4 IN RE: )







11 above-entitled cause at the Midland Hotel, 172

12 West Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois, on the 16th

13 day of July, A.D. 1997, at 9:22 a.m.



16 BEFORE: MR. PETER F. VAIRA, Hearing Officer













4 (1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.,

5 Washington, D.C. 20007-5243), by:



8 appeared on behalf of the GEB Attorney;



11 LTD.,

12 (225 West Washington Street, Suite 1000,

13 Chicago, Illinois 60606), by:




17 appeared on behalf of the Chicago

18 District Council of Laborers;








1 PRESENT: (Cont'd)


3 (111 West Washington, Suite 1700,

4 Chicago, Illinois 60602), by:


6 appeared on behalf of

7 John A. Matassa, Jr.



















1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Ladies and gentlemen,

2 let's bring this meeting to order. My name is

3 Peter Vaira. I'm the independent hearing officer

4 from the Laborers' International Union.

5 Sitting beside me is a paralegal from

6 one of the local law firms. I sometimes use,

7 often use a lawyer from my office. But for at

8 least the next couple days, Miss Marquardt will do

9 the, just taking personal notes for me.

10 This is a hearing in the matter of the

11 Chicago District Council. It's a complaint filed

12 by the Laborers' International Union against the

13 District Council under trusteeship pursuant to the

14 Laborers' International Union of North American

15 Constitution. And the law that applies in these

16 areas is well settled in the reported cases in all

17 the labor reporters. We will follow that.

18 Let me just go over some working rules

19 here. We will generally follow the rules of

20 arbitration and the rules of evidence. However,

21 as you know, in those situations, the rules of

22 hearsay are greatly relaxed.

23 What I will generally do is, if

24 evidence is offered, it is permitted to be,


1 permitted to be made part of the record, unless

2 it's so far out that it's ridiculous.

3 But if it has some possible probative

4 value, we will let it come in as part of the

5 record.

6 At the end of the proceeding, I would

7 expect the Council will tell me why or why not

8 some of the evidence does or does not apply or

9 should not be probative.

10 But so we won't go into long arguments

11 over the evidentiary value of some of the items,

12 unless there's a very serious question.

13 I have some persons here -- let me just

14 say this. The rules of our union is that the, are

15 that in trusteeship matters, and other matters

16 that we hear, only the persons who are involved

17 are entitled to come.

18 This is an in-house battle between its

19 members, and no outsiders should be allowed to

20 participate. That doesn't mean you are not

21 free -- I can't stop anyone from talking about it

22 after they leave here. But the doors are closed;

23 only the persons, relevant persons, and the

24 relevant persons here would be the members of


1 this, the delegates to this particular union,

2 District Council.

3 And there are maybe, I think there is a

4 member from the International Union just to

5 observe, and some members of the GEB Attorney's

6 staff. But the reason for that is, this is an

7 in-house affair, and this is the union's problem

8 to settle. And they are going to settle it inside

9 these doors.

10 All right. I have some appearances

11 here; who? The GEB Attorney is represented by

12 whom, sir?

13 MR. BOSTWICK: Dwight Bostwick and Robert

14 Thomas.

15 MR. THOMAS: Robert Thomas.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Representing District

17 Council?

18 MR. CARMELL: Sherman Carmell, Martin P.

19 Barr, Suzanne M. Law.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay, thank you.

21 MR. LEIGHTON: George N. Leighton,

22 representing John Matassa.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: I know that I received

24 a call from some other attorneys who may appear


1 for some individuals. And I'm not going to

2 mention their name now. I'll mention them to the

3 other attorneys. They are the attorneys that I

4 know, and have known for a long time, and I

5 believe will sometime during the proceedings

6 appear here.

7 Gentlemen, prior to beginning, we had a

8 lawyers' conference, and we talked about some

9 issues that have come up. Do you want to put

10 that, the gist of our conversation on the record?

11 MR. BOSTWICK: Certainly, your Honor. This

12 is Dwight Bostwick from the GEB Attorney's

13 office.

14 Our position would be on this issue

15 that they, the individuals who are officers, or

16 delegates, for that matter, of the District

17 Council are not specifically named parties in this

18 action; just the District Council is.

19 If there were individuals or officers

20 who wanted to cross-examine or participate in this

21 hearing, that they should be collaterally estopped

22 on those issues and any future disciplinary

23 matters that are brought against those

24 individuals.


1 If they don't choose to exercise that

2 ability, then they would simply, if charged in a

3 disciplinary hearing, have whatever full rights

4 and protections they have normally, and would be

5 able to cross-examine those people at that time.


7 MR. CARMELL: Well, obviously the District

8 Council doesn't take any position on it, except to

9 be pleased that we cleared the issue, as regarding

10 appearance of attorneys, that as Mr. Bostwick has

11 said, so that that can be relayed, I can relay

12 that to the officers, delegates who may be

13 considering having counsel, and to any counsel

14 that may call me.

15 With that being said, that is the only

16 decision the District Council has.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I gave you a

18 preliminary ruling from me.

19 Because the issues in this case,

20 trusteeship issues, are so fluid, this is almost,

21 almost an investigatory type of a proceeding.

22 It's -- it is not in danger of a disciplinary

23 matter and the issues are going to be fluid and

24 maybe not well-defined.


1 So, to say that someone would be

2 collaterally estopped if they examined, I gave a

3 ruling. If an individual wants to examine a

4 witness on behalf of a person they represent

5 outside of just one or two questions, if they

6 proceed and want to make an examination, there is

7 a presumption, a rebuttable presumption, they may

8 be collaterally estopped at a secondary hearing.

9 But I say a rebuttable presumption

10 because the issues, I don't think they are the

11 same and this is such an informal proceeding and I

12 will treat it that way that I don't want to make a

13 hard-and-fast rule.

14 I do reserve the right, though, to cut

15 that off. If someone proceeds and begins a long,

16 long, long examination, I am just going to cut it

17 off. We will worry about the presumption later.

18 For those persons who don't want to

19 examine or decide that that is not -- they are not

20 estopped. So I am not going to make that

21 hard-and-fast rule.

22 MR. CARMELL: I thank the hearing officer for

23 it because, as you well recognize, being an

24 experienced trial attorney, that the interest of


1 the District Council may at any given time not be

2 in line with a particular officer or delegate.

3 Therefore, the trial decision that the

4 District Council makes to examine or not examine a

5 particular witness should not inure to the

6 detriment of any of the individual officers or

7 delegates.

8 I think with that on the record and

9 your rulings and the GEB attorney's statements,

10 that the officers and delegates are now fully

11 advised of their opportunity to have an

12 independent hearing if and when some other

13 proceeding is filed that involves them.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think that's fine.

15 Gentlemen, we will proceed. I look

16 back and sometimes the union in these proceedings

17 sets out coffee or something else for people --

18 for persons to participate. It is a rare occasion

19 when there isn't some coffee. There doesn't seem

20 to be any here today, but maybe sometime in the

21 next few hours we could think about that.

22 I was a hearing officer connected with

23 hearings in Beaumont, Texas. For some reason the

24 union there seemed to think ice water was all we


1 should have, nothing stronger than that. The

2 lawyers's table had ice water as much as you could

3 drink. That was about it.

4 So, sometime along the way we may see

5 if there is some coffee available so the

6 participants can pick up and go back including the

7 Hearing Officer can go back and get some coffee.

8 Gentlemen, let's go.

9 MR. CARMELL: Preliminary matter, Mr. Hearing

10 Officer.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, sir. You can call

12 me Mr. Vaira. That's fine. This is among

13 lawyers. Go ahead.

14 MR. CARMELL: All right, Mr. Vaira. The

15 District Council wishes to at this time renew its

16 motion that you recuse yourself and place into the

17 record, in addition to the matters which you have

18 ruled on, which I am not going to repeat that have

19 been ruled on, matters that appeared in the

20 Chicago Sun-Times on Sunday, July 13, 1997, a

21 rather long and involved article which begins

22 with -- about the laborers hearings today.

23 And I'd like to read into the record

24 and go from there this following which appears in


1 the article, quote: "The outcome many labor

2 observers say is a foregone conclusion. The

3 International Union must and will place the

4 Chicago Council under trusteeship to

5 demonstrate its commitment to reform."

6 And there is the following which is

7 even more directly --

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, who said

9 that? Who is the person being quoted?

10 MR. CARMELL: It doesn't say.


12 MR. CARMELL: It says, as papers do, many

13 labor observers say. The writer of the article is

14 Tom McNamee.

15 Within this article is the following,

16 and these are quotes:

17 "In another twist, the Hearing Officer

18 will be Philadelphia attorney Peter F. Vaira

19 who is already on record as saying the

20 laborers union, including the Chicago

21 Council is a, quote, 'captive,' unquote, of

22 organized crime.

23 "As head of the Justice Department's

24 Chicago Strike Force in 1982, Vaira co-wrote


1 the internal memo that spelled out the

2 union's mob ties.

3 "But Vaira said Friday that it is

4 common practice for unions attempting to

5 clean house to choose former judges and

6 prosecutors as hearing officers to give the

7 proceedings credibility," end of quote.

8 Mr. Vaira, taken in context of these

9 statements that it's a foregone conclusion and

10 that the only person -- the initial person at

11 least who would reach a conclusion is the Hearing

12 Officer subject to appeal to the Appellate level,

13 sir, together with the statement and the fact that

14 we have not seen the 1980 -- whatever this 1982

15 Chicago Strike Force memorandum, we would like to

16 have an opportunity to see that so that it could

17 be part of the record if we believe it appropriate

18 because it seems to confirm the testimony that you

19 gave and which is part of the motion to recuse

20 yourself.

21 I want to make it clear that the

22 District Council doesn't quarrel with former

23 prosecutors or even, by God, former defense

24 lawyers from having employment as hearing officers


1 in internal matters. We have former prosecutors

2 who are judges in the District Court, et cetera.

3 It is, Mr. Vaira, the combination of

4 the fact that the Department of Justice at any

5 time, as the hearings show, can rescind the

6 agreement and file a consent decree, in which case

7 the independent hearing officer status is gone.

8 It's replaced by an independent monitor.

9 Together with not just your having been

10 an attorney, but the testimony you gave before the

11 Senate select committee and apparently, and I say

12 that underlined apparently because I haven't seen

13 this memo which says that, according to

14 Mr. McNamee, that the Chicago District Council of

15 laborers is a captive of organized crime, since

16 this is the main thrust of this hearing, as I read

17 it plain, permeates the whole hearing, in our

18 previous hearing conference, telephone conference,

19 I think that became clear.

20 We have a lot more here than your

21 former status and if, nothing else, Mr. Vaira, and

22 I'd like you to consider this, we have some 20 odd

23 locals and thousands and thousands of members who,

24 if the outcome of this is as the Sun-Times writer


1 says will never believe that it was done because

2 the evidence showed it but will believe that it's

3 because it had to be done and that you had already

4 made up your mind.

5 If nothing else, from the appearance of

6 conflict, appearance of bias that goes into the

7 reasonable members' minds, I would suggest to you

8 and request that you reconsider and determine that

9 you will recuse yourself from this hearing.


11 Mr. Bostwick, any comments?

12 MR. BOSTWICK: Well, I will make them brief.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me just add one.

14 That internal memo that you speak of written in

15 19 -- maybe '75, I have no copy of. I have not

16 seen it, haven't thought about it for years. It

17 was some sort of white paper. I think management

18 paper that said the Department of Justice, a

19 management tool for manpower, something like

20 that. And whatever it said, I have no idea. I

21 can't recall that.

22 Mr. Bostwick.

23 MR. BOSTWICK: Well, I will keep my comments

24 brief.


1 The appearance and the reality of the

2 integrity of the reform process have already been

3 litigated in other forums. Mr. Carmell knows that

4 well. He was the one that litigated them.

5 We have the stamp of approval of the

6 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, the District --

7 Federal District Court here in Chicago as well as

8 Congressional committees in Washington, D.C. after

9 days of hearing.

10 So, I don't take seriously the notion

11 that you are unable to preside over the hearing.

12 I also would have worked a lot less

13 hard on this matter if I had thought it was a

14 foregone conclusion, which I do not.

15 And obviously recusal matters are

16 matters for your determination and I will simply

17 leave it at that. From our side, I have no reason

18 to believe that you are unable to rule on these

19 issues fairly.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: As the GEB attorney

21 knows, the GEB attorney has lost a number of

22 decisions before me. As you well know, sir.

23 MR. BOSTWICK: I myself have lost one.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I will deny


1 the motion. Let's proceed.

2 MR. BOSTWICK: Brief opening statement.


4 Feel free to make it wherever you want

5 to make it. If you want to do it there, it's

6 fine.

7 MR. BOSTWICK: I will feel free to walk

8 around a little bit.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: Wherever you are most

10 comfortable. This is a hearing that is meant to

11 get evidence. I want you all to feel comfortable

12 in doing it. Keep it simple decorum.

13 MR. CARMELL: If we could move that podium,

14 because it does block your exhibits, or replace

15 those, one of the two. I can't see the bottom of

16 that exhibit.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: This exhibit here.

18 MR. CARMELL: I'm just saying, I don't mind

19 if the podium is pushed back or whatever, or we

20 don't use the podium, or however.

21 That's fine. Thanks.


23 MR. BOSTWICK: Good morning to the Hearing

24 Officer, to the officers and delegates of the


1 District Council, the attorneys for District

2 Council.

3 My name is Dwight Bostwick. As we

4 mentioned, I'm from the GEB Attorney's office.

5 Here to assist me in presentation of this matter

6 for our office is Bob, Robert Thomas. And we have

7 a number of investigators working for the

8 Inspector General's office who will be present at

9 the hearing, and also part of some testimony.

10 And I will, without any further ado,

11 address my comments to you.

12 The leadership of the Chicago District

13 Council is corrupt. Currently, and for the past

14 25 years, this entity has been filled with mob

15 members, mob associates, and relatives of top mob

16 bosses. We are going to prove this, and I'll tell

17 you how.

18 First we are going to prove the general

19 existence and structure of organized crime in

20 Chicago, which is commonly referred to as the

21 Chicago outfit.

22 We will demonstrate that the leaders of

23 the Chicago District Council have had strong

24 discernible ties to the Chicago outfit for a


1 period of at least 25 years.

2 This first chart, Exhibit 145, is a

3 chart that details in graphics a time line of the

4 general leadership of the Chicago District Council

5 over the past 25 years. It also includes select

6 officials, field representatives and delegates of

7 the Chicago District Council. That's Exhibit 145,

8 for the record.

9 This chart over here is Exhibit 163.

10 This chart is a general depiction of select

11 leaders, crew members, and other individuals in

12 the Chicago outfit, which we will prove through

13 the witness of, through the testimony of a number

14 of witnesses, and through exhibits.

15 This is not all of the Chicago outfit.

16 This is a select portion of the individuals that

17 will be mentioned most at the hearing. These are

18 individuals who have the closest ties to the

19 leadership of the Chicago Laborers' District

20 Council, as set forth in Exhibit 145.

21 The short way of saying this is that

22 this hearing is all about the connections between

23 these two charts. That's our case.

24 You are going to hear from a parade of


1 witnesses who have extensive law enforcement

2 backgrounds. These individuals have worked

3 organized crime activity here in the city for

4 decades.

5 They have surveilled meetings of

6 organized crime figures, listened to tapes and

7 discussions of these crime figures, worked on

8 undercover operations, reviewed police and FBI

9 reports.

10 They have spoken personally to sources

11 and witnesses who are associates of organized

12 crime. Over and over again, these individuals are

13 going to identify the people on these charts as

14 being associated with organized crime.

15 You will also hear from witnesses who

16 are associates in the mob in live testimony. And

17 in prior sworn testimony, you are going to hear

18 these mob associates tell you about their

19 experiences in the mob, and how the mob operates.

20 You are also going to hear them testify

21 about their personal experiences with the

22 individuals on these charts. They are going to

23 provide consistent and compelling testimony about

24 the ties between the leadership of the Chicago


1 District Council and the Chicago outfit over the

2 past 25 years.

3 We are going to prove that the Chicago

4 District Council leaders identified on this chart

5 and in the trusteeship complaint, who owe their

6 allegiance on the one hand to the working members

7 of the union, who bargain collectively for Chicago

8 area locals, and who sit as trustees over pension,

9 health and welfare funds, that have literally

10 hundreds of millions of dollars as assets,

11 actually owe their primary allegiance to the

12 Chicago outfit.

13 Our position and the reason we are

14 bringing this case is because that's

15 unacceptable.

16 Toward the end of the case, we are

17 going to show that the outfit's control and

18 influence over the leadership positions in the

19 Chicago District Council has resulted in numerous

20 specific instances of undemocratic procedures and

21 financial malpractice.

22 Some of the manifestations of this

23 corruption are as follows: The transfers of power

24 without contested election for a period of 25


1 years in select locals and District Council,

2 uncontested transfers of outfit individuals from

3 official positions in different locals,

4 uncontested selection of leaders who are not

5 qualified to serve as officials, transfer of power

6 from one individual with associations with the

7 outfit to another, the practice of accepting

8 unauthorized dual salaries, aggregating to

9 millions of dollars, and the irresponsible

10 appointment of trustees who preside over the

11 affairs of affiliated funds.

12 But perhaps the most damning evidence

13 that you will hear is the deafening silence of the

14 leaders and delegates of the District Council, as

15 organized crime related arrests, indictments and

16 convictions pile up over the years, as a series of

17 Congressional committees, the President's

18 Commission on Organized Crime, hold hearings and

19 submit reports on organized crime specifically in

20 Chicago, and how this is connected with the

21 District Council and the individuals in the

22 District Council and various affiliated locals,

23 and as the press and the Chicago Crime Commission

24 continue to expose organized crime ties to the


1 Chicago District Council's leadership.

2 The evidence we will present is

3 extraordinary, and will compare favorably to that

4 presented in federal criminal trials.

5 At the close of the hearing, we are

6 going to ask the Independent Hearing Officer to

7 impose a trusteeship on the Laborers' District

8 Council to correct corruption and LCN influence,

9 to correct financial malpractice and to restore

10 Democratic procedures to this institution.

11 But we have a message for the delegates

12 of the Chicago District Council as well through

13 the presentation of this evidence.

14 Let's be frank. You all have a

15 fiduciary duty to your union members to protect

16 and safeguard their jobs and their money. You

17 have a duty to listen to this evidence, and take

18 positive steps and affirmative steps to help

19 eradicate the influence of organized crime in this

20 union.

21 We expect that based upon the hearing

22 of this evidence, you will find it necessary to

23 take action yourselves, and in fact, that is the

24 only way this forum, process is ultimately going


1 to work.

2 That's all I have at this time. We are

3 ready to present our case.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, you may if

5 you wish.

6 MR. CARMELL: I don't wish at this time.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right, sir. Would

8 you proceed?

9 MR. BOSTWICK: We will call Mr. Douglas Gow.

10 By way of explanation for the Hearing

11 Officer and the District Council attorneys, we

12 have done the following with respect to the

13 exhibits.

14 We have boxes of exhibits marked with

15 tabs, indicating the numbers of the exhibits. I'm

16 going to ask the witnesses simply to pull those

17 documents as we referred to them, and replace

18 them. But if the GEB Attorney -- I'm sorry, if

19 the Independent Hearing Officer or the District

20 Council attorneys want to review that evidence at

21 the same time, they have the boxes right next to

22 them.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: He has a box also?

24 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. They have a


1 box as well.

2 So with that, I'll proceed, if that's,

3 if we're ready.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think somebody here

5 is able to administer an oath.

6 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly

7 sworn.)


9 called as a witness herein, having been first duly

10 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:



13 Q. Sir, could I have your name?

14 A. W. Douglas Gow.

15 Q. What is your current occupation?

16 A. Currently, I'm the Inspector General

17 for the Laborers' International Union.

18 Q. What is the scope of your duties?

19 A. In essence, my duties extend to

20 enforcement of the disciplinary and ethics code,

21 and certain violations of the Constitution of the

22 union. The emphasis here is upon eradicating

23 organized crime influence within the union.

24 Q. Have you had any prior experience in


1 law enforcement?

2 A. Yes, I have.

3 Q. What agencies?

4 A. FBI.

5 Q. What period of time were you with the

6 FBI?

7 A. I was with the FBI approximately 30

8 years.

9 Q. Could you describe the position you

10 held with the FBI?

11 A. I held a variety of positions there,

12 beginning with the investigative position, and

13 rose up through the administrative ranks, holding

14 virtually every supervisory job in the FBI. I

15 retired as the associate deputy director.

16 Q. Did you at one time hold the position

17 of section chief for the criminal section?

18 A. Yes, I did.

19 Q. Could you tell me what the duties

20 entail of that job?

21 A. Well, at the time that I had that

22 position, the criminal section of the criminal

23 investigative division was the largest section

24 within that division. We had responsibility for


1 all undercover operations, a number of criminal

2 violations; not all that the division handled.

3 For instance, I did not have organized

4 crime. I had all violent crimes, property crimes,

5 threats against individuals and so forth.

6 Q. Are you familiar with the investigative

7 techniques of the FBI through your experience in

8 these various positions?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Folks in the back, are

11 you able to hear Mr. Gow?

12 Get a little closer to your

13 microphone.


15 Q. What investigative techniques, Mr. Gow,

16 are you applying in your investigative effort to

17 identify LCN corruption within LIUNA?

18 A. Basically utilizing the investigative

19 techniques that I applied in the FBI. There are

20 limitations in this job. For instance, there are

21 certain things I don't have access to. They are

22 prohibited by law. But our investigations are

23 founded on the rule of law, and with due concern

24 for due process.


1 Q. Have you uncovered evidence of LCN

2 corruption within LIUNA during your tenure as

3 Inspector General?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 MR. CARMELL: I object. That is conclusion.

6 Let him tell the facts.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll note the

8 objection. You may answer that question. Go

9 ahead.


11 A. I said yes.


13 Q. Okay. Have you made an effort to

14 determine reasons that the La Cosa Nostra

15 infiltrates the unions like LIUNA?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Where do you look for answers to those

18 questions?

19 A. In a variety of places. My contacts

20 extend to former law enforcement, current law

21 enforcement, a variety of commissions that have

22 been held with regard to organized crime, public

23 source information such as newspaper articles,

24 books that have been written on the subject,


1 Congressional commissions and Presidential

2 commissions and their reports.

3 Q. What are some of the reasons the

4 La Cosa Nostra infiltrates unions such as LIUNA?

5 A. Basically for financial --

6 MR. CARMELL: In order not to burden the

7 record, you are going to give the same ruling

8 concerning his testimony to these conclusions,

9 which is exactly what you are supposed to find.

10 How they got in supposedly, whether

11 they got in, I don't want to keep making

12 objections. I don't know.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will note your

14 objections. The ultimate decision is through me

15 to figure out whether there is -- is organized

16 crime at all and is anywhere in this union, and

17 his conclusions are more of -- I think right now

18 he is going through some sort of historical

19 explanation.

20 I still haven't heard any proof.

21 Whatever he says and if we walked out of here

22 right now, I have heard nothing. I assume that

23 the question about have you found any evidence of

24 it, we'll hear that. If we don't hear it, we


1 don't hear it.


3 Q. Let me show you Exhibit No. 1. Can you

4 get that exhibit from your box there.

5 A. My eyesight is not quite what it used

6 to be.

7 I have it here.

8 Q. Prior to taking a look at that, what

9 are some of the reasons that you have uncovered

10 for La Cosa Nostra infiltrating unions such as


12 A. Again, there is a number of reasons,

13 but I'd say in essence that it's for financial

14 gain. It's both for legitimate and illegitimate

15 purposes, to place people on payrolls, to

16 establish no-show jobs, people, so to speak, on

17 ghost payrolls, but also to have legitimate jobs

18 to exercise discretion and control of contractors

19 in the collective bargaining process and so forth.

20 Q. What is Exhibit 1 that's before you

21 now?

22 A. Exhibit 1 is a declaration of Alphonse

23 D'Arco that was given in conjunction with United

24 States vs. the Mason Tenders District Council of


1 New York.

2 MR. CARMELL: I am going to object to this.

3 He has testified that this is an affidavit. He

4 has not laid any foundation that he knows that

5 this is Alphonse D'Arco's signature, when it was

6 given or anything. This is hearsay upon hearsay.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that.

8 This is an affidavit from a District Court case

9 involving the Mason Tenders. Mason Tenders are

10 technically part of this union, am I correct?

11 It's a large portion of this union up

12 in New York, and I presume this is a civil case

13 that the United States brought against the Mason

14 Tenders to put them in receivership. Am I

15 correct?

16 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. Actually that

17 was going to be the next foundational question

18 addressed to Mr. Gow.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am glancing over

20 this. As I said earlier, gentlemen, I will

21 generally place all documents that you have before

22 me provisionally into the record. I will wait

23 until the end of the day for someone to tell me

24 why it does or does not apply.


1 I can see this is law division based

2 upon a group of people up in New York. I will

3 admit it, but I am looking for someone to explain

4 to me how it ties into Chicago.

5 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira, maybe I wasn't

6 articulate.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that.

8 MR. CARMELL: You have made an assumption

9 that because it says it's a declaration of

10 Alphonse D'Arco with a caption on it that in fact

11 it was a document filed, A, in court and,

12 secondly, that this is Alphonse D'Arco's

13 affidavit.

14 This is not an affidavit that Mr. Gow

15 has identified as being that he knows that is

16 Alphonse D'Arco's signature and his affidavit.

17 That's my objection.

18 You've gotten well beyond just an

19 affidavit of someone who this person can

20 identify. That is a different area that we can

21 get into later.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that. The

23 rules of evidence being as they are in an

24 arbitration, I will expect Mr. Bostwick to give me


1 some assurances or some proof that this is what

2 it's supposed to be.

