HY 50955 BEC Oe anes tt 522 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS operations that they are engaged in, to the detriment of the public at Inrge, and to the detriment of innocent people who can’t help themselves. It focuses and emphasizes how serious this menace 18, Very well, you may proceed. Mr. Brown. Notwithstanding these findings, the grand jury con- cluded that there was no national or local Mafia in Tampa. I would like to submit as exhibit 1 a certified copy of the report of the grand jury dated March 80, 1956. “The CiainMan. Very well, this report of the grand jury will be received and it may be made exhibit No. 44, and exhibit 1 to this witness’ testimony. I may later direct it be printed, but as of now we will just let it be Aled as an exhibit for reference. (The document referred to was marked “Exhibit No. 44” for refer- ence, and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) Mr. Brown. It seems likely to me that the grand jury failed to acknowledge without qualification the presence of the Mafia in Tampa because it sought a pattern of Mafia operations similar to the historical Sicilian tradition of primitive and direct extortion, rather than the sophisticated and polished control of rackets that now characterize that organization. ‘ The Ciaimaan. I take it from that last statement that you feel that they have considerably improved their technique. Mr. Brown. Very much so. The Crrarraan. Of crime operations. Mr. Brown... Very much. Senator Musxir. May I ask a question, Chief, there? "As I understand what you have just testified relative to the grand jury’s report, they acknowledged that there was some evidence of the axistence of Sicilian Mafia in the community, but apparently felt that evidence was not conclusive; is that a correct summary ? Mr. Brown. That_is correct; yes, Senator, The Tampa Police De- partment, however, has long been aware that many criminals in our area have local reputations as Mafiosi. My staff and I have made a careful evaluation of those reputations, based upon personal know!l- edge, criminal records, surveillance reports, personal histories, familial relationships, statistical analyses, reports from confidential inform- ants, information from Federal and local luw-enforcement agencies, and other customary police intelligence sources, , It is our considered conclusion that the Mafia exists in Tampa, that it controls most illegal gambling in Tampa and central Florida, and that its members have interstate and international ties to other Mafia groups. The organization of the Mafia in the Tampa area is best understood from a chart we have formulated which I submit to this subcommittee” asourexhibitNo.2.  — Senator Musxir. Before we get to that, Chief, may I ask another question? The grand jury to which you referred sat in 1956, am I correct ? ” Mr. Brown. That is correct, sir. Senator Musxir. That is 7 years ago. Do you think you have accumulated additional evidence as to the existence of the Mafia in Tampa which would justify a new reference to the grand jury? , Mr. Brown. Yes; I believe so. , Boclda: 324273630 Page 662 BNE, haste nln oda.
ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS — 623 Senator Musxin. Areyou planning that? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Ciramaan. Very well. This chart may be received as exhibit No. 45 and we will direct it be printed in the record if it can be, as far as it can be. The title of it is “The Mafia Organization in the Tampa, Fla., Area.” (The document referred to was marked “Exhibit No. 45” for refer- aa ence and faces this page.) ~ The Citamaan. Would you say the operations of this organized group are not confined just to the city limits of Tampa, but they are . In the area ? Mr. Brown, By all means ; the entire area. i: The Citsirman. All right. This chart is now a part. of the record and, if you wish to comment about it, we will proceed with your state- ment. Mr. Brown. The chart is keyed to show only the criminal, business, and familial interrelationships and activities of the persons named, although other criteria figured in our categorization of these persons, Q Of course, this chart cannot be considered as a definitive “table of | organization” of the Tampa Mafia, because it is but a simplified repre- sentation of an organization that is ina constant state of flux, and about which we know we still have many things to learn. However, I believe it is completely accurate in showing that Santo Traflicante is the boss of this criminal group. Indeed, it is to Santo Traflicante that Tampa owes the dubious distinction of having been od represented at the notorious crime convention at Apalachin, N.Y., is in November 1957. The Curairman. I notice you designate or refer to this group as the Mafia. Would you say that it is the same group that has been referred to by the famous witness, Joe Valachi? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir; itis, ; The Cirammaan. Whether he calls it Cosa Nostra or the Mafia makes no difference. This is the organized crime group to which you re- ferred? Mr. Brown. That is correct, Senator ; this is the group. Senator Musxim. May Iaska question there? : Under this group, there is another group which you describe a3 ‘f nonmember associates and employees. Is that intended to suggest ' fF. that the people who are so described know nothing about the identity ~~ of their employers and the organization of which they are a part? Mr. Brown. Senator, that is a part of the insulation of the group. a They have many employees, and as we go into the statement, to show a how in this gambling operation the seller is non-Sicilian in most , cases, and he reports to another member up the ladder, and so on up. Many of these people are nonmembers of the Mafia as it is. : Senator Musxiz. Do they know they are engaged in criminal ac- tivities? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. , Senator Musxiz. They know they are a part of a criminal orga- _ hization ? ; Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. - Senator Muskie. But they are not members? nes Mr. Brown. That is correct. ' I 1 | —_— HY 50955 Docld: 32423630 Page 663
i. - 524 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS : : * : ORGA? Senator Musxiz. What do they need to do to become members in ihe Tampa area? : Mr. Brown. Well, I think I can clarify that later on in the state- ment, Senator. The Cuamman. Allright; you may proceed. ; ‘Mr. Brown. Santo Traflicante, Jr., was born in Tampa on November 14, 19 He was one of tive brothers. He maintains residence today mai pe: and in Miami. Tle previously lived in Tlavana, Cuba, where he owned and operated eambling casi er the Batti regime. When Fidel Cast?0"Took over, Trafticante’s gam non Trafli, the alias “B on the night after Anasta The Depai organization fication of th Apalachin ec of Tampa, F) “Toms™rere stopped. Ile was expelled from Cuba and returned to Furthermo the United States. Tle inherited the control of the¢fitmbers Fitk out-of-town r in central Florida which his father, Santo Traflicantés>Sry-he-dttc of the Tampa ficante is asso Louis Coticel: quently seen - boarding a pl: _, Other know Draflicante gn colo, and Ant] Mr. O’Dox: nuity, so that. a statement w the interest. of like to have it j Do you have in 1954, and he continues to head this operation. Testimony in the A of the Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities im the Labor or Management Field identified Santo Trafficante, Jr., m at ‘ nines ing, casino in Havang. That testimony stated that Traflicante took over the Sane Soren fron the Mannarino brothers in Pittsburgh, Pa. Gabriel Mannarino was a fellow delegate with Santo Trafficante, Jr., to the Apalachin crime convention in 1957. Additional testimony named Trafficante, Jr., as the key figure in the Mafia in Tampa, stating, as the Tampa police had long known, that he succeeded his father as the major racketeer in the city. Other information substantiated by our files reveals that Trafficante is an associate of such notorious criminals as ae Lansky, Joseph reaene Sagat Aniello Dellacroce, Josepl stassi, Sam Man- Mr. pe xa Lr, narino, Joseph Arcuri, and of Joseph Riccobono, also known as Staten Mr. O’Dorn: Tsland Joe, who had been closely allied with the elder Traflicante, Aly. pe La Lu. The Crain. Mr. pe va Lin Brady, and his to our attentior record. T hare and was also discovered at the Apalachin meeting. When Joseph Profaci’s daughter Carmella married Anthony Tocco, con of Detroit mobster William “Black Bill” Tocco, in Brooklyn on June 4, 1955, one of the guests at the reception in the Tfotel Com- a modore in New York was Santo Trallicante, Jr. Among those who also attended were 13 other persons who later attended the Apalachin The Cirarrat. : conference, as well as other notorious Mafia figures, such as Frank 1 No. 46 for refere .Livorsi, Thomas and John Dioguardi, Tony and Albert Anastasia, - (Document, re and Thomas “Three Finger Brown” Lucchese. inay be found in There have been at least two known attempts on the life of Santo The Crramara Traflicante: On January 2, 1953, he was shotgunned in a car on the that you have m: streets of Tampa, receiving wounds in the arm. Later, in Cuba, four | Mr. pp wa Lua: American mobsters who intended to kill Traflicante were told by ; The Cuamara Cuban police that they would have to do it on American soil. record, either at Trafficante has been arrested in ‘Tampa several times for investiga- - . Statement of the - tion, because of our knowledge that he was deeply involved in gam- (The statemen; ‘bling, even though we have not yet been able to obtain the quantum of P proof necessary to a successful prosecution. He has also been picked: ; ° up by the police for questioning about the gangland slayings of Rene One of the clear t: is reflected by the e 8 a courier for the first came to the at Rerved him, in Tam, Diecidue, two of the tacts made by Cotic tion about him whie Nunez, Angelo Giglio, and Joe Antinori. ; Traflicante was a suspect in the Albert Anastasia murder on Oc- tober 25, 1957, in New York because he had appeared in New York just before the murder. He was considered a likely suspect, because there had been reports that Anastasia was then attempting to move wee HY 50955 DBocld: 32423630 Page 664
,RCOTICS ‘1e members in on in the state- “von November residence today \favana, Cuba, ot the Battista ambling opera- nd returned to mimbers racket », Sr., who died lect Committee Wield identified Souci gambling ‘cante took over Pittsburgh, Pa. Trafficante, Jr., 1 key figure in ad long known, 0 city. that Traflicante Lansky, Joseph ~tassi, Sam Man- ‘nown as Staten irler Trafficante, Anthony Tocco, in Brooklyn on the Hotel Com- mong those who dthe Apalachin . such as Frank Ibert Anastasia, ine life of Santo “ina car on the oy, in Cuba. four re were told by ‘wean soll. os for investiga- nvolved in gam- 1 the quantuin of also been picked slayings of Rene » murder on Oc- ed in New York - suspect because -nipting to move ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS 9525 in on Traflicante’s gambling operations in Cuba. Traflicante, using the alias “IB. ITiH,” stayed with Anastasia in the latter’s hotel suite, on the night of October 24, 1957, and moved ont approximately 1 hour after Anastasia’s murder in a nearby barber shop. The Department's evaluation of Traflicante as the boss of the Mafia organization in Tampa was confirmed, of course, by the positive identi- fication of the “Louis Santos of Havana, Cuba,” apprehended at the Apalachin conference in November of 1957, as Santo Traflicante, Jr., of Tampa, Fla. Furthermore, we have witnessed and documented many visits of out-of-town racketeers with Santo Trafficante and his fellow hoodlums of the Tampa area. These visitors give further indications that Traf- ficante is associated with Mafia members in other cities. For example, Louis Coticchia of Chicago, also known as Lou Brady, has been fre- quently seen visiting Traflicante and on one occasion they were seen boarding.a plane together, heading for Miami. Other known outside racketeers who have visited in Tampa with Traflicante gang members are John Joseph Vitale, Salvatore Lopic- colo, and Anthony Giardano, all known racketeers from St. Louis, Mo. Mr. O’Donnett. I think at the present time, in interest of conti- nuity, so that the record will read properly, Sergeant de la Liana has a statement with regard to a courier operation within the Mafia. In the interest of time, I am not going to ask him to read it, but I would like to have it introduced in the record. Do yowhave that? ; Mr. pena Luana. Yes, Ido. Mr. O’Donnett. How many pages does it consist of ? Mr, peta Luana. Itis five pages. The Cnautwan. Give a better description of it and tell us what it is. Mr. pe va Luana, It is with reference to Louis Cotic¢chia, alias Lou Brady, and his visits to Tampa on various occasions, which first. came to our attention on April 18, 1962. This subject has a long criminal record. I have an FBI record which I will also submit into evidence. The Cuanaran. Let the FBI record be received and made exhibit No, 46 for reference. (Document. referred to marked “Exhibit No. 46” for reference and may be found in the files of the subcommittee. ) The Cnammman. Now, your statement, is that a summary statement — that you have made and prepared for the record? Mr. pexa Luana. Yes, sir. The Craman. Very well, it may be received and printed in the record, either at this point or immediately following the prepared statement of the witness now testifying. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT or Set. JACK DE LA LLANA One of the clear ties of the Trafficante organization with other criminal groups is reflected by the contacts with Trafficante made by a man who appears to act as a courier for the Mafia. Louis Coticchia, alias Lou Brady, FBI Ne. 1427403, first came to the attention of our Department on April 18, 1962, when we ob- served him, in Tampa, in the company of Augustine Primo Lazzara and Frank Diecidue, two of the men on our Mafia chart. Berause of this and other con- tacts made by Coticchia, our intelligent unit developed the following informa- tion about him which I think is of interest to this committee in giving a profile ee ee ee ee ee are BW 50955 DBocld:32423630 Page 665 i vt “ Ae ey tg wet
