk a straight line, or take a blood or breathalizer test.
Hi Turnbull, I was not aware of Caifano's situation in LV. But I did know that he was sent out to Las Vegas and CA as the Outfit's 'eyes and ears' so to speak. And that's interesting about drivers licenses. I'm also aware that the feds sometimes alter 302's both to color them in a light most favorable to the agent with his superiors (to make it look like he gained some intelligence for the bureau), and to besmirch a guys rep. So these reports can sometimes be tricky.
Last edited by NYMafia; 04/02/25 03:25 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Was Chicago’s Marshall Caifano an Informant?
[Re: Liggio]
#1119558
04/07/25 05:40 PM
04/07/25 05:40 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
NYMafia
OP
|
OP
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 12,708
|
I'm not a gangster, but it seems like I know more street guys or guys who were in the streets who are more stand-up than most of these mobsters. They all serve time without snitching and can still get active when they need to be. Now, whether or not they were as criminally successful could be another matter entirely, but it seems like your average everyday crook or ex-con is more solid. Well, with all due respect to you, Liggio, I don't know if I'd go that far. But, what I will say, is that through the decades there were a lot more guys -- and important guys -- spilling the beans that anyone thought. Thats for shit sure!
|
|
|
|