3 In the meantime you may proceed.


5 Q. Mr. Gow, where did you receive this

6 document?

7 A. Basically this document and others like

8 it that we received through contacts with the

9 Department of Justice or through access to court

10 records ourselves.

11 Q. Is this part of the LIUNA Inspector

12 General's working file?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Are you confident that it is a true and

15 correct copy of declaration prepared for purposes

16 of United States vs. Mason Tenders District

17 Council?

18 A. I am.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: If I went to the

20 District Court in the Eastern -- Southern District

21 of New York and looked up this civil number, could

22 I find this document? I am asking either one of

23 you gentlemen.

24 THE WITNESS: I can't answer that, Judge,


1 right at this time. A number of these documents

2 with regard to specific individuals I have

3 obtained through contacts with the Department of

4 Justice.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will look for someone

6 to tell me where this -- the authenticity of

7 this. You may proceed.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: May you -- your Honor, I had

9 provided to Mr. Carmell a number of these exhibits

10 in advance of the hearing asking for stipulations

11 to authenticity. I take it that some of them have

12 been stipulated to and some of them have not.

13 In an effort not to slow down the

14 hearing too much, what I propose to Mr. Carmell is

15 that if he is going to raise certain objections as

16 to the authenticity of these documents, we could

17 be subject to recall of various witnesses if

18 necessary for just authentication purposes.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me put it this

20 way. I will assume that the documents that you

21 are bringing up to here are good faith and you

22 haven't faked them or taken them out of

23 somewhere. I assume both lawyers for both sides

24 will be doing that.


1 What I would look for as I say at the

2 end is proof that, number one, that it is

3 authentic but then how does it tie into this

4 particular proceeding.

5 So, rather than spend a great deal of

6 time talking about authenticity or so forth, I

7 presume it has some basis in fact someplace.

8 Let's proceed and if you come up later

9 and indicate to me that this is made out of hole

10 cloth, since I am not a jury, I am not going to be

11 overwhelmed by -- overprejudiced by seeing or

12 hearing some information that I can't exclude.

13 Remember at the end of this case it's

14 up to me to decide what is probative and what is

15 not and I have to live or die on what I write.

16 Obviously other persons will look that over.

17 What I am saying is we will proceed,

18 give me the information about this, and I presume

19 it's -- it has some basis. If it does not, I will

20 throw it out.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: I can give a proffer as to

22 what it's offered to show.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: No, go right ahead.

24 That's why I mentioned earlier that


1 trusteeship is a much more fluid evidentiary

2 proceeding. That's why our earlier discussions

3 about the stipulations and the estoppel are

4 important because this is a rather free-flowing

5 type of an evidentiary proceeding.

6 MR. CARMELL: But, with all due respect, it

7 doesn't flow beyond the bounds of any evidence and

8 there still is a need to authenticate a document

9 and I would agree with -- I have agreed with

10 counsel that one of two things will happen.

11 He will either at a break or whatever

12 establish for me that this is an authentic

13 document that was filed and something that

14 establishes that Mr. D'Arco signed it or he

15 will -- I have no problem with him bringing in a

16 witness out of turn or later to authenticate.


18 Gentlemen, I sat last fall for my 31

19 total -- 31 days in Buffalo, not in trusteeship,

20 but disciplinary proceeding. We had piles of

21 documents like this and, in fact, after it was

22 over I held some additional telephone hearings to

23 see if we could clear up the validity of some of

24 the documents and I think I eventually threw them


1 out. So there is no guarantee that since we are

2 putting them in doesn't mean that they will stay

3 in.

4 For the sake of moving this along,

5 getting evidence into the record, you may

6 proceed. I will note Mr. Carmell's objections and

7 we will deal with that as we go.

8 MR. CARMELL: Well, he hasn't offered to

9 admit it at this time. Do I understand that?

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think it's

11 preliminary.

12 MR. CARMELL: That's what I thought. We

13 haven't come to that.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Put it this way: I

15 will preliminarily admit documents that he

16 presents to me and at the end decide whether or

17 not I should discard them or not, in other words,

18 if there is some question, I will admit them

19 preliminarily.

20 MR. CARMELL: I do understand that,

21 Mr. Vaira. My point is that I have a right to

22 know what it's being offered for, what purpose is

23 this document being offered for or any other. Is

24 it to prove what? Before it comes in.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let him have a chance.

2 MR. CARMELL: That's all I am saying.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's give him a

4 chance. You don't have to make an offer of

5 proof. Just proceed and I will decide whether or

6 not it stays in.


8 Q. Mr. Gow, who is Alphonse D'Arco?

9 A. Alphonse D'Arco is a made member of the

10 Luchese organized crime family out of the New York

11 area. He rose from a mere member to the acting

12 boss of the family. He is now in the witness

13 protection program.

14 Q. Paragraphs 3 through 5 on page 3, does

15 Mr. D'Arco testify in his declaration relating to

16 a general structure and existence of organized

17 crime in the United States?

18 A. Yes. In there he states that

19 throughout his entire life he was associated with

20 people who were members or either associates of

21 the criminal organization known to him as La Cosa

22 Nostra.

23 Q. Is this information that he provides in

24 this declaration consistent with interviews your


1 office has conducted with other witnesses?

2 A. It's -- yes, it's consistent not only

3 with that, but historical information that's been

4 compiled by us and what is known to myself and my

5 investigators.

6 Q. Could you give a brief overview of the

7 structure of organized crime in the United States?

8 A. Basically the LCN, La Cosa Nostra, is a

9 nationwide criminal organization that's divided

10 into units, generally called families. Families

11 are in many respects named after the area or the

12 individual that heads that particular family.

13 Each family is headed by a boss who has

14 an underboss and an individual known as a

15 counselor or a consigliere as an adviser. From

16 there, they are divided up into crews, each crew

17 headed by a captain or a capo.

18 Q. I'm going to refer you to paragraph 10,

19 which I am looking for a page number here.

20 A. Page 7.

21 Q. Page 7. What does -- to what does

22 Mr. D'Arco refer in paragraph 10 on page 7?

23 A. In 10, in paragraph 10 he states, "The

24 LCN tries to control labor unions for a variety of


1 reasons," and then he goes on to state what those

2 reasons are.

3 Q. Is that information than consistent

4 with the information you have obtained from

5 witness interviews and public reports and the

6 like?

7 A. Yes, it is.

8 Q. I ask you to read paragraph 10 for us.

9 A. Paragraph 10 states that "The LCN tries

10 to control" --

11 MR. CARMELL: I object. If it's going to be

12 in the record, it's there.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't think he needs

14 to read it. I have glanced through paragraph 10.

15 We will certainly note that paragraph 10 is what

16 you --

17 MR. BOSTWICK: What I have described it as.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: And we will look at

19 paragraph 10.

20 MR. BOSTWICK: That's the purpose of that

21 document. I move for its admission.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Has this fellow,

23 Mr. D'Arco, testified -- I see you mention he is

24 in the witness protection. Has he testified in


1 any of the cases in New York, criminal cases in

2 New York, Mr. Gow?

3 THE WITNESS: I'd have to check on that. As

4 best I can recall, I believe he did testify in

5 conjunction with the Mason Tenders, but I may be

6 wrong in that.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am talking about

8 other criminal cases.

9 THE WITNESS: I am not aware of any others

10 sitting here.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will be interested in

12 knowing that if you can.

13 I will admit this document, Exhibit 1.

14 (WHEREUPON, said document,

15 previously marked GEB Attorney

16 Exhibit No. 1, for

17 identification, was offered

18 and received in evidence.)


20 Q. I'd like you to refer to Exhibit 2. Do

21 you recognize that document, Mr. Gow?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. What is it?

24 A. It is a declaration of Salvatore


1 Gravano, better known as Sammy Gravano.

2 Q. And where was that document obtained?

3 A. Again, this document is -- was obtained

4 through contact with the Department of Justice

5 sources. It concerns United States bringing a

6 case against the Mason Tenders District Council.

7 Q. Is this part of the records of the

8 Inspector General's office?

9 A. Yes, it is.

10 Q. As of the time you collected this

11 document did you assure yourself that this was a

12 true and correct copy of the declaration prepared

13 for purposes of United States vs. the Mason

14 Tenders District Counsel?

15 A. I had no reason to question that based

16 on the sources that I obtained it from.

17 Q. Could you tell me the date on the back

18 of the last page?

19 A. The date on the back is, he executed it

20 on October 17th, 1994.

21 Q. Who was or is Salvatore Gravano?

22 A. He again was a member of organized

23 crime and a member of the Gambino family. He rose

24 from a member to the underboss of the family,


1 until he entered into the witness protection

2 program.

3 Q. Let me refer you to section C of this

4 declaration, Page 5, paragraphs 11 and 12. What

5 do those items refer to?

6 A. Well, paragraph C is entitled Organized

7 Control Over Labor Unions. In paragraph 11,

8 through 12, he details the Gambinos' actions, or

9 likes to control unions. Well, he states, the

10 Gambino family likes to control the unions of

11 unskilled workers such as Mason Tenders, because

12 there is no apprenticeship or special training

13 requirements to become a member in such unions.

14 As a result, members and associates of the Gambino

15 family could be placed easily into the Mason

16 Tenders' jobs, even though they generally lacked

17 training or experience in the more skilled forms

18 of construction work.

19 He goes on to state, the LCN likes to

20 have control and influence over labor unions,

21 because such control provides organized crime with

22 a power base. He says, through control over labor

23 unions, the LCN --

24 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira --



2 MR. CARMELL: He is reading. Let's stop the

3 reading. If he wants to tell us what he knows,

4 not what this document says --

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: He may read it. It's

6 only a couple paragraphs. And let him put his

7 case in.

8 You may continue to read, sir, or

9 paraphrase as you are going.


11 A. What he is doing is detailing of why

12 organized crime likes to control labor unions.

13 Again, it gets into the fact that they can exert

14 power and influence over a contractor by

15 controlling certain aspects of it. They can

16 infiltrate legitimate businesses by influencing

17 bids for contracts, etcetera, and this is what he

18 lays out.


20 Q. Let's back up and make this clear. The

21 Mason Tenders District Council is a part of LIUNA,

22 is that correct?

23 A. That's correct.

24 Q. And it is a District Council in New


1 York, correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And these two declarations, Exhibit 1

4 and Exhibit 2, relates to Chicago, to -- I'm

5 sorry, to an individual in the La Cosa Nostra,

6 describing why it is that the La Cosa Nostra has

7 an interest in controlling labor unions?

8 A. Yes.

9 MR. CARMELL: That's not quite a fair

10 statement. It is, the Genovese family or Gambino

11 family, as the case may be, has an interest in

12 it. And so the document says what it says. But I

13 don't believe that's a fair characterization.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: The document, you're

15 right, Mr. Carmell, says what it says. I think

16 the gist of it is they are talking about unskilled

17 labor unions, where there is no apprenticeships,

18 giving the reason why --

19 MR. CARMELL: But within the framework of the

20 families, to which these affiants have affirmed.

21 That is what I'm saying.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's correct.

23 Remember, I asked earlier, this is two New Yorkers

24 talking about a Brooklyn, a Brooklyn local or


1 Brooklyn District Council.

2 Am I correct, Mr. Bostwick? The Mason

3 Tenders District Council has been placed in court

4 receivership, am I right, sir?

5 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: And that's, that

7 number, the case is 94 CIV 6487. That's out of

8 New York. That has to do with this court case.

9 And in fact, they are right now under trusteeship,

10 right?

11 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: When I say "they," I

13 mean "it" is under trusteeship, okay.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. And I don't

15 want to engage in discussing every piece of

16 evidence and its meaning as we go along. But I do

17 think there was a misstatement there that these

18 relate totally to these families.

19 Paragraph 12 of the exhibit we are

20 looking at right now says the LCN likes to have

21 control and influence over the labor unions.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume that you are

23 offering that, as indicated, as sort of a generic

24 philosophy, why organized crime would like to or


1 it leads to influence certain locals or certain

2 industries.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Precisely.


5 Q. Mr. Gow, is testimony provided by Mr.

6 Gravano in these paragraphs of the declaration

7 consistent with other testimony and information

8 you have obtained regarding the motivation behind

9 the LCN's infiltration of LIUNA?

10 A. Again, yes.

11 MR. BOSTWICK: I move for admission of

12 Exhibit 2.


14 (WHEREUPON, said document,

15 previously marked GEB Attorney

16 Exhibit No. 2 for identification

17 was offered and received in

18 evidence as GEB Attorney

19 Exhibit No. 2.)

20 MR. CARMELL: Same objection as --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I give you

22 some advice. There is a fair sized body of law on

23 this subject matter, associations and organized

24 crime, in the Southern District of New York, and


1 also in the Seventh Circuit, in the Teamsters,

2 United States versus International Brotherhood of

3 Teamsters.

4 And there have been a number of cases,

5 many, maybe 100 cases involving these issues,

6 organized crime relationship, the type of evidence

7 that is admissible.

8 And I direct your attention to that.

9 That is, it is not controlling here, but it is

10 persuasive because it has gone through the court

11 system. And you have both Judge Elstner and the

12 Seventh Circuit writing on the subject.


14 Q. Mr. Gow, as part of your efforts as the

15 Inspector General of LIUNA, have you undertaken an

16 investigation of the Chicago District Council?

17 A. Yes, I have.

18 Q. Certain officers of the Chicago

19 District Council?

20 A. That's correct.

21 Q. Select affiliated locals of the Chicago

22 District Council?

23 A. That's correct.

24 Q. How many locals are affiliated under


1 the umbrella of the Chicago District Council?

2 A. 21.

3 Q. How many of these affiliated locals

4 have been targeted for investigation by the

5 Inspector General's office?

6 A. Approximately seven, and the District

7 Council, including.

8 Q. Which affiliated locals have been

9 targeted?

10 A. Local 1, 2, 5, 225, 1001, 1006, 1002.

11 And I have to explain, 1002 is no longer

12 chartered.

13 But at the period of time we were

14 looking at it, and at the officers, and there is

15 many, so to speak, carryover, local 8 was involved

16 in that, while it's not part of the District

17 Council, it was part of our investigation.

18 Q. What role does the Chicago District

19 Council play with respect to the affiliated

20 locals?

21 A. Well, Chicago District Council plays

22 same role as any District Council plays, in regard

23 to its affiliates. It is a central coordinating

24 body for the affiliated locals. As such, it is


1 affiliate of the International Union.

2 District Councils come into being

3 basically in two ways. A group of locals get

4 together and decide that it's in their best

5 interests to harness their political power and

6 strength and make application to the International

7 to form the District Council.

8 Or the international on its own

9 initiative can decide it would be best to have a

10 District Council in a particular area in

11 particular circumstances, and press forward to

12 form a District Council.

13 Q. How many union members are under the

14 jurisdiction of the District Council and its

15 affiliated locals?

16 A. The most current count that I can get

17 through the per capita tax division in LIUNA

18 headquarters was 19,243.

19 Q. How many union members -- excuse me, is

20 this the total of the membership of the 21 locals?

21 A. Yes. That's the total membership of

22 the 21 locals.

23 Q. Does the Chicago District Council play

24 any role over the funds or the affiliated funds of


1 the District Council?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. What role is that?

4 A. The role is that the District Council

5 is the body that elects the labor side trustees,

6 you know, to handle these funds.

7 Q. Are there a number of funds affiliated

8 with the Chicago District Council?

9 A. Yes, pension, health, welfare and so

10 on.

11 Q. As an example, how much money is in the

12 pension fund? Have you undertaken to determine

13 that?

14 A. I believe the latest figures that I

15 have based on government records is over 900

16 million.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Does that mean that

18 the, so the individual locals, the 21 have no, no

19 funds of their own, no funds that they control?

20 It's all in the District Council?

21 THE WITNESS: To my knowledge, that's

22 correct.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: That would be pension,

24 health?


1 THE WITNESS: Health, welfare, and several

2 others.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Several others?

4 Training fund?

5 THE WITNESS: There's a training fund too.


7 Q. Back to the makeup of the Chicago

8 District Council, who makes up the actual

9 membership of the Chicago District Council?

10 A. Delegates that are elected from the

11 individual locals. The number of delegates is

12 based on the representative size of the locals,

13 and it ranges from two to seven.

14 I think 500, a local with 500 or less

15 can have two delegates a local, the highest number

16 being seven delegates.

17 Q. How are these delegates selected,

18 according to Constitution?

19 A. In accordance with LIUNA Constitution.

20 They have to meet the standards that are set forth

21 for the normal elections.

22 Q. Are the Chicago District Council and

23 affiliated locals required to memorialize position

24 and salary of officers on certain documents?


1 A. Yes. Federal law requires they do this

2 on LM2s, and also by the Constitution, that they

3 have to utilize, memorialize this in the form of

4 minutes, which have to be kept for a certain

5 period of time.

6 Q. During the course of the Inspector

7 General's investigation of the Chicago District

8 Council, and the affiliated locals that you have

9 just mentioned, had your office made efforts to

10 collect records, to establish the current and

11 historical leadership of these entities?

12 A. Yes, we have.

13 Q. Which documents are those?

14 A. Both LM2s and minutes, and also

15 documents such as the 5500s.

16 Q. How far back did you get the LM2s?

17 A. To I believe 1970.

18 Q. Where did you get them?

19 A. From the Department of Labor.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is a public

21 document, right? What is 5500?

22 THE WITNESS: That has to do with the funds.




1 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is similar to LM2,

2 but for the pension fund, right?

3 THE WITNESS: (Indicating.)


5 Q. Mr. Gow, I've only brought one copy of

6 these, because they are rather bulky. I'll

7 certainly give Mr. Carmell an opportunity to take

8 a look at these. But you have exhibit behind you,

9 Exhibits 118 through 125. I'd like to just have

10 you tell us what those are.

11 A. These are a compilation of the LM2s,

12 I'm looking at Exhibit 118, which goes through the

13 year 1970 to 1980 -- 1995.

14 Q. And again, I only brought one copy of

15 these, because they are extremely bulky. Are

16 these the LM2s that you received from the

17 Department of Labor?

18 A. Well, I did not see, you know, each and

19 every one that came from Labor. We made the

20 application to the Department of Labor. They were

21 certified and authenticated by the Department of

22 Labor.

23 The clerk in my office handled this.

24 And we forwarded them to your office.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: What years are these,

2 gentlemen?

3 THE WITNESS: 1970 to 1995.


5 Q. And that is for each of the affiliated

6 locals that you have mentioned?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Which locals are those again?

9 A. Local 1.

10 MR. CARMELL: Can we identify them by exhibit

11 number, which is Local 1?


13 Q. Why don't you start and do that with

14 118.

15 A. Okay, 118.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Your Honor --

17 MR. CARMELL: I'm all right. I see them on

18 the list. He gave me a list, so --



21 A. You want me to go through each one?


23 Q. No. Is there an authentication in the

24 front of each one of those binders from the


1 Department of Labor?

2 A. Yes. So for instance, I hereby

3 certify, and then it's signed by authentication

4 officer, Department of Justice.

5 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, what I would

6 propose at this time is that we can provide at a

7 break Mr. Carmell and his associates to take a

8 look at these. I don't think there is, I don't

9 anticipate any problem with the authentication of

10 these documents.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume they are

12 authentic, at least for that purpose, you can move

13 on. So these are all the LM2s for every local, or

14 just the seven under investigation?

15 THE WITNESS: For those under investigation.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: That would be seven

17 locals.


19 Q. As well as the District Council?

20 A. District Council.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: I'd move those be admitted.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. They are

23 admitted.

24 (WHEREUPON, said documents,


1 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

2 Nos. 118 through 125, for

3 identification, was offered and

4 received in evidence as GEB Attorney

5 Exhibits Nos. 118 through 125.)


7 Q. Can you pull Exhibits 145 and 152, Mr.

8 Gow, pull them right out of the box? Why don't we

9 go over, very briefly, each one. What is 145?

10 A. 145 is what is depicted up here, is the

11 chart of the District Council.

12 Q. That is this chart right here against

13 the wall?

14 A. That chart right there, showing the, so

15 to speak, executive positions from 1970 through

16 1995. The remainder -- yeah, I'm sorry, that is

17 exactly --

18 Q. Now, where did you, how is it that this

19 graphic representation of the leadership in the

20 Chicago District Council was made?

21 A. This is compiled basically through

22 review of the LM2s that pertain to the District

23 Council; also pulling of the officer blanks at the

24 records section at LIUNA.


1 Q. Were the minutes also minutes of the

2 Chicago District Council?

3 A. Minutes were also reviewed.

4 MR. BOSTWICK: I would move admission of 145.

5 MR. CARMELL: I need voir dire on this, Mr.

6 Vaira. You will see why if I get to ask a couple

7 questions.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. It seems, from

9 what I understand, it is a purely a graphic, a

10 graphic demonstration of what the, who has held

11 office, am I correct?

12 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. Federal rule

13 of evidence 1006 would be directly on point on

14 this, in federal proceedings; it's simply a

15 summary.

16 MR. CARMELL: Can I have a moment?

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll give you a

18 moment. Go ahead.

19 MR. CARMELL: You have on the bottom there of

20 that exhibit select officials, field

21 representatives, or delegates. I think that they

22 should discern which is which on there, those that

23 are employees or delegates. It's delegates, Mr.

24 Vaira, that come from the local union. Those are


1 all lumped together. There is no discernment.

2 If he can't, I can discern with him who

3 is who.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand what you

5 are saying. Right now, this is a piece of

6 demonstrative, purely a chart to guide us as we

7 go. If we are incorrect, you know, we will find

8 that out.

9 I take it, Mr. Bostwick, at the bottom,

10 you put different names; some of these folks may

11 be field reps, some may be delegates, some may be

12 some other officials of local unions, am I

13 correct?

14 MR. BOSTWICK: Of the Chicago, of the

15 Laborers' District Council on this chart, and then

16 on the other charts of locals; this Exhibit 145 is

17 specifically the Laborers' District Council.


19 MR. CARMELL: Don't you want to know --

20 Mr. Vaira, we know from Mr. Gow that a delegate is

21 elected from the local union and the District

22 Council takes the delegate as they come.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's right.

24 MR. CARMELL: Wouldn't you want to know which


1 of those persons on there was an employee of the

2 District Council as opposed to being a -- just a

3 delegate who the District Council takes?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's do this. The top

5 within the lines are the officers. Below the line

6 is a group of names and it's going to be one of

7 the two. They are going to be a delegate, they

8 are going to be a field rep or some other

9 official. I am not so sure what other official

10 they would be.

11 When this becomes relevant, you

12 gentlemen will tell me. You take a pencil and put

13 a sign after each one. Until that happens, it's

14 not very probative. So, I will let it stand and

15 you can go on and when something, for example --

16 if someone wants to talk about Frank Demonte, you

17 can take your little pencil and whatever Frank

18 was, field rep or whatever.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: We can certainly provide that

20 over the course of the testimony.

21 In response to Mr. Carmell's concern,

22 one of the things I would state is that the

23 members of the District Council are the delegates.

24 So, it's not -- it's not irrelevant to


1 they are on a chart relating to the District

2 Council. It's not as though we are picking and

3 choosing people from locals for no reason.

4 There is a position that they hold in

5 the Chicago District Council and we would

6 certainly, as we go along, part of our proof will

7 be what positions they specifically hold.

8 For the purposes of this chart --

9 actually I have another chart that shows these

10 people's exact positions.


12 MR. BOSTWICK: Both in the locals and in the

13 District Council and their salaries.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. Right now

15 it's neither here nor there, their connection to

16 the District Council in some fashion.

17 If it becomes extremely relevant to

18 find out, I am just using Demonte just as an

19 example, if you want to -- if it is going to

20 become extremely relevant, we will find out what

21 he does. Okay.


23 Q. Mr. Gow, why don't you just briefly and

24 quickly go through each one of the exhibits and


1 simply tell us which of those exhibits relate to

2 which locals, which affiliated locals. In other

3 words, Exhibit 146.

4 A. Oh, okay.

5 Q. It's going to be 146 through 152 and as

6 you are reaching for it perhaps I can ask you a

7 question to move things along.

8 Are each one of those additional

9 exhibits, Exhibits 146 through 152, prepared in

10 the same manner that the Chicago Laborers District

11 Council chart was prepared?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You will have to give a verbal

14 response.

15 A. I said yes. Exhibit 146 relates to

16 Local Union 1. Again, it's a chart that is

17 similar to that. Exhibit 147 relates to Local

18 Union 2; 148, Local Union 5; 149 to Local Union

19 225; Exhibit 150 to Local Union 1001 and 151 to

20 Local Union 1002.

21 Q. How about 152? I think there is one

22 more.

23 A. One more here. Exhibit 152 relates to

24 Local Union 1006.


1 MR. BOSTWICK: I'd move for admission of 145

2 through 152 at this time.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will admit them.

4 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

5 previously marked GEB Attorney

6 Exhibit Nos. 145 through 152, for

7 identification, were offered

8 and received in evidence.)


10 Q. Mr. Gow, let me take you back to the

11 beginning of your investigations of the Chicago

12 District Council. What day did you begin as the

13 LIUNA Inspector General?

14 A. My first day was February 1, 1995.

15 Q. How soon after this did you begin to

16 focus on LCN corruption in the Chicago District

17 Council and select affiliated locals?

18 A. By March of '95.

19 Q. So, that's a month, approximately?

20 A. Approximately a month.

21 Q. A month. How high a priority was that

22 for you at that time?

23 A. Oh, at that time it was our number one

24 priority with regard to organized crime matters.


1 Q. Has it continued to be a priority since

2 then?

3 A. Yes, it has.

4 Q. What are the reasons you targeted the

5 Chicago District Council and certain affiliate

6 locals for investigation?

