One thing I do know is that Massino will say anything to save his ass.
I very much doubt Massino can afford to make things up. The deal he made involves his full cooperation and if he's caught lying about anything he will lose his privileges. Furthermore, he already admitted to having ordered Sciascia's murder, so why lie about his reasons? He has been put into the witness protection program and will live the rest of his life in relative comfort. He has everything to lose by deceiving the feds about certain details.
I'm not sure but I think you're arguing that the "lies" Massino told other mobsters about his reasons for having Sciascia killed aren't evidence of being a shifty character because what matters is what he told the FBI and what he said on the stand. These "lies," which have been reproduced in several books, quote several mobsters or are attributed to said mobsters. Let's assume that Massino was perfectly consistent and didn't tell any mobster the real reason he had Sciascia killed, i.e., Sciascia's supposedly serious breach of mob protocol.
Why would Massino have to hide from his Bonanno underlings such a justifiable reason for punishing one of his captains? Why would Massino have to hide this reason from Vito Rizzuto?
If Paul Cotroni was in the wrong for breaking the jaw of a made man--assuming this physical alteration even happened--did Sciascia think that if he reported the offense to Massino, that Massino wouldn't deal with it in a proper manner? Thus leading Sciascia to do something rash? Wouldn't Sciascia have recourse by asking Rizzuto to deal with Paul Cotroni? Did Sciascia think he wouldn't get justice by going through Rizzuto?
Let's not forget that Joe Renda was born in New York and was possibly or probably made in New York. Wouldn't he be able to raise Cotroni's indiscretion with Massino or, if going through the chain of command was important, via someone other than his uncle Gerlando?
It's okay to question FBI intelligence and other law-enforcement intelligence. Everyone should remember that such intelligence sometimes consists of wrongly identifying organized-crime figures, regardless of whether the mobsters are in the middle of committing a crime or are sitting in a cafe sipping an espresso. I'm all for considering new theories as to murder motives once new information comes out, but the new theories and information don't automatically supplant the older theories and information.
One could argue that the person confessing to murdering Cotroni, Gérald Gallant, would have nothing to lose by mentioning that a six-feet-under Sciascia was ultimately behind the order to kill Cotroni. That FBI file makes no sense at all.