co HY 50955 Docld: 32423630 526 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS -. of a hoodlum who ts entrusted by the Mafia to act as a courier for them between the various groups. Coticchia was born on February 25, 1920, in Cincinnati, Ohio. When he was arrested a couple of yenrs ago, he gave as his occupation “industrial financier.” He is presently reported to be interested in the operation of a company offering wired music in the Chicago area known as Symphonaire Svund Systems, Inc. Ilis criminal record shows that he was first arrested in 1936 in Ohio for robbéry. In 1937 he was arrested in Miami, Fla., for investigation of a “shake- down.” He was held for 4 days and released without charges, Ile was arrested again in Hot Springs, Ark., in 1038 for iuvestigation and released with the under- standing that he would leave the city. . , In 1938, in Cleveland, Coticchia was arrested and charged with assault with intent to commit rape. He was convicted and received 1 to 15 years, of which he served 4 years, being released in 1941. lle was arrested in 1942 in Los Angeles, Calif., on @ warrant issued in Baltimore for grand theft. He was tried in Balti- “more for receiving stolen goods and received 5 years in prison. Coticchia was again arrested in Dallas, Tex., in 1961, by the U.S. marshals for violation of and for conspiring to violate the Federal Securities and Exchange Act of 1933, which case is still pending In the Southern District Court of New York. His last arrest known to us was on January 4, 1963, when he was ar- rested in Tampa for investigation of grand larceny. He was released due to insufficient evidence. Coticchia worked as a “pit boss” in gambling casinos in Las Vegas, Nev., and Ylavana, Cuba. He was involved in a scandal in 1960 in which mobsters at- tempted to take over a nationwide bail bond business. Coticchia has been in and out of Tampa since our first observation of him and on every occasion he is im direct contact with Trafficante and Diecidue. On December 31, 1962, he purchased a new automobile in Tampa, paying the dealer $3,625.95 in cash. Ue then registered the car under the name of Jane Campbell. He remained in Tampa several days and was in constant contact with Trafficante and Diecidue. On January 4, 1963, Coticchia was arrested in Tampa on suspicion of grand larceny and at the time of his arrest he hud $1,775 in cash on his person, He had papers on him that showed he had resided previously at the Aloha Motel in Miami under the name Luiz Paulino Bailey from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He also had a paper with a list of gambling equipment and the name “Empress Lines, Ltd., Nassau—via Wappen Von Hamburg—German boat loading pier No. 3.” ‘ ‘ An investigation revealed this equipment had been shipped airfreight from Las Vegas to Nassan and placed ina German vessel, the Wappen Von Hamburg, which sails between Nassau and Miami, This equipment included 50 one-arm bandits, or slot machines, and was valued in excess of $65,000. The information received was that this vessel was to travel between Miami and Nassau as a floating gambling casino. : After Cotiechia’s arrest in Tampa, the telephone calls were checked at the motel. It showed that he had made several calls to Trafficaute, Diecidue, and other associates of Trafficante. Le had also made a long-distance call to Sonny’s Restaurant in Miami Beach, which is owned by Thomas Altamura, FBI No. 511503, a Mafia member and another associate of Santo Trafficante, Jr. I would like to submit fer the record Coticchia’s FBI record, and a photograph of him taken by my department when he was arrested in Tampa on January 4, 1965. Another example of the Trafficante group’s connections with Mafia figures in other parts of the Nation is: John Joseph Vitale, FBI No. 793259, of St. Lonis, Mo. Vitale is well known to the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, and is reputed to be the Matia leader in that area. We has a record of 13 arrests and a conviction for violating the Harrison Narcotics Act for which he received a sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment. He has been arrested as a fence and is believed to deal in anything in which there is a large percentage of profit. - Police authorities consider him among the most dangerous of Mafia principals in the St, Louis area, and he is known to have underworld counections through- out the country. He appeared twice before the Senate Rackets Comittee (August 19, 1958, and February 11, 1959) and each time refused to answer any questions, invoking the fifth amendment. On April 17, 1963, Vitale flew from St. Louis to Tampa, using the name “Jack Howard.” He visited the Diecidues for 4 hours and then flew back to St, Louls Page 666 ORGA using the sam there, he was traveled to T. Mo., to the Dic To me it d trouble of flyi between two } Significantly, doubts that ln These two connections of the Mafia grou, Mr. O’Do? Mr. Brow gave sworn 1953 concerr long been en to testify or been grantec those who te Nick Scaglio Mr. O'Do> you have intr. Mr. Brow) Mr. O’Dox Mr. Brown cal Mafia tech prises by the « - This incident deeply involv major interesi 'The case w: officer, Detect: the operation racket of consi based upon inf lottery. An attempt operation of t] suits of clothi with the full had immediate As a result « were arrested. The Crrainma Mr. Brown. The Cnaima he is the boss 2 Mr. Brown, _Each receive viction was late term and was indicted by the We know of by Santo Traffic
N NARCOTICS urier for them between i, Ohio. When he was 4 “industrial financier. 1 of a company offering Sound Syste, Tne, ak in 1936 in Ohio for vestigation of a “shake- crges, He was arrested -eleased with the under- rzed with assault with 1 to 15 years, of which din 1942 in Los Angeles, [le was tried in Baiti- riay the U.S. marshals Securities and Exchange un District Court of New 1963, when he was ar- ‘lle was released due to : in Las Vegas, Nev., and ‘) in which mobsters at- -t observation of him and ‘oante and Diecidue. On rampa, paying the dealer name of Jane Campbell, contact with Trafficante pa on suspicion of grand . cash on his person. He asly at the Aloha Motel in » de Janeiro, Brazil. Te and the name “Empress ‘erman boat loading pier n shi airfreight from \ shipoen Yon Hamburg, ment included 50 one-arm - 965,000. The information . Miami and Nassau as 4 calls were checked at the Trafficante, Diecidue. and wng-distance call to Sonny 8 Anmas Altamura, FBI No. ot ante, Jr. iL aes and a photograph ted in Tampa on January i with Mafia figures in AUNO. 793279, of St. Lonis, ‘an Police Department, and -has a record of 13 arrests « Act for which he received arrested as a fence and is, , entage of profit. . vkerous of Mafia principals -sworld connections through- senate Rackets Committee time refused to answer any ri ok ‘ampa, using the name Jac 1 then flew back to St, Louis , the Matia group on a national-basis, ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC LN NARCOTICS 527 using the same alias. We alerted the St. Louis police and upon Vitale’s arrival there, he was interviewed by detectives of that city. Ile declared that he had traveled to Yampa to settle a debt of the Lombardo Produce Co., of St. Louis, Mo.. to the Diecidue Bros. of ‘Tanipa. To me it does not seem probable that Vitale would go to the expense and trouble of ilying to Tampa and returning the same day in order to settle a debt between two produce companies with which he has no known connections. More significantly, his use of an alias to run this errand, too, points out his own doubts that he was engaged in a legitimate errand. , These two examples, Colicchia's und Vitale’s, indicate to us the interstate ‘connections of the ‘Traflicante organization, aud point up the need for attacking Mr. O’Donnett. All right, we will continue. Mr, Brown. Some of Traflicante’s men shown here on our chart gave sworn testimony before the Hillsborough County solicitor in 1953 concerning gambling in Tampa. They admitted that they had long been engaged in illegal gambling activities. ‘They were forced to testify or face jail terms for contempt of court, because they had been granted immunity from prosecution for such crimes. Among those who testified were Frank Diecidue, Augustine Primo Lazzara, Nick Scaglione, Henry Traflicante, and James C, Longo. Mr. O'Donneunt. Are any of these individuals on the chart that you have introduced as exhibit 2? Mr. Brown. Yes, they are all on the chart. Mr. O’Donnetn. Thank you. Mr, Brown. Santo Trafficante has himself been caught up ina typi- cal Mafia technique of seeking to preserve and protect. its illegal enter- prises by the corruption of law enforcement and other public officials, This incident substantiated our intelligence that Traflieante was deeply involved in gambling operations, and it showed that he had major interests in gambling outside the city of Tampa. The case was initiated in 1954 by a veteran St. Petersburg police officer, Detective Sgt. larry Dietrich, who had obtained evidence of the operation of the ‘Traflicante bolita ring. Bolita is a numbers racket of considerable importance in Florida, involving weekly payoffs based upon information taken from radio reports of the weekly Cuban lottery. An attempt was made to bribe Sergeant Dietrich to ignore the operation of the ring. He was given a new car, a television set, some suits of clothing, and cash. Sergeant Dietrich accepted the bribes (— ‘ with the full knowledge and orders of his superiors, to whom he had immediately reported the#itin®F attenipt. As a result of his work, § e and his brother Ienry were arrested. Both were ch ribery and were convicted. The Cirainman. Whenfti 5 Mr. Brown. ‘This iy The Cramman, he is the boss? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. E feceived a priso gars. Santo Trafficante’s con- jhe * 7% viction was [a His brother served his , term and was recently released. Both brothers were ‘subsequently indicted by the Federal Government for tax law violations. We know of no legitimate businesses that are owned or controlled af by Santo Traflicante. Ile owns no real estate, nor any other property, ct ‘4 HY 50955 DBocld: 32423630 Page 667
HY 50955 DBocld: 32423630 Page 666 528 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS automobile real or personal. Ts house us.9 are held in the names ofoliers, Plowever, we do not believe him to be destitute, Tor histo Trubling in the central Florida area alone must net him huge amounts of money. Ilis operations there show, also, a characteristic Malia method of utilizing non-Sicilian associates where it serves ifs criminalobjectives. Sergeant Branch, who has for the past 7 years been investigating gambling and other organized criminal activities in the Orlando area, will describe the Mafia’s control, through the Harlan Blackburn “organization, of lottery operations in central Florida. We know of no legitimate businesses that are owned. The Charkatan. Sergeant Branch is here with you? Mr. Brown. Yes, sit. On the lower right-hand side of our chart we have depicted that group of Traflicante associates, Sergeant Branch will here testify about the Blackburn group. The Cramacax. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this subcommittee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. Brancn. I do, TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM BRANCH The Crram«an. Will you identify yourself for the record ? Mr. Branciur. I aaa sergeant with the Orlando Police Department attached to the intelligence division, and I have been with them since 1951, [have been working in this type of work since 1956, with the cooperation of the Federal and State agencies in our area. The Crairman. Do you havea prepared statement? Mr. Brancr. Yes, sir, Do. Tho Curamman. It appears to be four or five pages. Do you wish to read it? . Mr. Branci. Yes, sir. In the central Florida avea the main gambling activity is known as bolita or Cuba. Baglituis.¢ numbers lottery where the winning num- ber is drawn daily. Cuba isa numbers lottery where the winning number is drawn weekly... Bettors can place bets on any number from 1 to 100 and receive a 60-to-1 return if they win. The Cuba winning number is the last two digits from the Cuban national lottery number which is five digits and is broadcast over a Havana radio station each Saturday shortly after 2 p.m. The public is contacted by “peddlers” or “sellers,” who receive a com- mission of 15 percent of their sales. “Pickup” men, who take the bets “from the sellers to the “checkup houses,” receive 20 percent of what they collect. Employees such as checkup men, adding machine opera- tors, and supervisors above this position usually receive salaries for their duties. Lottery operations in central Florida prior to 1948 were dominated first by Charlie Wall of Tampa and then by Sam Warren, an Orlando native. In that year Harlan Blackburn, FBI No. 1026922, a con- victed felon, came into Orlando and began taking over bolita and Cuba gambling. ; This man is on the chart also. ducting the lottery. ORGANIZEL Blackburn was he was convicted served 414 years the Florida State March 1956 for o} a 5-year prison sel Senator Musxn Mr. Brancu. ¥ Senator Musxrr Mr. Brancu. N Senator Musxir Mr. Brancu. H yes, sir: The Cuarran. Mr. Brancu. Ni He was then ine conviction of cons was most recently Federal wagering trial, Blackburn supe Florida cambling. FP’. Lee, Cecil Merri Don Mach, Dan Fu and Clitford Bell;. Riffe; Clyde F. Te Macon Tribue, Jul shaw;, Cecil Merrit Solombn; and Ral and Elvin Carroll. With the excepti ul of these persons other crimes, Thave here copies committee’s record. The Ciairman. ' reference only. (The documents 1 erence and may he fi Mr. Branerr. The operation fora-num! of gross and net col have secured from « from witnesses tha gambling. Senator Musrrie, ° Mr. Brancu. I h; The lottery operat County into all of « Georgia. From 1948 until t} that Santo Trafficant visiting Orlando anc