7 A. Well, in looking at a number of

8 documents, talking to law enforcement sources,

9 contact with the individuals that I hired to work

10 in this area, all indicated that this was a --

11 there was a problem here. There was infiltration

12 by organized crime into the affiliates and the

13 District Council.

14 Q. Did you at some point in time receive a

15 complaint, draft civil RICO Complaint from the

16 Department of Justice?

17 A. Yes. I had a copy of the draft civil

18 RICO Complaint.

19 Q. Did that document identify certain

20 individuals from the Chicago area that the

21 Government believed were involved in the La Cosa

22 Nostra?

23 A. Yes, it did.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't need to know


1 what the Government thought about it or what sort

2 of probable cause you have. You're here. So, I

3 don't need to hear that unless it's particularly

4 relevant to what all the United States Government

5 thought about this.

6 Our proof is what our proof is. You

7 don't have to convince me that you had to get

8 here. You're here. So you can go on.



11 Q. Did you review at any point in time

12 Congressional committee reports relating to

13 organized crime in Chicago?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Let me refer you to Exhibit No. 5,

16 which is a white binder. I ask you to look at the

17 first page behind the first tab. Do you recognize

18 this document?

19 A. Yes, I do.

20 Q. What is this document?

21 A. It's entitled "Organized Crime in

22 Chicago." It's a hearing before the Permanent

23 Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on

24 Governmental Affairs, United States Senate. It's


1 dated March 4, 1983.

2 Q. Is this the full report of these

3 hearings?

4 A. I'm not exactly -- I don't know what

5 you have here.

6 Q. Okay. Are these not selections of

7 this --

8 A. It looks to me like they are selections

9 from the committee's report.

10 Q. Are the selections -- do you know what

11 purpose the selections have been made?

12 A. Well, it's pretty evident. The

13 selections that you have here are based on law

14 enforcement sources that served in this area and

15 had an intimate knowledge of organized crime

16 activities in the Chicago area.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: Your Honor, or Mr. Vaira, what

18 I would propose to do on this document is not go

19 through it ad nauseam. It is a public record that

20 was available to the members and officials of the

21 District Council at this time.

22 I would like to highlight a few items

23 that specifically relate to the individuals on

24 this chart through Mr. Gow.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, I understand

2 that. You may do that. Understanding that as you

3 go, this type of evidence is -- has been admitted

4 in -- by Judge Lacey in New York on the basis of

5 that it needs corroboration from other sources.

6 So, if there is somebody up in front of

7 Congress talking about somebody being connected to

8 the mob, that doesn't make it so. That means that

9 it's some evidence that some persons have said

10 that. We will look for other corroborating

11 evidence also.

12 So, with that understanding you may go

13 forward.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. The other

15 reason to offer this is from the notice

16 perspective.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that.

18 That has been done a number of times in the

19 Teamsters litigation for notice purpose. I notice

20 this is the -- this is the old McCellum committee,

21 is that it? Permanent Subcommittee on

22 Investigations. Okay.

23 That was -- at that time it was Senator

24 Percy I think was on this, was he?


1 THE WITNESS: You're correct.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Senator Nunn. Those

3 are the two ranking Senators. For a long time

4 were stalwarts on that committee. Go ahead.


6 Q. Mr. Gow, just to clarify what it is we

7 are talking about here, let me ask you to turn to

8 the -- I guess it appears as the fourth page back

9 from the first tab. Actually marked as page 1 at

10 the bottom. Do you see that page? It says

11 "Organized Crime in Chicago" at the start.

12 It's the beginning of the hearing. You

13 just go four pages back from tab one. Opening

14 statement, Senator Roth. Do you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Just in the second paragraph under the

17 opening paragraph of Senator Roth. Could you

18 simply read that. That just defines the scope of

19 this specific committee so we know what we are

20 talking about here.

21 A. All right. I think I can summarize it

22 very briefly. He states:

23 "The scope of activities involving the

24 syndicate or the mob or the outfit in


1 Chicago is truly pervasive. Organized crime

2 in Chicago touches practically everyone's

3 life or livelihood. The evidence shows that

4 tentacles of mob activity in this city reach

5 into Government, law enforcement, unions and

6 other legitimate political, social and

7 economic functions."

8 Q. Were these hearings public?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Were the reports made publicly

11 available?

12 A. To my knowledge, yes.

13 Q. Let me have you turn to the second tab

14 and ask you to identify what that is.

15 A. Second tab is prepared statement of

16 Edward D. Hegarty. Mr. Hegarty was a special

17 agent in charge of the FBI Chicago division at the

18 time. He has since retired.

19 Q. Does Mr. Hegarty in this prepared

20 statement review and identify the structure of

21 organized crime in Chicago?

22 A. He does.

23 Q. Let me just turn you to page 114, have

24 you read just the bracketed portion if you will.


1 A. Mr. Hegarty states:

2 "The Chicago LCN family continues

3 today, as it has throughout its history, to

4 obtain lucrative income from traditional

5 racketeering and vice activities. These

6 include but are not limited to loansharking,

7 extortion, gambling, prostitution and labor

8 racketeering.

9 "With respect to labor racketeering,

10 many of the activities and members of the

11 Chicago LCN member are given cover by

12 unions, thus providing a degree of respect

13 and legitimacy. It takes four vital

14 components to make up a full grown labor

15 racket, i.e., dishonest labor leaders,

16 unscrupulous employees, crooked public

17 figures and professional criminals. The

18 Chicago LCN has long recognized the

19 advantages of controlling the unions.

20 During Al "Scarface" Capone's regime nearly

21 two-thirds of all the unions were under his

22 domination. To a degree the Chicago LCN

23 continues to maintain this grip on organized

24 labor. The ultimate result has been in many


1 instances an amalgam of hoodlums, corrupt

2 unions and corrupt public officials formed

3 into an enormous power base. Not only does

4 this generate significant income for

5 organized crime, but equally as important

6 provides a high degree of insulation against

7 prosecutive interference."

8 Q. Mr. Gow, on page 119 -- let me refer

9 you to 119 through 121. I am not going to have

10 you read that. But is a specific investigation

11 and indictment referred to on those pages?

12 A. Yes. It's a case that included

13 conspiracy to bribe a U.S. Senator against Alan N.

14 Dorfman, Roy Lee Williams and others.

15 Q. On page 121 are any individuals of the

16 District Council identified --

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. -- as having been convicted of that

19 activity?

20 A. Yes. Two individuals, James Caporale

21 and Alfred Pilotto.

22 Q. I am going to mark these on the chart

23 as you go.

24 MR. CARMELL: I think that is a misreading of


1 what the case was. The bribing of a U.S. Senator

2 is not a LIUNA case, does not involve Caporale, as

3 I read it.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am familiar with that

5 case. I was not here then, but I -- was Caporale

6 in that case?


8 THE WITNESS: It was the Hauser case.


10 Q. Could you describe in brief detail what

11 that case was about. We are going to hear

12 evidence that is more extensive about this subject

13 matter.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: What case are we

15 talking about? Which one are we talking about?

16 THE WITNESS: Now we are talking about the

17 Hauser conspiracy. It was -- had to do with

18 kickbacks to obtain health care and life insurance

19 franchises in Chicago and south Florida.


21 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. Is that the one

22 that starts on the bottom, Mr. Bostwick, September

23 of 1976? Which begins on the bottom of page 119.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.


1 MR. CARMELL: Okay.

2 MR. BOSTWICK: On the bottom of 119 and

3 through the end of 122 actually I guess. Or 123.


5 Q. Does this case specifically relate to a

6 fraud on the affiliated funds of the Chicago

7 District Council?

8 A. Yes, it does.

9 Q. Can you tell me from page 121 who --

10 the two individuals that are bracketed who

11 received convictions in this matter?

12 A. The two individuals noted here are

13 James -- as I said, James Caporale, who was the

14 secretary-treasurer, of the District Council I

15 believe at the time, and Alfred J. Pilotto, who is

16 president of Local 5 and vice president of the

17 District Council. This is special international

18 rep to the international union.


20 gentlemen, the case you are talking about then

21 started when there was a search warrant executed

22 on the consultants and administrators, which was

23 the group that administered the pension funds or

24 the funds of the District Council or some LIUNA


1 entity, right?

2 MR. BOSTWICK: They had contracts with the

3 Chicago District Council. We will hear more

4 detailed evidence on the substance of this case.

5 For the purposes now, I simply want to

6 establish, as I believe through Mr. Gow, that

7 the -- these two individuals who are officers of

8 the Chicago District Council were convicted of

9 fraud on funds that were affiliated with the

10 Chicago District Council.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: But that case occurred

12 in Florida, am I correct?


14 MR. BOSTWICK: Tried.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: The case was tried in

16 Florida. Some of the funds were up here in

17 Chicago and then that case -- the investigation

18 continued and later on a whole slew of individuals

19 were tried down in I think Florida. At least

20 these two, Caporale and Pilotto, were convicted.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.


23 connection. Now, that is not the case that you

24 referred to when you first opened this.




3 THE WITNESS: Dorfman.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Dorfman case.

5 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. I mistook

6 Mr. Gow. I think we were reading from the wrong

7 page.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Dorfman case was --

9 MR. BOSTWICK: Different.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: -- A Teamster matter.

11 It was much more involved. I think it was tried

12 here in Chicago some other time. Just so we don't

13 get confused about that. I am not confused about

14 it. I understand the difference and I am not

15 associating this with the Dorfman case at all.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Go ahead.


18 Q. On page -- why don't you go back to the

19 or the first page of the next tab, a statement by

20 Roemer.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Page 157?

23 A. Right.

24 Q. Who is William Roemer?


1 A. William F. Roemer, Jr. was a special

2 agent with the FBI. He was assigned to the

3 Chicago division for a number of years and worked

4 on specialized organized crime matters,

5 subsequently transferred to the Phoenix division

6 and worked for me down there when I was assistant

7 in charge of that office. He has since passed

8 away.

9 Q. Is it fair to say -- I don't want you

10 to refer to this in its entirety, but is it fair

11 to characterize this testimony as an overview of

12 the history of organized crime in Chicago and the

13 current state of organized crime in Chicago as

14 understood by Mr. Roemer?

15 A. That's correct. He has two sections to

16 his prepared statement and they are as you've

17 said.

18 Q. There is one last tab in this exhibit.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Is there anything in

20 particular that you would like us to look at in

21 Roemer's statement or is it just there for

22 background?

23 MR. BOSTWICK: I have -- as part of -- let me

24 do this by asking him a question.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. You may lead.

2 You may direct him to something. Don't feel

3 constrained.


5 Q. Mr. Gow, is the entire prepared

6 statement by Mr. Roemer relevant to establishing

7 who outfit members are in Chicago during the early

8 1980s?

9 A. Yes, it is.

10 Q. Does Mr. Roemer set forth these

11 individuals in a chart form?

12 A. Yes, he does.

13 Q. And that's on page 186 of his prepared

14 statement?

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. We were unable to get a very good copy

17 of this chart, but we did try to blow it up a

18 little bit and it appears in the back of the

19 binder behind the tab labeled "Chart." Do you see

20 that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you see that?

23 Let's go to the second page of that and

24 this is again a graphic representation of


1 Mr. Roemer's testimony or his prepared statement

2 to the committee?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you see the highlighted individuals?

5 A. I do.

6 Q. Could you read off -- well, first, do

7 any of those individuals have connections with the

8 Chicago District Council?

9 A. Several of them do.

10 Q. Could you read off the highlighted

11 individuals.

12 A. As best I can. Vincent Solano, Frank

13 Caruso.

14 Q. A little slower, please.

15 A. Vincent A. Solano.

16 Q. Right.

17 A. Frank Caruso.

18 Q. Okay.

19 A. Dominick Palermo.

20 Q. All right.

21 A. Frank DeMania. Am I reading that

22 correct?

23 Q. DeMonte?

24 A. DeMonte.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: You have trouble with

2 Italian names, Mr. Gow.


4 MR. BOSTWICK: It's also a function of this

5 chart. It was very difficult to make a copy of

6 this chart.



9 Q. Do you see the other individual there,

10 Sal Gruttadauro?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Is it fair to say that as of 1983 these

13 individuals that I have circled up here on Exhibit

14 145, these are individuals that were identified in

15 the 1983 hearing for the Permanent Subcommittee on

16 Investigations as having involvement directly with

17 organized crime?

18 A. That's correct.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: So in context, the

20 information went all into this public hearing in

21 1983, am I correct?

22 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.


24 Q. Did any of these officials serve on the


1 Chicago District Council after 1983?

2 A. Well, as you have on your chart there,

3 yes.

4 Q. Let's just refer to the officials

5 because we have the graphics here.

6 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me.


8 MR. CARMELL: We have as I see it on this

9 chart, we have two Frank Caruso's. We have a

10 Frank Caruso, a Frank Michael "Mike" Caruso. And

11 which one are we talking about on 145?

12 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm sorry. The highlighted

13 individual, Frank Michael Caruso.


15 relationship with 145 here?

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Yes, that is this individual

17 here. Sergeant at Arms. I'm sorry. You are

18 right. We did highlight one too many.


20 Q. Did any of these -- let's just talk

21 about the officials on Exhibit 145 on this blowup,

22 Mr. Gow.

23 Did any of these officials serve on the

24 Chicago District Council after the 1983 hearing?


1 A. Yes. The two that you have circled

2 there, James Caporale and Frank Caruso, Sergeant

3 at Arms.

4 Q. In fact, does Mr. Caporale attain the

5 top status as business manager after this hearing?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Or at least I should say, be more

8 accurate on that, serve as business manager after?

9 A. Serve.

10 Q. Let me refer you to another item you

11 mentioned earlier, which is the President's

12 Commission on Organized Crime. I believe you

13 mentioned that.

14 Do you know when that occurred, the

15 President's Commission on Organized Crime hearing

16 in Florida?

17 A. I believe that was 1985, 1986.

18 Q. Did they take testimony in that --

19 A. Oh, yes.

20 Q. -- effort?

21 Prepare a report?

22 A. Yes.

23 MR. BOSTWICK: Exhibit 4 -- I believe I will

24 move admission of Exhibit 4 and 5, but I believe


1 Mr. Carmell had stipulated to those, the form.

2 MR. CARMELL: Yes, I will stipulate to

3 authenticity.

4 MR. BOSTWICK: Right, stipulate to

5 authenticity, right?

6 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

7 previously marked GEB Attorney

8 Exhibit Nos. 4 and 5, for

9 identification, were offered

10 and received in evidence.)

11 MR. BOSTWICK: As to just the 4 and 5, is

12 that correct?

13 MR. CARMELL: Yes.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: Okay.


16 Q. As to Exhibit 4, if you refer to that,

17 Mr. Gow --

18 A. Yes. Exhibit 4 is the President's

19 Commission on Organized Crime, and it's entitled

20 Report to the President and Attorney General.

21 It's captioned The Edge, Organized Crime, Business

22 and Labor Unions.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, you should

24 know, I think everybody else knows, that I was the


1 first executive director of the President's

2 Commission on Organized Crime, served for only two

3 months.

4 And the only thing I did was rent

5 office space, and begin to, begin to put personnel

6 together. But that came through at the end, so

7 you don't see my name on there. But you will know

8 that I was the first executive director before

9 there was any staff. I left before any staff

10 arrived.

11 MR. CARMELL: I did know that you were there,

12 too short a time and did too little for me to

13 raise it.


15 Q. Mr. Gow, let me refer you to Page 2 of

16 the summary, which is behind the first tab.

17 Just so we all know what we are talking

18 about here, could you read that paragraph that is

19 highlighted which sets forth the scope of that?

20 A. It states that this is the second

21 report of President's Commission on Organized

22 Crime, examines the problems of labor and

23 management racketeering by organized crime in the

24 United States, and provides an explanation of how


1 modern labor/management racketeering operates and

2 why it flourishes.

3 The report also describes the role of

4 the legitimate businesses in labor/management

5 racketeering schemes, and explains how organized

6 crime through domination, influence of labor

7 organizations, employers and legitimate

8 businesses, can control segments of entire

9 economic markets, and can distort the cost of

10 doing business to marketplace participants through

11 theft, extortion, bribery, price-fixing, fraud and

12 restraint.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Slow down. The

14 reporter is trying to catch every word.


16 Q. Mr. Gow, did the President's Commission

17 on Organized Crime take a special interest in the

18 affairs of the laborers' union?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. As well as the District Council and

21 affiliated entities?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. Let me refer you to what is the third

24 tab, which just says LIUNA; you see that?


1 A. Yes.

2 Q. What is this section?

3 A. It's section 6. It's entitled, The

4 Laborers' International Union of North American

5 (LIUNA) A Case Waiting To Be Made.

6 Q. Is that a separate portion of this

7 report?

8 A. Section 6, yes.

9 Q. Okay. Let me have you turn to Page 2

10 of that. And I'd like for you to read that for

11 us, the conclusion.

12 A. One of LIUNA's vice-presidents is John

13 Serpico. Serpico is also president of LIUNA Local

14 8 in Chicago. In testimony before the Commission

15 in 1985, Serpico admitted that he is a friend or

16 personal acquaintance of virtually every important

17 organized crime leader in Chicago. These include

18 Tony Accardo, the boss of bosses in the Chicago

19 La Cosa Nostra, Joseph Aiuppa, and Jackie Cerone,

20 the LCN's principal underbosses to Accardo.

21 Serpico also knows several LCN territorial bosses,

22 who report to Aiuppa and Cerone, including Vince

23 Solano.

24 Q. Let me stop you there. Does Vincent


1 Solano have relationship on the Chicago District

2 Council?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Let me circle that up here. Continue.

5 A. Including Vincent Solano, president of

6 LIUNA Local 1, Al Pilotto, formerly president of

7 LIUNA Local 5, and Joseph Ferriola, who Serpico

8 stated was a close personal friend.

9 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, what is

10 the relevance of John Serpico, whose local is not

11 participant in this Chicago District Council?

12 He is not an officer, never been an

13 officer or delegate, with respect to who he knew.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: We will, we intend to prove

15 that he has association with these individuals on

16 the Chicago outfit side of things.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell has a

18 point. And we will look for you to connect this

19 up.

20 I'm aware of Mr. Serpico, and the prior

21 litigation in this union chair, and we will

22 proceed, see how you solidify them.

23 May I ask you a question? Gentlemen,

24 we have been at it here for almost two hours. I


1 think the reporters might need a break, and just

2 other folks might need a break. So I suggest we

3 take about a good ten, twelve minutes here, 15

4 minutes, to regroup.


6 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.)

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay, Mr. Bostwick. Go

8 right ahead.


10 Q. Mr. Gow, I think when we left off, we

11 were referring to Exhibit 4, which is a select

12 portion of the President's Commission on Organized

13 Crime, their report. And we were on tab 3.

14 We had just read the second page of

15 that report, which was noted to me that wasn't

16 actually Page 2, but it is the second page in this

17 document, right?

18 A. That's correct.

19 Q. Let me take you to the fourth page

20 behind that tab, which starts, The Locals. You

21 see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Let me -- that is not a long passage.

24 Why don't you just simply read what is bracketed.


1 I'm going to do what I just did before, which is

2 highlight the individuals on this Exhibit 145.

3 A. This portion is entitled The Locals.

4 In the first paragraph, as Serpico's Local 8

5 illustrates, organized crime's influence over

6 LIUNA is most extensive at the local level. This

7 control is particularly concentrated in large

8 cities such as Chicago, Cleveland, St. Louis and

9 New York, as well as smaller cities, such as in

10 New Jersey.

11 The best documented examples are

12 influenced locals in the Chicago region. Again,

13 the degree of control is relative to the number of

14 union offices filled by LCN members or their

15 relatives. For example, LIUNA Local 1 in Chicago

16 provides a safe haven for known members and

17 leaders of the Chicago La Cosa Nostra. The

18 president of the Local 1 is Vincent Solano, a

19 territorial boss of the LCN outfit on the north

20 side of Chicago. Ken Eto, an LCN associate, knew

21 Solano for many years and reported to him for

22 almost a decade, and described Solano's operation

23 and the territory he controls in testimony before

24 the Commission.


1 Q. Why don't you skip right to the next

2 page, and read the bracketed mark.

3 A. LIUNA Local 1 vice-president is

4 Salvatore Gruttadauro.

5 Q. I'm going to stop you right there.

6 Does he have a relationship with the Chicago

7 Laborers' District Council?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. All right.

10 A. LIUNA Local 1 vice-president is

11 Salvatore Gruttadauro. The recording secretary is

12 Frank "Babe" Demonte.

13 Q. I'm also circling Mr. Demonte on the

14 Chicago Laborers' District Council chart.

15 A. Both individuals are members of the LCN

16 whom Eto stated directed groups of criminals,

17 soldiers and associates.

18 Q. Let me have you skip down to that next

19 paragraph.

20 A. Chicago LIUNA Local 5 is another

21 influenced local union. Former special

22 International representative and local president

23 Al Pilotto, who also served as vice-president of

24 the Laborers' District Council in Chicago, is a


1 LCN territorial boss.

2 Q. Now I've marked him down already.

3 Continue.

4 A. Another LCN member who has served as a

5 union officer is Dominick Palermo, field

6 representative.

7 Q. I'm going to mark Mr. Palermo down as

8 well on Exhibit 145.

9 That's all we'll introduce from this

10 specific report at this time. But as I say, all

11 of these excerpted portions we feel are relevant

12 to the case.

13 Mr. Gow, is the report generated by the

14 President's Commission on Organized Crime publicly

15 available?

16 A. Yes, it is, or was.

17 Q. Were you also aware of some

18 Congressional hearings relating to organized crime

19 in 1988?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. I'm going to hand up what has been

22 marked as Exhibit 167. That is not on our exhibit

23 list. We have only recently made copies of this.

24 I can give out -- do you have one up there?


1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. Okay. Let me just give out -- now,

3 this Exhibit 167, what is that?

4 A. It's entitled Hearings Before the

5 Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the

6 Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States

7 Senate. And it's captioned at the top, Organized

8 Crime, 25 Years After Valachi.

9 And it's dated April 11th, 15th, 21st,

10 22nd, 29th, 1988.

11 Q. Who put this exhibit together?

12 A. I put this together.

13 Q. Where does it come from?

14 A. It comes from the record of the

15 hearings, which I have a personal copy of.

16 Q. Is this the entire record of the entire

17 hearing?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Why are the selections -- why did you

20 select the portions that you did?

21 A. These portions have, in some manner,

22 touch upon organized crime and its influence in

23 the Chicago area.

24 Q. The only thing I want to direct your


1 specific attention to for the purposes of this

2 testimony today is the last page of that exhibit.

3 And this is a poorly copied chart. But can you

4 describe for us exactly what that is?

5 A. Yes. It's a depiction of the chart

6 that's entitled the Chicago Hierarchy. It's

7 labeled Exhibit No. 9 for the Committee, and dated

8 1987.

9 And in there, it's, I'll have to tell

10 you, it's no better in the book.

11 MR. CARMELL: This is totally unreadable.

12 It's nobody's fault. I couldn't even decipher a

13 name or -- maybe they could reconstruct it and

14 attach to it. I will accept what you do as being

15 the persons who are on there.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Let me try to do this through

17 Mr. Gow.

18 I believe Mr. Gow has copied the

19 original which he is holding. It is still poor,

20 but it's a lot better than the one you are

21 holding. If we can do that through Mr. Gow, he

22 has handwritten names; after review of those, you

23 know, the book, we can simply introduce that as

24 the original exhibit. I can give you copies of


1 the original.

2 Is that acceptable, Mr. Carmell?

3 MR. CARMELL: Yeah, if you can tell us where

4 you are starting, start from the top and go to the

5 left, so we can start to follow it along.

6 MR. BOSTWICK: Right. There is only five or

7 six names, and that's the entire testimony.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am taking a piece of

9 blank paper here, and pencil, pen; we will let Mr.

10 Gow draw squares and put names in it.

11 MR. BOSTWICK: That's perfect.

12 MR. CARMELL: That would be better.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: There is only about

14 four or five there.


16 Q. As you do that, why don't you describe

17 who they are. We will make copies of those and

18 give them to everybody by tomorrow.

19 A. The chart depicts in the center, is a

20 picture of an individual who is labeled the boss,

21 and the name is Joseph Ferriola.

22 Coming down the line, showing the chain

23 of command here, you have between the capos and

24 the boss, there is a line going off to the side,


1 consigliere, and that is Anthony Accardo.

2 Then each of the bosses depicted down

3 here is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 1 is Vincent Solano,

4 Joseph Lombardo, Ernest Infelise, James LaPietra

5 and Albert Tocco.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Would you just draft

7 that before you leave? You can give us that.


9 A. Can I have one -- you want me to do it

10 or --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yeah. Have one of your

12 associates do it.

13 THE WITNESS: I'll do it.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: But the object of this

15 was to utilize the names, we are talking about

16 bosses and --

17 MR. BOSTWICK: Right.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: What was Mr. Accardo on

19 that?

20 THE WITNESS: The consigliere.


22 Q. What is the date on that chart?

23 A. Dated 1987.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: I'd move admission of that


1 exhibit. What we can do is staple Mr. Gow's

2 writings or diagram to the back of that exhibit.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Is that, that came out

4 of that, this came out of the hearing? What he is

5 drawing up is simply what is in the, was in the

6 hearing?

7 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. That was an

8 exhibit to the hearing.

9 MR. CARMELL: Your Honor, one clarification.


11 MR. CARMELL: Joseph Lombardo, we had a

12 secretary/treasurer, Joseph Lombardo.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that.

14 MR. CARMELL: Is he on here?

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't think that is

16 Joseph Lombardo. It's --


18 Q. Mr. Gow, can you answer that question

19 for us? We can get testimony on that point. Is

20 the Joseph Lombardo who is mentioned in there, to

21 your knowledge, the Joseph Lombardo on this chart,

22 the Joseph Lombardo, Jr.?

