There were a lot of corrupt cops that could've leaked informations.The Chi outfit and the Fbi had some strange relationship,especialy in the Accardo years....but i doubt that Accrdo was a informant.He may had some colaborations with the FBI but i dont think that he was givin any info in his operations..thats just crazy

If you had to choose sides on who you would want as a boss, would you choose a low profile, disciplined and highly capable accardo, or would you choose a psychopath who was bringing all kinds of heat from the G ??

How many people were killed while accardo was boss? His house gets broke into and over half a dozen known burglars end up dead .not to low key.plus y wouldn't he tell about his own operations? Scarpa did it to his guys? Every boss BUT accardo ended up in jail there I jus find it hard to believe he was that good of a mobster they couldn't get him

Back in those days there were still a lot of cops, aldermen and judges in The Outfit's pocket, Tommy. I can't say for sure but that could be a reason Accardo never did any time.

It's likely the divisions weren't anywhere near as formal as people like to believe. Chicago didn't make people for a long time, wasn't exclusively Italian by any means... at its best it seemed to be like a very smart, loose, efficiently run company.

I remember either reading or hearing Romer say that at one time they (FBI) thought about the possibility of trying to get Accardo to "turn" but quickly decided it wouldn't work. Instead they focused their attention on Murray Humphreys, but were unsuccessful in getting him to "flip." They were successful in harassing Humphrey until he had a heart attack and died.

If you check the FBI files you will find many documents that have names which have been blackened out. Some of these blackened out areas are names of informants. I have been very surprised at the number of informants that were utilized by the FBI during the 50's and 60's. I don't remembering reading any documents from the 70's or later. Oh, I did read all the info. available relative to the Family Secrets case.

I've read a lot about Murray Humphreys and a little about Gus Alex. Both were high ranking Outfit members even though Humphreys was Welch and Alex was Greek (i believe this is correct). Both men were valuable assets to Ricca and Accardo. Humphreys value to the Outfit is legendary and Alex was apparently very close to Accardo.

I've also wondered about the structure of the street crews, divisions, or organization of the Outfit. I still have lots of questions.

Go to the American News Post forums... There is discussion on the structure to the point of exhaustion. Just do a search for a few key words.

Technically speaking, they were high-ranking associates, as they could never actually be "members" in the strict sense of the word.

Technically they were associates but they had the power of the other top guys

I think they were as powerful as many of the top Italian members in the Outfit but there would always be at least one guy who had more power - whoever was the boss at the time. And that was always going to be an Italian member of the Outfit.

I agree that they were never the top guys. Ricca and Accardo of course had more power but anyone else i'd they had just as much power.

According to Russo's book, it would depend how you look at it. While a boss likely had the final say, he really went out of his way to charactarize Humphreys as the brains and the operator. In terms of leadership, from what I remember, he seemed to suggest that Accardo, Humphreys and Ricca basically ran it as a triumvirate. In his depiction, the question of ultimate power didn't really seem to be an issue.

Makes sense if you think about it. Just like the board of a company.

I don't think Humphreys was quite an "associate" in the same way that someone in the East Coast Families would have been an associate, always somewhat on the outside or limited power. Humphreys was there from almost the beginning. He put in work and with the exception of a handful of people had more power than just about anyone else. When he got started the Outfit didn't have a "made man" concept.

I recommend Russo's book as well. That said, Humphreys still had to defer to Ricca/Accardo and occasionally complained about the Italians sticking together.

I believe the reference to Russo's book by jonnynonos about the triumvirate is an important point because apparently during this era the Outfit WAS run like a company. And what struck me was the the cooperation and absence of any one person being labeled as the ultimate authority. Very unusual for mobsters because in most criminal organizations someone always wants to be the top guy.

tommy- good question, but as i mentioned in an earlier post, other than the comment about Roemer, i haven't read anything about Accarado being an informer.