AAFFIC IN NARCOTICS and all his other possessions we do not believe him tobe ie central Florida area aon “His operations there show lizing non-Sicilian assocts ars been Investigating the Orlando area, lan Blackburn We know of - +7 year tivities ivh the Ifar ntral Florida. ve with you? chart we have depicted that Blackburn group. vat the testimony you are will be the truth, the wh TAM BRANCH “dd , cord ? elf for the re: svtment ‘Orlando Police Departme nt . 4 I have been with them 6 nee is of work since 1956, wi ‘neies in our area. ered statement ¢ ish ar or five pages. Do you wis at vhere rn ws Tottery where the won , place bets on any num er from “ hey win. The Cuba wi ning Guban national lottery num ver a Havana radio stati * or “sellers,” who receive a con -Pickup” men, who take he be 3.7 receive 20 percent 0 iat “aut men, adding machine op o Non usually receive salaries dominated ‘ ior to 1948 were ae by Sam Warren, an Orlando 10 a Imen, FBI No. 1026922, a con L began. taking over bolita and HY 50955 Bocld: 32423630 74 4 ambling. I From 1948 until the latter part of 1953, our department established ORGANIZED CRIME, AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS §29 . Blackburn was born in Sand Lake, Fla, on April 13,1919. In 1935, he was convicted of forging a U.S. Government check, for which he served 414 years in prison. In 1948, he was Sentenced to 2 years in the Florida State prison for cattle theft, He was again arrested in March 1956 for operating a lottery in Polk County, Fla., and received a 5-year prison Sentence, but was released in 1959, Senator Musxir, Did you say Mr. Blackburn was on the chart? Mr. Branerr, Yes, sir. He is listed in the lower right-hand corner, Senator Musi, It is not on this chart 2 Mr. Brancn. No, sir; not on that one. Senator Musutr, Blackburn is not & member of the ML Mr. Brancr. He is a subordin yes, Sir. The Cuarrman. Is he thesame as Sam Warren? Mr. Branert. No, sir;heisnot. Sam Warren is dead, He was then incarcerated for 60 days in Polk County for an earlier conviction of conspiracy to violate the lottery laws of Florida. He nes Most recently arrested on N. ovember 5, 1962, for failure to buy a Federal Wagering tax stamp. He is presently out on bail awaiting trial. Blackburn supervises the five lottery bankers who control centra] Florida gambl ing. These bankers are Rudy Mach, Joe Wheeler, Clyde F. Lee, Cecil Merritt, and. Ralph Strawder: . Mach has in his operation Don Mach, Dan Fussell, Buddy Parron, Glen Brechen, Tomniy Berry, and Clifford Bell: Foe Wheeler has Max Reid, Mary Carden, and Phil Riffe; Clyde F. Lee has Jesse Joyner, Vasco Joyner, Mathew Smith, Macon Tribue, Julia Ciphon, Toy Anderson, and Katherine Brad- shaw; Cecil Merritt has Clayton Thonias, Sonny Brown, and George Solomon; and Ralph Strawder has Benny White, Willian Harrell, and Elvin Carroll, ; With the exception of Carden, Riffe, Harrell, White, all of these persons have criminal records other crimes, Thave here copies of their FBT records committee’s record, The Crratratan, They may be received in bulk as exhibit No. 47 for reference only. . (The documents referred to were marked “Exhibit No, 47” for ref- tence and may be found in the files of the subcommittee. ) Mr. Brancrr, These five exceptions have been connected with this rperation fora number of years, however, and their names and amounts ross and net collections appear in much of the evidence that we ave secured from checkup houses. We have also sworn testimony m witnesses that these persons have been engaged in illegal afia, as such ? ate that works under their clirection ; and Ciphon, and arrests for gambling and and submit them for the sub- Senator Musxr, What is the size of their take? . Mr. Brancu. I hare that further along in my Statement, sir, The lottery operation of the Blackburn Stoup extends from Orange ounty into all of central Florida and Into the southern State of ria. hat Santo Trafficante, Jr., rating Orlando and super ing the lottery. ‘ and his brother, Henry, personally were vising the checkup houses that were con- Page 669
HY 50955 Docld: 32423630 530 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS It has also been obvious to us that the Trafficante organization has controlled the Blackburn operation for at least the last LO years. From our examination of seized records, and from the fact that in all raids on the checkup houses we have arrested persons having close family ties with the Traflicante organization who were acting as auditors for his interests. In addition, there has been heavy tele- phone toll traffic between the Trafficantes in Tampa and the Blackburn roup in Orlando. When Blackburn was arrested in 1953, a memorandum was found containing telephone numbers of Augustine Primo Lazzara, Salva- tore J. Lorenzo, J. M. Cacciatore—unele of Santo Trafficante, Jr—and Santo Traflicante, Jr., and of the Nebraska and Flamingo Bars, both owned by the Trafficante family. Tn 1937 a search of a gambling house in Orange County by a State officer, with the assistance of the Orlando Police, resulted in the arrest of several persons. One of these was Lorenzo and another per- son by the name of Leto, from Tampa. They both gave sworn state- ments at that time to the county solicitor that they were working for Santo Trafficante, Jr. In November 1961, another raid was conducted by agents of the Internal Revenue Service in conjunction with the Orlando Police Department on a house in Orange County. There were six persons arrested, and among those were Armando. Rios and Sam Cacciatore. These two were cousins of Santo Trafficante, Jr. ; In July 1963, a raid on a gambling house in Sanford, Fla., by the IRS agents,. with the assistance of the Orlando Police Department, established that it was another operation of Harlan Blackburn’s, supervised by Clyde Lee. Tn the records seized there was the phone number of ‘Traflicante’s cousin, John Favata Cacciatore, and the phone number of the printing establishment employing Stefano Seaglione, who is also on the chart. During the past 12 years that we know of at least three murders that have been due to fights for control of lottery operations in the Orlando area. The fantastic amount of money taken in by these lottery operations has been repeatedly established by our raids of these gambling houses, For example, the raid in 1957 in Orange County, where Frank Ferreri and Sam Lorenzo were arrested, disclosed that the house was doing a gross business of $100,000 per week. Senator Muskir. What were they paying out? Mr. Brawcrr. The profit on this operation runs about 50 percent. The November 1961 raid in Orange County where Armando Rios and Sam Cacciatore, cousins of Santo Traflicante, were arrested re- vealed that operation was doing a conservatively estimated gross of $160,000 per week. The CitarrmANn. With the same ratio of half applying there? Mr. Brancn. Yes, sir. Senator Musxir. When you say “net profit,” this means after deductions of the commission which totaled 85 percent? Mr. Brancit. Yes, sir. Senator Musuim. And the prizes. Mr. Brancit. Yes, sir. The commission and also the prizes and what other operating ex penses they may have such as automobiles, rent, telephone bills. Page 670 ORGA: The latest $250,000 per From thos The Cuan Mr. Brax Orlando, ‘J and auditors From thes heavily into revenues are nized crime. Any addit further restr stantial blow Senator M was it dishon Mr. Brane _ ehey don’t They stop at The Crrair: Mr. Brawer The Crram cannot eet his Mr, Branei Thank you, The Crain be afraid to p All right, C Stand by, S Mr. Brancn TI ; Mr. Brown. 16 1s necessary dates from the 1937 and 1945, non all illegal city was referre Senator Mus papers? Mr. Browy. During the 1 rackets toany M. Wall, starte the illegal gam Florida. He st: admitted:to a HH ing from illegal by entering intc _ The elder Tra in 1904 and been cf the missing Tampa. He die arrest for Santo | In 1952, Wall
¥ NARCOTICS ie organization has the last 10 years. un the fact that. in ed persons having ‘+n who were acting -as been heavy tele- -and the Blackburn srandum was found ‘no Lazzara, Salva- “rnfficante, Jn.—-and ‘lamingo Bars, both ) » County by a State ‘ce, resulted in the zo and another per- ‘h gave sworn state- -y were working for “l by agents of the the Orlando Police re were Six. persons ind Sam Cacciatore. ‘anford, Fla., by the Police Department, ‘Tarlan Blackburn’s, there was the phone Cacciatore, and the employing Stefano least three murders ~ ‘ry operations in the -se lottery operations wse gambling houses. where Frank Ferrert the house was doing ins about 50 percent. shere Armando Rios te, were arrested re- 'y estimated gross of ipplying there? ‘> this means after ercent? :t other operating ex-"..- . telephone bills. ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS 33] The latest raid, in July of this year, indicated a gross revenue of $250,000 per week. , I’rom those figures The Cramraan. Where was that raid 2 ; Mr. Brancu. That was in Sanford, Fla., just 17 miles north of Orlando. These figures are established by the Internal Revenue agents and auditors. - From these figures, it is easy to see why the Mafia has moved so heavily into lottery gambling in central Florida and why gambling revenues are universally acknowledged to be the “lifeblood” of orga- nized -crime. , Any additional legislation that this subcommittee can promote to further restrict and inhibit gambling will, in our opinion, be a sub- stantial blow to organized crime. Senator Musxir. Did they actually pay off on those lotteries or was it dishonest in that respect, too? Mr. Brancu. Usually they pay off. They don’t pay off when we pull a raid on them or arrest them. They stop at that. But they are in operation the next week. ‘The Crrarraan. You mean they do not pay off for that day? Mr. Brancn. No, sir; they don’t. The Crrairman. It is unfortunate for the fellow that won, who cannot get his winnings. Mr. Brancrr. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. oo The Cuairman. If the law enforcement is pretty vigilant, I would be afraid to place a bet under those circumstances. All right, Chief, if you will, you may proceed. Stand by, Sergeant, as we may want to ask you some questions. . Mr. Brancu. Yes, sir. TESTIMONY OF NEIL G. BROWN—Resgumed Mr. Brown. To understand the crime network Trafficante operates it is necessary to examine the modern era of crime in Tampa, which cates from the early 1920's. Its most. violent episodes were between 1937 and 1945, when the Sicilian underworld was attempting to move inon all illegal gambling in Tampa. This period in the history of our city was referred to as “the era of blood.” Senator Musxis. Who coined that phrase, the gang or the news- papers? ; Mr. Brown. I think it was the newspapers, Senator. ; During the 1920's, before the Sicilian underworld moved into the rackets to any great extent, one of our most notorious residents, Charles ME Wall, started his rise to become the acknowledged boss of most of the illegal gambling in the ‘Tampa and central area of the State of Morida. He styled himself “dean of the underworld,” and in 1953 he admitted to a Hillsborough County solicitor that he had made his liy- ing from illegal gambling. During 1945, Wall forfeited his leadership by entering into a partnership with Santo Trafficante, Sr. @ The elder Trafficante was born in Sicily in 1886. He eame to Tampa po 1904 and became a naturalized citizen in 1925. Tn 1950, he was one fi the missing witnesses in the Kefauver crime hearings held in Tampa. He died on August 11, 1954. Police records do not show any arrest for Santo Trafficante, Sr. In 1952, Wall declared that he was retiring, although he did not HW 50955 DBocld: 32423630 Page 671
Docld: 32423630 NARCOTICS 532 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC state what he was retiring from. Int 4, Wall's body was found in his home. Ife had been brutahy-bertten and his throat had been slashed. We have never discovered who the murderers were, nor have we determined their motive. Perhaps Wall was murdered be- cause the killers learned he had admitted that he was Trafficante’s partner in illegal gambling, and that he disclosed confidential facts about the Mafia. ; In 1960, Sergeant de la Llana obtained—from a confidential sou of known reliability—an astounding report about the Mafia and its op- eration in Tampa. The report had becn obtained from Charles Wall in 1945, approximately 6 months after Traflicante, Senior, had made himself a partner in Walls’ gambling enterprises. oo Wall declared that from 1920 through 1945 he controlled gambling in Tampa and in the Florida counties of ILillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Hernando, Polk, and Orange. His rival for control of the gambling rackets was the local Mafia organization. "This was headed, he said, by Santo Trafficante, Sr., the Diecidue brothers, James Lumia, Ignacio Antinori and Salvatore [taliano, Antinori was murdered on October 92, 1940; Lumia was murdered on June 5, 1950; and Italiano fled to Mexico in 1951. Wall admitted that he had good reasons for going along with Traffi- cante, Senior, in 1945; previously the Mafia growp had made three at- tempts on his life; the first was in 1937 as Wall was leaving a bank on the main street in Tampa; the second try occurred as Wall was leaving the garage behind his house; the third, in 1940, happened a few blocks from his house. Inthe third attempt, a truck passed the automobile in which Wall was riding and then stopped abruptly in front of the car. James DeSimone and Nicola Impostato, FBI No. 2716602, each armed with a shotgun, stepped from the truck and fired at Wall and his chauffeur. Both escaped with slight injuries. DeSimone and Impo- stato were known Mafia killers from Kansas City, Mo. They were staying with the Antinori family at the time. The Cuamman, Is Wall still living? Mr. Brown. No, sir; he was killed. The Cuainman. Later killed? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Crramrman. ‘These three attempts failed but later he was isilled# Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. | Wall declared that the Mafia tried to make the public believe that the organization no longer existed in this country and that Mafia mem- bers pointed to the end of terrorism among Italian groups as evidence that the Mafia was gone from the underworld scene. Wall believed, however, that the organization had merely changed its type of opera- tion. He said that other. racketeers had once used the Mafia to monopolize rackets in major American cities. They had educated the Mafia so well in the process that the Sicilians had taken over the rackets themselves. Wall stated that the Mafia learned to consider extortion from Italian businessmen a “nickel-and-dime” business. They had discovered that public oflicials could be corrupted by bribery and that they could organize to take over the major rackets in the United States. Wall declared that the Mafia was not dying out, but “was bigger and better than ever.” Ie said that his partner, the elder Trafficante, had told him that there were some 10,000 active Mafia members in the United States. Wall stated that the Mafia leader in Tampa was Page 672 ORGANIZ Santo Trafliea of the organiz: tries of the wor in the United s a sizable Sicili hy Joseph Prot of the major kk Frank Costellc members of tl Luciano were fi _ According te tinet groups, ar was that only while Ainevien Wall was told even though he were. not dueto can birth, but & of the proceeds « to keep the me _ Senator Mus inner circle, Chic _ Mr. Brown, 4 circle, ~ Below that—— Senator Musk Mr. Brown. I be in the inner ci The Crarrma: the Tampa area i: Ar. Brown. T The Cratrwrar Mr. Brown. N The Craaraz organization is se Mr. Brown. ‘T] _ The Crrarrman it, but who was VW Mr. Brown. T The Cuatraran, (At this point § Mr. Brown. W from 1930 throug. ano, James Lum Thomas, and Fra leadership of Trai Wall that Vincen Diecidues but that had Joseph Profac Senator Muskie Mr. Brown. Yes Senator Musnir any point in this h pie er ed