23 A. No.




2 A. No, he is not.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: We will handle relations and

4 others through other witnesses.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: But I'm sure that's not

6 the same --

7 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. We don't want

8 to create a misimpression.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: You can move on, if Mr.

10 Gow can do his drafting later.


12 Q. Can you testify and chew gum at the

13 same time, as they say?

14 A. We'll give it a shot.

15 Q. As the LIUNA Inspector General, did you

16 also speak to former members of the FBI with

17 experience in organized crime, for purposes of

18 targeting the District Council, as a prior

19 investigation from the LIUNA Inspector General's

20 office?

21 A. That's correct; not only members of the

22 FBI, but Department of Labor and even had contact

23 with some State offices.

24 Q. Was the information you received


1 consistent with the information you reviewed in

2 reports and the like that we have just gone over?

3 A. Yes, it was.

4 Q. How soon after you were hired as the

5 Inspector General in February of 1995 did you

6 personally participate in investigation of the

7 Chicago District Council and select affiliated

8 locals?

9 A. Well, as I previously mentioned, I took

10 over this position February 1, 1995. And

11 thereafter, in putting together our office and

12 investigative team, it was in March that we put,

13 so to speak, an investigative plan together to

14 come into the area.

15 And I came to town with several

16 investigators on, from March 26th of 1995.

17 Q. All right. What was the purpose of

18 your coming to town?

19 A. It was to initiate our investigation

20 into the selected locals and the District

21 Council. It was also to coordinate not only

22 initial investigations, but to coordinate audits

23 of these selected locals.

24 Q. Did you speak with anybody in Chicago


1 about this project that related to the District

2 Council in any way?

3 A. Well, I had a couple of conversations

4 but not in great depth, and I have to explain that

5 a little bit because when I initially came to town

6 I met with the regional manager, Terry Healey.

7 Subsequent to that, on the following

8 day, when we were attempting to institute our

9 investigation or contacts with the people that we

10 had identified for interview, I was basically put

11 off by an attorney by the name of Hugh Arnold who

12 in my recall was representing the District Council

13 and these individual locals.

14 And there was the question of

15 representation by -- what representation the

16 individuals that we wanted to interview were --

17 could have and should have, why they wanted to be

18 interviewed, what we were doing, et cetera, these

19 types of questions.

20 Q. What was told to Mr. Arnold about the

21 purpose?

22 A. I gave him a very I would say brief

23 interview of why we were there and the types of

24 questions we would be asking these individuals.


1 He subsequently made available I

2 believe it was on the 27th two individuals who we

3 interviewed out at the regional manager's office,

4 and I really don't recall their names right now.

5 Following that, there was a series of

6 interviews that were conducted that extended on

7 for a couple of weeks.

8 Q. During the course of this trip did you

9 receive a personal threat?

10 A. Yes, I did.

11 Q. Can I have you turn to Exhibit -- well,

12 first let me ask you simply to tell the

13 independent hearing officer and the delegates the

14 nature of that threat.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Just briefly outline

16 where we are going with this particular

17 conversation about Mr. Gow and his threat.

18 MR. BOSTWICK: Establishing a foundation for

19 who may have made the threat and why.

20 MR. CARMELL: Well, if he can't identify

21 the -- I don't know what it's going to be; but if

22 he can't identify the speaker, then I don't think

23 this comes in, as free flowing as we may be.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: Maybe I can ask a foundational


1 question that would help you out.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am just trying to put

3 this into perspective here. Mr. Gow is out here

4 conducting an investigation. Somebody gave him a

5 phone call, am I right? Is it something like

6 that?

7 THE WITNESS: Yes, it was a message that was

8 left on the phone when I was not present at the

9 time.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, let's see.

11 MR. CARMELL: A message left -- a message

12 left on the voice mail in his hotel, unidentified,

13 and at that point I really --

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's do this.

15 MR. CARMELL: Strenuously object to it coming

16 in for whatever it may be. That has gone too far.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: I think to have this

18 discussion prior to hearing Mr. Gow lay a full

19 foundation of it is a little bit premature.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will tell you what we

21 will do. Let's do this with this threat even

22 though a lot of evidence can come into a

23 trusteeship.

24 Why don't you gentlemen do this. We


1 will move past this and at the break I would ask

2 you to take the reporter and make a full

3 transcript of what you are going to ask him.

4 MR. BOSTWICK: Of the questions I am going.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Questions you are going

6 to ask him and his answers, just put it on and

7 after you gentlemen can see it, you can tell me

8 about it and I may like to hear it.

9 Right now I am going to bypass it and

10 at the break or sometime you just take the

11 reporter aside and make a portion of it and I will

12 decide whether I should hear it or not after I

13 hear from both of you.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: In other words, I will

15 actually take the testimony from the reporter

16 and --

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Just take the reporter

18 up here in the corner and sit down and ask

19 questions and after that, we will hear what it is

20 and you gentlemen can explain to me.

21 As I say, I am not a jury and I am not

22 going to be influenced, overwhelmed by something

23 that comes in about threats. In these types of

24 investigations threats do kind of float around. I


1 am looking at the record and we will see how

2 probative it might be.

3 MR. CARMELL: You have placed the cart before

4 the horse because by putting it in the record,

5 whatever you may say about it, by taking it -- the

6 transcript and saying I've read it and I am not

7 going to let it in, it's in.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am going to hear from

9 you first before we decide that we even put it in.

10 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira, somebody has to lay

11 a foundation for a conversation. I suggest that

12 we first say -- get into the record what

13 foundation he has concerning this.

14 Came back to his hotel or whatever it

15 is, picked up the machine, heard such and such and

16 before he testifies, then say whether there is any

17 foundation at that point for his statement -- for

18 the supposed conversation.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Here is what we will

20 do. Certainly he can lay the foundation and you

21 gentlemen go and put it on the record after we are

22 done.

23 Yes, you should put the foundation. I

24 didn't mean to cut you off. Go ahead.



2 Q. Mr. Gow, why don't you tell us about

3 how you -- the background of how you received this

4 threat?

5 A. Well, I think the background of it is

6 that, as I mentioned, that I had arrived in town

7 on late afternoon of the 26th. I had not

8 initiated any of the investigation. I had had a

9 meeting with Mr. Healey and out at his place. He

10 drove me to the hotel.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Who is Mr. Healey?

12 THE WITNESS: The regional manager.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Regional manager of

14 LIUNA here.


16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Whatever district it

17 was in.




21 A. Following that, the following day is

22 when we initiated our investigation. I had a

23 meeting with the investigators.

24 Q. Excuse me. Your investigation of what?


1 A. Of the District Council and of the

2 selected locals and we had a meeting with the

3 investigators. We met with the audit staff. I

4 had my conversations with Mr. Arnold, which, you

5 know, were basically somewhat acrimonious.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Arnold told you

7 that he was representing the District Council.

8 THE WITNESS: As best I can recall, District

9 Council and the selected locals.



12 A. Following that, we did not gain access

13 to any individuals that day. In fact, I had to go

14 back to the International. When I say go back,

15 not physically, but to my office back there, and

16 have a letter drawn up again that was quite

17 pointed, directed to the individuals out here that

18 their failure to comply with the interviews and

19 what ramifications that might have.

20 It was that night after returning from

21 dinner that this phone message was on my machine.

22 You know, having been almost 30 years

23 in law enforcement and then also spending five

24 years in the U.S. Marine Corps where I had acted


1 as a brig officer and had received threats before,

2 this to me --

3 MR. CARMELL: Objection. Now we should stop,

4 Mr. Vaira, because we have gotten beyond the

5 foundation.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: He can describe it as a

7 threat.

8 MR. CARMELL: If he is going to describe what

9 he considers to be the threat and substance, we

10 have then gotten beyond the foundation.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: He is at least entitled

12 to say he considered it a threat.

13 MR. CARMELL: I don't quarrel with that, what

14 he considered it to be.

15 THE WITNESS: That's exactly what I was going

16 to do. I wasn't going to mention the content of

17 the call.


19 A. All I was going to say, based on my

20 experience in law enforcement and experience

21 previous to that there was no doubt in my mind the

22 reason for that phone call was made by an

23 individual that was upset that I was there in town

24 that day conducting the business that I was and it


1 was meant to put a damper on my activities.

2 And I think I had -- that phone call

3 was listened to by a number of the people who

4 worked with me that are experienced, seasoned law

5 enforcement officers, FBI agents I have known for

6 years. Their same opinion also.

7 MR. CARMELL: Well, Mr. Hearing Officer,

8 there is no foundation for this.

9 MR. BOSTWICK: I don't see.

10 MR. CARMEL: The only foundation -- wait.

11 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm sorry. I thought you were

12 finished.

13 THE WITNESS: Judge, can I add one other

14 thing?


16 THE WITNESS: I will just say I am not known

17 in Chicago. I have not lived here. I have not

18 worked here. So, for someone to call me in that

19 type of a framework, in my mind, it leads right to

20 the fact of what I was doing and why I was there.

21 It was not based on any of my previous

22 investigations or anything like that.


24 MR. CARMELL: We have no foundation other


1 than just his testimony that this Healey drove him

2 to the hotel, that anybody knew where he was, in

3 this telephone call, telephone message.

4 And, secondly, even if anybody else did

5 know, he can't identify who it was or where they

6 came from.

7 So, unless he wants to say --

8 testify -- and Mr. Healey is not a representative

9 of the District Council. He is described as a

10 regional manager. I would certainly doubt that he

11 is implicating Mr. Healey.

12 So, there is no foundation for this to

13 come in and I would strongly urge that you -- it

14 is not part of the Complaint. There is no

15 allegation in the Complaint that anybody there

16 made a threat unless you are going to get to that

17 generic paragraph.

18 Is that the generic paragraph?

19 MR. BOSTWICK: I will when you take a breath.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think I have heard

21 enough to at least let you gentlemen put this on

22 the record out of my presence and then I will hear

23 from you both after that.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, may I be heard on


1 the whole point?


3 MR. BOSTWICK: What we are talking about here

4 is obviously organized crime. In investigations

5 of organized crime, threats are a part of that

6 environment and that world. We are going to hear

7 extensive testimony on that point. I don't see

8 how Mr. Gow could have laid a clearer foundation

9 for the introduction of this tape and for your

10 Hearing Officer's consideration of it.

11 There is no -- it can be admitted and

12 then you can consider what weight you want to give

13 it and how strong the connection is. Certainly in

14 Mr. Gow's mind there is absolutely no equivocation

15 as to why he received this message at this time.

16 It relates specifically to what he was

17 doing. It relates to the pattern that we have

18 already established that is well known in public,

19 and to not allow it I think is bordering on

20 travesty.

21 In addition, he has mentioned that we

22 have not named this in the Complaint. This is a

23 specific allegation in the Complaint. I can't

24 refer the -- recall the paragraph. It's either 19


1 or 20. But this is part of the operations of the

2 Outfit as they attempt to secure and maintain

3 their power over the Chicago District Council and

4 its affiliated entities.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, we will

6 do -- you have had enough foundation certainly to

7 make it clear that the observer and experienced

8 law enforcement officer that makes his perception

9 of a credible -- let's put it on the record out of

10 my presence and we will make a decision.

11 As I say, at the end of this case we

12 are going to decide what goes in and what does

13 not.

14 This particular one, because there may

15 be some difficulty connecting it, I will have to

16 decide that. But you have made your record. We

17 will hear it. It won't take any more than about

18 three minutes to put this on the record out of my

19 presence.

20 MR. CARMELL: Can I have the opportunity

21 outside of your presence to cross-examine him

22 concerning --

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume you will do

24 that.


1 MR. CARMELL: Well, not the content. But the

2 foundation of it.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, I assume you can

4 do that.

5 MR. CARMELL: Maybe the best way to do it is

6 that we could take a break and empty this room and

7 then we wouldn't have to go hide in the corner.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Of course. Or just

9 before we start back.

10 MR. CARMELL: Before you start back again

11 after lunch.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, let us not

13 make this some major suppression hearing. You

14 have about five minutes to do it.

15 MR. BOSTWICK: Perhaps for clarification sake

16 we should simply lay a quick foundation that the

17 documents and the tapes are what they are. In

18 other words, we don't have to tell the audience if

19 that is what the concern is.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's fine.


22 Q. Mr. Gow, without referring to this

23 content of the tape, the content of the

24 transcript, let me refer you to Exhibit 58.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: I presume that's the

2 tape recording.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: That's actually the

4 transcript.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: The transcript of the

6 tape. That's fine. You don't have to go through

7 that. That's fine. We will accept that.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: Will you accept that this is a

9 true and correct copy of the tape and the

10 transcript? Exhibit 58-A and B.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will accept your

12 assurance of that. That's fine.

13 MR. BOSTWICK: Then I am finished with this.

14 I have no further questions.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay, Mr. Gow. Thank

16 you.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: I should say at this time I

18 have no further questions.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Go ahead, sir.



22 Q. Mr. Gow, who appointed you to the

23 position of Inspector General of LIUNA?

24 A. I was first contacted by Brendan


1 Sullivan in Washington, D.C. and asked if I would

2 be interested in assuming this position. I --

3 Q. Were you aware at the time that Brendan

4 Sullivan was Arthur Coia's personal attorney?

5 A. At my first contact, no, I was not. I

6 later learned that.

7 Q. And the Arthur Coia I'm speaking about

8 is Arthur A. Coia who was then and is now the

9 general president of LIUNA?

10 A. That's right.

11 Q. So we are understanding that?

12 A. Right.

13 Q. And it was Arthur Coia and the General

14 Executive Board that appointed you as Inspector

15 General, is that correct?

16 A. The process, as I tried to explain to

17 you before, I was interviewed by Brendan Sullivan,

18 subsequently by the GEB attorney and then after

19 that I had a meeting with Mr. Coia and then

20 subsequently I assumed that the entire board

21 approved my appointment.

22 Q. During the course of your duties as

23 Inspector General you have issued reports which

24 have been published to the membership, is that


1 correct?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. And were those reports published in the

4 Laborer magazine?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. Now, do you recall in the report that

7 appeared in March and April of 1995 making this

8 statement:

9 "In keeping with the bold and

10 necessary mandate of January 18, 1995 by

11 LIUNA General President Arthur A. Coia and

12 the General Executive Board, the Office of

13 Inspector General was created"?

14 Do you recall that statement?

15 A. I really don't recall it, no.

16 Q. Do you recall making this statement:

17 "On February 1, 1995 the General

18 President and the General Executive Board

19 hired W. Douglas Gow, a recently retired

20 senior Federal Bureau of Investigation

21 official," et cetera, "to open the Office of

22 Inspector General"?

23 A. I don't dispute that.

24 Q. Was there any particular reason why


1 you -- strike that.

2 You are aware, have become aware that

3 the General Executive Board is made up of the

4 general officers and the vice presidents, is that

5 correct?

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. And was there any particular reason why

8 you singled out Arthur A. Coia for commendation in

9 appointing you as Inspector General?

10 A. Other than in his position as General

11 President of the union you would need deference in

12 writing to something like that.

13 In other words, let me explain.

14 Basically a lot of the things that we

15 do when we write, we write in the same vein as if

16 we -- when we wrote them when I was in the FBI and

17 when you delivered an article like that you always

18 mentioned the director.

19 Q. So that you would equate Arthur A. Coia

20 with J. Edgar Hoover in status?

21 A. No, I'm not saying that. I am not

22 saying that at all.

23 Q. But in position?

24 A. He is the president of the


1 International union.

2 Q. I see. So that throughout the report

3 you have in March/April, 1995 in Laborers,

4 whenever you are talking about LIUNA, you talk

5 about the General President and General Executive

6 Board and that's just your custom to have done

7 that, is that correct?

8 A. Yes, at that time.

9 Q. Now, you know before you were appointed

10 that your appointment had been discussed with the

11 Department of Justice?

12 A. I was told that it was done at some

13 point in time. In fact, I was brought before the

14 Department of Justice at a period after I was in

15 the position.

16 Q. Let me try and break this down

17 chronologically.

18 Who told you that the Department of

19 Justice was going to have input into your

20 appointment?

21 A. I don't know if I'd characterize it as

22 input into it --

23 MR. BOSTWICK: Let me simply put in an

24 objection at this point to relevance. I realize


1 you may want to go far afield on this, but perhaps

2 we could at least get a proffer from Mr. Carmell

3 about why this is relevant to his direct.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assumed in this

5 process that all these individuals who were chosen

6 had their names in some way run past the

7 Department of Justice. I suspect.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: I would certainly stipulate to

9 that.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think that -- I think

11 that the Department's aware of me. I have no idea

12 what it is or the appellate officer, how it got by

13 him. I assume. I strongly assume that the

14 Department --


16 THE HEARING OFFICER: -- knew who was going

17 to be on the scene, this group that's been

18 appointed. I don't think there is any secret. I

19 don't know about myself, but I understand you met

20 with the -- some individual.

21 THE WITNESS: It was subsequent as best I can

22 recall to -- it was the first meeting after I was

23 in the position that we had a meeting of all

24 the --


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I think

2 you can be sure at least all individuals'

3 identities were known. When I say the appellate

4 officer, the GEB attorney.

5 MR. CARMELL: I appreciate that. What they

6 were known to is not what I am getting at.


8 Q. What I am getting at, Mr. Gow, is you

9 were aware that you could not be appointed to the

10 position of Inspector General without the approval

11 of the Department of Justice?

12 A. No, I was not aware of that at all. No

13 one ever said that the Department of Justice would

14 be the body that said I could or could not have

15 the job. That was never mentioned to me at all.

16 Q. What was --

17 A. I took it as the governing people that

18 was -- the two that I interviewed with, Bob

19 Luskin, the GEB attorney, and Brendan Sullivan,

20 were the two that were basically going to decide

21 whether I would or would not have the job.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, what I

23 think --

24 MR. CARMELL: All right.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. What I wanted to

2 just add as a matter of relevance, there is no

3 question that the Department of Justice played

4 some role in this procedure, because there was an

5 agreement between the Department of Justice and

6 the union.

7 So, it is I assume and these

8 individuals all in fact got some sort of tacit

9 approval. The question becomes does that then so

10 disqualify them to put them into this procedure.

11 That I think is -- we are not going to

12 go into. But you may raise the fact -- I think

13 you made it -- that the Department of Justice knew

14 and approved of their positions.


16 Q. You met with the General Executive

17 Board attorney Robert Luskin and Brendan Sullivan

18 before your appointment, is that correct?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. And when you met with Brendan Sullivan

21 were you told --

22 MR. BOSTWICK: Objection.


24 Q. -- who he was?


1 A. I'm sorry.

2 Q. Were you told who he was?

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: This whole history of

4 how this came about, I don't know that it's at all

5 relevant. You may point out that they have a bias

6 now because they were appointed by the Department

7 of Justice and the results of this -- I shouldn't

8 say appointed. Approved by it. There has been

9 some sort of agreement. Yes, there has been.

10 There is no question about that that

11 there is an agreement. Whether or not there is

12 organized crime in this local and has it been

13 proved, will it be proved. I think we are getting

14 somewhat far afield.

15 MR. CARMELL: I didn't ask about the

16 Department of Justice. I asked about Mr. Brendan

17 Sullivan.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Sullivan was and

19 still is Mr. Coia's personal attorney.

20 MR. CARMELL: You know, Mr. Vaira, with all

21 due respect, you have said I am going to let

22 everything in and you are jumping in in my fourth

23 question and telling me what is relevant and what

24 is not relevant.


1 I want to try my case. You may not

2 like it. You may throw it all out. As far as I

3 am concerned what I have heard so far from Mr. Gow

4 is garbage. But you are going to make that

5 decision.

6 I went through the D'Arco affidavit and

7 that crap came in and I have gone through it and I

8 want to try my case. If you don't want to let me

9 try my case, don't let me try my case.

10 I have a reason, as you will see,

11 hopefully, why these are relevant including the

12 credibility of this witness.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: So far this particular

14 witness hasn't said an awful lot that comes down

15 to credibility.

16 MR. CARMELL: He is the Inspector General and

17 if you give me an opportunity, he is the person

18 who brought this case.

19 He has testified on direct examination

20 that his purpose was to -- he had found corruption

21 and he testified that he was -- the emphasis was

22 on eradicating organized crime in LIUNA.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume that. I have

24 now --


1 MR. CARMELL: Brendan Sullivan is Arthur

2 Coia's counsel. Arthur Coia, as we will show, is

3 O.C. Gow knows it. Everybody knows it. And

4 let's find out what his credibility is, whether he

5 wants to eradicate O.C.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me put it this

7 way. This is an issue I faced in almost every one

8 of my hearings in Buffalo against this a million

9 times.

10 If Mr. Coia is under investigation or

11 if he is not, I will hear it. He is not on trial

12 in this case.

13 So, if you got any questions about

14 that, you got -- I am going to have to hear that

15 some other time.

16 MR. CARMELL: Oh, no. You are going -- if

17 you are going to cut me off with Arthur Coia, then

18 you are cutting me off from showing whether this

19 witness is credible as far as what organized crime

20 is and as to whether there are other reasons why

21 this investigation has led to this Complaint for

22 trusteeship.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: That, I have ruled upon

24 that about five other times, and in the case in


1 Buffalo. We are not even going to try it. Those

2 individuals are not here.

3 MR. CARMELL: He testified about the civil

4 RICO complaint, that he read that civil RICO

5 complaint and took action on it.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: I read that civil RICO

7 complaint. I think the civil RICO complaint is

8 off, sort of in other worlds, has no probative

9 value here.

10 Gentlemen, let us move on. I will cut

11 off this line of testimony. We are not going to

12 try a whole group of other persons. I'm going to

13 hear the testimony about this particular District

14 Council.

15 But we are not going to go into that,

16 because I have ruled upon that, and about five

17 times, in Buffalo.

18 MR. CARMELL: I'm not interested in whether

19 you ruled upon it in Buffalo.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm using it as

21 precedent, so --

22 MR. CARMELL: You may have been wrong in

23 Buffalo. Buffalo didn't get all the way --

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, let us have


1 some order back there. This is not a local

2 hearing where you can shout out. So the discourse

3 is between me and Mr. Carmell.

4 Okay. Mr. Carmell, I rule that that

5 line of questioning is just not relevant here.

6 MR. CARMELL: Well --

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: You may make an offer

8 of proof at some other time --

9 MR. CARMELL: I'm not going to make it. You

10 have told me --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: -- if you want.

12 MR. CARMELL: -- it's not coming in.



15 Q. You are subject to being removed by the

16 General Executive Board and Arthur Coia at any

17 time, is that correct?

18 A. No, I'm not. I have a no-cut

19 contract. It's, right now it extends through

20 January of this year.

21 Q. If they removed you, they would be

22 required to pay your salary, isn't that correct?

23 A. Sure.

24 Q. Yeah. But they can remove you and pay


1 you; you are like a ballplayer?

2 A. I'm not so sure they could, the way

3 it's written.

4 Q. Now, is your job as general --

5 Inspector General a full-time job?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. What's your compensation?

8 A. 135,000 a year.

9 Q. Before you took on this job, what job

10 did you hold directly before you became Inspector

11 General?

12 A. I was in private consulting. Directly

13 before I took this job, I was consulting with the

14 U.S. Secret Service.

15 Q. What was your compensation then?

16 A. It was a lump sum over, for a period of

17 a job. It wasn't based on an hourly rate.

18 Q. What was the lump sum for the period?

19 A. I believe for the period it was

20 $20,000.

21 Q. Do you have any other sources of

22 compensation other than possibly a pension,

23 etcetera, while serving as Inspector General?

24 A. Some very minor.


1 Q. What kinds, minor?

2 A. I teach at the FBI Academy and receive

3 a payment for that.

4 Q. Anything else?

5 A. Other than, if you're talking about

6 interest on, you know, investments --

7 Q. No, no. I'm talking about work, jobs.

8 A. No, no. There was, early on, I had one

9 other. I had been also consulting with an

10 engineering company before I took this job. And

11 after I had this job, they paid me some

12 compensation for previous work done.

13 Q. How many persons are on your staff?

14 A. Oh, it varies. Some of the people have

15 come and gone. I have, if you're talking about my

16 staff at the office at LIUNA or total --

17 Q. No; total Inspector General staff.

18 A. Total Inspector General staff is

19 somewhere in the neighborhood, it varies between

20 45 and 50 individuals.


22 THE WITNESS: No, they are not full time.


24 Q. In the year 1996, if you know, what was


1 the total amount of money that LIUNA paid for the

2 Inspector General's services, the whole staff,

3 you, everybody else?

4 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm going to object to that.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't know what the

6 relevance of it is.

7 Can you tell me the relevance of, where

8 you are going with this, Mr. Carmell? I mean, the

9 union -- he files a report; it's in the union, in

10 the union record. What relevance is it that he

11 has 45 persons working, he pays them half a

12 million dollars, or whatever?

13 MR. CARMELL: He has a financial interest in

14 his job.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume; I assume

16 everybody has a financial interest in their job.

17 MR. CARMELL: His financial interest is

18 subject to the Department of Justice keeping him

19 in office.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: May or may not be.

21 MR. CARMELL: Because I have a record that

22 may go beyond you, Mr. Vaira; probably will, the

23 way I see it. And I want --

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: How can you say that,


1 Mr. Carmell? Come on. How can you say that?

2 MR. CARMELL: Because the five questions, you

3 cut me off; you talk to me about flowing and

4 running rules and liberality and all of this. And

5 you have said, hey, that's fine for one side, but

6 not for the other.

7 So I, these gray hairs don't come as

8 much from worry as they come from experience. And

9 I know, I sometimes know, what's down the road.

10 I'll do the best I can.

11 Now, having said that, am I cut off

12 from asking him his financial interest, Department

13 of Justice, the fact that he might bring a

14 prosecution based upon not the facts as he found

15 them, but somebody else told him to, or you are

16 going to lose your job?

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think what you are --

18 why don't you ask him that question.