I've made an attempt to contact two retired FBI agents who were assigned to Chicago in the 60's and are still working in Chicago in the private sector. One returned my email and declined to talk with me by telephone about his experiences during his tenure with the FBI. I told him i fully understood and thanked him for returning my email. I have not heard from the other former agent. I would really like to talk to a former FBI agent who worked during the 60's and see if they could answer some questions. I know it's a long shot but i plan to keep trying. I'm very much aware they would never reveal the identity of an informant, even if they knew the identity. I have other questions to ask.

One of the questions i plan to ask is about how Accardo avoided jail time. I realize i probably will never get an answer, especially from the gov't, but i plan to give it a shot. I have asked this question to a couple of Outfit historians/authors in Chicago and the response was that he had very good lawyers and was lucky. As he became older and in poor health the feeling was that if he were convicted, he would probably die before the appeals were exhausted. I believe this was in reference to his testimony before a congressional panel where he was obviously in bad health and being less than truthful.

One final point, the court documents (Accardo) are online and i've actually read a few. But to me they are kinda boring, so i did a quick glance and moved on. The one i reviewed was related to the search warrant and seizure of property and something like $275,000 in cash and some guns. Accardo prevailed and his property and cash were returned.

I'll say this, the old man had lots of moola, because the lawyers do not work for peanuts. And Accardo was a beer salesman???? The IRS wondered about that, too in another court case.

Thanks for all the comments.

The non-Italian "members and associates" of the Chicago Outfit is an interesting topic and has been discussed in some other threads as well ( Chicago Outfit - not la cosa nostra? ).

I have read about guys like Jake Guzik, Murray Humphreys, Gus Alex, Joe Epstein, Sidney Korshak, Frank Wortman, Art Berne, Fred Evans etc. were in positions of authority and leadership, despite being non-Italian. I think the Outfit under Capone embraced doing business with non-Italians (as long as they were good partners). Capone loved and respected Guzik, who was as much a mentor as Torrio. I believe this business philosophy with non-Italians continued under Nitti, Rica and Accardo.

I read that Frank "Buster" Wortman, Art Berne and others in the Outfit crew in East St Louis had a "making ceremony". This crew was largely non-Italian. Jesse Stoneking gave testimony that Berne "made" him the same way that Wortman made Berne - he swore allegiance, promised not rat (omerta), etc. They did not burn a saint or draw blood from a finger, but a gun and knife were present.

Stoneking had a tattoo on his forearm that said "Outfit", and evidently many from this crew did the same.

I find it interesting that the Outfit crew in East St Louis was largely run by non-Italians, and was often in conflict with the St Louis family, which was mostly Italian.

The Outfit at its peak seems to have been exceedingly smart and lethal. These guys were dyed-in-the-wool career criminals, many of whom knew each other from childhood. The creme rose to the top in terms of the brains. I personally have a hard time picturing Humphreys, Rica, etc., sitting around talking about who was the boss, who was the capo, who was just an associate, etc. It was a very dynamic criminal organization back then capable of thinking on its feet and turning on a dime.

As its aged it seems to have gotten a little dumber and rested on ceremony more, including generally excluding non-Italians far more than it used to, relying on the "making" ceremony etc.

Joe Fosco once said the making ceremony was just a ridiculous ploy to pay people less. You're not getting any more money, but we expect loyalty now as you are a "made" member!

Guys like Humphreys and Giancana, and Capone, seem to me to have been viciously, expressly about making money and, to the end that it helped them make money, consolidating power. I really can't imagine any of them going through some juvenile making ceremony.

Cerone was never Giancana's underboss. Giancana didn't like or trust Cerone. Accardo did not have the power to exile Giancana. Giancana voluntarily went to Mexico and other places outside the U.S. and made a lot of money. It was time for him to go because of all the heat. Accardo had no power to murder Giancana. It was the other way around. Giancana was the Boss of the Taylor St. Crew which was the largest and dominant Crew in the Outfit. Accardo was connected to Elmwood Park and was a Top Level Advisor who was semi-retired. Ricca was the top Advisor and kept the peace. Accardo never ordered any murders without Giancana and Ricca's say.