IN NARCOTICS 355, Wall's body was en and his throat ha io murderers were, Nor “all was murdered be- ithe was Trafficante $ osed confidential facts na confidential source at the Mafia and its op- sed from Charles Wall “ute, Senior; had made he controlled gambling arough, Pinellas, Pasco, ontrol of the gambling ‘ix was headed, he said, James Lumia, Ignacio as murdered on October a0; and Italiano fled to voing along with Trafli- ‘oup had made three at- ‘was leaving a bank on -red as Wall was leaving 1, happened a few blocks passed the automobile in iptly in front of the car, No, 2716692, each armec ‘L fired at Wall and his _ DeSimone and Impo- 3 City, Mo. They were <d but later he was killed? <e the public believe that " try avd that Mafia mem- ‘yalian groups as evidlenes Id seene. Walt believe ; hanged its type of opera- once used. ae Maha to _ ‘They had educated the had taken over the rackets rned to consider extortion ‘ye’ business. They had apted by bribery and that vkets in the United States. i iy iwger ying out, but “was bigger :ner, the elder Trafficante, - active Mafia members in {afia leader in Tampa wat HY 50955 Docld: 32423630 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS 533 Santo Traflicante, Sv. and that he was well informed on the activities of the organization in the United States, in Sicily, and in other coun- tries of the world. ‘Traflicante had told him, Wall said, that the Mafia in the United States was directed by a local board in every city having a sizable Sicilian population. There was a national board, headed by Joseph Profaci in New York City, which was composed of the heads of the major local boards. Traflicante is reported to have said that Frank Costello, Vineent Mangano, and Joe Massie were influential members of the national board, and that Frank Nitti and Lucky Luciano were former members. According to Wall’s account, the Mafia was composed of two dis- tinct groups, an “inner circle” and an “outer cirele.” The general rule was that only natives of Sicily were admitted to the “inner circle,” while American-born Italians were recruited into the “outer circle.” Wall was told it was possible for a member to be transferred from “outer” to “inner” status when he performed an act of special merit, even though he had been born in the United States. ‘The restrictions were not due to lack of trust by native Italians toward those of Ameri- can birth, but becanse the “inner circle” usually took the major part of the proceeds of the Mafia’s illegal activities and, therefore, preferred to keep the membership of the “inner circle’ as small as possible, Senator Muskie. Would you say that this chart represents the inner circle, Chief ? Mr. Brown. At the very top portion, Senator, would be the inner cirele, Below that Senator Muskie. By the “top portion,” do you mean Mr. Brown. T would include in that that the three top men would bein the inner circle and those below that would be in the outer circle. The Cuairman. Those would only be in the inner circle so far as the Tampa area is concerned ? Mr. Brown. That is right. - The Cirainwan, Not in the inner circle overall 2 Mr. Brown. No, sir; this is just in the inner circle in the Tampa area. The Crainsan. But that gives an indication of how the overall organization is set up. Mr. Brown. Thatis correct. The Crraratan. You may have it in here, but I may have missed it, but who was Wall talking to when he gave all this information? Mr. Brown. That was a confidential informant. The Crairman. I see. Very well, (At this point Senator Javits entered the hearing room.) Mr. Brown. Wall believed the influential Mafia members in Tampa from 1930 through 1945 were: Santo Traflicante, Sr., Salvatore Ttali- ano, James Lumia, and the Diecidue family—Alfonso, Antonio, Thomas, and Frank. ‘The Diecidues and their in-laws opposed the leadership of Trafticante in the Tampa organization. 'Traflicante told Wall that Vincent. Mangano, of the national board, supported the Diecidues but that he, Trafficante, was able to stay in power because he had Joseph Profaci’s friendship. Senator Muskm. May Lask a question here? - Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. Senator Musxin, You refer to the national board. TI do not recall iny point in this hearing where there was this kind of a direct refer- Page 673
HY 50955 Docld: 32423630 584 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS ence to a national organization in the Mafia. Was it referred to as such? ; Mr. Brown. This is the information as Wall has reported that it consisted of a national board. Senator Musxie. Do you know who he identified as members of the national board? Mr. Brown. Well, Joe Profaci and Vincent Mangano were two of the members of the national board. - The Cuatrman. They are shown to be leaders of families, both of them. Senator Musxtr. But those same people are leaders of families in New York as testified by Valachi. Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Cuatrman, So it is your impression that the heads of the New York families made up a national board that had jurisdiction over Tampa, among other places? Mr. Brown. That is correct; yes, sir. Wall declared that there were approximately 40 members of the Mafia living in the Tampa area and he believed that Trafficante’s share of proceeds of their gambling operation was being divided with other menibers of the Mafia. Information in our files from another confidential source confirms Wall’s statement. In addition it reveals that Antonio Diecidue made annual trips to Miami for the purpose of renting a house for Vincent Mangano, who came down from New York every year to spend 2 or 3 months in Miami. This source stated that many important members of the Mafia visited Mangano in Florida, but that Traflicante never appeated. Senator Musnir. May Task another question on the national board? Was it your impression that the national board members shared in the proceeds of the criminal activities in Tampa? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir; they hada percentage. Senator Muskie. Have you any idea what that percentage was? Mr. Brown. No,sir; [have no idea. The gray shadings on our chart depict the influence of each of these men. To me, it appears to be no small coincidence that in Tainpa the Diecidue family lost stature from at least. the early 1950's when Vincent Mangano disappeared; nor that Traflicante, Jr., the Profaci man, was in the immediate vicinity, when Albert Anastasia was murdered in 1957. Sergeant de la Llana’s intelligence unit has prepared summaries of the men in Trafficante’s organization, along with a commentary of relevant facts about each of them. So that our information may be available not only to the subcommittee, but to all police units to whom your reports are so valuable, I wish to submit these summaries and commentary for the record, as our exhibit 8a through t; and exhibit 4. The Cuamoan. The summary to which you have referred may be received as exhibit 48—— Mr. O’Downesn. Chief, as I understand it, these are summations, very brief summations, of the 19 individuals that are on the chart insofar as their criminal activity, their mode of business, their crim- inal history, et cetera; is that correct # Mr. Brown. That is correct. The Curairman. It may be received as exhibit No. 48. Page 674 ORGAN] (The doeun and may be fi _ The Cua Is it? _ Mr. O’Don: little detail as 4, which will bi The Ciratrxr The summar That is what Mr. Brown, phe Cuarrxa exhibit 4, your Mr. Brows, he Cuatryg, Mr. Brown, The Citatrar: Exhibit 48 is 4 Mr. Brown, © The Crrarmag; on the chart ? Mr, Brown. * The Cuamara Mr, Brown. .3 Che Crramata; (The documen and mav be foun The Cratraraz You may proc: Mr. Brown. C€ task to obtain ev members, because ways been reluct their fear of Mafi that the Mafia de the relative infre Successfully prose _ We have lites 1928 to the presei circumstances of uses murder to dis hators of its code s activities and goa] solved, A ratio ( ticular murder wa irgument, althoug the argument. It though the killer a In startling cont in examination 1962 shows that a unsolved, a solutic through 1969, all 8: 24-366-—63—pt. 2
i N NARCOTICS ‘as it referred to as as reported that it _alas members of the angano were two of of families, both of nders of families in ae heads of the New ad jurisdiction over 40 members of the wl that Trafficante's s being divided with “tial souree confirms ionio Diecidue made » house for Vincent important members «ut Trafficante never , the national board? ‘ tnembers shared in 2 percentage was? influence of each of coincidence that in least the early 1950's Trafficante, Jr., the wn Albert Anastasia “pared summaries of th a commentary of information may be police units to whom hese summaries and ugh t; and exhibit 4. ive referred may be rese are summations, nat are on the chart ’ business, their crim: so. 48. year to spend 2 or 3 - ws ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS 535 (The documents referred to marked “Exhibit No. 48” for reference, and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) ; The Cuairman. You make reference to another exhibit. What is it? , Mr. O’Donwett. Will you explain the other exhibit? Go into a little detail as to the various murders that you have on your exhibit 4, which will be a different exhibit in our hearings. The Crratrman. Let the Chair get this straight first. The summary that he referred to has been made exhibit 48. That is what you referred to as “our exhibit 32°"? AIr. Brown. Yes, sir. ; The Cuairman. Then you say “through t; and exhibit 4.2 What is exlubit 4, your exhibit 4? Mr. Brown. Exhibit 4 is a brief summation on each of the subjects. The Cuamman, What is your exhibit 3? Mr. Brown. They are arrest records of each of the individuals. The Citarraan. Very well. Exhibit 48 is the arrest records. -Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Cuamrman. Your exhibit 4 is a brief summary of each person on the chart? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Crairman. It is of his records and activities? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Crainman. It may be received as exhibit No. 49 for reference. (The document referred to marked “Exhibit No. £9” for reference, and may be found in the liles of the subcommittee. ) The CuatrmMan. Now the record is straight. You may proceed. Mr. Brown. Our department has always found it a most. diMeult task to obtain evidence sullicient for successful prosecution of Malia members, because the witnesses who might offer such evidence have al- ways been reluctant to do so. ‘The paramount. reason, of course, is their fear of Mafia reprisals, since it is common knowledge in Tampa that the Mafia does not hesitate to use murder for such reprisals and the relative infrequency with which such professional murders are successfully prosecuted. , We have categorized certain homicides in the Tampa area, from 1928 to the present, as “gangland slayings.” An examination of the circumstances of some of these murders emphasizes how the Mafia uses murder to discipline its membership, to revenge itself against vio- “lators of its code and to otherwise eliminate opposition to its criminal activities and goals. Of the 23 homicides on the list, only 1 has been solved. A ratio of less than 5 percent. of solution—and that par- ticular murder was cleared up because it apparently resulted from an argument, although it is possible that the slayer deliberately provoked the argument. It was not, therefore, a typical gangland slaying, al- though the killer and the victim were both underworld figures. In startling contrast to the number of unsolved gangland slayings, an examination of all other Tampa homicides from 1958 through 1962 shows that we have had 145 murders and that only 4 are presently unsolved, a solution ratio of better than 97 percent. From 1960 through 1962, all 83 homicides in our city were solved. 24-366-—G3-—pt. 2——10 S0955 Daocld:32423630 Page 675
536 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS The Citaratan. What period is covered by the 23 gangland slayings that you make reference to? Mr. Brown. From 1928 through the present day. The Cuatraan. Ina period of about 30 years. Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Crairamax. And you identify them as gangland slayings as distinguished from the usual homicide cases that you have? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Crramman. On those, according to your testimony, it has been inpossible—or you have been unsuccessful, at least, in solving any of them except the one that appeared so obvious, and it would not possibly come within the category of “gangland slayings”? Mr. Brown. Yes, sir. The Cramuan. But you have included it as being the only one that was solved. Mr. Brown. That is correct. Senator Muskie, What are the characteristics of the gangland slay- ings that makes it so difficult to solve them as contrasted with your excellent record in other homicides? Mr. Brown. Of course, primarily it is because of witnesses who are reluctant to give the Iaw enforcement any information whatsoever, In some of our killings—I recall one where we had nine witnesses in the room and nobody actually saw the murder or knew anything was going on, Senator Musxre. So this fact has a direct. bearing upon the question of immunity statutes, for example. Mr. Brown. Thatis right. That is correct. ; The Crarrsran. This, in other words, emphasizes the rigid disci- ‘pline, the code of underworld law, that cannot be violated without suffering the penalty of death. Mr. Brown. That is correct. - The Cairman. In other words, the nine who were in the room when the murder was committed, possibly every one of them knew what happened. Mr. Brown. Yes, sir; I would think so. , The Crrairnman. IT would doubt that somebody did not know it. But, anyway, they know that the penalty for them talking would be death. Mr. Brown, Yes, sir. The Crrarraan. Even if they were inclined to, and I do not mean to say they were inclined to, even if one of them were inclined to “talk, he knows what the penalty would be. And that makes it difficult. That is why you have the trouble in the gangland slayings, the silence, the threat, the intimidation of a death sentence, of their being executed by their underworld government if they talk. Mr. Brown. That is true. Senator Musxie. Then, Chief, just to nail that point down, they seem to be more than concerned and clearly are more concerned for themselves and for their allies than they are about immunity against prosecution. Mr. Brown. Yes, sir; that is true. They are afraid for their lives. The Cuatrman. Very well. You may proceed. , HY 50955 DBocld: 32423630 Page 676 ORC Mr. Br ' pertinent list as our. The Cx (The de erence and (At this The Cuz Mr. Bro: Valachi’s t by violence _ At least ; in 1936 anc rectly attri had given t . third mi cago, invely illustrating lates its ruk difficulty of lining Attor that purpose he Carr: aspects relat figure in the the Mafia an in Kansas Ci Carramusa eral narcotic Impastato, F Ventola, Pat; Fernice. Ta ply for the k in Tampa wa had inherited tinori. The e & narcotics de. prosecuted su cardinal Mafi; them at their Chicago with anew life unde hree years mobile, Carrar Lumia, an ass but was himsel- was the’same N to kill Charles } In Tampa w. of my police col recanting at tr Witnesses, becat of this frustrat ranking membe:
‘ vaigland slayings as i ' t IN NARCOTICS 23 gangland slayings y- mt you have? estimony, it has been least, in solving any us, and it would not slayings” ? « being the only one - of the gangland slay- contrasted with your of witnesses who are armation whatsoever, fad nine witnesses in + or knew anything i ing upon the question sizes the rigid disci- be violated without sere in the room when of them knew what dy did not know it. om talking would be a, and I do not mean ‘om were inclined to And that. makes it io gangland slayings, ith sentence, of their ' if they talk. iat’ point down, they ‘ more concerned for nt immunity against afraid for their lives. 50955 ‘a narcotics deal. rinking members of the Tampa Mafia. Bocld:329493630 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS 537. Mr. Brown. I have had these gangland slayings listed, with a few pertinent comments about each, and submit to the subcommittee this list as our exhibit 5. The Crainman. It may be received and be made exhibit No. 50. (The document referred to was marked “Exhibit No. 50” for ref- erence and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) (At this point Senator Javits withdrew from the hearing room.) The Cuarrman. You may proceed. Mr. Brown. With few exceptions, those murders well reflect Joseph Valachi’s testimony that Mafia members do live by violence and die by violence. At least two of the unsolved murders on our list-—that of Gus Perez in 1986 and of Joe “Pelusa” Diaz in 1958—were, in my opinion, di- rectly attributable to the Mafia’s knowledge or belief that the victims had given to legal authorities evidence incriminating Mafia members. A third murder—of Carl Carramusa, in 1945—taking place in Chi- cago, involved some Tampa Mafiosi, and is of particular interest in illustrating the Mafia zeal for vengeance against a member who vio- lates its rules. It is of further significance, too, in demonstrating the difliculty of protecting witnesses against the Mafia—and is under- lining Attorney General Kennedy’s request for additional funds for that purpose, which request I strongly endorse. The Carramusa case developed in Kansas City, Mo., with certain aspects related to the Mafia organization in Tampa. The principal figure in the case was Carl Carramusa, known as a minor member of the Mafia and a front man for the Mafia’s narcotics traffic operation in Kansas City. Carramusa was indicted in 1942 for conspiring to violate the Fed- eral narcotic laws. His codefendants were Joseph DeLuca, Nicola Impastato, Paul Antinori, Joe Antinori, Charles Gerrgimina, Louis Ventola, Patsy Ventola, Charles Tiabi, Samuel Pernice, and Fellipo Fernice. Tampa’s Mafia organization was one of the sources of sup- ply for the Kansas City group, and at that time the narcotics trade in Tampa was headed by Paul Antinori and Joseph Antinori, who had inherited the narcotics leadership from their father, Ignazio An- tinori. The elder Antinori had been murdered a few years before in All of the defendants in the Kansas City case were prosecuted successfully, primarily because Carramusa violated the cardinal Mafia code of l’omerta, or silence, testifying openly against them at their trial. After the trial, Carramusa went into hiding in Chicago with his wife and family, changing his name and beginning anew life under new circumstances. Three years later, in June of 1945, while he was seated in his auto- mobile, Carramusa’s head was blown off by a shotgun -blast. James Lumia, an associate of the Antinoris, was a suspect in this killing, but was himself murdered at Tampa in June of 1950. A prime suspect was the same Nicola Impastato, who had some years before attempted to kill Charles Wall. oo In Tampa we have suffered also the frustration I know that many -. of my police colleagues in other cities have experienced—the deliberate > recanting at trial of the original statements of complaining or key 2 witnesses, because of their fear of Mafia reprisal. ‘ clear instance of this frustration of law enforcement effort involved three of the Page 677
Docld: 32423630 HY 50955 588 ORGANIZED CRIME AND ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTICS One day in 1958, one Joe Castellano went to the Italian Club in Tampa to play cards with a group of friends. During the course of the evening, he talked to Salvatore Scaglione privately. Scaglione asked Castellano if he wanted to make a profit on a “hot load” of whisky. Castellano said he was interested, and they agreed to meet later that night. At the meeting, Scaglione was accompanied by Joe Mistretta and Angelo LoSealzo. Castellano got into the front seat of a car provided by the others, and the four men drove to a thickly wooded area outside of Tampa city limits. Castellano was then attacked with a hammer, being hit repeatedly on the head. THe managed to get out of the car, although he was badly hurt. He broke loose from his elderly assail- ants and ran away. ITe stumbled into a nearby house and asked to be taken to the constable’s house, where he gave a statement about the incident, naming the three as his assailants. He swore to the county solicitor that he had no idea why he was beaten. Scaglione, -Mistretta, and LoScalzo were arrested and charged with assault with ‘intent to murder. Joe Castellano disappeared for a period of time. After he was found, the case went to trial. Castellano changed his story completely and testified that he had injured himeelf while hunting on the night of theattack. The predictable result, of course, was a verdict for the defendants of “not guilty.” RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER FEDERAL LEGISLATION TO FIGHT ORGANIZED CRIME IT believe firmly that it is almost impossible for the Police Depart- ment of the City of Tampa, or any other municipality, to cope ef- fectively with the activities of a national or international crime syndicate such as these hearings show exists in the United States. One of the main problems is that the most dedicated, well-trained, and well-staffed police force is almost always limited legally and financially to the territorial boundaries of its municipality. Tor example, the Tampa Police’ Department is obviously interested in and informed about the activities of Santo Trafficante. However, in the past the department was unable to do anything about Trafficante’s operations in pre-Castro Cuba; it has no jurisdiction _or control of his illegal affairs in Miami and elsewhere in central Florida. The department could only record that he attended the Apalachin meeting in November of 1957, but it could do nothing about this obvious evi- dence that he was a high-ranking member of a national crime syndicate. In the light of our experience with the Mafia in our own city’s underworld, I submit for this subcommittee’s consideration some sug- gestions for Federal legislation which I believe would certainly help local law enforcement agencies to fight organized crime more effectively. " 1. More ample funds must be obtained by local agencies to recruit high caliber police personnel and to retain superior personnel having the experience and capabilities to understand, investigate, and prose- cute organized criminal conspiracies. Because of the demonstrated interstate nature of organized crime, Federal legislation similar to Page 675 ORGAN educational a funds and tra _2. I endors tion before t] Wiretapping i 3. I recomr house for crit crime and rac tory, to all loc example of th: Intelligence L in the 3 short informing us c and has given who are associ _ For examph initiated a pro Each member dividuals in ; When all of th of gambling o these operatiox this menace. I believe als our increasing gambling oper: The Florida law enforcemer correlate the d ganized crime it This unit toc throughout Flo ligence data ab. member is forwa Bureau, which Only sheriffs’ can become me membership are honesty and inte bers and aceept unanimous vote. Intelligence iy wide operation c more helpful in: of organized erir beyond—our bor with those juris criminals or rack directly into the our best talents eliminate this gre he Crratrman Is there any fur
HY 50955 September 19, . selli, The Miami Herald 1976 Could Rosselli Have Linked. Castro Plot to JFK Death? By RON LaBRECQUE . Herald Staff Writer =~ : In 1960, when the CIA was try- -ing to set up a delicate attempt on _the life of Fidel Castro, it turned to a man once described as “the big- “gest flag-waving SOB in the coun- -try” — West Coast underworld ‘figure Johnny Rosselli. * Rosselli — a seemingly improba- .ble conspirator in a government “plot — got the “flag-waving” label .from Salvatore (Momo) Giancdna, ‘then Chicago's top crime boss and a man Rosselli brought into that "same plot.. Now both are dead, murdered in the past year, and investigators are wondering whether their plotting led to their deaths and whether the CIA plots against Castro -- only recently made public and even kept from the Warren Commission — are vitai clues to the John F. Ken-_ nedy assassination. The deaths of Giancana, in June” of 1975, and Rosselli, this summer, have aroused a renewed concern in Washington, where on Friday the House of Representives voted to re-- open the investigation of the Ken- nedy murder. . REP. THOMAS N. Downing (D., Va.), who will be chairman of the, panel, said he is “convinced” a con- spiracy was involved in Kennedy’ 8 death. Now, in the aftermath of thexvis; olent deaths of Giancana and Ros-' the question arises ‘of what role, if -any, the Kennedy: White House played in the early 1960s. “deal” the CIA made with the two underworld figures to have Castro murdered. Whether “the Kennedy 7" White’ House knew ‘about about the CIA’s \ plotting (Robert F. Kennedy found . out after the contacts were ended), - the CIA’s use of the underworld Docld: 32473630. Page 673 ‘seems ironic in retrospect. ' * Robert Kennedy’s passionate ef- forts to disable organized crime are well documented. IN 1960 when Robert Kennedy wrote about what he had learned of organized crime in America from his years as chief counsel to the Senate Rackets Committee, he -tog quoted Giancana te make a point. . He told about Giancana’s inter ' view at his local draft board at the outbreak of World War I, when he was asked what he did for a live ing. ' “T steal,” Giancana is said to have replied. — : So Sam Giancana didn’t go to ;war and years later would boast to ‘Chicago reporter Sandy Smith that the stayed out of the Army — la ‘beled unfit — by telling the truth. i “What's wrong with the syndi- ‘cate?” Kennedy, quoted Giancana. "Two or three of us get together ‘on a business deal and everybody “says it’s a bad thing. Businessmen ‘do it all the time- and nobody - ‘squawks.”" A Senate committee began stu-.. dying the Kennedy questions more: ivert CIA activities. } IN AN addendum to the Senate ‘Intelligence Committee's interim report last November, Sen. Howard ‘Baker (R., Tenn.) said, “It is my ‘personal view that on balance the likelihood that presidents (the re- ‘port dealt with Dwight Eisenhower and Kennedy) knew of the (Castro) assassination plots is greater than the likelihood that they did not.” Just to trace Rosseili’s history with the CIA is mind- boggling for the investightors. Yet, it is just one aspect of the search for his killer. ; Johnny Rosselli —- born on the ‘fourth of July in Esperia, Italy, and “71 when he died — was not first ‘and foremost a CIA operative. ee ‘than a year ago as it looked at co- * His greater role as evidenced by two convictions, his associations and to some extent his own com- ments, was as an influential, if publicly lesser known, organized crime figure. . r HIS ASSOCIATION with other Tdentified underworld members was monitored by law enforcement agencies as recently as several weeks before ‘his July 28 disap- pearance. By all accounts, Rosselli was a- charming man, dressing in expen- :Sive clothes, married for.only two fyears in the early jeasily attracted women. I He. wag an immigrant who told ~ jin a short autobiography written .. tabout 1967 that his “life of crime” ~ iegan as a teenager in Boston, at- tempting arson for his stepfather yand: stealing $50 on his own. As he: 1940s and’: iknown most of his life as one who . \raveled west, finally to settle in. alifornia, his ‘attention turned to . bootlegging, gambling and dab- pling in the movie business. . IT IS said that Rosselli guarded it he West Coast gambling interests ; for Giancana's Chicago syndicate. Why Rosselli was chosen by the CIA for a Castro plot in 1960 is un- clear, although CIA officials have since testified that they wanted the ind of contacts in Cuba which or- ‘ganized crime had made during the | re-Castro days when Havana was ‘a.gamblers’ haven. ‘Giancana was enlisted by Rossel- i because he had influence with - Florida’s Santo Trafficante, consid- ered the key underworld gambling figure in Havana. - . The unraveling of CIA and un- derworld conspiracies, an awesome -~ team of nine in the Metro Homicide Division. It is a team now clearly consumed by the task which has “web spanning decades, is left to a- been a’ full-time operation since . Rosselli’s body was pulled. from | Dumfoundling Bay on. Aug. 7,