19 MR. CARMELL: I'd like to do it the way I

20 want to. I'd like to present my case.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll allow you to

22 pursue that line, to find out if he will lose his

23 job if he doesn't perform.



1 Q. Mr. Gow, you report to the General

2 Executive Board Attorney, is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Is there anybody else you report to?

5 A. No.

6 Q. When you began in --

7 A. Let me back up a little bit, Mr.

8 Carmell, on that. We do produce a report that is

9 required by the government, on a 90-day basis.

10 And I don't produce the entire report. But I

11 provide a section of it.

12 So in effect, I guess you can say that

13 it's a, I am reporting to the Department of

14 Justice.

15 Q. Do you participate in meetings with the

16 Department of Justice concerning the progress or

17 concerning your investigations?

18 A. I do.

19 Q. Do you meet with the Department of

20 Justice concerning who should be targets of your

21 investigation?

22 A. Those discussions come up. But it's

23 never that levied in those meetings that you will

24 specifically do these things.


1 They have suggestions, and certainly

2 their wish list as far as, you know, seeing that

3 certain things are accomplished early on in the

4 investigation. In fact, they provided a, so to

5 speak, what we refer to as a wish list of targets

6 for the investigation.

7 Q. Does the Department of Justice set

8 priorities for your investigations?

9 A. Other than that wish list, as far as

10 setting priorities, they have, as I said, spoken

11 their minds at these meetings and what they deem

12 as, you know, what we should be looking at, and

13 where we should be going with regard to organized

14 crime.

15 Q. Did you attend hearings before the

16 House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime,

17 on July 24th and 25th, 1996?

18 A. I did. I don't remember the exact

19 dates, but --

20 Q. Did you know a man named John C.

21 Keeney, Deputy Assistant Attorney General?

22 A. Did I tell him?

23 Q. Did you know him then?

24 A. Oh, yes, yeah.


1 Q. Did you hear him testify?

2 A. Part of his testimony, I believe. I

3 don't know how long he was on the stand. When I

4 got there, I think he was on. I've known Mr.

5 Keeney for 20 some years.

6 Q. Did you hear Mr. Keeney testify that

7 the Department of Justice monitors the Inspector

8 General?

9 A. I don't recall that. I don't dispute

10 that. In fact, I told you we provide a report to

11 them every 90 days. So if that's not monitorship,

12 I don't know what is.

13 Q. Does the Department of Justice prod the

14 Inspector General?

15 A. At the meetings, yes, there is some

16 prodding that goes on.

17 Q. When the Department of Justice is not

18 satisfied, does it expect the Inspector General to

19 do further things?

20 A. When they are not satisfied, do they --

21 Q. With what you have been doing.

22 A. They have expressed dissatisfaction a

23 number of times. And we have simply told them

24 that the reason, you know, an individual can do so


1 many things at one time, or our priorities are

2 this; so we have had those differences of opinion.

3 Q. Does the Department of Justice

4 determine priorities in your investigations?

5 A. They try to have some input into it.

6 Q. That is not my question. If they tell

7 you that that is a priority, is it a priority?

8 A. If they tell us that a certain thing is

9 a priority, then I try to make it a priority.

10 Q. If they tell you that certain

11 individuals or entities are targets, you will

12 follow that, won't you?

13 A. I will look at it, yes.

14 Q. You will follow what they, the

15 Department of Justice says, won't you?

16 A. Within the parameters of how I can do

17 the work and what I've got going on at the time.

18 Q. Does the Department of Justice have

19 access to all of LIUNA's internal documents?

20 A. All of their --

21 Q. Yeah.

22 A. I don't know if -- through subpoena

23 power, they certainly would; if you are talking

24 about my records or all of LIUNA's records --


1 Q. All of LIUNA's records.

2 A. Well, I can't answer that except in

3 reference to my records.

4 Q. Well, let me ask you whether you agree

5 with this statement that Mr. Keeney made to

6 Congress on July 25, 1996, quote: The Department

7 of Justice has access to all of LIUNA's internal

8 documents, relating to its day-to-day operations

9 and efforts it performs, unquote. Do you remember

10 him saying that?

11 A. I don't remember him saying that,

12 but --

13 Q. Do you --

14 A. -- I don't dispute it.

15 Q. You don't dispute it?

16 A. No, I don't dispute it.

17 Q. Now, let's discuss the agreement

18 between the Department of Justice and LIUNA. You

19 are aware of that agreement?

20 A. I'm aware of it. I was not part of it

21 when the agreement was drawn up. And a lot of the

22 nuances and so forth and what was said, I have not

23 been privy to. So I don't know if I can help you

24 here.


1 Q. Let's try. I hope you can; let's try

2 and stay away from the nuances and get down to the

3 guts.

4 Under the agreement between the

5 Department of Justice and LIUNA, dated February

6 13, 1995, the Department of Justice has the

7 prerogative to end the internal process any time

8 it believes and wishes to, isn't that correct?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. And if the Department of Justice makes

11 that decision, there is a consent decree that has

12 already been signed which would be filed, is that

13 correct?

14 A. That's correct.

15 Q. And if that decree is filed, its Office

16 of Inspector General ends, is that correct?

17 A. No. I was told that the Office of the

18 Inspector General would continue on after that

19 time. That is what I was told.

20 Q. Who told you that?

21 A. That was told to me by Brendan

22 Sullivan.

23 Q. And Brendan Sullivan was not from the

24 Department of Justice, was he?


1 A. No.

2 Q. Have you read the consent decree?

3 A. Originally. I really don't recall

4 parts of it right now. I've always, when

5 questions come on the consent decree that I would

6 receive there, I would refer those to Bob Luskin.

7 Q. Having read the consent decree, did you

8 find any provision in there for an Inspector

9 General?

10 A. I don't recall anything like that.

11 Q. Do you recall that there were three

12 offices that would be created; an independent

13 monitor, do you recall that name?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Investigations office?

16 A. (Indicating.)

17 Q. And an election officer?

18 A. I think that's correct.

19 Q. And are you aware whether a consent

20 decree, the investigative officer, will replace

21 the Inspector General?

22 A. I don't recall the specific language

23 that deals with that at all. I'm sorry.

24 Q. Are some of your duties to initiate and


1 conduct investigations within LIUNA?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. To remove organized crime and all other

4 criminal elements as a source of influence in the

5 affairs of LIUNA?

6 A. To attempt to, yes.

7 Q. Now, are you aware that those are the

8 functions which under the consent decree will be

9 given to the investigation officers by the

10 Department of Justice?

11 A. Again, I can't recall the specific

12 language of the consent decrees. You would have

13 to show it to me.

14 Q. If the Department of Justice would file

15 the consent decree, you as an individual, Mr. Gow,

16 would then have to be reapproved for a position,

17 is that correct?

18 A. I would, I assume so.

19 If you are trying to get to the point

20 that I'm here as, so to speak, to make another

21 career in this job, you're absolutely wrong. I

22 have said publicly before, and I've said it not

23 only to the Department of Justice, I've said it in

24 public forums, I am not here -- I'm here to do the


1 job that they originally hired me for.

2 I have no intentions of staying beyond

3 a certain time. I haven't said, you know, exactly

4 what that time is. I feel when, once the

5 investigations that we have begun have come to a

6 certain stance, then it's time for me to move on

7 at that time. So if the point here is that

8 everything is, I'm afraid of losing my job, I am

9 not.

10 Q. Well, Mr. Gow, you probably were a fine

11 FBI agent, but you are a lousy mindreader, because

12 you don't know what I'm thinking. So I will

13 proceed. It's not important what I think. It's

14 important what the record shows.

15 Mr. Gow, you have an ironclad -- you

16 say you have a contract. When does that contract

17 expire?

18 A. I told you, January of this year,

19 January 31st.

20 Q. And are you planning to renew that

21 contract?

22 A. I have not been asked if I want to

23 renew it.

24 Q. Do you want to renew the contract?


1 A. I would probably stay a while longer.

2 Q. A while will be how long?

3 A. Possibly one more year.

4 Q. Would you want at least $100,000 a

5 year?

6 MR. BOSTWICK: I have to object, your Honor.

7 A lot of this is, he is asking for speculation.

8 And I'm not sure how it relates. I'm willing to

9 listen to a lot of this, but --

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume from the

11 questioning that, from that consent decree, which

12 I have read, is that if the Department of Justice

13 pulls the plug, he is out of a job.

14 MR. CARMELL: As you are.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: And who knows about me,

16 you know? I could be out of a job too. So I

17 assume if that goes, he goes.

18 Now, the question then becomes really,

19 what he is saying is that, has that, that threat

20 of, motivated him to do or say things in this

21 particular, in this particular context, which are

22 not true or exaggerated. And that's, that is your

23 issue. And I will assume he doesn't get the job;

24 they pull the plug tomorrow, he's gone.


1 MR. CARMELL: You have -- so I will accept

2 that. I'm through with that line of questioning.

3 You have so tied my hands in showing that, you

4 have said, Mr. Vaira, I'm here to decide Chicago

5 District Council; I agree with that. Person who

6 has testified concerning his attempts to eradicate

7 crime has indicated that certain people have

8 certain associations or work certain places.

9 Now, sauce for the goose is sauce for

10 the gander. If you really believe that, why can't

11 I go into what other violations of the EDP, to

12 which he has not any; I have a right to show that

13 with other individuals who may be similarly

14 circumstanced, he does not believe these to be EDP

15 violations. That is what we are here for, is

16 EDP.

17 Now, will I make that total connection

18 to your satisfaction? I don't know. Do I have a

19 right to show that if he says, I want to eliminate

20 from the ranks of the LIUNA, any place, any place

21 I find it, organized crime, and here is what I say

22 is organized crime, it is this connection, let's

23 use it for my sake, 1, 2 and 3, and I can show

24 that 1, 2 and 3 over here, on my left side, he


1 brings no charges against, that goes to the issue

2 of whether 1, 2 and 3 in fact are connections that

3 warrant violations.

4 I understand your argument. We call it

5 the speeding argument; the fact that you got

6 caught as a speeder doesn't say that everybody

7 else was speeding at 90 miles an hour. That is

8 not my purpose in it.

9 But my purpose is to get into what is

10 truthfully and what factually are matters which

11 would warrant EDP violations, now, that, or

12 violations of the Constitution, both.

13 And that's why I have a right to go

14 into other instances.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Let me address

16 it. Mr. Carmell, this individual is, you have

17 laid some foundation. He said based upon his

18 experience, some of these individuals are

19 connected to organized crime. I presume there are

20 going to be some other persons involved.

21 We will just take any, any example,

22 even though the names -- Spingola nobody has

23 talked about, but let's assume Mr. Gow said,

24 Joseph Spingola I'm convinced is a member of


1 organized crime, all right? The proof of this

2 case is, is that true, and is, will that be

3 corroborated by some other evidence? Is that

4 standing alone sufficient?

5 Now, whether Mr. Gow should be chasing

6 Jones, Smith and Brown who are over in Rhode

7 Island or wherever they are, and is laying down on

8 the job or not chasing them or not, is not

9 relevant.

10 All I'm saying is, do we have proof

11 that -- I'm not saying Spingola is -- just let's

12 say, do we have proof that Spingola is connected

13 to, enough to indicate that the District Council

14 has persons like him running it or whatever it

15 is.

16 Whether or not he is doing something

17 else someplace else is not of our concern. You

18 may argue that, and he is laying down on the job

19 someplace else, to protect his own business.

20 I'm only concerned with this record.

21 Do we have information that these individuals who

22 are running this particular District Council are

23 connected to organized crime? Is his statement

24 verified, corroborated by others?


1 And that's why I'm saying, I'm not

2 tying your hands; I'm trying this case, not

3 others.

4 MR. CARMELL: But you have ignored at least

5 one vital point, and that's Title III of

6 Landrum-Griffin, which is the trusteeship

7 provision.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm familiar with that.

9 MR. CARMELL: Which permits trusteeships only

10 for specified purposes.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's right.

12 MR. CARMELL: One of the defenses, maybe one

13 of the few defenses, is that a trusteeship has

14 been brought for an improper purpose. That's

15 clear in the law.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's right.

17 MR. CARMELL: One of the things I have a

18 right to show is whether this was brought for an

19 improper purpose.

20 I can do that only by comparisons. You

21 will make the decision as to whether, assuming,

22 let's assume that there are criteria that if it's

23 for a wrong or improper purpose, that is a total

24 defense, as I read the law, is a defense to a


1 Title III prosecution.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, those --

3 MR. CARMELL: And I -- let me just finish.


5 MR. CARMELL: And so that is one of my

6 defenses. You are saying I can't go into it.

7 Mr. Gow was not on this stand merely

8 testifying as being a scrivener. We could have

9 put documents into evidence, Mr. Vaira, without

10 Mr. Gow. It's obvious that the Senate committee,

11 those PCOC hearings are public documents.

12 He has been put on the stand as the

13 investigative officer who has pursued this case.

14 And he is saying, here is why I've pursued it. My

15 FBI friends, informants, have told me this, this.

16 I want to eradicate organized crime. I'm here on

17 my white horse doing it. And this place, this

18 Chicago District Council has organized crime. He

19 is the witness. I have a right to test his

20 credibility as to whether he really believes

21 that.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't know that he

23 really believes it. I don't know --

24 MR. CARMELL: I do, because he testified to


1 it. Wait. You may say it's not material. But

2 they put him on for this.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: You remember my

4 question was, look, I'm not really interested in

5 how you got here. I'm not really interested if

6 you were flying over it and looked down and

7 decided one afternoon that Chicago ought to be a

8 place you could land and come in the summertime.

9 I'm not concerned about that. I'm

10 concerned about what is the evidence before us.

11 MR. CARMELL: But I am, because I have a

12 defense that is entitled by Title III, under all

13 the court cases, and one of them is that the, that

14 this complaint has been brought for an improper

15 purpose.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: But you know what those

17 cases are. Without bringing in some legal

18 philosophical discussion, proper purpose means

19 that the International Union is trying to stifle

20 dissent. They are trying to take over. That is

21 the improper purpose.

22 MR. CARMELL: True.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: If one of the purposes

24 is that they have organized crime, they want to


1 siphon it out, I don't think you have that.

2 MR. CARMELL: I have a right to show their

3 legitimate activities.

4 I have the right to cross-examine

5 Mr. Gow. Mr. Gow is on cross-examination here.

6 He is their witness. He is there because I

7 believe -- I want you to reconsider so I am giving

8 as much as I can. I am not trying to hold back.

9 I am saying that this is exactly one of the

10 defenses within the purpose.

11 How do I show that? I show that

12 through comparisons. I show that through evidence

13 of what biases he may have or prejudices he may

14 have. I show it through the fact that it may not

15 have been his decision to even bring this case.

16 It may have come from another party.

17 Let's just say it came from the

18 Department of Justice. Let's say that I can

19 prove, Mr. Vaira, that he sat in the Department of

20 Justice office and said, guys, I can't bring this

21 case. There is no evidence. And they said we're

22 going to pull the pin unless you do it. Now,

23 that's relevant.

24 Do I have a smoking gun? I may have


1 one. But I certainly have a right to make a warm

2 gun through circumstantial evidence.

3 You are experienced and a far better

4 prosecutor than I would ever imagine, and that is

5 not strokes, and you know the difference between

6 an indirect circumstantial evidence case. There

7 aren't a lot of direct smoking guns where the guy

8 gets up and says I robbed the bank or I embezzled

9 the money, and paper and inferences and all of the

10 matters that are there are to be drawn from the

11 record.

12 Give me my opportunity to do that. You

13 have not given me any leeway and I am telling you

14 that I will tie it up. If not, you will do

15 exactly what you said you would do with

16 Mr. Bostwick. You would just take it in

17 provisionally and you will throw it out at the end

18 of the case.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. But I still

20 don't know where you are going, how much he makes

21 and I don't know how relevant that is. He makes

22 money. Maybe next year he doesn't get the

23 $100,000.

24 MR. CARMELL: The issue is now and if they


1 might pull the pin. You might not draw that

2 inference, but you are not allowing me to put it

3 on the record. That's the difference.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I can't see where you

5 are going.

6 MR. CARMELL: You don't have to see where I

7 am going. You have to let me get there.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: I have to see where you

9 are going. I am saying if there is evidence of

10 organized crime these ladies and gentlemen are

11 trying to put on here and if they show -- I think

12 that goes a long way to show that there is no

13 improper motive.

14 MR. CARMELL: It may go a long way. But you

15 leave me without the opportunity to say there is

16 anything in the record which I could argue shows

17 an improper purpose. You have cut me off from it.

18 What you have left in here is Mr. Gow

19 pontificating as to what he believes is organized

20 crime, showing, reading excerpts from President's

21 Commissions on Organized Crime in 1983.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Anybody could have read

23 those.

24 MR. CARMELL: I agree with you. Anybody


1 could have read them. If Mr. Gow's position up

2 there is not that this is part of his

3 investigation -- he is telling us why he came to

4 Chicago and he is telling us why he has put this

5 together.

6 This case is his. He is the

7 investigator. The General Executive Board

8 attorney brings it, but I will show that this was

9 his evidence, his investigation and his case.

10 I have a right to show the length of

11 time it's taken, where it's been, where the

12 dissidents are, where free speech is being

13 trampled upon, where other people similarly

14 circumstanced are still in office and haven't been

15 touched and from that you can say when it's all

16 over with I didn't make my improper motive.

17 But you are not going to let me do it

18 and that is one of my defenses. And we would

19 spend less time if you let me go through my

20 cross-examination and get those matters in that I

21 believe are appropriate and go do what you have to

22 do as the independent hearing officer.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: What you are saying --

24 here is what I am going to do, Mr. Carmell. I am


1 going to deny your motion, but I am going to ask

2 you to put -- when he leaves, take some time to

3 put this on the record as a matter of proof and I

4 will reconsider it.

5 Tell me where you are going, put it

6 down, what questions you would ask, where you were

7 planning to go with it and I will tell you if I

8 think it goes to the area of the improper motive.

9 Okay. You may proceed. On some other

10 subject.

11 MR. CARMELL: I really don't find a subject

12 that doesn't seem to be improper.

13 Because you have cut me off from lots

14 of areas which are the crux of my defense, I think

15 we should take our break now, luncheon break, and

16 I will have to look through this and see where we

17 are going to go.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Here is what we will

19 do. Come back. You want an hour, Mr. Carmell.

20 After we come back -- roughly an hour. You can

21 have a little bit more, certainly.

22 You come in. The first thing you

23 gentlemen will do before we -- we will clear the

24 room and put your evidence on concerning whatever


1 this --

2 MR. BOSTWICK: The tape. The threat.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Then we can bring

4 everyone back in and, Mr. Carmell, you can make

5 your offer of proof in whatever form you want to

6 make it, proposed questions or outline form.

7 MR. CARMELL: I prefer to do it in questions,

8 questions that I would ask him and I would assume

9 that each one of these questions would be answered

10 in the affirmative.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. We will do

12 it that way. Okay. We will take our break now

13 and we will come back.

14 Mr. Carmell, what time do you want?

15 12:30. Quarter to 1:00?

16 MR. CARMELL: Quarter to 2:00.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. Quarter to

18 2:00.

19 (WHEREUPON, at 12:30 p.m. the

20 hearing was recessed until

21 1:45 p.m., this day, July 16, 1997.)








4 IN RE: )






10 July 6, 1997

11 2:00 p.m.



14 The hearing resumed pursuant to

15 recess.


17 BEFORE: MR. PETER F. VAIRA, Hearing Officer












4 (1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.,

5 Washington, D.C. 20007-5243), by:



8 appeared on behalf of the GEB Attorney;



11 LTD.,

12 (225 West Washington Street, Suite 1000,

13 Chicago, Illinois 60606), by:




17 appeared on behalf of the Chicago

18 District Council of Laborers.








1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Back on the record.

2 Ladies and gentlemen, the hearing is

3 now again in session. In the meantime, I

4 reinforce the exclusionary rule at the request of

5 some members, and only the persons who are

6 permitted to be here. So we have taken care of

7 that. You gentlemen that made that objection, see

8 we carry that out.

9 Mr. Bostwick and Mr. Carmell are going

10 to proceed with an examination of Mr. Gow here on

11 a matter that I said that we would hear out of my

12 presence.

13 Gentlemen, you want me to step out?

14 MR. CARMELL: No. You are going to make a

15 ruling. We are going to hear it. Everybody will

16 know what was said. And then we will make our

17 motion at that time.




21 Q. Mr. Gow, I just have a few questions

22 for you on this specific point. Can you pull out

23 Exhibit 58?

24 A. 158?


1 Q. No; 58.

2 Mr. Gow, there is technically a 58-A

3 and 58-B. The tape itself is 58-A. The document

4 is 58-B. Can you tell me what the document is,

5 58-B?

6 A. Exhibit 58-B is a memorandum from

7 myself to Bob Luskin. Subject is threatening

8 phone call to Inspector General Gow, 3/29/95 in

9 Chicago, dated June 3, 1997.

10 Q. Is there a full transcript of the tape

11 of the 58-A on that --

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. -- included in that exhibit?

14 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm simply going to ask that

15 we move introduction of 58-A and B, and we play

16 the tape.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will hear the tape.

18 THE WITNESS: I have the original.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Miss Reporter, we have

20 the transcript of the tape. You can take it down

21 from there. It is short. You might have trouble

22 hearing it anyway.

23 (WHEREUPON, there was a short

24 interruption.)


1 MR. BOSTWICK: We are having trouble playing

2 the tape, obviously.

3 THE WITNESS: It's coming next.


5 MR. BOSTWICK: It wasn't cued up.

6 (WHEREUPON, tape was played, as

7 follows:

8 "Douglas. You fucking piece of shit.

9 Who do you think you're fucking with? A

10 bunch of kids from Waco? I'll fuck your

11 family in the face. I'll fuck your mother in

12 the mouth. You fucking piece of shit."

13 THE WITNESS: That's it.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: I have nothing further.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, go ahead.



18 Q. Beginning with the latest, which is

19 this tape, you testified you came to Chicago on

20 March 26th, 1995, is that correct?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. When did you leave Chicago?

23 A. On the 28th.

24 Q. March 28th?


1 A. Yes.

2 Q. I see. Now --

3 A. No, wait.

4 Q. According to -- just a moment. You

5 have a change in date?

6 A. No, I don't have to change the tape. I

7 was just trying --

8 Q. Not change the tape; change the date.

9 A. This call was made on the 29th. I left

10 the next day.

11 Q. Okay. So now you are saying you didn't

12 leave on the 28th?

13 A. Couldn't have.

14 Q. But you left on the 30th of March?

15 A. It would have to be on the 30th that I

16 left, because I left from -- I was out at the

17 regional office, out at regional office. And I

18 left the afternoon, it was the day after this

19 call.

20 Q. How do you fix the day of when you left

21 Chicago?

22 A. Just as I mentioned to you. I was, the

23 following day I checked out of the hotel; was out

24 at the International, left from the


1 International. I was with my deputy, Bill Rice.

2 So there was an individual with me. I believe Joe

3 Griffin was with me out at the International that

4 day.

5 Q. What time did you leave Chicago on the

6 30th of March?

7 A. Oh, it was afternoon. I can't remember

8 the exact time. It seems to me it was, as best I

9 can recall, I would think somewhere around 4 or

10 5. I'd have to go back and look at my voucher to

11 get the exact time.

12 Q. Let's find out who you -- now, you were

13 in at the Chicago Hilton and Towers; that's where

14 you were staying, is that correct?

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. That's where the telephone call came

17 in, is that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And I did not hear anything on the

20 voice mail that told us the date of the telephone

21 call. So you're fixing the date as March 29, is

22 that correct?

23 A. And I have, in addition to that, there

24 were three other people that were witness to the


1 phone call that can testify to the date.

2 Q. Great. Could you just answer the

3 question.

4 A. You asked me if --

5 Q. There is nothing on the voice mail that

6 tells the date as being March 29, is that correct?

7 A. I don't recall it, no. No such thing.

8 Now, the original date was picked up and has been

9 given to the FBI. It would be on there.

10 Q. Well --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: The date -- you can

12 explain your answer. After he asked you was

13 anything on the tape, you may explain later on why

14 you think it was on the 28th.

15 The date, gentlemen -- go ahead, go

16 ahead.


18 Q. Now, let me go through persons who

19 would have known that you were at the Chicago

20 Hilton and Towers during that period of time.

21 One was this gentleman Terry Healey, is

22 that correct?

23 You're nodding. That doesn't do us any

24 good.


1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. And he was regional manager of LIUNA?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. The other were auditors of Thomas

5 Havey & Company, is that correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And they were representatives you had

8 hired -- I mean -- strike that.

9 Who was Thomas Havey Company?

10 A. They are an audit firm that is located

11 basically nationwide that has an expertise in

12 labor-related matters.

13 Q. And then there were -- how many of your

14 staff knew that you were at the Chicago Hilton and

15 Towers?

16 A. Well, at that time the people that

17 would have been back at my office, the agents or

18 the representatives that were with me because they

19 were all staying at the same hotel.

20 Q. Can you tell me approximately how many?

21 A. We had, let me see, four of us.

22 Q. Did you leave a number at your office

23 where you could be reached?

24 A. Yes, they had a number where I could be


1 reached.

2 Q. Anybody who came in and asked for that

3 number from your office could have obtained that

4 number?

5 A. Not necessarily. The office -- we

6 operate on a need-to-know principle. So I mean

7 anybody to walk in and say I need to get ahold of

8 Doug or something like that, if it was somebody

9 unknown to my people, they wouldn't have been

10 given the number.

11 Q. Now, another person who knew or another

12 entity that knew you were in Chicago is the

13 Sophisticated Traveler travel agency in

14 Providence, Rhode Island, is that correct?

15 A. That's correct. They made the

16 reservation.

17 Mr. -- in addition to that, the GEB

18 Attorney's office knew I was in Chicago at that

19 time also.