For the record, FBI docs claim (not saying they are right or wrong, just laying them out) that Frank Ferraro was Giancana's underboss until he died in 1965 and was replaced by Sam Battaglia. None of them said Cerone.

Faithful1, I believe this theory of Frank Strongy Ferraro being the Underboss of the Outfit came from Bill Roemer's book (the F.B.I. agent who also said Joe Ferriola was the Top Boss of the Outfit in 1986 LOL). I will explain why Roemer had this idea in his head. Roemer did not completely understand how the very secretive Outfit was Structured. He tried to make the Outfit be structured like New York which was very inaccurate. Frank Ferraro was a made guy and an Outfit 'specialist'. He reported directly to the Top Boss in the Outfit. Before Giancana, he reported to Ricca. 'Specialists' are made guys who do not necessarily belong to one of the Street Crews. They are MADE MEN who the Top Boss may inherit from the previous Top Boss. These men are usually political Specilaists who deal with all the Crew Bosses and sometimes the other made men in the Outfit across the board. They are very valuable men. Frank Ferraro was a political specialist and made man. He was not the Underboss of the entire Outfit. There was no underboss of the Entire Outfit during the Giancana reign.

It's kind of like putting a square peg into a round hole. You can't make it fit. I agree that the FBI tried to put the Outfit's square peg into New York's round hole. It was difficult to figure out who reported to who in some cases, easier in others. His role sounds similar to what Bill Bonanno wrote about certain capos (captains) who reported directly to the boss. These capos didn't have crews of their own and were considered to occupy a more prestigious position than capos with crews. Fratianno also mentioned that Nick Licata was a soldier (low-ranking made guy) under Dragna who reported directly to him.

Ferraro was described as one of the men whose area was the Loop, along with the Alex brothers.

In comparing Roemer's books to the FBI files shows that there were times he diverged from them. There were other agents who also covered the Outfit did even more reporting than Roemer. There were also a lot of different informants. I'll add that some of these files DO talk about soldiers who were NOT made guys, confirming what you have been writing about here.

Accardo tried to force giacanna to take cerone as his under boss and giacanna said "I will be my own underboss" giacanna often defied accardo

Exactly. Why did he defy Accardo on this subject? Answer. Because if Accardo kept pushing the disagreement and made a big issue out of it, Giancana would have killed him and Cerone. That's why.

Elmwoodparker, you clearly have a lot of knowledge on the Outfit. However, I disagree that Accardo did not have the power to exile Giancana or to have him murdered. The fact is Accardo survived and Giancana did not. When Giancana got clipped, Rica was dead and Accardo was the most senior guy in the Outfit. I refer you to Gary Martin's post earlier in this thread dated 2/3/2013.

While we cannot know all of the facts, and everyone is entitled to their opinion, I think Gary's post summarizes the general consensus and historical record.

Do you have a source for this?

Tony G, Accardo did not have the power to exile Giancana or certainly kill him between 1957 and 1965. In 1974, of course Accardo had that power. Giancana didn't have any Crew and had been gone for 9 years. So, it depends WHAT YEARS you're talking about when we compare the power of Giancana to Accardo. Basically, Accardo, Auippa & Cerone kicked Giancana when he was down which was a smart move on their part.

Here is one writer's analysis of what happened to Giancana. You can decide. Notice the reference to Giancana's power base.

Hope this opens.

http://books.google.com/books?id=5ugCAAA...ana&f=false

I always figured Accardo and Aiuppa had Mooney offed because they didn't want him regaining any power and possibly posing a threat to them. Even though he was in failing health and had been out of the loop for several years (as elmwood says) it was still probably a wise business decision on their part.

Here's another one for those who are interested.


http://www.dougiethompson.com/kennedy-mafia1.html

I can't read for u faithful1

I'm not asking you to read for me. I asked if you could provide a source for your quote about Giancana saying that he would be his own underboss. Where did you get that quote from or did you make it up? That's what I'm asking.