HW 50955 '- ‘THAT THE Metro team is even Involved is happenstance. Ragsselli - ‘lived in Plantation, Broward :Coun- -, ty, with his sister and brother-in-- law. It’s just that his killers chose. to dump his body in Dade. While. several detectives say their instincts lead them to con- . clude that the Rosselli murder was | an internal underworld affair, all: on the team are aware of the pres-__ sure on them to search each clue | that leads back to the CIA-Castro- affair. — ; . With: Rosselli’s ‘death this sum- . mer, the newly appointed Senate “committee saw its list of knowl- — -edgeable witnesses further trim- med..Some of those witnesses have _ died violently and some from natu- ral causes. ‘" When Giancana was murdered in June of 1975, before he could even be questioned by the committee staff, authorities attributed it to an internal gangland struggle — even though. the: murderer is still un- known. ~The death of Rosselli, who had - appeared before the committee _three times in the past year with- out immunity, caused greater con- : cern on Capitol Hill. THE SAME night Rosselli's body was identified —- the legs hacked off and stuffed along with the body ‘into an oil drum -— Baker, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence : Committee, called for the FBI to ‘get involved in the case. (Several days later, Attorney General Ed- - ward Levi ordered FBI involve~ ment.) ' Tt wasn’t until several weefs later, however, that what was known to Baker. became public . knowledge. A section of the former commit- tee’s April report told of a Wash- ington attorney who in 1967. went. to Supreme Court Chief. Justice. Earl Warren (chairman: of the® then-disbanded Warren: Commis: . sion) to.say that two‘of his" clients believed they knew ‘about Cuban: ‘agents in the United States w E _conspired in the assassination. of : bee «John F. Kennedy, ore tes THE INFORMATION: eventually "+ reached the FBI, but as the Senate committee concluded this year, the . 1967 FBI probe was slipshod and! incomplete. One of the clients referred to ing the report has since been identified "as Rosselli. And it has since’ been” learned that Rosselli was con- _vinced he held a vital clue to the JFK murder. Docld: 32423630 - wiretap” “effort, “aware of Rosselli's CIA activities. “’ Page 650 “There was never the slightest. doubt in John’s mind that Castro was responsible for the assassina~- tion of Kennedy,” said Edward P. Morgan, the attorney referred to in the report. Morgan is an attorney of no mean stature in Washington. He “ served as chief counsel to the joint. congressional ' committee - which studied the Pearl Harbor attack, counsel to the Senate Foreign Rela- tions Committee and for seven FEL. was chief inspector of the FBI. . ROSSELLI. told Morgan about the CIA plot in 1967, when the De-- - partment of Justice was vigorously _ attempting to deport Rosselli. for being an illegal alien. Rosselli, Morgan said, “was cere - : tain that the people he (Rosselli) « put around Castro in the CIA plot = turned right around and killed Ken- . nedy. The people he still knew (in - 1967) did it.’”’ ‘Rosselli, according to Morgan, : ' decided to talk about his CIA activ-- - ity in hopes of decreasing the pres- - sure from the FBI and Department. of Naturalization and Immigration,. both Justice Department agencies. ; Several. friends of Rosselli, in-* ‘cluding Morgan, say they are con-. ‘vinced the FBI tried to get Rosselli to become an organized crime. in-° ‘formant by threatening to have:” him: deported : if he ‘didn’t coopera:.; -te. - . . IN’ 1961, through | a _bungled_ the “FBr* “became: While Giancana: and Rosselli. were in Florida planning the opera-' tion, Giancana wanted to return to Las Vegas to check on-his girl friend, Phyllis McGuire, whom he suspected’ of dating comedian Dan. Rowan. To keep Giancana in. Flori- da, it was agreed that a bug would ' be placed in her hotel room and her. conversations monitored. . But: the private detective they”: hired, with CIA money. it has since | been learned, was discovered and © , arrested. Eventually the police in- . vestigation. led back to the Castro | i ’ plotters. Prosecution was avoided when : the: CIA intervened and said the’ “national interest’? would be -dam- . aged if the plot information be- - came public.” "WHEN THE wiretap case was again to be investigated in 1966, ‘this time by a Senate committee headed by the late Sen. Edward Long (D., Mo.), the CIA again. step-. ped in to stop it. _ Robert - agent-turned Howard Hughes aide Morgan was told about the pend- ing investigation by Rosselli and Mahue, a former FBI who was the CIA's initial link to. Rosselli. ; Mahue told Morgan that both he: and Rosselli had been subpenaed to; appear before the committee. Mor- . gan said. he called Lawrence Hous-' ton, the CIA general counsel. Hous-% 3 ton went to Long and the investi: - gation was dropped. at . MORGAN SAID he knew, as the: Senate committee recently empha-i ‘sized as well, that all information: . -about the CIA plots —- which could? 4 have been the incentive for pros! Castro forces to kill Kennedy —- had been kept from the Warren: ‘Commission. “I was an admirer of Earl Ware. ren,” Morgan said. “(His) report: said that ... Oswald alone killed? Kennedy. It kept bugging me after. so gruesome a detail from Rosselli: that the Chief Justice could put. his -name on a report which didn't as-. sess the most’ significant. piece of. evidence bearing’ on the killing: of: Kennedy.”: - : The information. Morgan had was passed to Warren via..colum- nist Drew Pearson, a mutual friend. Eventually, it reached the FBI, but, remarkably, even after di-' rect orders from President Lyndon Johnson in the spring of 1967, in: vesti gation was not vigorousiy Pure? _ Sued. THE SENATE Intelligence Com-. _ mittee compared that apparent. in-: action with a statement former FBI. ‘director J. Edgar Hoover made to . the Warren Commission on-May 5,; 1964. Hoover said, “well, I can ase: ‘sure. you so far as the FBI is cone. cerned. the case will be continued; in an open classification for alk. “time. ‘That is, any information com-: . ing to us or any report coming to:- ; us from any source will be thor- oughly investigated, so. that .we: will” be “able “to: ‘prove: or "disprove Ethe allegation.” - A Senate Committee staff mem ber commented recently, “what is “really happening is that the investi- gation which the FBI should have done in 1967 — and no one can come close to explaining why it wasn't — is actually being done how.” 7... HART, AS have local investiga- tors, has established three possible scenario’s for Rosselli’s death: his recent organized crime activity, re- taliation for his Castro assassina- tion efforts or the information he held concerning the JFK assassina- tion. :
“Maybe Reowséllj's-- Information was the vical nerve a the: Kennedy” assassination,” a Senate source told , The Herald: - High officials in the Cuban gov- ernment also reportedly feel there « ‘ was a “Cuban factor”ein the JFK death, but they see it as a result of. exile politics, according to a recent article by Alton Frye, a senior fel-, low of the Council Foreign Rela-: tions in Washington. _Frye wrote that he visited Ha- * ‘vana recently and met with Cuban, . Officials including, Deputy Prime: ' Minister Carlos Rafael Rodriguez. “... they volunteer the suspicion that the recent murders of Sam Gi- ancana and Johnny Rosselli -. surely have some connection with } Cuban exile politics and the ‘Kenne-.- . dy murder,” Frye wrote. . THERE HAVE been theories re-— cently propounded to show why both pro and anti-Castro forces . ’ could have wanted to get. JFK out” : of power in 1963. On the one hand, there is the ree" "port of French journalist Jean Dan- 2 _?iel, who was the bearer to Castro - . of an offer from.JFK for calmer re- .. lations. Castro was tated. that J ; agreeable, The report stated. that aniel “later .was- lunching’ with. © Castro when word came that Ken-.. “nedy had been’ shot. Daniel de-° * scribed the Cuban leader as’ genu- _inely shocked by the news. — It has since been learned that probably in the very hour JFK was shot, a one- ‘time Castro supporter was receiving a poison pen device ‘from a CIA agent in what was a long-running anti-Castro effort... ’ That Cuban agent was code-named: AM/LASH, and he has since been identified as Rolando Cuebala, now~ imprisoned in Cuba for his assassi- ! . nation plotting. o.. - ay WHETHER JFK had knowledg of, or perhaps even approved,’ an . of the assassination plots:will. prob- : / ably never be known:?* His closest advisers, who - testis ; ‘ fied before the Senate Committe "all said he had no knowledge o! -such plots and. would. never: hav « approved of them. + The same month Rosselli was . Passing poison pills to his Cuban » contact at a meeting at. the Fon- © tainebleau, March of 1961, former. ' Florida Sen. George Smathers, a friend of Kennedy, said he and HY 50955 Bocld: 32423630 Page 641 Kennedy discussed the. “ramifica~" tions of a Castro assassination. Smathers has since said Kennedy rejected the idea and that the dis- cussion was more of a “brain-pick- ing” session, : | AT LEAST one high: -level CIA 8 official did testify he believed the White House was being briefed on- the plots but according to Richard Bissell, one of the officials who originally decided to use Rosselli, it be was through the method of “plau- ‘sible deniability.” That, according to the recent Senate report, “can also lead to the use of euphemism and circumlocu-’ tion, which are designed to allow the President and other senior offi- cials to deny knowledge of an op- eration should it be disclosed.” Another alleged link between: the White House and the under- ‘world plotters, first made public by the Senate Committee, has also f been denied by virtually everyone . involved. Judith: Campbell Exner, the woman who claims to have. been friend and lover to both Gian- “cana and JFK, introduced to both by Frank Sinatra, was not a link in. the Castro plotting, those close’ to both Giancana and. Kennedy have.’ ‘said. , ; dy’s closest advisers told The Her- 9 _ gangsters. : phone call ; House and Exner was made only | . in the Senate report shows that the _met with JFK following the inva ‘ sion fiasco. . A MAN with access to Kenne- ald recently, ‘The. Giancana-Ros- selli thing is unrelated to the Exner thing..I was there: e JFK knew her, but he was naiv: ‘about: those kinds of things. There is documentation to show that on March 22, .1962, Hoover. _lunched- privately with Kennedy _and presumably gave him his first : information linking Exner with the : The final: recorded .: between the White few hours later. . . Another possible link discussed{/' 7 same unidentified Cuban-to who ape Rosselli passed the poison pills y t prior to the Bay of Pigs operatio : in April of 1961, was among group of Cuban exile leaders wh .IT IS known that several of the ° Cubans: with - whom Rosselli worked have been identified, but. investigators say that not all: are: _ known. _ ; those agents’. AS a condition: to his appear--i . ances before the Senate Committee; ” in the past year, it was agreed that 2 ’ Rosselli “would not state the: names or confirm. the existence of. whom he knews about,” Rosselli's attorney | Leslie} : Scheer said. a eer The: friends and acquaintances of”. . Rosselli who could _be contacted by | $ The Herald all said they. never’ *\heard the names of the Cuban. agents, Cb eae pee ae veto bee ee But “a‘ committee" ‘source’ ‘cau- : tioned: “they (Cuban agents) read.- | the committee’s report, they know j who’ s being referred to.” ~ ANOTHER - Rosselli. attorney, : - Tom Wadden, a partner of Edwards Bennett Williams; said, “Yes,. ’ think he, had more knowledge’ | than he testified to. Searching Rosselli’s more: recent : ., past. for. enemies also presents’. problems, . investigators say, The decline of. John Rosselli ap-# ‘pears to begin in the late 1960s. In« 1967, he was convicted:in. a card-": cheating scandal at the posh, celeb-: rity-filled Friar’s Club in: Los. An- . geles where the influence of Sina- tra had made him a mémber ace cording to investigators. ; Deportation pressures. were also mounting at this time. ROSSELLI entered prison on the: conviction in 1970 where he would; - serve three years of a five-year , sentence. - In 1971, he was brought td a. federal grand jury in Los Angeles . . which was probing whether some ; _indentified Detroit organized crime . ‘leaders conspired with the. Emprise: Corp. — a giant firm with nation-j wide race track and sporting event! concessions —- to hide financial in-! terests in the, Frontier Hotel. ain’ Las: Vegas. ae TS Rosselli, too, had, an interest int the Frontier, which opened in 1967.. He owned the gift shop concession : along, with a partner naméd Joe. Breen. How Rosselli obtained the. concession is unclear, but” Breen _ said it gave Rosselli an’ income of about $60,000. ROSSELLI at one time hdd been. a major influence in Las Vegas. - Several sources sajd that when the owners of the Desert Inn wanted Howard Hughes to move out of the - penthouse — because his special needs were ‘costly and ‘putting
HY 50955 some: “high. rollers” in would be more profitable — it was Rosselli -who patched things up. Hughes eventually bought the * Desert Inn, as well as the Frontier. What Rosselli told the federal grand “Jury about the Frontier. in. 1971 is unknown. Rosselli didn’t: testify later at the trial at which: Anthony J. Zerilli and Michael: Pol- _izzi and the. Emprise.Corp., among : “others, were convicted. % : ZERILLI and Polizzi are ‘still in. jail. In 1973, the House of Repre- sentatives -Select Committee on Crime: probed the influence of or- ganized crime in sports — and one area they. looked at was Emprise. _and the Frontier Hotel case. © At the time of the conviction, the federal prosecutor asked that Poliz- zi and Terilli be jailed, immediately : because monitored, . wiretapped conversations showed that the two had talked about “murder, the kill- ing of certain individuals.” ° . An intimate associate of Rosselli, however, discounts the possibility that Rosselli’s grand jury appear- ance could have led, to his death. -“They know Johnny didn’t talk ‘to the grand jury,” the associate said. JOE BREEN said Rosselli hadn't been to Las Vegas for nine years, that “he: 5 never even seen the gift _ shop.” Since his. prison * release and ‘move to Plantation, Rosselli wasn’t trying to regain power; according to his friends. ‘‘He had no muscle,” said an. associate.“I can’t believe Rosselli was getting back into mob stuff.” . But at the same time, many of the associates were surpised to ‘learn about Rosselli’s recent visits with alleged organized ¢rime. fig- ures on the West Coast. Several associates speculate that : Rosselli wanted to get involved in : casino gambling, preferably in the ‘Middle East, and was looking for ; someone with maney. to. back him.. MY IMPRES iON was that he was: broke,” ini, said. “He told me last_year, Mt in_in. bad. financial, aa > straits.? "o> a Scheer said Rosselli’ s income in- cluded about $60,000 from the gift ’ shop and about $3,500 in social se- curity, most of which went for back fees to attorneys and for gov-. _ernment fines. - . _ - Docld: 32423630. Page 662 One friend said. that* just “before. Giancana’s death, Rosselli had ac- ‘cepted Giancana’s. offer of money. The friend was to act as the inter- mediary. “Let me figure out what- my next (attorney's) tab. will: be,” the friend. quoted Rosselli a ing. Rosselli is. described, as a man with a sense of humor who did lit-’ tle offending. . A California woman. who had known Rosselli.for about 40 years: :told ‘The Herald, “If you were. around him for 30 minutes you'd . like him because he would regard you as a human being.” : “If you had a headache he would _either get you an aspirin or send someone to get one. I said: some-- . thing significant there —- he would get it or he would send someone — he wasn’t a pansy, but he wasn’ta tough | guy € either.”