20 Q. And also -- you talked about members of

21 your staff. Just a moment.

22 Let's stay with for a moment -- did

23 Mr. Hugh Arnold know that you were staying at the

24 Chicago Hilton and Towers?


1 A. He talked to me there while we had our

2 meetings with the audit people. I never -- to my

3 knowledge, I never told him I was staying at the

4 hotel.

5 But that's where, you know, the

6 number -- I gave him I think my beeper number and

7 called him from the hotel and gave him a number

8 because it was a pay phone that I was talking

9 from. I never gave him the room number.

10 Q. You never told Hugh Arnold that you

11 were staying at the Chicago Hilton and Towers?

12 A. No, I don't recall mentioning to him I

13 was staying there. I called him from there and he

14 certainly knew I was calling him from there.

15 Q. Now, between March 26, 1995 and the

16 date that you had this voice mail message, had you

17 interviewed any LIUNA members?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Had you told anyone else where you were

20 staying other than the people we have gone

21 through?

22 A. The additional investigators that were

23 working with me that live in this area knew I was

24 staying there.


1 Q. Staying with the Sophisticated

2 Traveler, didn't you at some time recommend that

3 the LIUNA stop doing business with the

4 Sophisticated Traveler?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. And wasn't that because the husband of

7 the owner of Sophisticated Traveler had mob

8 associations?

9 A. Yes, that's correct.

10 Q. So that when did you first learn that

11 the Sophisticated Traveler was connected to the

12 mob?

13 A. That information was sometime after

14 this event occurred. I'm trying to think back

15 exactly. It was probably six months or later

16 after that investigation was completed.

17 Q. And the mob that I'm referring to is

18 the -- what has been referred to in various

19 documents as the New England family, Raymond

20 Patriarca, Jr.?

21 A. Yes, yeah.

22 Q. Did you recognize -- do you recognize

23 the voice on the voice mail?

24 A. No.


1 Q. To your knowledge has the FBI made any

2 arrests based upon the voice mail?

3 A. No.

4 MR. CARMELL: That's all I have on that

5 subject.

6 Mr. Vaira, what I'd like to do is two

7 things.

8 One, I'd like to move on to another

9 areas; and with respect to the areas that were our

10 colloquy, I'd like to have the opportunity to read

11 the transcript tonight, see exactly what is out

12 there.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: To make a proffer.

14 MR. CARMELL: Yes. See what the proffer of

15 proof is.

16 I presume Mr. Gow is going to be here

17 tomorrow in case it's going to be -- in case you

18 stayed with your ruling and it's going to be a

19 proffer of proof through question and answer so

20 that he may be here.

21 Am I correct? If not -- am I going to

22 hold him over?

23 THE WITNESS: I had a reservation to go out

24 tonight.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Here is my question.

2 You make the proffer through questions and give me

3 what you think the answer would be.

4 MR. CARMELL: All right. I can do that now

5 or I can do that later. I think if Mr. Gow is not

6 going to be here and if the proffer that you are

7 saying I have to make is mine, I will be both

8 attorney and witness.

9 Let me finish as much as I can with

10 Mr. Gow. Let me finish Mr. Gow.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. You are going on

12 to another subject.

13 MR. CARMELL: Well, yes, because I am not

14 going to be able to ask him these questions as I

15 understand your ruling.


17 MR. CARMELL: All right.


19 Q. Mr. Gow, you have seen the witness list

20 and you know that Ron Fino is on the list?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And is Ron Fino an adviser to you?


1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Is he a paid adviser?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. How much does he receive?

5 A. He receives an hourly rate and

6 expenses.

7 Q. And what is the hourly rate based on?

8 You will pay him for what?

9 A. Pay him for the times that we are

10 debriefing him for information that he prepares

11 for us, review of previous testimony, any -- I

12 shouldn't say witnesses. Other sources that he

13 may lead us to. Any other types of information

14 that he digs up that would appear to be of value

15 that we would evaluate it.

16 Q. Do you pay -- do you pay him for time

17 testifying?

18 A. He has -- yes, he has been paid for his

19 time when he has been testifying.

20 Q. Let me break it down, if I may, sir.

21 What is Mr. Fino's hourly rate?

22 A. $75 an hour at this time.

23 Q. And when you say that he is being paid

24 to testify, is that based on an hourly rate or is


1 there --

2 A. No.

3 Q. Let me finish my question, sir. It may

4 help out a bit.

5 Is it on an hourly rate or a flat rate?

6 A. No, it's on an hourly rate. It's not

7 based -- it's not being paid to testify. It's

8 being paid for his time away from his other work.

9 Q. What is Mr. Fino's other work?

10 A. Well, I think we are dealing with a

11 person that is --

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I have sustained a

13 prior objection to that in another proceeding. I

14 think in that other proceeding we described it

15 generically, did we not?

16 THE WITNESS: I wasn't there.

17 MR. CARMELL: We weren't there.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: We described it

19 generically. He described that he was in business

20 for himself.


22 Q. For Mr. Fino -- if Mr. Fino is called

23 as a witness here, he will be paid at an hourly

24 rate for his travel and for the time that he


1 testifies, is that correct?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. You have a written contract with Mr.

4 Fino?

5 A. We have a, we originally did; we have

6 not updated that. We are in the process of, you

7 know, redoing that.

8 MR. CARMELL: I'd like to have that written

9 contract, copy of that written contract, Mr.

10 Hearing Officer. If they can redact his address,

11 they can redact anything that is identified on it,

12 I would like to see what that contract is.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, is there any

14 argument that he -- we know he is getting so much

15 an hour. We know he is getting paid for travel.

16 He gets time and expenses. Is there anything else

17 in that contract of any --

18 THE WITNESS: That's it.

19 MR. CARMELL: Sir, it's not for them to tell

20 us what it is.

21 I've had the experience where I've

22 heard testimony, I've seen the provision in the

23 contract, which a particular party has forgotten

24 or considers it to be insignificant, which I


1 don't.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. All right.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Perhaps this would be brought

4 out by the time, if Mr. Fino in fact does testify,

5 maybe we can readdress this issue then. I have

6 never seen a contract. And I initially would

7 object to it, but --

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: We'll get it.

9 MR. CARMELL: Perfectly fine, that if

10 anything concerning Ron Fino comes in, I know that

11 what we refer to as 302s, FBI 302s are exhibits

12 here, with Ron Fino, I do want to see those, that

13 contract, if Mr. Bostwick decides to introduce

14 anything with respect to Ron Fino.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: I take it -- I saw his

16 name on the witness list.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct. His name is

18 on the witness list. If we call him, I guess we

19 can revisit this issue. I just don't think it's

20 appropriate at this time with this witness.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will be replowing

22 the ground a second time. So let us move on. If

23 that issue is relevant, we will certainly take

24 that on.



2 Q. Mr. Gow, I want you to look at GEB

3 Exhibit 145. You may have on -- can you see it?

4 We do have a smaller version of it.

5 A. I can see it.

6 Q. Better man than I.

7 Now, under the rubric, selected, select

8 officials, field representatives or delegates,

9 Joseph Abate, A-B-A-T-E, what time period does he

10 fall?

11 A. He would fall in the time period of

12 1970 to 1995, in that chart.

13 Q. For the full 25 years?

14 A. Well, at some point in time in there.

15 There is another chart that addresses that. And I

16 just can't recall off the top of my head. You

17 would have to look at that other chart.

18 Q. Do you know what -- did Joseph Abate

19 during the time period hold any position other

20 than a delegate to the District Council?

21 A. Again, I'd have to refer to that

22 chart. As best I can recall, I believe he did.

23 Q. Let me try and move this along a little

24 bit. If I asked you about any of the 13 people


1 who are listed under that rubric, can you tell me

2 what positions they held, other than delegate?

3 A. Some I could. Others, I'd have to

4 refer to the chart.

5 Q. Why don't you tell me what persons you

6 know, the positions they held.

7 A. Well, Vince Solano is a president of, I

8 believe it was Local 1.

9 Q. Okay.

10 A. DiForti was a, I believe a delegate,

11 field rep to the District Council. John Galioto

12 is an officer of, it's either 225 or 5.

13 Q. Wait, please understand my question.

14 What position did --

15 A. Of these select officials, of the reps.

16 Q. Yes, on the District Council.

17 A. Again, I'd have to refer to that

18 chart. I just, you know --

19 Q. Fine. Then we won't burden you. We

20 are not here to test your memory. We are here to

21 get the facts, if we can. If I ask you about the

22 dates of things, would you say the same thing?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. You would want to refer to the chart?


1 A. I'd have to refer to the chart. I

2 haven't, you know --

3 Q. Now, I want to discuss with you, as

4 you've already discussed, the structure of the

5 Chicago District Council. Now, the Chicago

6 District Council is governed by the Uniform

7 District Council Constitution, is that correct?

8 A. That's correct.

9 Q. Uniform District Council Constitution

10 is adopted by the convention of delegates at the

11 quadri -- "quintennial," every five years

12 convention, is that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And the current Uniform District

15 Council Constitution was adopted at the convention

16 in 1996, is that correct?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. And that was during the period of time

19 that you were -- that you were investigations

20 officer, is that correct?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. Did you have an opportunity to review

23 the Uniform District Council Constitution before

24 it was adopted by the delegates?


1 A. No.

2 Q. Did anybody ask you to?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Are you aware of any objection that was

5 raised by the General Executive Board Attorney to

6 the Uniform District Council Constitution as

7 adopted in 1996?

8 A. I can't recall any specifics. I stayed

9 out of that area.

10 Q. Getting to the structure, the members

11 of the District Council are delegates from

12 affiliated locals, is that correct?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. And the number of delegates from the

15 local is based on the number of members?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. The business manager of the local is a

18 delegate to the District Council by virtue of his

19 election to the office of business manager of the

20 local, is that correct?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. All the other delegates must be elected

23 as delegates in accordance with the Local Union

24 Uniform Constitution, isn't that correct?


1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. Now, the officers of the District

3 Council, in order to be a candidate for District

4 Council officer, you must be a delegate?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. And the District Council Executive

7 Board is composed of seven members, is that

8 correct?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. And the Executive Board of the District

11 Council acts between delegates at meetings, is

12 that correct?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. Now, in your review of the Chicago

15 District Council, did you find that there were

16 minutes kept by the Executive Board?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And did you receive all of the minutes,

19 as far as you know?

20 A. As far as I can recall, yes.

21 Q. For what period of time?

22 A. Again, it would be for the period of

23 1970 to 1995.

24 Q. And the delegates are to meet once


1 monthly, is that correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And you have minutes of the delegates'

4 meetings of the Chicago District Council, don't

5 you?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And did they meet basically monthly?

8 A. As best I can recall, yes.

9 Q. And that a quorum of delegates for

10 action at a meeting is the majority of the locals,

11 is that correct?

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. Now, from your examination of the

14 minutes, isn't it true that the Executive Board

15 minutes would be read to the delegates?

16 A. Let me make it clear that I did not

17 make an examination of the minutes. That was done

18 by other people. But you're correct in what

19 you're saying.

20 Q. And as far as you know, obviously from

21 reports from staff persons, and those minutes

22 would be put before the delegates for their

23 approval or disapproval, is that correct?

24 A. That's correct.


1 Q. And the finances of the District

2 Council were read to the delegates, is that

3 correct?

4 A. As best I can recall.

5 Q. And they were put to the delegates for

6 their approval or disapproval, is that correct?

7 A. Again, yes.

8 Q. Now, what, if you know, what were the

9 duties of the sergeant-at-arms in the District

10 Council?

11 A. Sergeant-of-arms is to maintain order,

12 to ensure that, so to speak, the bona fide people

13 are the ones that attend the meetings, that, you

14 know, no one that is not duly constituted is not

15 involved.

16 Q. Is the sergeant-at-arms a member of the

17 Executive Board?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Are you sure that he is a member of the

20 Executive Board?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Okay. One moment, please.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Article 5, article 5.

24 MR. CARMELL: Yeah.


1 MR. BOSTWICK: Perhaps if Mr. Carmell is

2 going to ask him or quiz him on the provisions of

3 the Constitution, we can refer him to the

4 provisions of the Constitution at hand. Is that

5 what --


7 Q. Is it your understanding that, from the

8 local union, that the delegates other than the

9 business manager have to be elected by the

10 membership of the local union?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And the Local Union Uniform

13 Constitution sets out the procedures for

14 nominations and elections?

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. Does the Uniform District Council

17 Constitution provide for the appointment to fill

18 vacancies in the Executive Board?

19 A. I believe it does.

20 Q. Do you have problems with that

21 provision?

22 A. I'm sorry, what?

23 Q. Do you have a problem with that

24 provision?


1 A. Do I have a problem with it?

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. No.

4 Q. Is that an undemocratic provision?

5 A. No. That's a standard practice.

6 Q. The Uniform District Council

7 Constitution provides that a term of office of

8 officers is four years, does that sound familiar

9 to you?

10 A. Four years?

11 Q. Four years, for the District Council?

12 A. I believe it was three.

13 Q. Well, I can refer you to the

14 provision.

15 A. I may be wrong.

16 Q. It doesn't matter.

17 Do you find that there's anything

18 undemocratic about having that term of office,

19 four years?

20 A. No.

21 Q. One of the allegations in the complaint

22 is that there has been no opposition for elections

23 in the District Council, do you recall that?

24 A. Yes.


1 Q. Do you find it undemocratic for a

2 candidate to be deemed to be elected if he or she

3 is not opposed?

4 A. That's a question I don't think I can

5 answer yes or no. There's a lot of factors that

6 become determinate there, and circumstances

7 surrounding that, that appointment or the

8 unopposed election.

9 If it's truly a democratic area, where

10 there is no opposition and everything is a level

11 playing field, I have no problem with it. When

12 there are other factors, I would say I have a

13 problem with it. It's not an easy,

14 straightforward answer.

15 Q. You have given me a straightforward

16 answer. I appreciate it. Let me see if I can

17 refine it.

18 There is no per se undemocratic

19 principle that unopposed candidates are duly

20 elected?

21 A. You're correct.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, that is

23 the Constitution. It has been I think in effect

24 for a while. There have been no challenges to


1 that. And that may be standard procedure

2 throughout the labor movement.

3 So whether he thinks it's bad or good

4 is, that may sound nice, but the law is pretty

5 well-established.

6 MR. CARMELL: That's a very -- that is what

7 surprises me, in which one of the allegations in

8 the complaint is that uncontested nominations is a

9 basis for this trusteeship, and also the fact that

10 offices were filled by, vacant offices were filled

11 by appointment.

12 That is how I read it. I read that.

13 There may be other things to go also. But that is

14 one of them. And I just want to clarify that this

15 is not a problem as he sees it.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Well, just to clarify --

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's what he said,

18 that is what he meant, he sees a problem or not.

19 I'm not moved by that.

20 MR. BOSTWICK: I also don't want a

21 mischaracterization of what he said. He said

22 without more, standing alone and per se, that --

23 MR. CARMELL: I tried to make that clear.

24 And it is.



2 Q. Are you aware that the uniform District

3 Council -- uniform District Council Constitution

4 does not require the election of officers of the

5 District Council by secret ballot?

6 A. I can't remember reading that in there.

7 MR. CARMELL: Well, I refer the Hearing

8 Officer --

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: I remember that.

10 That's a provision that is in there. It's not a

11 secret ballot.

12 MR. CARMELL: It doesn't have to be a secret

13 ballot.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Doesn't have to be.

15 Generally the practice throughout this union. It

16 varies. It varies, but it does not have to be.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: We are certainly willing to

18 stipulate to the provisions of the Constitution if

19 that's what we're doing here.


21 Q. If I could refer you to 145, so the

22 record is clear because there are circles on it,

23 the persons that Mr. Bostwick has circled have

24 been persons who have been named in documents


1 which we have such as the President's Commission

2 on Organized Crime, et cetera, is that correct?

3 A. That's correct.

4 Q. And the only officer listed from 1970

5 to the present who was within that category was

6 Alfred Pilotto who it looks like is the period

7 1975 to 1982, is that correct?

8 A. Per that chart and of the documents

9 themselves, but I think --

10 Q. That's -- I know what you don't mean to

11 do. I am just asking you because that's what is

12 circled here.

13 From the documents which you

14 testified --

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. -- about and that's all that was given

17 to you. There may be more. There may be others.

18 But what you testified to, only Alfred

19 Pilotto was one of the persons.

20 And within the category of select

21 officials, field representatives or delegates were

22 four, Frank DeMonte, Salvatore Gruttadauro,

23 Dominick Palermo and Vincent Solano, is that

24 correct?


1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. Let me try and tie GEB Exhibit 163 to

3 Exhibit 145.

4 We haven't discussed 163 yet. I'm

5 sorry. That hasn't been discussed yet as far as I

6 know.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's correct.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

9 MR. CARMELL: No, I am not going to.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: While it looks like

11 some other chart that you saw on paper this

12 morning. That's the confusing part about that.

13 MR. CARMELL: Yes, let me just look at those

14 for a moment.


16 Q. I'm going to do just one local union.

17 I am going to do GEB Exhibit 146, which would be

18 typical of all the other locals so I can attempt,

19 sir, to tie that into GEB 145.

20 Now, on 146 --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: That would be Local

22 Union 1.

23 MR. CARMELL: Yes, Local 1.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Local 1, okay.



2 Q. From 1970 to 1992 Vincent Solano,

3 although we don't know for the full period of time

4 because you have a note there, but at least for a

5 period of time Vincent Solano was the business

6 manager of Local 1, is that correct?

7 A. Correct.

8 Q. And as we already discussed by virtue

9 of his being the business manager of Local 1, he

10 became a delegate to the District Council?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. And to the extent that any of the other

13 persons listed on Local -- on Exhibit 146 were

14 delegates, they would have had to have been

15 elected by the local union membership, is that

16 correct?

17 A. That's correct.

18 Q. Now, you testified concerning seven

19 locals who were targets of your investigation, and

20 I am going to skip 1002 because they're out. We

21 have an LN-13 on that.

22 That is Local 1, Local 2, Local 5,

23 Local 225, Local 1001 and Local 1006, is that

24 correct?


1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. How many delegates do those seven

3 locals have at the District Council at the present

4 time?

5 A. At a minimum 14. I would have to go

6 and check the exact membership to tell you the

7 exact number.

8 Q. And at the present time how many total

9 delegates are there of the 21 locals in the

10 Chicago District Council?

11 A. It's somewhere in the neighborhood I

12 think of 70.

13 Q. If I told you 90, would that surprise

14 you?

15 A. No. I think that's correct -- I'm in

16 the ballpark, though, right?

17 Q. You are. Percentage here, a percentage

18 there.

19 Now, there are approximately 19 -- not

20 approximately -- you testified 19,243 members of

21 the 21 locals, according to the information you

22 had received --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. -- from the International.


1 How many members came from the seven

2 locals?

3 A. Oh, I didn't break that down. I'd have

4 to go back and take a look at that. I can get

5 that number, but I don't have it at my fingertips.

6 Q. Do you have any reasonable estimate,

7 not a guess?

8 A. No, I really don't without looking at

9 the figures and I'd have to add them up.

10 Q. Mr. Gow, what are the most important

11 leadership positions of the Chicago District

12 Council?

13 A. Business manager would be the number

14 one most important I'd say of the District

15 Council, then going down the rank order of the

16 Executive Board.

17 Q. So, the business manager and Executive

18 Board are the most important positions?

19 A. Yes.

20 MR. BOSTWICK: Well --


22 Q. Most important leadership positions?

23 A. Of the District Council.

24 Q. Yes.


1 A. Business manager.

2 Q. Business manager?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Now, the Complaint paragraph 5 --

5 throughout refers to three categories, mob

6 members, mob associates and mob relatives.

7 Would you, if you can, define for the

8 purposes of this Complaint a mob member.

9 A. A mob member would be an individual who

10 would be referred to as a made member of the mob.

11 An associate is a non-made member of organized

12 crime, an individual who works with the particular

13 group. And a relative -- was that the third one

14 you asked?

15 Q. Yes.

16 A. A relative would be just as it is, a

17 son, daughter, niece, nephew, something like that,

18 of a person who is identified as a made member.

19 Q. When you are using the definition of a

20 relative, sir, are you using the definition that

21 would have been used with your experience with the

22 FBI?

23 A. As a relative?

24 Q. Yes.


1 A. I guess I am.

2 Q. Is there any distinction between the

3 definition you are giving now and the definition

4 that is in the EDP of a relative?

5 A. No, I don't think so.

6 Q. EDP. I don't know that this fits your

7 definition. I just want to make sure we are all

8 going to be talking about the same thing.

9 It says a relative shall mean a lineal

10 descendent, step-child, ancestor, sibling or

11 spouse or child of a lineal descendent,

12 step-child, ancestor or sibling.

13 Are you aware of that definition?

14 A. I have read it in the past. I

15 certainly couldn't have quoted it there, but in

16 effect that's what I think --

17 Q. I couldn't either.

18 From your understanding of this

19 lawyer's piece, is a nephew a relative of an

20 uncle?

21 A. I would put him in that category.

22 Q. It's a lineal descendent?

23 A. Lineal.

24 Q. Okay. What do you understand the term


1 lineal descendent to mean, if you do understand it

2 at all?

3 I just want to know if you have a view

4 of what it is or if it's ever been defined

5 anyplace that you know of.

6 A. I have not other than I guess Webster's

7 breakdown of a lineal descendent. This is

8 something in discussion that has not come up

9 before.

10 For the defining of lineal descendent,

11 I would put in someone that is in the lineage of

12 an individual and that would -- I am not

13 explaining this exactly right. But, in other

14 words, a branch off of your family from you to

15 your sister to a someone off there I think would

16 fall in the lineal category.

17 Q. Doesn't sound like it to me, but that

18 is not what it is. Branches off would be second

19 cousins and third cousins.

20 A. Well --

21 Q. All right. So that we know, you know

22 of no policy statement or written definition that

23 had been given to the membership as to what

24 constitutes a lineal descendent?


1 A. I know of nothing other than what you

2 have read out of the EDP.

3 Q. Now, with respect to Exhibit 145, are

4 all of the persons who are circled there mob

5 members or were they mob members?

6 A. Yes. Yes.

7 Q. Were any of them mob relatives?

8 A. Well, yes. You are talking about

9 circled now.

10 Q. Yes, circled.

11 A. Not to my knowledge.

12 Q. Are any of the uncircled persons on GEB

13 Exhibit 145 are or were mob members?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Who?

16 A. James Caporale, John Matassa, Bruno

17 Caruso, Joe Mazza, John Galioto, Jimmy DiForti,

18 Dominick DiMaggio, Joseph Abate, Vincent DiVarco,

19 Craig Kumerow, Nicholas Gironda.

20 Q. Your testimony is that everyone you

21 named is a mob member, a made member of the mob?

22 A. Member or associate.

23 Q. Tell me which ones are mob members,

24 made members of the mob, as you've defined them.


1 A. John Matassa, Bruno Caruso, Jimmy

2 DiForti, Frank Demonte, Joseph Mazza, Vincent

3 Solano, and I believe Dominick DiMaggio.

4 I may be wrong.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: On whom? DiMaggio?


7 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm sorry. I didn't hear that

8 last answer.


10 A. I said on Dominick DiMaggio, I take

11 that back.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: He is not certain of

13 Dominick DiMaggio.


15 Q. With respect to Bruno Caruso, what is

16 your source of information or the basis for your

17 testifying that Bruno Caruso is a made member of

18 the mob?

19 A. Law enforcement sources.

20 Q. Documents?

21 A. Yes, documents, witness -- when I say

22 witness statements, cooperating witnesses.

23 Q. Is Bruno Caruso's name as being a made

24 member of the mob in any President's Commission on


1 Organized Crime report?

2 A. None that I can recall.

3 Q. Is he named as a made member of the mob

4 in any Senate hearings or Congressional hearings

5 that you know of?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Is he listed as a made member of the

8 mob in any Chicago Crime Commission report?

9 A. I can't recall with regard to Chicago

10 Crime Commission report.

11 Q. Let me go through again the basis upon

12 which you make the statement, Bruno Caruso is a

13 made member of the mob. And that is cooperating

14 witness statement?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Who is the name of the witness?

17 A. Can I give the names?

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Witness is asking a

19 question, editorially. He is asking the

20 question. Is there, Mr. Bostwick, an objection to

21 him answering that question?

22 MR. CARMELL: If Mr. Bostwick wanted to

23 object, he would have objected.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: No. I don't know if


1 you heard him. He said, can I give that out?

2 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Bostwick knows what he

3 wants to object to, Mr. Vaira.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, I assume that.

5 MR. CARMELL: I guess it's out on the table

6 now. So let's go protect all these sources, so

7 that we have no way of knowing who says what.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: For the record, Mr. Carmell, I

9 don't think that that required -- I will make a

10 statement on this, which is that there are other

11 witnesses that we will produce who are more

12 intimately familiar with the workings.

13 Mr. Gow can testify as to the names of

14 any individuals who gave information, to the

15 extent that he knows them and knows that they are

16 not protected, and knows that there is an ability

17 to give them.

18 If he does not know that information, I

19 guess he will testify to it, but --

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, he didn't

21 say that on direct. It just came out on cross.

22 So whatever you get on cross, you know, you get

23 what you're asking. He didn't put him out to say

24 that. I don't think he said that on direct.


1 MR. BOSTWICK: He was not offered as a

2 witness for this purpose. We have other witnesses

3 for this purpose.

4 But if you want to wander into this

5 area, that's fine.

6 MR. CARMELL: That's fine.


8 Q. Now, I want to know the names of the

9 people. Let's start first with those that are not

10 in protective custody. Give me the names of the

11 persons who have told -- upon which you base your

12 statement that Bruno Caruso is a made member of

13 the mob.