18 § 1510 crimes AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Note §3 ; perjury involving alleged contribution to though pretrial publicity was nationwide, political organization in return for im- exposure varied in certain sections of the ~ airment of _ Securities aud Exchange country. u. S. vy. Mitchell, D.C.NY.19079, prejudice ¢ ommission investigation and judicial 372 F.Supp. 1239, appeal dismissed 485 Relevance of | proceedings were not entitled to continu- F.2d 1290. Sentence & ance of change of venue on ground that, Severance it Sufficlency o- § 151%. Obstruction of State ‘or local law enforcement (a) It shall be unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to ob- * a4. Constite: struct the enforcement of the criminal laws of a State or political subdi- : ““Ppnis_sectio vision thereof, with the intent to facilitate an Mlegal gambling pusiness _ 8. ov roe if-— : tlo . Cc tion were though they. (1) one or more of such persons does any act to effect the object ey. char! | of such a conspiracy; tions. U. £& (2) one or more of such persons {s an official or employee, elected, . eae thes appointed, or otherwise, of such State or political subdivision; and . 1064, 33 L.Fe (3) one or more of such persons conducts, finances, manages, - This sect of an illegal gambling busi- persons eri ness. cal sundae . me eilitate e; (>) As used In this section-—— specified ci means a gambling business — powers Ere (1) “illegal gambling business” ause, US which— infringe on (i) is a violation of U.S8.C.A.Con supervises, directs, or Owns all or part the law of a State or political subdivi- “process OF . tally vague gion in which it is conducted; (it) involves five or more persons who conduct, finance, - fa! Garr manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of such business; .. 3, pefinttl and . 4 Definitlo (ili) has been or remains in substantially continuous opera- -| ness a tion for a period in excess of thirty days or has a gross revenue .{ who condu of $2,000 in any single day. ; ot 8 wun th (2) “gambling” includes but is not limited to pool-selling, book- at ouiey an ¢ making, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels, or dice tabies, «| eluded in and conducting lotteries, policy, bolita or numbers games, or selling Riehl, C.A chances therein. “ ee (3) ‘State’ means any State of the United States, the District fendant, of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory -~ charging or possession of the United States. . on ee. 1955 and | y bingo game, lottery, or similar (ec) This section shali not apply to an ett,, CAC . _game of chance conducted by an organization exempt from tax under para-, . Tg ictin graph (3) of subsection (¢) of section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code to obstru of 1954, as amended, if no part of the gross receipts derived from such of Fouls! activity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder, member, or enl- spire £ ‘ ployee of such organization, except as compensation for actual expenses tows pt incurred by him in the conduct of such activity. gambling (d) Whoever violates this section shall be punished by a fine of not come more than $20,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, oF poth. grounds Added Pub.W, 91-452, ‘Title VIII, § 802(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 936. state off -Beferences In Text. Paragraph (3) of sion of a State or possession, on the same Indicts subsection (c)_of section BOL of the Inter- subject matter, or to relieve any person of with cor na} Revenue Code of 1954, referred to In any obligation linposed by any law of any of erimi: subsec, (c), is classified to section B0l(c) State or ape or political subdivi- of this (3) of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code of sion of a State or possession.” persons _. 1954. : Legislative History. For legislative his- ment, of 3 Congreasional Statement of Findings. tory and purpose of Tub.L. 91-452, see subdivis: ‘5 Section §01 of Pub.b. 91-462 provided’ 197 U.8.Code Cong. and Adm.News, D- tate ile: that: “The Congress finds that illegal 4007. . ified clr gambling involves widespread use of, an to time has an effect upon, interstate commerce section - and the fucilities thereof.” of cott! Priority of State Laws, Section 811 of Index to Notes dictmen Pub.d., 91-452 provided that: “No provi- applicat sion of thie title fenneting this section Admissibility of evidence § Use, 1 and section 1955 of this title, amending Constitutionality spiracy section 2316 of this title and enacting ma- Construction with other laws % nal law terial set out as notes under this section Definitions 1 section. and section 1955 of this title} indicates an Discovery and inspection le a -{ gonspir intent on the part of the Congress to oc- Elements of offense 5 inal lay eupy the field in which such provisiun op- Evidence 2% - thereof, erates to the exclusion of the law of a Indictment la . {  gambli State or possession, of & political subdivi- Participants in buainesa $ | cuinste : j onspit 200 | Law E 7 HW 50955 pocta: 82423630. Page 687 i
HW 50955 Docld 239493630 18 § 1505 Historical and Roviser’s Note. Tased on Title is, U. 8.C., 1040 ed., § Sta (Mar, 4, 1000, ¢, 321, § 133a, as added Jan. 13, 1M0, c. 1, 54 Stat. 13; June 8, 1945, ¢. 178, § 2, 59 Stat. 234). Word “agency was substituted for the words “independent establishinent, board,. commission” in two instances to climinate any possible ambiguity as to scope of section, (See definitive section 6 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phrase- ology. 80th Congress Louse Report No. 304. References in Text. The Antitrust Civil Process Act, referred to in the text, is classified to chapter 34 of Title 15, Cominerce and Trade, Notes of Generally 2 Constitutionalily 1° Evidence 6 Indictment or Information 58 Proceedings within section 3 Questions for jury 7 Witness within section 4 Library references Obstructing Justice G97, 21, C.5.8. Obstructing Justice §§ 5, 22. 1. Constitutionality Former section 24a of this title [now this section] providing that whoever “cor- ruptly” endeavors to influence, intimidate or impede any witness in proceeding, ete. was not unconstitutional for failure to sct Up an ascertainable standard of guilt contrary to U.S.C.A.Const. Amends. 5 and 6. U.S. v. Brumfield, D.C.La.i940, 85 F, Supp. 696, : . 2 Generally This section covers any activity which Would influence or intimidate witness who might be called to testify and is not limited to witness who has bron called to testify with defendant's knowledge. U.S. vy. Batten, D.C.D.C.196t, 226 F.Supp. 492, certiorari denied 85 S.Ct. 898, 880 U.S. O12, 13 °L.Ed.2d 709, rchearing denied 83 8.Ci. 1537, 381 U.S. 930, 14 L.Ea.2a oss. 3 Proccedings within section The submission to the Naturalization Serviee of an application to file a peti- tion for naturalization eanoot, in a legal es 2 TNE a Dee Ae ae A Page 683 CRIMES 996 Ch. 73 Revision Notes 1562 Amendment. Pub.U. 87-6t4 Sub- stituted the catchline “Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agen. cies, and committees” for “Influencing or injuring witness before agencies and committees” and punished the willful re. moval, concealment, destruction, mutila- tion, alteration or falsifieation of docu. ments which were the subject of a de- . mand under the Antitrust Civil Process Act if done with the intent to prevent compliance with a elvil investigative de. mand. Legislative History: For legislative his. tory and purpose of Pub.h. 87-664, sea $s 1962 U.S.Code Cong. and Adm.News, p.. 2567, Decisions sense, have pendency throughout the en- tire United States withia meaning of this. section creating a. criminal offense against one who corruptly attempta te obstruct or impede the due and prope: administration of Jaw, under which such & proceeding is had before a departinent or agency of the United States, Taran. v. U. 3, CA.Minn.2059, 266 F.2d 561. In prosecution for corruptly endeuver- ing to Influence and impede due al proper administration of law in relativa to a naturalization proceeding allege lly pending. before Immigration Service. based on a false statement allegediy made in defendant’s appleation for pare don regarding other arrests and conviz- tions against him, naturalization pros ceeding was not pending in 1935) befere the Service when the defendant mace the application for pardon, nor when pardon was obtained by him, so as to authorize conviction, where at the time of charged offense the Service had no ape plication in its hands, in that it rogur ed the naturalization application as uet having been entitled to be submitted and returned it to defendant, and defendant subsequently submitted a new applics- tion in 1955 having no relation to wit was done in 1951. Id. “Proceeding” within this section in- cludes any investigation which is dircetel by formal order of Securities and Es- change Commission and at which desiz- nated officer takes testimony under oath. U.S. ¥. Batten, D.C.D.C.1964, 226 P.Supp- 492, certiorari denied 85 §.Ct. S93, a US. 912, 13 L.Ed.2d 799, rehearing denies 8&3 S.Ct. 1557, 381 U.S. 930, 14 Y..d.2d oS Ch. 73 4. Witne One wh able wit and who ness” the defendant when anc prosecutic and corr: false and ate Comn &, CALC: denied 83 2d 795, 3. Indiet: Indiletnic tawfully, corruptly and corr struct and, cise of po cifie acts, and partia: from Senat jon invole sonable re} quiry of : concealing memorandy which bore matter of § ficiently ch section dea juring witr juittees, UL IST F.Supp. TIndictmen Inwfaliy, wi ruptly influ corruptly. e and impede power of ing particularly Wally destro Seuate Select volee ar reco lation te sub, ale Seleet Co withholding containing 1 reasonable r inquiry, and dismissed, o1 judicata app meut charg: refusal te ar Select Commi Indictment lawfully, will Tuptly influer corruptly once and impede .
HW 450955 Pe meee PR nar ee PRO Re jsion Notes + i Amendment. Pub.J.. 87-684 sie ad the catchline “Obstruction : o¢ 3 lings before deparlments,, azeg. and committees” for “Influencing: ag jing witness before Agencies ang ‘aittecs” and punished the WIHful rege - yi, concealment, destruction, mutits. wutteration or falsification of docu... 8 which were the subject of a de. d under the Antitrust Civil Process if dune with the intent to preveng glance with a civil investigative dae a. ‘ slative ILlistery: Fur legislative hfs iand purpose of Pub.l. 87-004, see {USCode Cong. and Adm.News,-p MOTN PY ate BR bao SiOns nae ‘9, have pendency throughout the ens “United States within meaning of this creating a ‘Criminal offense st one who corruptly attempts te uct or impede the due and proper dnistration of Jaw, under which suck { ‘oreeding is had before a department , isency of the United States. Taraa. S. C.AMinn.1959, 266 F.2d S6L, ?io influence and impede due and jut adiministration of Jaw in relatioa naturalization proceeding allegedly before Immigration  Secvies. on a faise statement allegedly iu defendant’s application for pat warding other arrests and couvice against him, naturalization prer ie was not pending in 1051 hefore rvice when the defendant made Papplication for pardon, nor whet. ten was obtained by him, so 3s @ durizs couvietion, where at the time: snurged offense the Service had no ape Stion in its hands, in that it regards” the naturalization application. 33 avke = been entitled to be submitted aad. . rd it to defendant, and defendsaty “quently submitted a new applicar; in 1955 having no relation to what, tone in 1951, Id. | mA t . i prosecution for corruptly endeavore ; i 2 A ceeding” within this section ines any investigation which is directed: ‘ferinal order of Securities and Ex:- Ree Commission and at which desig-.. ed oficer takes testimony under oath. uF 3 y. Batten, D.C.0.C.1904, 226 P.Sup p> ; cortiorarl denied 83 S.Ct. S98 30 212,13 T.d.2d 799, rehearing denied S.Ct. 1837, 381 US. 950, Lb L.Ed.2d 8 i Docld: 32423630 ch. 73 OBSTRUCTION Witness within section .e whom defendant knew was prob- a witness before Scnate Comunittee 1 who intended to testify was a fawit- though not under subpoena when dant gave him false story to tell . and if he testified, for purposes of eaanitians for subernation of perjury oy} corruptly influencing witness to give Pose aud perjurious information to Sen- +e Committee investigators, Stein v. U. ~ CACALIGE, 337 F.2d 1, certiorari - tod §5 $.Ct. $59, 880 U.S. 907, 18 Td. in Indietmment or information Indictment charging that defendant un- sfully, wilfully, and knowlngly did cepruptly iifiuence, obstruct and impede a} corruptly endeavor to influence, ob- et and impede due and proper excr- ef power of inquiry by certain spe- nets, particularly altering, defacing a partially destroying and withholding : Senate Select Committee certain un- invoice or record, which bore rea- Unie relation to subject matter of in- + of Senate Sclect Committee, and aling and withholding envelope and corundum containing union’s records, hich bore reasonable relation to subject ter of inquiry, and relevant to it, suf- celently charged an offense under this section dealing with influencing or in- wring witness before agencies and com- tees. U. & v. Presser, D.C.Ohio 1900, ryt F.Supp. Gs. Indictment charging that defendant un- vetully, wilfully and kuowingly did cor- ithy influence, obstruct and impede and ruptly endeavor to jufluence, obstruct “vt impede due and proper exercise of aver of inquiry by certain specific acts, ricuiarly altering, defacing and par- iy destroying and withholding from te Select Committee certain union in- .aiee or record, Which bore reasonable re- tien to subject matter of inquiry of Sen- ate Select Committee, and conecaling and withholding envelope and memorandum containing ‘unfon’s records, which bore onable relation to subject matter of wuiry, and relevant to it, would not be lissed, on ground that doctrine of res eata applied because of prior indict- t charging defendant with unlawful “refusal to answer question before Senate Svlect Committee. “1d. Indictment charging that defendant un- lawfully, wilfully and knowingly did cor- tuptly influence, obstruct and impede and vorrupthy endeavor to influence, obstruct smu finpede due and proper exercise of 18 § 1505 power of inquiry by certain specific acts, particularly altering. defacing and par- tially de&troying and withholding from Senate Select Committee certain union invoice or record, which bore reasonable relation to subjcct matter of inquiry of Senate Select Committee, and concealing and withholding envelope and memoran- dum containing wnion’s records, which bore reasonable relation to subject mat- ter of inquiry, and relevant to it, would not be dismissed, on ground of double jeopardy, because of prior indictment charging defendant with unlawful refusal te answer question before Senate Select Committee, since same facts would not prove each case. Id. OF JUSTICE ‘An indictment for conspiracy to vio- late crminal code by subornation of per- jury in proceeding before the Federal Petroleum Toard was not subject to crit- ficism that it was too vague, contradic- tory, duplicitous, uncertain and indefnite. U. S&S v. Bromfield, D.C.1a.1949, 85 F. Supp. 696. ° G. Evidence The “two witness rule’ was not appli cable in showing that defendant violated this section proscribing obstruction of justice by influencing witness to give false testimony and information to Sen- ate Committee and its investigators, and testimony of one person alone was suffi- cient to convict. Stein vy. U. S., C.ACal. 1964, 337 F.2d 14, certiorari denicd $3 $.Ct. $89, 380 U.S. 907, 13 L.Ed.2d 705. Testimony of one person alone is suffi- cient to convict defendant for obstructing justice iu influencing witness to give false testimony to Senate Committee and te give false and perjurious information to committee investigators. Id. iyidence . sustained convictions under eounts charging corruptly inducing wit- ness to testify falsely and corruptly in- fluencing him to give false and perjurious information to investigators of Senate Cominittee. Id. ", Questions for jury Whether deféndant charged with cb- struction of justice in Securities and Ex- change Commission’s investigation by in- ducing person to testify falsely that he had purchased certain securities through firm of which defendant was head and had resold sceuritics to that firm Knew that witness would be asked to testify under oath was jury question. U. &. ¥. Batten, D.C.D.C.1064, 226 ESupp. 492, cer- tiorarl denied 85 S.Ct. 693, 380 U.S. 912, 13 L.d.2d 799, rehearing denicd 83 S.Ct. 1557, 381 U.S. 930, 14 T,Ed.2d 688. 597 Pagé 689
i i ¥ § 1504 TITLE 18..—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AMENDMENTS 1968—Pub. L. 90-578 substituted “United States magis- trate” and “magistrate” for “United States commissioner” and “commissioner”, in two instances, respectively. : Cross REFERENCES Bribery of officers, jurors or r witnesses, see section 201 et seq. of this title. Influencing juror or witness as criminal contempt, see section 401 of this title. Wire or oral communications, authorization for inter- ception, to provide evidence of offenses under this section, see section 2516 of this title. SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to In sections 201, 1961, 2516 of this title. § 1504. Influencing juror by writing. Whoever attempts to influence the action or de- cision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is @ member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any written communication, in rela- tion to such issue or matter, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than six months. or both. Nothing in this section shall. be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) a ; Leais.aTive History Reviser’s Note-Based on title 18, U. 8. C., 1940 ed., § 243 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 197, 35 Stat. 1113). Last paragraph was added to remove the possibility that a proper request to appear before a grand jury might be construed as a technical violation of thia section. Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials and witnesses, see section 201 of thia title. : Minor offenses tried by United States magistrates as excluding offenses punishable under this section, see section 3401 of this title. SECTION REFERRED To IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to In section 202 of this title. § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before depart- ments, agencies, and committees. Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to ‘influence, intimidate, or impede any witness in any proceeding pending before any department or agency of the United States, or in connection with any in- quiry or investigation being had by either House, or any committee of either House, or any joint commit- tee of the Congress; or Whoever injures any party or witness in. his per- son or property on account of his attending or having attended such proceeding, inquiry, or investigation, or on account of his testifying or having testified to , any matter pending therein; or Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance in whole or in part with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made | under the Antitrust Civil Process Act or section 1968 of this title willfully removes from any place, con- ceals, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material which is the subject of such demand; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, Page 4312 obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, ob- struct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which such proceeding is being had before such department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which such inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Con- gress— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned — not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770; Sept. 19, 1962, Pub. L. 87-664, §6(a), 76 Stat. 551; Oct. 15, 1970, Pub. L. 91-452, title CX, § 903, 84 Stat. 947.) Lecrstative History Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed., §241a (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 1935a, as added Jan. 13, 1940, ch. 1, 54 Stat. 13; June 8, 1945, ch. 178, § 2, 69 - Stat, 234). Word “agency" was substituted for the words “iIndepend- ent establishment, board, commission” in two instances to eliminate any possible ambiguity as to scope of sec- tion, (See definitive section 6 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. REFERENCES IN TEXT The Antitrust Civil Process Act, referred to in text, is classified to chapter 34 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. AMENDMENTS 1970——Pub. L. 91-452 added reference to section 1968 of this title. 1962—Pub, L, 87-664 substituted the catchline “Ob- struction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees" for “Influencing or injuring witness before agencies and committees” and punished the willful re- moval, concealment, destruction, mutilation, alteration or falsification of documents which were the subject of a demand under the Antitrust Civil Process Act if done with the intent to prevent compliance with a civil investigative demand. Cross REVERENCES Bribery of public officials or witnesses, see section 201 of this title. SecTION REFERRED To IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to in section 203 of this title; title 12 section 1457, § 1506. jrheft or alteration of record or process; false Bid. Whoever feloniously steals, takes away, alters, fal- sifies, or otherwise avoids any record, writ, process, or other proceeding, in any court of the United States, whereby any Judgment is reversed, made void, or does not take effect; or Whoever acknowledges, or procures to be acknowl- edged im any such court, any recognizance, bail, or judgment, in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) - LEGISLATIVE HisTory Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. 8. C., 1940 ed., § 233 (Mar. 4, 1908, ch. 321, # 127. 35 Stat, 1111). The term of imprisonment was reduced from 7 to & years, to conform the punishment with like ones for similar offenses. (See section 1503 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REeFerReNCces Concealment, removal or destruction of records, se8 section 2071 of this title. Embezzlement or theft of records, generally, see section 641 of this title. eee commences sata Em EEN + mean ns rm netics Ste I EONS sage ata sont TED rece One CESEETRAEE s
. TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE § 1504 ; AMENDMENTS 1968—Pub. L. 90-578 substituted “United States magis- trate’ and “magistrate” for “United States commissioner” _ and “commissioner”, in two Instances, respectively. ; ; Cross REFERENCES Bribery of officers, Jurors or witnesses, see section 201 et seq. of this title. Influencing juror or witness as criminal contempt, see section 401 of this title. Wire or oral communications, authorization for inter- ception, to provide evidence of offenses under this section, see section 2516 of this title. SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to in sections 201, 1961, 2516 of this title. : § 1504. Influencing juror by writing. Whoever attempts to influence the action or de- cision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any written communication, in rela- tion to such issue or matter, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than six months. or both. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) LEGIsLative HisTory Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed., $243 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 197, 35 Stat. 1113). Last paragraph was added to remove the possibility that a proper request to appear before a grand jury might be construed as a technical violation of this section. Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials and witnesses, see section 201 of this title. : . Minor offenses tried by United States magistrates as excluding offenses punishable under this section, see section 3401 of this title. SECTION REFERRED To IN Ofer Sections This section is referred to in section 202 of this title. § 1506. Obstruction of proceedings before depart- ments, agencies, and committees. Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or, communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any witness in any proceeding pending before any department or agency | of the United States, or in connection with any in- quiry or investigation being had by either House, or any committee of either House, or any joint commit- tee of the Congress; or ; Whoever injures any party or witness in his per- son or property on account of his attending or having ‘attended such proceeding, inquiry, or investigation, or on account of his testifying or having testified to any matter pending therein; or Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or ‘obstruct compliance in whole or in part with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made | under the Antitrust Civil Process Act or section 1968 of this title willfully removes from any place, con- ceals, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material which is the subject of such demand; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, Page 4312 obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, ob- struct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which such proceeding is being had before such department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which such inquiry or investigation © is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Con- gress— ; Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned — not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770; Sept. 19, 1962, Pub. L. 87-664, § 6(a), 76 Stat. 551; Oct. 15, 1970, Pub. L. 91-452, title CX, § 903, 84 Stat. 947.) LgeGisuaTive History Reviser’s Note Based on title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed., §24la (Mar. 4, 1908, ch. 321, § 195a, as added Jan. 13, 1940, ch. 1, 64 Stat. 13; June 8, 1945, ch. 178. § 2, 68 Stat. 234). Word “agency” was substituted for the words “Independ- ent establishment, board, commission" in two instances to eliminate any possible ambiguity as to scope of sec- tion. (See definitive section 6 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. REFERENCES IN TEXT The Antitrust Civil Process Act, referred to in text, is classified to chapter 34 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. AMENDMENTS 1970-—Pub. L. 91-452 added reference to section 1968 of this title. 1962—Pub. L. 87-664 substituted the catchiine “Ob- struction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees” for “Influencing or injuring witness before agencies and committees” and punished the wiliful re- moval, concealment, destruction, mutilation, alteration or falsification of documents which were the subject of a demand under the Antitrust Civil Process Act if done with the intent to prevent compliance with a civil investigative demand. ‘ Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials or witnesses, see section 201 of this title. SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to in section 203 of this title; title 12 section 1457. § 1506. pheft or alteration of record or process; false ae. Whoever feloniously steals, takes away, alters, fal- sifies, or otherwise avoids any record, writ, process, or other proceeding, in any court of the United States, whereby any judgment is reversed, made void, or does not take effect; or Whoever acknowledges, or procures to be acknowl- edged im any such court, any recognizance, bail, or judgment, in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) -. LEGisLATive HIsTory Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. 5. C., 1940 ed., § 233 (Mar, 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 127, 35 Stat. 1111). The term of imprisonment was reduced from 7 to 5 years, to conform the punishment with like ones for similar offenses. (See section 1503 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. Croes REFERENCES : Concealment,, removal or destruction of records, see section 2071 of this title. Embezzlement or theft of records, generally, see section 641 of this title. ee EE et AENEAN, eS
§ 1504 AMENDMENTS 1968-—Pub. L. 90-578 substituted “United States magis- trate’ and “magistrate” for ‘United States commissioner” and “commissioner™, in two instances, respectively. . Cross REFERENCES Bribery of officers, jurors or witnesses, see section 201 et seq. of this title. Influencing Juror or witness as criminal contempt, see section 401 of this title. Wire or oral communications, authorization for tnter- ception, to provide evidence of offenses under this section, see section 2516 of this title. . SECTION Rererrep ro IN OTHER SECTIONS _This section is referred to in sections 201, 1961, 2516 of this title. § 1504. Influencing juror by writing. Whoever attempts to influence the action or de- cision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or: sending to him any written communication, in rela- tion to such issue or matter, shall be fined not more | than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than six months. or both. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of @ request to appear before the grand jury. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) LEGISLATIVE History Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. S.C. 1940 ed. § 243 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 197, 35 Stat. 1113). Last paragraph was added to remove the possibility that a proper request to appear before a grand jury might be construed as a technical viclation of this section. . Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials and witnesses, see section 201 of this title. Minor offenses tried by United States magistrates as excluding offenses punishable under this section, see section 3401 of this title. SECTION REFERRED To IN Orier SecrionNs This section is referred to in section 202 of this title. § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before depart- ments, agencies, and committees, Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any witness in any proceeding pending before any department or agency of the United States, or in connection with any in- ” quiry or investigation being had by either House, or any committee of either House, or any joint commit- tee of the Congress; or. Whoever injures any party or witness in his per- son or property on account of his attending or having attended such proceeding, inquiry, or investigation, or on account of his testifying or having testified to any matter pending therein; or - Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance in whole or in part with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made | under the Antitrust Civil Process Act or section 1968 of this title willfully removes from any place, con- ceals, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material which is the subject of such demand; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Page 4312 obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, ob- struct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which such proceeding is being had before such department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which such inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of ‘either House or any Joint committee of the Con- gress-— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770; Sept. 19, 1962, Pub. L. 87-664, 8 6(a), 76 Stat. 551; Oct. 15, 1970, Pub. L. 91-452, title KX, § 903, 84 Stat. 947.) Lecistarive History Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed., § 241a (Mar, 4, 1908, ch. 321, § 135a, as added Jan. 13, 1940, ch. 1, 54 Stat. 13; June 8, 1945, ch. 178, § 2, 69 Stat. 234). Word “agency" was substituted for the words “Independ- ent establishment, board, commission” in two instances to ellminate any possible ambiguity as to scope of sec- tion. (See definitive section 6 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. REFERENCES IN TEXT The Antitrust Civil Process Act, referred to in text, is classified to chapter 34 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. AMENDMENTS 1970—Pub. L. 91-452 added reference to section 1968 of this title. 1962—-Pub. L. 87-664 subatituted the catchiine “Ob- struction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees" for “Influencing or injuring witness before agencies and committees” and punished the willful re- moval, concealment, destruction, mutilation, alteration or falsification of documents which were the subject of a demand under the Antitrust Civil Process Act if done with the intent to prevent compliance with a civil Investigative demand. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials or witnesses, see section 201 of this title. ‘SECTION REFERRED To IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to in section 203 of this title: title 12 section 1457. § 1506. pheft or alteration of record or process; false aU. Whoever feloniously steals, takes away, alters, fal- sifies, or otherwise avoids any record, writ, process, or other proceeding, in any court of the United States, whereby any judgment is reversed, made void, or does not take effect; or Whoever acknowledges, or procures to be acknowl- edged i@ any such court, any recognizance, ball, or ‘judgement, in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, oh. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) ° LEGISLATIVE History “ Reviser’ s Note.-Based on title 18, U. 5. C., 1940 ed., § 233 (Mar. 4, 1909. ch. 321, $127, 35 Stat. 1111). : The term of imprisonment was reduced from 7.to 6 years, to conform the punishment with like ones for similar offenses. (See section 1503 of this title.) . Minor changes were made in phraseology. ; Cross REFERENCES ~ Concealment, removal or destruction of record’, ee section 2071 of this title. Embezzlement or theft of records, generally, see section 641 of this title. ae | . . sector + wo ermetnttetbenttiion oe ree «MEL ATRSRNFE NE 4 a . .
2 § 1504 TITLE 18.—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AMENDMENTS © 1968-——-Pub. lL. 90-578 substituted “United States magis- trate” and “magistrate” for “United States commissioner” and “commissioner”, in two instances, respectively. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of officers, jurors or witnesses, see section 201 et seq. of this title. Influencing juror or witness as criminal contempt, see section 401 of this title. Wire or oral communications, authorization for inter- ception, to provide evidence of offenses under this section, see section 2516 of this title. Secrion REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred. to in sections 201, 1961, 2516 of this title. § 1504. Influencing juror by writing. Whoever attempts to influence the action or de- cision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he Is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any written communication, in rela- tion to such Issue or matter, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than six months. or both. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) Lecis.aTive History Reviser's Note.—Based on title 18, U. 3. C., 1940 ed., $243 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 197, 35 Stat. 1113). Last paragraph was added to remove the possibility that a proper request to appear before a grand jury might be construed as a technical violation of this section. Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials and witnesses, see section 201 of this title. Minor offenses tried by United States magistrates as excluding offenses punishable under. this section, see section 3401 of this title. SECTION REFERRED To IN OTHER SecrioWs— This section ts referred to in section 202 of this title. § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before depart- ments, agencies, and committees. Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any witness in any proceeding pending before any department or agency of the United States, or in connection with any in- quiry or investigation being had by either House, or any committee of either House, or any joint commit- tee of the Congress; or Whoever injures any party or witness in his per- son or property on account of his attending or having | attended such proceeding, inquiry, or investigation, or on account of his testifying or having testified to any matter pending therein; or Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance in whole or in part with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made | under the Antitrust Civil Process Act or section 1968 of this title willfully removes from any place, con- ceals, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material which is the subject of such demand; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by -any threatening letter or communication influences, Page 4312 obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, ob- struct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which such proceeding is being had before such department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which such inquiry or investigation is being had ‘by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Con- gress— ; , Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned hot more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770; Sept. 19, 1962, Pub. L. 87-€64, §6(a), 76 Stat. 551; Oct. 15, 1970, Pub. L. 91-452, title DX, § 903, 84 Stat. 947.) LEGISLATIVE HISTORY _ Reviser’s Note.—Based on title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed., §241a (Mar. 4, 1008, ch. 321, § 195a, as added Jan. 13, 1940, ch. 1, 54 Stat. 13; June 8, 1945, ch. 178, $ 2, 59 Stat. 234). Word “agency” was substituted for the words “independ- ent establishment, board, commission" in two instances to eliminate any. possible ambiguity as to scope of sec- tion, (See definitive section 6 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. REFERENCES IN TEXT The Antitrust Civil Process Act, referred to in text, is classified to chapter 34 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. AMENDMENTS 1970-—Pub. L. 91-452 added. reference to section 1968 of this title. 1962—Pub. L. 87-664 substituted the catchline “Ob- struction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees" for “Influencing or injuring witness before agencies and committees” and punished the willful re- moval, concealment, destruction, mutilation, alteration. or falsification of documents which were the subject of a demand under the Antitrust Civil Process Act if done with the intent to prevent compliance with a civil investigative demand. : Cross REFERENCES Bribery of public officials or witnesses, see section 201 of this title. SECTION REFERRED To IN OTHER SECTIONS This section is referred to im section 203 of this title; title 12 section 1457. § 1506. Theft or alteration of record or process; false aul. Whoever feloniously steals, takes away, alters, fal- sifies, or otherwise avoids any record, writ, process, or other proceeding, in any court of the United States, whereby any judgment is reversed, made void, or does not take effect; or Whoever acknowledges, or procures to be acknowl- edged im any such court, any recognizance, bail, or judgment, in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same— Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 770.) - LEGISLATIVE Hisrory Reviser's Note.—Based on title 18, U. 8. C., 1940 ed., § 233 (Mar. 4,.1909, ch. 321, § 127, 36 Stat. 1111). The term of imprisonment was reduced from 7 to & years, to conform the punishment with like ones for similar offenses. (See section 1503 of this title.) Minor changes were made in phraseology. Cross REFERENCES Concealment, removal or destruction of records, see section 2071 of this title. , Embezzlement or theft of records, generally, see section 641 of this title,