14 A. Several former FBI agents, Lee Flossi,

15 Bob Sigalski, Jack O'Rourke.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Go a little slower, so

17 she can hear who you are --


19 A. Lee Flossi, F-l-o-s-s-i, Jack O'Rourke,

20 Bob Sigalski, S-I-G-A-L-S-K-I.


22 Q. And that those were verbal statements

23 from them to you?

24 A. Yes. And there are written documents.


1 Q. What are the written documents?

2 A. Reports and interviews, etcetera. I

3 can't --

4 Q. From Mr. --

5 A. I can't give you right now a list of

6 what these documents are. In other words, we have

7 had numbers of meetings discussing these things,

8 and where this has been discussed and brought up

9 verbally based on a number of issues.

10 Q. Have you seen any law enforcement

11 agent -- have you seen the FBI organized crime

12 reports?

13 A. Since I've been in this job?

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. No, not the organized crime reports.

16 Q. Have you seen the 1992 organized crime

17 report from the FBI?

18 A. The public version, I believe we have a

19 copy of it back at the office.

20 Q. Did you see Bruno Caruso's name in

21 there at all?

22 A. No.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: What's the organized

24 crime report from the FBI? What is that?


1 THE WITNESS: There is a --

2 MR. CARMELL: It's an exhibit that's coming

3 in, began with the Appalachia and goes through the

4 FBI.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Just so we know what we

6 are talking about. He never mentioned it

7 earlier. I'm trying to catch up.

8 THE WITNESS: I'm not --

9 MR. CARMELL: Wanted by the Mob, FBI

10 Organized Crime Report, 25 Years After Valachi.

11 MR. BOSTWICK: Maybe you could, in fairness,

12 show it to him. That's Exhibit No. 3. It was not

13 introduced through Mr. Gow. He has not talked

14 about it yet. But if you want to refer to it,

15 maybe we should make sure we are not talking

16 apples and oranges.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: My question is here,

18 gentlemen, Mr. Gow got up, put some information

19 on, which you are asking about. He obviously has

20 some information other than he testified on

21 direct. Mr. Bostwick didn't offer him for that,

22 simply it may be because there are other persons

23 who know better or are closer to it.

24 So if you are getting nonresponsive


1 answers, he may have to dig up or go back. We are

2 not trying to hold you back. But I don't know if

3 he is prepared for all this.

4 You have the documents that you want to

5 refer to?

6 THE WITNESS: Yeah. I'd have to go back

7 through this again, in some of the questions he

8 asked me, and do a review. Off the top of my

9 head, I can't give a real definitive answer.


11 Q. John Matassa, is he listed in any of,

12 your PCOC report that you testified about?

13 A. The only one that he, that I recall he

14 was listed in, he was listed in as a relative, was

15 in the draft complaint.

16 Q. Talking about John Matassa.

17 A. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm going to have to --

18 I just can't give you an answer without doing some

19 review here. I just can't recall.

20 Q. Except for Alfred Pilotto, some of the

21 people you have circled down there, and I went

22 through these documents you gave us, gave to the

23 Hearing Officer, I didn't find Bruno Caruso, I

24 don't find John Matassa, and I don't find a lot of


1 other people that you have named. Does that

2 surprise you?

3 A. Does it surprise me?

4 Q. Yes, that they are not named as made

5 members of the mob?

6 A. Well, no, it doesn't surprise me, based

7 on the sum total of my knowledge.

8 And I think that this is what, you

9 know, you are going to hear further testimony from

10 other people that will address those factors.

11 Q. Okay. So you, to your knowledge,

12 though, you don't -- they are not in there, you

13 don't know why they wouldn't be in there?

14 A. I can't -- no, I don't.

15 Q. Final question. Is there anything in

16 the EDP that you know of that prevents a relative

17 of a mob member from being, from holding office in


19 A. No.

20 Q. Is there anything that you know of in

21 the EDP that prevents a relative of a mob

22 associate from holding office in LIUNA?

23 A. No. Again, it goes back to the

24 definition and associations here; and if it


1 doesn't meet the standards set out, there is

2 nothing wrong with it.

3 Q. So, just by being a relative of a mob

4 associate, you are not prohibited from holding any

5 office in LIUNA, isn't that correct?

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. And, finally, being the relative of a

8 mob relative will not prevent you from holding

9 office in LIUNA, is that correct?

10 A. That's correct.

11 MR. CARMELL: I have nothing further.

12 MR. BOSTWICK: I have a few quick

13 clarifications on the chart that Mr. Carmell was

14 referring to.



17 Q. Mr. Gow, could you take a look at

18 Exhibit No. 4, please, quickly, that binder.

19 A. No. 4.

20 Q. Yes.



23 Q. I'm sorry. I have got the wrong one.

24 Exhibit 5.


1 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's a white book

2 also. It's not here. Use mine.


4 Q. Mr. Carmell had said those are the only

5 names on the chart on Exhibit 145, the large

6 blowup, were the only individuals that had been

7 identified in these various public reports as

8 individuals associated with organized crime.

9 And I just wanted to clarify since I

10 erased that exhibit a couple of times that we have

11 in fact added a couple of others.

12 Can you refer to the chart in the back

13 of Exhibit 5.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. All right. Do you see the individuals

16 who are highlighted? There are two Frank

17 Caruso's. Remember we went through this?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. With Frank Michael Caruso, do you see

20 that individual?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. That was marked before. I had actually

23 erased it. I will add that back up there.

24 Do you also see I believe it's page 119


1 of this?

2 A. Of the second part.

3 Q. Which is under the tab of the prepared

4 statement of Mr. Hegarty, page 121 is what it

5 was. Page 121. Remember we had gone through that

6 case that we had a little bit of trouble

7 identifying the Hauser matter?

8 A. Right.

9 Q. Do you recall that testimony?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And we had indicated James Caporale, we

12 had circled that name as well.

13 A. And Al Pilotto.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Alfred Pilotto.


16 Q. And Al Pilotto as well. I am circling

17 these names on the charts.

18 Mr. Gow, one last question.

19 Have you ever done anything in the

20 investigation of any individual as a part of this

21 LIUNA reform process that you felt uncomfortable

22 with because it was directed either by the

23 Government or any International official?

24 A. No.


1 Q. What would you do if that happened?

2 A. I'd refuse to do it.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: No further questions.

4 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira.


6 MR. CARMELL: If I could have your attention.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am reading this

8 document. I am listening. I am standing so I can

9 get a little closer to the action.

10 MR. CARMELL: I would like you to hear the

11 last question and the last answer and tell me

12 whether I am now foreclosed from going into the

13 issues I wanted to that you told me I had to

14 proffer.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: I heard the last

16 question.

17 MR. CARMELL: He asked him is there anything

18 that he has ever done in this investigation that

19 wasn't basically on his own and he said no and I

20 would have quit or resigned, and I now want to

21 test that.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: He said anything --

23 MR. CARMELL: Why don't we -- I did not --



1 MR. CARMELL: I did not phrase it

2 appropriately.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I heard it. I heard

4 the question. Anything that you have been

5 asked -- referred to by the Department of Justice

6 or others that you felt uncomfortable with.

7 MR. CARMELL: Right.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is the term,

9 uncomfortable with. I am not sure what that

10 means.

11 MR. CARMELL: I want to explore what he is

12 comfortable with.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: We have referred to

14 that. We are not going to replow this ground. I

15 am not so sure what question it went to and how

16 probative it was. Did you do anything you were

17 uncomfortable with. We covered that. He felt

18 free to go wherever he wanted to go and no one

19 ever told him to do anything else.

20 Assume that they had. The question is

21 here we are in Chicago. We are talking about is

22 there organized crime in this particular District

23 Council and is there or is there not.

24 MR. CARMELL: No, sir, that is not the


1 question.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is the main

3 question.

4 MR. CARMELL: That is not the question that

5 was put to this witness on redirect and it is not

6 the answer that he gave.


8 MR. CARMELL: And you are going to let that

9 in, which it is, and you are not going to let me

10 examine, which you won't.

11 Let's leave that go.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, that

13 particular question and answer has about zilch

14 weight to me. That's why I was down here looking

15 at the table and somebody called me and asked me

16 if I really heard that.

17 I heard it. It didn't -- I don't think

18 it's probative of anything. So, gentlemen, let's

19 go on.

20 MR. CARMELL: Well, then I am going to go on

21 with my proffer now if I can.


23 MR. CARMELL: We don't need him on the stand

24 obviously since you are not going to allow him to


1 answer.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Are you going to

3 proffer what you expected to prove and what he is

4 expected to answer?

5 MR. CARMELL: I have 15 pages of questions

6 and answers. The answers are very short and the

7 questions are relatively short.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. This goes under

9 the proffer of what you would expect to hear from

10 Mr. Gow.

11 MR. CARMELL: Right.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Go ahead.

13 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, two points of

14 clarification. Will we get a copy of those as the

15 proffer?

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think he is going to

17 put them in the record.

18 MR. CARMELL: Right.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: You are going to read them on

20 the record now.

21 MR. CARMELL: Yes.

22 MR. BOSTWICK: The second point of

23 clarification is because of the -- because the

24 introduction of the tape was a little out of


1 sequence I can't recall whether we moved its

2 admission with the transcript.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think you did.

4 MR. BOSTWICK: I wanted to clarify.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: I believe we ruled.

6 MR. CARMELL: I want to move to strike it

7 because --

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Move to strike.

9 Gentlemen, I am not convinced of the

10 probative value of that tape recording and the

11 testimony. I don't know what it connects up

12 with. As I said, other matters I will permit to

13 be introduced into the record. Right now somebody

14 has got to give me some other indication of what

15 that proves.

16 All right. Go ahead. Let's hear your

17 proffer.

18 MR. CARMELL: "Q. Arthur A. Coia was

19 General President since 1993?

20 "A. Yes.

21 "Q. Arthur A. Coia is the son of

22 Arthur E. Coia, who was LIUNA's General

23 Secretary-Treasurer?

24 "A. Yes.


1 "Q. Arthur A. Coia is under

2 investigation at the present time by the

3 Inspector General?

4 "A. Yes.

5 "Q. Arthur A. Coia is fully

6 subject to the EDP including removal for

7 barred conduct?

8 "A. Yes.

9 "Q. Isn't it true that the

10 Department of Justice has stated that it is

11 of the opinion that Coia, Arthur A. Coia,

12 became General President because he was the

13 son of his father?

14 "A. Yes.

15 "Q. Isn't it correct that the

16 Department of Justice is of the opinion that

17 Arthur A. Coia became president -- strike

18 that -- that Arthur A. Coia's father was

19 mobbed up?

20 "A. Yes.

21 "Q. Are you aware of the

22 Department of Justice first draft civil RICO

23 complaint under cover of a November 4, 1994

24 letter?


1 "A. Yes.

2 "Q. Are you aware that the draft

3 RICO complaint named all of the members of

4 LIUNA's General Executive Board as

5 Defendants in their official capacities?

6 "A. Yes.

7 "Q. Are you aware that that

8 complaint named Coia as a Defendant in both

9 his official and individual capacities?

10 "A. Yes.

11 "Q. Are you aware that the RICO

12 complaint alleged that Coia, quote,

13 'associated with and been controlled and

14 influenced by organized crime'?

15 "A. Yes.

16 "Q. Are you aware that that

17 complaint alleged that, quote, 'Coia has

18 been associating with the members of the New

19 England LCN family for a substantial period

20 of time'?

21 "A. Yes.

22 "Q. Are you aware that in the

23 complaint Coia was a Defendant in the United

24 States vs. Arthur A. Coia, et al., in the


1 Southern District of Florida?

2 "A. Yes.

3 "Q. Are you aware that the

4 Florida indictment charged that between 1973

5 and 1976 Coia and his father as officers,

6 agents and employees of LIUNA, quote, 'did

7 knowingly receive, agree to receive and

8 solicit a fee, kickback, commission and a

9 thing of value, that is, money, in the

10 amount in excess of $25,000 from Joseph

11 Hauser and Farmers National Insurance

12 Company because of him intent to be

13 influenced with respect to their actions,

14 decisions and other duties relating to

15 questions and matters concerning the

16 Massachusetts Laborers Health and Welfare

17 Fund'?

18 "A. Yes.

19 "Q. Are you aware that the

20 complaint also alleged that Coia shared the

21 amount greater than $25,000 with, quote,

22 'co-conspirator Raymond Patriarca'?

23 "A. Yes.

24 "Q. Are you aware that the


1 complaint also charged that between 1973 and

2 1976 Coia and his father as officers, agents

3 and employees of LIUNA, quote, 'did

4 knowingly receive, agree to receive and

5 solicit a fee, kickback, commission, thing

6 of value, that is, money, in an unknown

7 amount greater than $25,000 from Joseph

8 Hauser and Farmers National Insurance

9 Company with cause of and with intent to be

10 influenced with respect to their actions,

11 decisions and other duties relating to the

12 Rhode Island Laborers District Council

13 Health and Welfare Fund'?

14 "A. Yes.

15 "Q. And are you aware that the

16 RICO complaint alleged that Coia shared the

17 amount greater than $25,000 with, quote,

18 'co-conspirator Raymond Patriarca'?

19 "A. Yes.

20 "Q. Are you aware that the

21 complaint alleged that the acts by Coia were

22 in violation of 18 USC Section 1954?

23 "A. Yes.

24 "Q. Are you aware that the Joseph


1 Hauser in the Florida indictment is the

2 Joseph Hauser whose declaration is GEB

3 Attorney Exhibit 18?

4 "A. Yes.

5 "Q. Are you aware that the civil

6 complaint alleged that Raymond Patriarca was

7 from at least 1970 until his death in 1984

8 the boss of the New England LCN family?

9 "A. Yes.

10 "Q. Are you aware that the acts

11 by Coia alleged in the Florida indictment

12 constitute barred conduct as defined in the

13 EDP?

14 "A. Yes.

15 "Q. Are you aware that the first

16 RICO complaint alleged that Coia had

17 conspired to and did unlawfully, knowingly

18 and intentionally engage in a pattern of

19 racketeering activity in violation of 18 USC

20 1962?

21 "A. Yes.

22 "Q. Are you aware that this

23 allegation constitutes barred conduct by

24 Coia under the EDP?


1 "A. Yes.

2 "Q. Are you aware that the first

3 RICO complaint alleged that Coia had

4 extorted LIUNA membership through force in

5 violation of 18 USC Section 1951?

6 "A. Yes.

7 "Q. Are you aware that this

8 allegation constitutes barred conduct by

9 Coia under the EDP?

10 "A. Yes.

11 "Q. Are you aware that the first

12 RICO complaint alleged that from 1986 to

13 about July 31, 1994, covering a period of

14 time that Coia was general president, that

15 Coia conspired to and did extort money from

16 LIUNA locals in violation of 18 USC Sections

17 1951 and 1952?

18 "A. Yes.

19 "Q. Are you aware that this

20 allegation constitutes barred conduct by

21 Coia under the EDP?

22 "A. Yes.

23 "Q. Are you aware that the first

24 RICO complaint alleged that from 1986 to


1 about July 31, 1994, covering the period of

2 time while Arthur Coia was general president

3 of LIUNA, that Coia conspired to and did

4 defraud LIUNA locals in violation of 18 USC

5 sections 1341, 1346 and 2?

6 "A. Yes.

7 "Q. Are you aware that this

8 allegation constitutes barred conduct by

9 Coia under the EDP?

10 "A. Yes.

11 "Q. Are you aware that the first

12 RICO complaint sought to have Coia

13 permanently barred from holding any LIUNA

14 office and from participating in any way

15 with the management of any LIUNA entity or

16 benefit fund?

17 "A. Yes.

18 "Q. Are you aware that the

19 Department of Justice representative Coffey,

20 on July 25, 1996, testified before the House

21 Committee that the DOJ believed that the

22 information in the first RICO complaint

23 concerning Coia is true and correct, and

24 that that was under oath?


1 "A. Yes.

2 "Q. Are you aware that as of

3 October 7, 1994, and July 25, 1996, as

4 testified to by Michael Ross, supervisory

5 agent, FBI, before the House Committee, that

6 the FBI was of the opinion that, quote,

7 "Coia is a criminal associate of the New

8 England Patriarca organized crime family,"

9 end of quote?

10 "A. Yes.

11 "Q. Are you aware that Coia has

12 an arrest record?

13 "A. Yes.

14 "Q. Mr. Gow, do you confer daily,

15 did you tell the Los Angeles Times on

16 September 12, 1995, that you conferred daily

17 with Coia and the GEB Attorney?

18 "A. Yes.

19 "Q. Were you present at the

20 House, did you hear the House Committee

21 testimony by Mr. Luskin that the GEB

22 Attorney has taken two depositions of Coia,

23 which the DOJ considered too lenient in

24 questioning?


1 "A. Yes.

2 "Q. Are you aware that Mr. Luskin

3 told the committee that the GEB Attorney was

4 going to take another dep of Coia in early

5 August, 1996?

6 "A. Yes.

7 "Q. Have charges been brought

8 under the EDP against Arthur A. Coia?

9 "A. No.

10 "Q. Has the General Executive

11 Board Attorney begun proceedings with a

12 complaint for trusteeship over LIUNA?

13 "A. No."

14 That's the proffer.

15 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, if I can comment on

16 that briefly, for the record, we do not oppose the

17 asking of any of those questions. I can't tell

18 what you Mr. Gow's answers are going to be.

19 I think it's probative of absolutely

20 nothing as a theoretical matter. It is nothing

21 more than if, in the Buffalo trusteeship matter,

22 the attorneys had stood up and said, you haven't

23 yet brought an action against Vince Solano and

24 Bruno Caruso.


1 I don't think it's -- what we are

2 talking about is the Chicago Laborers' District

3 Council. Mr. Gow obviously cannot discuss

4 specific investigations of any individuals, just

5 as he couldn't discuss an investigation of

6 individuals that are part of the Chicago District

7 Council.

8 But as to many of those questions, I

9 would stipulate to some of those answers. As to

10 many of them, I would not. But Mr. Gow is the

11 witness. I simply don't, don't interpose an

12 objection on that.

13 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me, Mr. Vaira. I missed

14 some questions.


16 MR. CARMELL: I want to finish the proffer.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I said that

18 I thought this line of questioning was irrelevant

19 to this issue. The issue is, I don't care how

20 many other persons they haven't prosecuted; and if

21 they are going to prosecute, fine.

22 I have also given the rule once before

23 in an election process, election appeal, that the

24 Department of Justice original complaint was not a


1 complaint that was ever filed. It was a working

2 draft. And since that time, a great deal of that

3 complaint has proved, at least in information I've

4 heard, not really trustworthy.

5 And on top of that, the Department of

6 Justice still has that plug in the pool. And if

7 they don't think it's working, then I'm sure they

8 would pull it. So all of that is really

9 irrelevant. I'm here to find out, are these

10 people involved in organized crime.

11 If we are going to hear a case against

12 Mr. Coia tomorrow, then I'll hear it against him.

13 Right now, let's go on with this case. And that's

14 what I'm here to hear. I'm not here to hear a

15 thousand explanations why we haven't prosecuted

16 another 40 other persons out there. All right?

17 MR. CARMELL: I'd like to ask Mr. Gow --


19 MR. CARMELL: -- proffer four questions.



22 Q. Mr. Gow, as Inspector General, is each

23 case carefully reviewed to ensure that all

24 allegations have been aggressively pursued and the


1 matter brought to logical conclusions?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Is it --

4 MR. BOSTWICK: Sorry. Is this a proffer or

5 is this --

6 MR. CARMELL: No. It's a question to him.

7 This directly goes to --

8 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm sorry. I thought you were

9 still proffering.


11 A. If, could I explain a little bit?

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm not sure what --

13 ask him that again.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: Ask him that again.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm not sure what that

16 question meant.


18 Q. Let me put it another way then.

19 In the September, October, 1995

20 Laborer, your report, you said, quote, "Each case

21 is carefully reviewed to ensure that all

22 allegations have been aggressively pursued and the

23 matter brought to logical conclusion," end of

24 quote.


1 A. Yes.

2 Q. You said that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. That is a fact?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Still is a fact?

7 A. Still is.

8 Q. Is the Inspector General authorized to

9 investigate and prosecute corruption by officers

10 of the International Union?

11 A. Absolutely.

12 Q. Is the IG authorized to investigate and

13 prosecute corruption by officers of the District

14 Councils?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And of the local unions?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And did you write in The Laborer from

19 May, June, 1995 that your, quote, "mandate is to

20 serve the union member to the best of his ability,

21 and to guarantee a union free of corruption," end

22 of quote?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Was that true then?


1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Has it remained true today?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. That's all I have, Mr. Witness.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I've ruled.

6 I'm taking the offer of proof, but for whatever

7 the questions, and I would take them as if that

8 would be the answer. That is still irrelevant to

9 this proceeding. So let's proceed.

10 MR. BOSTWICK: I would call --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay, Mr. Gow, thank

12 you.

13 MR. BOSTWICK: I call Mr. Jack O'Rourke.

14 I take it Mr. Gow can be excused.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, he can.

16 (Witness excused).


18 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly

19 sworn.)


21 called as a witness herein, having been first duly

22 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:




1 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, can you state your name

2 for the record, please?

3 A. Yes, John J. O'Rourke. That's spelled

4 O'-R-o-u-r-k-e.

5 Q. What is your current employment?

6 A. I am an inspector with the Office of

7 the Inspector General, LIUNA.

8 Q. How long have you held that position?

9 A. Since May of 1996, to the present.

10 Q. What is the nature of your work for


12 A. Conduct investigations of corruption

13 and alleged organized crime influence in the

14 Laborers' Union in the Chicago area.

15 Q. Have you had any prior experience in

16 law enforcement?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. Can you describe that for us?

19 A. I was a special agent for the Office of

20 Naval Intelligence, at Chicago, in Washington,

21 D.C., for six years. I then joined the FBI and

22 served 26 years, various offices, 23 years in the

23 Chicago office.

24 Upon retirement, in 1995, I became an


1 inspector with the Cook County Sheriff's Office,

2 and was assigned to the FBI task force, and in the

3 FBI offices in Chicago.

4 I resigned that job in May, 1996, and

5 at that point became inspector with the Office of

6 the Inspector General.

7 Q. In total, Mr. O'Rourke -- well, first,

8 did some of those positions involve the

9 investigation of organized crime in Chicago?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. In total, how many years did you spend

12 in law enforcement, investigating organized crime

13 related activity in Chicago area?

14 A. I have 32 years as a law enforcement

15 officer, 23 years directly investigating organized

16 crime in the Chicago area.

17 Q. For clarification purposes, what period

18 of time were you talking about when you are

19 talking about this span of 32 years in organized

20 crime related --

21 A. I was transferred --

22 Q. -- investigations?

23 A. -- transferred to Chicago in 1973, and

24 worked until I retired, and then for a year and a


1 half afterwards, with the task force, primarily

2 engaged in investigating organized crime in

3 Chicago.

4 Q. Can you estimate for us the number of

5 organized crime investigations you have worked on

6 in this period?

7 A. Several hundred in that period.

8 Q. Can you estimate the number of

9 organized crime convictions you played a role in

10 during that period?

11 A. Either as case agent or as part of a

12 team of FBI agents working the same case,

13 approximately 70, 75.

14 Q. Did you receive any awards during that

15 period of time?

16 A. Yes, sir. I received approximately 100

17 accommodations from the director of the FBI or

18 various law enforcement agencies, and also

19 received an award from the Chicago Chamber of

20 Commerce in 1991 for excellence in law

21 enforcement.

22 Q. Have you held any teaching positions?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. What did you teach?


1 A. I was a field police instructor with

2 the FBI, in hostage negotiations, crisis

3 negotiations, criminal psychology, informant

4 development and organized crime cases.

5 Q. Throughout the hearing, you and other

6 witnesses will be referring to a number of terms.

7 And I'd like to get you at the outset to provide

8 definitions of some of those terms.

9 First thing I would want you to do is

10 take a look at Exhibit 3, if you can.

11 What is this document, Exhibit 3?

12 A. These seem to be out of order. Here it

13 is. Excuse me.

14 This is a booklet put out by the

15 Federal Bureau of Investigation, on 25 Years After

16 Valachi. It was an informational booklet put out

17 by FBI headquarters to the general public and law

18 enforcement.

19 Q. Is it a true and correct copy of that

20 document that was distributed by the FBI,

21 describing mob activities?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 MR. BOSTWICK: I move for the admission of

24 Exhibit 3.


1 MR. CARMELL: No objection.


3 admitted, sir.

4 (WHEREUPON, said document,

5 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

6 No. 3, for identification, was

7 offered and received in evidence as

8 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 3.)

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: By the national, this

10 is by the national office, am I correct? The

11 FBI?

12 THE WITNESS: Yes, correct.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Public document?

14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.



17 Q. If I can turn you to the, or refer you

18 to the fourth page -- I'm including the cover

19 page, they don't have numbers on the bottom,

20 but -- my copy doesn't seem to. You see that

21 quote that is in brackets, defining organized

22 crime?

23 A. Yes, sir, I do.

24 Q. Could you read the FBI's definition of


1 organized crime?

2 A. The Federal Bureau of Investigation

3 defines organized crime as any group having some

4 manner of formalized structure and whose primary

5 objective is to obtain money through illegal

6 activities.

7 Such groups maintain their position

8 through the use of violence or threats of

9 violence, corrupt public officials, graft or

10 extortion, and generally have a significant impact

11 on the people in their locals or region or the

12 country as a whole. One major crime group

13 epitomizes this definition, La Cosa Nostra.

14 Q. Does La Cosa Nostra, to your knowledge,

15 have a code of conduct?

16 A. Yes, sir, they do.

17 Q. Can you, is that referenced in this

18 booklet here?

19 A. Yes, sir, it is.

20 Q. Can you tell us --

21 A. It's on Page 6.

22 Q. Can you describe for us that code of

23 conduct, based on that?

24 A. Yes, sir. The LCN code consists of, to


1 put the organization above wife, children, country

2 or religion, to follow orders of his captain

3 without question, even to include murder, to

4 furnish no information or help to a law

5 enforcement agency, to pay assessments imposed

6 upon him by his captain, regardless of purpose, to

7 disclose nothing about the organization to

8 outsiders, to respect all members, despite

9 personal feelings, to pay debts owed other

10 members, never to injure, steal from or make

11 disparaging remarks about other members, and to

12 refrain from associating with other members'

13 wives, sisters or daughters, except with honorable

14 intentions.

15 Q. Are you aware of whether the LCN exists

16 in the Chicago area?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. What role does corruption play in the

19 LCN?

20 A. Corruption and graft is essential to

21 the operation of the LCN or the Chicago Outfit as

22 it's called here.

23 Q. In Chicago, where have you found

24 evidence of Outfit corruption in your 32 years in


1 law enforcement?

2 A. Evidence of corruption exists in

3 Chicago in political corruption, in police

4 corruption, in judicial corruption, in labor

5 unions, with City government and so on.

6 Q. What methods are used to further

7 corruption?

8 A. To further corruption, cash, money,

9 bribery, violence, threats of violence.

10 Q. Does the FBI keep an inventory

11 classifying associates and members of the Chicago

12 Outfit?

13 A. Yes, sir, they do.

14 Q. How does the FBI define the term made

15 member of the Chicago Outfit?

16 A. A made member is an individual who has

17 gone through some form of ceremony and is taken

18 into the organization and is made a member.

19 It indicates he then shares in the

20 profits of the organization and has certain

21 prerogatives, respect paid to him by other

22 members, the ability to have his own crew, to put

23 money out on the street as juice loans, to extort

24 bookmakers and take them under his control and


1 various other prerogatives that nonmembers do not

2 have.

3 Q. How does the FBI define the term

4 associate of La Cosa Nostra or the Chicago Outfit?

5 A. An associate is one who works on behalf

6 of a made member of organized crime and there are

7 probably 10 to 20 associate members for every made

8 member, which is kept small. The associate

9 members are individuals who hope some day to be

10 made members of the Outfit.

11 They do the day-to-day tasks,

12 collecting street tax, contacting bookmakers,

13 settling up debts, the regular work of the mob on

14 a day-to-day basis under the direction normally of

15 lieutenants and of bosses who are made members.

16 Q. Do some of these associates work in

17 businesses or other areas?

18 A. Yes, sir. Some of the associates would

19 be individuals who are not out actually doing the

20 day-to-day work but who are under the influence

21 and control of organized crime.

22 They could be business owners,

23 bookmakers, individuals in a position --

24 attorneys, police officers, individuals who are in


1 a position to do favors and perform tasks at the

2 direction of organized crime.

3 Q. What criteria, Mr. O'Rourke, is used by

4 the FBI to put an individual on the inventory of

5 the FBI as a member or associate of organized

6 crime?

7 A. With regards to a made member, the FBI

8 has rather stringent requirements. The

9 requirements are that two made members who perhaps

10 are picked up on a wiretap discussing a third

11 would be sufficient.

12 A made member discussing in front of an

13 undercover FBI agent with another individual who

14 is a made member, a third member, would be

15 sufficient.

16 Generally two confidential informants

17 independently who identify an individual as a made

18 member would be required before they are put on

19 the list as identifiable made members or suspected

20 made members.

21 Q. Have you had a chance to review those

22 charts during the course -- not charts -- the

23 inventory, the FBI inventory, of members and

24 associates of organized crime in the Chicago area?


1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. That's during the course of your 32

3 years in the FBI?

4 A. Yes, sir. And of course it's added to

5 and then taken away from as individuals die or

6 become retired or as new individuals are

7 identified and put on the list. So it changes

8 periodically.

9 Q. Are mistakes made occasionally so that

10 people are in fact taken off if new information

11 arises?

12 A. If information arises that the

13 individual is not actively involved or is not a

14 made member, of course they are taken off.

15 Q. And they are added to?

16 A. And they are added to as information

17 comes in from various sources.

18 Q. Let me ask you to define a few more

19 terms that you have mentioned already but we

20 haven't defined them. What is --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Before you do, can I

22 clarify a question.

23 Let's go back to associate. Earlier

24 you said that an associate are persons who are


1 working and want to become made members. Later on

2 your definition was they could be persons who

3 would be policemen, lawyers, persons who were

4 working under everyday occupations.

5 Can you explain those two -- sort of

6 conflict there.

7 THE WITNESS: Well, there is a conflict, yes,

8 sir.

9 Some individuals are actively out every

10 day, street tax collectors, enforcers, who are

11 threatening individuals to collect moneys, who are

12 criminals themselves and who aspire to become made

13 members.

14 Other individuals are under the control

15 and influence of organized crime, do their

16 bidding, protect them.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: But those persons have

18 no chance of ever becoming a member of the -- a

19 made member.

20 THE WITNESS: That's correct.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: So you gave an example

22 of a Norwegian store owner. He runs a grocery

23 store. Pretty fat chance of him ever becoming a

24 made member of the LCN.


1 If he does the work of them, either

2 reporting or doing something in favor, would you

3 say that person can be an associate?

4 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. If an individual is

5 identified as doing the work and associating with

6 organized crime, then the working definition is he

7 would be an associate.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: So the persons need not

9 be engaged in illegal activity every day to be an

10 associate.

11 THE WITNESS: That's correct, yes, sir.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Now, what about this

13 criteria of classifying somebody as a made

14 member? You said that you needed two made members

15 overheard talking about it. You also had one

16 other definition of two confidential sources.

17 Would you explain that, what you mean

18 by two confidential sources talking about it.

19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. Not talking about

20 it. Two confidential sources reporting to the FBI

21 independently of each other that a certain

22 individual is known to them as a made member based

23 on their own membership in organized crime as

24 associates.



2 have informant, better informants and top echelon

3 informants, some that have never been tested.

4 Do you have some sort of criteria about

5 the quality of the informants who talk about a

6 person before you identify him as a made member,

7 in other words, you get a -- one third level

8 sometimes reliable informant saying that Smith is

9 an organized crime member and then you get another

10 person just like the same -- same level of

11 informant. Would those two informants, half-baked

12 informants, would that be sufficient?

13 THE WITNESS: No, sir. They would have to be

14 proven reliable informants and individuals who are

15 in fact themselves involved in organized crime,

16 identifiable organized crime activities that have

17 inside information.

18 Two informants, for instance, who would

19 be reporting on cartage thieves and would not have

20 access, that would not be acceptable. Has to be

21 organized crime informants involved in organized

22 crime activities on a day-to-day basis.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. You may go

24 ahead.



2 Q. You referred to a few terms as you went

3 along there. I want to clarify their meaning.

4 What is street tax?

5 A. A street tax is an extortionate

6 collection of money by organized crime. What it

7 involves is a payment by individuals or businesses

8 engaged in illegal activities, chop shops,

9 bookmakers.

10 Q. What is a chop shop?

11 A. Chop shop is a salvage yard which

12 specializes in chopping up stolen cars and then

13 selling the parts off on an illegal market. The

14 fact that that's going on and it's illegal would

15 be enough for the Chicago Outfit to send

16 individuals out and collect a monthly tribute from

17 them for allowing them to continue to operate.

18 Could be, as I say -- bookmakers are

19 often the object of extortion street tax

20 collection, porno bookstores, any individual

21 engaged in some sort of illegal activity,

22 prostitution and so on.

23 Q. What is a juice loan?

24 A. A juice loan is an illegal loan made to


1 individuals by members of organized crime. The

2 interest -- there is no legal validity.

3 Individuals generally are poor risks. They are

4 generally burglars, gamblers, individuals who have

5 some problem and a need for money.

6 The loans are made out by Outfit

7 loansharks, juice men. The individual has to be

8 vouched for by an Outfit member, is brought to a

9 loanshark. The money is provided and then the

10 juice or the monthly or the weekly payment is

11 generally 5 percent as a rule of thumb. Sometimes

12 3, but usually 5 percent interest each week.

13 Q. Each week. How much does that work out

14 to be a year?

15 A. That would work out to be 260 percent

16 per year interest, and generally it does not come

17 off the principal. That is just the juice or the

18 interest to get the loan.

19 Q. What occurs if an individual does not

20 pay on their juice loan in your experience?

21 A. In my experience talking to victims of

22 juice loans they are required to show

23 identification, give their driver's license,

24 provide their home address and other details.


1 Q. Why is that?

2 A. So that they can be found and the money

3 collected and the threat is very clear at the

4 outset that if you do not pay the weekly juice,

5 the weekly payment, on the loan, then violence can

6 and may then ensue. They can be beaten. They

7 will be threatened, beaten, possibly killed as a

8 result of nonpayment of the loan.

9 Q. What if an individual who's taken a

10 juice loan doesn't pay. Is there any effect on

11 the sponsor of the individual, the Outfit or LCN

12 sponsor?

13 A. Yes, sir. Normally the individual who

14 vouches for the loan recipient or the victim is

15 responsible for collection of that money. If the

16 victim or the recipient doesn't pay or flees, then

17 the Outfit member who vouched for them is

18 responsible for paying or collecting the money.

19 The money must come in on a weekly basis and goes

20 up the line to the bosses of the Outfit.

21 Q. What is a crew or a street crew?

22 A. Street crew is the lowest level of the

23 organization of the Outfit in Chicago.

24 Historically there have been six or five or six


1 identifiable street crews.

2 It's headed by a boss who usually is

3 assisted by lieutenants on the street who control

4 a number of organized crime associates who do the

5 actual work of collecting moneys, shaking down

6 bookmakers, chop shop owners, collecting whatever

7 moneys, contacting people and so on.

8 Q. What are some of the -- first, are you

9 aware of some of the crews that have existed in

10 Chicago over time?

11 A. Yes, sir, I am.

12 Q. Can you describe for us just a brief

13 overview of what those crews are?

14 A. Historically there was a south suburban

15 Chicago Heights crew. There was the -- there is

16 the 26th Street Chinatown crew, which has existed

17 since the days of Al Capone, the Cicero crew based

18 in Cicero and the western suburbs, the Elmwood

19 Park crew, the Grand Avenue crew and north side or

20 the Rush Street crew.

21 Q. You have discussed a little bit in

22 response to Mr. Vaira's question the notion of

23 sources and source information. I'd like to

24 clarify that a little bit further still.


1 What is the definition of a source as

2 distinguished from a cooperating witness or some

3 other individual who gives you information?

4 A. A source or a confidential informant is

5 an individual who provides information to the FBI

6 on a confidential basis concerning illegal

7 activities and who wishes his identity protected

8 and he does not want to testify in open court

9 because of his fear of retribution.

10 Q. Where does law enforcement like

11 yourself while you were in the Bureau, where could

12 you get a picture of the identity, structure and

13 workings of the Chicago Outfit?

14 A. The picture is gathered through

15 convictions of mob members, through prosecutions

16 in Federal Court, through confidential informants'

17 information, through cooperating witnesses who

18 cooperate with the FBI and then testify in Federal

19 Court, subjects to agree to plead guilty and then

20 provide information on their organized crime past

21 and associates, through wiretaps, court authorized

22 Title III wiretaps, through consensual recordings

23 of a victim, witnesses, for instance, paying off

24 juice men or being threatened or even being beaten


1 or undercover operations in which FBI agents are

2 introduced into the organized crime scene by a

3 cooperating witness generally or a cooperating

4 informant and then taken in and recordings are

5 made, surveillances as well.

6 Q. Have you personally participated in

7 every law enforcement phase that you have just

8 described, surveillances, undercover operations,

9 court cases and the like?

10 A. Yes, sir, I have.

11 Q. I'd like to turn your attention now to

12 the structure and leadership of the Outfit in

13 Chicago. Before I do, over the course of your

14 career, have you spoken personally to cooperating

15 witnesses who are actually associates of the

16 Chicago Outfit?

17 A. Yes, sir, I have.

18 Q. Can you name a few of those

19 individuals?

20 A. Yes, I can. Leonard Patrick, Mario

21 Ranone, James Lavalle, Guy Bills, Richard Mara,

22 Nick Geo.

23 Q. Did you ever speak to a Gerald

24 Scarpelli?


1 A. Gerald Scarpelli, yes, sir.

2 Q. Are there others that you are not

3 remembering off the top of your head?

4 A. There are others that I can't recall,

5 yes, sir.

6 Q. Did you discuss with each of these

7 individuals the identities of other associates and

8 made members of the Chicago Outfit?

9 A. Yes, sir, I did.

10 Q. Let's take one of these individuals as

11 an example. Did Mr. Scarpelli provide you with an

12 overview of the leadership of the Chicago Outfit?

13 A. Yes, sir, he did.

14 Q. Why don't you take a look at Exhibit

15 49. We will pull that out. Probably easiest if

16 you pull the entire file out because the numbers

17 are in the front, not the back.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Before you mention

19 Mr. Scarpelli, Mr. Leonard Patrick, was he still

20 cooperating with you?

21 THE WITNESS: No, sir.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Couldn't have now,

23 because you are long gone. When you left was he

24 cooperating?


1 THE WITNESS: He was still being interviewed

2 by the FBI but since that time he's medically been

3 shown to be suffering from Alzheimer's or

4 medically incompetent. So, legally he is no

5 longer able to testify.


7 prosecuted Lenny Patrick. I prosecuted him when I

8 was a federal prosecutor, having nothing to do

9 with organized crime. It had to do with contempt,

10 refusal to testify, short trial. He just refused

11 to testify and found in contempt. That was it. I

12 was the lead prosecutor. Okay. I have never

13 spoken to Lenny Patrick.


15 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, you got GEB Attorney

16 Exhibit No. 49 before you, is that correct?

17 A. Yes, sir. That's correct.

18 Q. The marking there is a little bit

19 confusing. The marking of the GEB exhibit appears

20 at the bottom of the middle of the page. There is

21 also an exhibit sticker at the top of the page.

22 It says Government Exhibit 91. Do you know where

23 this document came from?

24 A. It was introduced in Federal Court and


1 it was part of a federal judge's ruling in the

2 suppression hearing which was an attempt to

3 suppress the statement, which failed on the part

4 of Mr. Scarpelli's attorney.

5 Q. What is this document?

6 A. This is a report of interview, or

7 FD302, Chicago prepared following our interview of

8 Mr. Scarpelli.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me ask you a

10 question. Was this, was this in a case in which

11 Mr. Scarpelli was the defendant?

12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. He was the subject

13 of the case.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: He was indicted, and

15 there was a motion to suppress this particular

16 document or testimony relating to it as an

17 admission or confession, is that right?

18 THE WITNESS: That's correct, sir. He was

19 arrested in possession of a machine gun, while

20 en route to commit an armed robbery in Bradley,

21 Illinois. And then that evening, into the

22 morning, we then interviewed him. And this was

23 the result.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: And then he was


1 eventually prosecuted. And this document was the

2 motion, the subject of a motion to suppress.

3 THE WITNESS: That's correct. But he was

4 never prosecuted, because he committed suicide at

5 the federal MCC about one hour after the

6 suppression hearing upheld his statement.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: But was he the only

8 defendant?

9 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, he was.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: This was going to be

11 used or possibly was to be used in case against

12 him, is that right?

13 THE WITNESS: Against him, and then there

14 were certain other admissions that he made that

15 would have been the basis for additional spinoff

16 investigation.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: No, but I mean directly

18 against him at the trial.

19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. That's correct.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay, all right.


22 Q. One further question, if you were to go

23 to the court file, clerk of the court, can you

24 pick this document up?


1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. In fact, isn't that just what we did?

3 A. That's correct, yes, sir.

4 MR. BOSTWICK: I move the admission of

5 Exhibit 49.

6 MR. CARMELL: On what basis? What is this

7 relevant to?

8 MR. BOSTWICK: To leadership of the Chicago

9 outfit. We are going to go through this.

10 MR. CARMELL: Is that what it's for, for the

11 statements of Mr. Scarpelli? I see there are

12 interlineations here. We've got a huge statement

13 here. What are we putting it in for, Mr. Hearing

14 Officer?

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's go over the first

16 part. It's a huge statement. There is a lot of

17 information in here. I believe that your purpose,

18 this is either original or corroborative evidence

19 of something else, or about the Chicago mob, is

20 what you are saying.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: Yes. As a matter of fact, we

22 have delineated a couple of short, two or

23 three-page excerpts or selections here which we

24 wanted to have him run through. They relate to


1 individuals on both of these charts.

2 MR. CARMELL: Well, I haven't had a chance --

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Pages 6 and 7.

4 MR. CARMELL: Pages 6 and 7?

5 MR. BOSTWICK: Is the primary.

6 MR. CARMELL: Well, so I understand, there is

7 nothing in here that, or does it, that mentions

8 the name of any member -- strike that -- any

9 officer or delegate of the Chicago District

10 Council?

11 MR. BOSTWICK: That's incorrect.

12 MR. CARMELL: That's incorrect?


14 MR. CARMELL: Then show me where it is, so I

15 can know what I'm doing.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: I'm not sure why we are doing

17 it this way.

18 MR. CARMELL: Because this is a statement of

19 a dead person. You are putting it into evidence

20 for what purpose? If it's merely to establish

21 what his view is of the structure of it, I want to

22 know that.

23 But if it's also going in for one of

24 the persons who is, has been an officer, is or has


1 been an officer or delegate, it just becomes a --

2 tell me where it is, and I can look at it.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I must

4 tell you that its precedential value in the

5 Teamsters, many, many cases, in the cases

6 involving the trusteeship of the Teamsters,

7 information like this comes in, to be corroborated

8 by other information that may be technically

9 hearsay.

10 So, I mean, as I told you earlier, I

11 will admit this, these documents. But they must

12 be corroborative or structured in such a fashion

13 that other, other items back them up. But let's

14 hear -- I think it's unfair to put all 40 pages in

15 here.

16 MR. CARMELL: Your view of the Teamsters

17 cases are not accurate, because I've been in

18 them. And they are required to say what part of

19 this document is coming in for what purpose.

20 All I'm saying is, if he is saying it

21 is to show the structure as this person, Mr.

22 Scarpelli, knew it, of whatever you want to call

23 it, it's one thing.

24 I asked him, is there any names of the


1 former members of the Chicago District Council

2 present, so I can see whether those persons are

3 supposed to be part of the structure, or they are

4 just an extraneous, as far as this hearing is

5 concerned.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, I agree that

7 there ought to be portions of this that ought to

8 be extraneous; when I see some names of some

9 lawyers I've known in the past floating in and out

10 of here, I don't know if it's meant to be part of

11 this.

12 Mr. Bostwick, I see you have some

13 portions of this blocked out.

14 MR. BOSTWICK: Yes. I can tell you --

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is what you intend

16 to center on?

17 MR. BOSTWICK: Exactly.

18 MR. CARMELL: Okay.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: You are not intending

20 to -- for whatever purpose you are going to be

21 putting those in, you say they are relevant, the

22 rest of the documents might make interesting

23 reading, but it's those parts are the ones that

24 have relevance to this particular hearing, is that


1 right?

2 MR. BOSTWICK: Have particular relevance.

3 I would argue that the entire document

4 is corroborative of the structure, the leadership

5 of organized crime. But the items that are

6 bracketed specifically here are particularly

7 relevant to this hearing, and there's only three

8 pages.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: In fairness to

10 everybody, including me, at the end of this, I

11 don't want to go wandering through here with a red

12 pen, trying to figure out what is supposed to be

13 relevant.

14 We are going to 1, 2, 3 --

15 MR. BOSTWICK: Pages 1, Pages 6 and 7.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is about all.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: That's it.

18 MR. CARMELL: Why don't we do, Mr. Vaira,

19 what counsel has already done, which has helped in

20 PCOC and the rest, he took, he only took those

21 pages and put them in. Why can't we just take

22 those pages and put them in, so there will be no

23 mistake.

24 Hear me out. If he then wants to come


1 back again from another witness on something else,

2 we will have that. I don't like seeing

3 50-some-odd pages come in and be, and said, we are

4 only interested in three pages. Let's put the

5 three pages in.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Probably what goes

7 before, pages that go after it, give it some

8 context.

9 MR. CARMELL: I don't like that either. I

10 agree there is going to be some construction on

11 that.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, back here I

13 see Page 7.

14 MR. CARMELL: Right.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Bostwick, if you

16 take the totality of 1 through 7, would that give

17 it some internal integrity?

18 MR. BOSTWICK: Well, this is, I think I'd say

19 1 through 9 would give it a little more in terms

20 of consistency. But I'm willing to, the rest is

21 fine. It's, I'm used to having the objection the

22 other way. I'm not trying to excerpt the

23 document. You know, we argue about completeness.

24 But it's fine with me if we want to


1 simply, if everybody wants to tear off the first

2 nine pages, and make that the exhibit, as opposed

3 to have 45 pages of it, I have no problem with

4 that.

5 The only other --

6 MR. CARMELL: I would have no objection then.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: 1 through 9, sir. Go

8 ahead.

9 MR. BOSTWICK: We can, if my colleague, Mr.

10 Thomas, will write a note on that, we can redo

11 those by tomorrow.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Don't mention it.

13 MR. CARMELL: We'll do it. We will make

14 copies of the pages, and then it's covered. Thank

15 you.


17 Q. Mr. O'Rourke --

18 MR. BOSTWICK: Well, I move for admission.

19 I'm not sure if, with that, it's admitted.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Page 1 through 9, we'll

21 admit.

22 (WHEREUPON, said document,

23 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

24 No. 49, for identification, was


1 offered and received in evidence as

2 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 39.)

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: What number is this?

4 MR. BOSTWICK: This is Exhibit 49; it's at

5 the very bottom, the middle of the first page.



8 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, just give us a very brief

9 background on Mr. Scarpelli, and how it was that

10 you came to interview him.

11 A. Gerald Scarpelli historically was a

12 burglar, armed robber, bank robber, specializing

13 in armored trucks, and jewelry robberies.

14 He became a member of the Chicago

15 outfit and was a hit man, collector and enforcer

16 in part of the Joe Ferriola Cicero crew, at the

17 time of his arrest in 1988.

18 From about '79 until '88, he was a

19 target of an FBI investigation, which I and my

20 partner were case agents.

21 He was dealing with a cooperating

22 witness, who was a former member of organized

23 crime, James Peter Basile, a/k/a Duke Basile.

24 Q. That was the cooperating witness?


1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. Who was he cooperating with?

3 A. Cooperating with the FBI.

4 Q. You in particularly?

5 A. Myself in particular, yes, sir.

6 Q. Okay.

7 A. He wore a concealed body recorder, met

8 with Gerry Scarpelli on a regular basis, over a

9 two-year period, discussing organized crime

10 related matters, loansharking, street tax, and so

11 on. Basile had been part of the collection crew

12 himself prior to that.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Can I stop you? I

14 should have done this before we started. We are

15 going to go into, it looks like you are going to

16 take a little time here with the descriptions of

17 Scarpelli.

18 It's been a couple hours. I think

19 everybody needs a ten, twelve minute, 15 minute

20 break. Let's do that before you get too far into

21 it.

22 MR. BOSTWICK: 4:15?

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: That would be fine.

24 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.)



2 Dwight.

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Everybody ready to proceed?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Ready to go, sir.


6 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, you had just finished

7 describing who Mr. Scarpelli was and how he

8 came -- how you came to speak with him. That

9 information generally is memorialized in the first

10 couple of pages?

11 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

12 Q. Let's turn directly then to page 6 and

13 the highlighted portions there. Do you see that?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Did you ever in the course of this

16 interview, did you discuss with Mr. Scarpelli the

17 current structure of organized crime in Chicago as

18 of this date, as of 1988?

19 A. Yes, sir, I did.

20 Q. Following along with the highlighted

21 portions on both pages 6 and 7, why don't you

22 simply describe for us what he told you and make

23 reference to that as needed.

24 A. Yes, sir. Jerry Scarpelli was


1 questioned concerning the structure of organized

2 crime.

3 He said that Sam or Samuel Carlisi was

4 the current boss of the Chicago mob as of 1988.

5 Q. Okay. We have got Mr. Carlisi on this

6 chart, Exhibit 163, is that right?

7 Maybe you need to pull the smaller

8 chart. I don't want to strain your eyes. It's

9 Exhibit 163.

10 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, could we

11 identify what period of time this document is

12 purporting to cover or what time frame or

13 snapshot?

14 MR. BOSTWICK: Why don't I -- when I

15 introduce it can I lay those foundational

16 questions?

17 MR. CARMELL: Okay.

18 MR. BOSTWICK: I just want to refer a little

19 bit to the chart as we go as a demonstrative aid,

20 and then I'll admit it at the end of this portion

21 if that's all right.


23 Q. Okay.

24 A. Yes, sir.


1 Q. You have Exhibit 163 in front of you?

2 A. Yes, sir, I do.

3 Q. That is on this Exhibit 163?

4 A. Yes, it is.

5 Q. Is that the same Carlisi?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. All right. Continue.

8 A. He said his former immediate boss,

9 Joseph Ferriola, also known as Joe Negal, was

10 probably the underboss of the mob. He explained

11 that Joe Ferriola was sick with a serious heart

12 disease and had recently been not real active and

13 was expected to die. As a result, Scarpelli

14 stated Ferriola has not been seeing anybody.

15 He advised that he had long been a

16 member of Joe Ferriola's crew which was being

17 presently run by Ernest Rocco Infelise also known

18 as Rocky Infelise.

19 Q. I am going to stop you there. Joe

20 Ferriola is on this chart as well?

21 A. Yes, sir, he is.

22 Scarpelli stated that this crew

23 operated in the Cicero, Illinois area, the western

24 part of Cook County and Lake County, Illinois.


1 Scarpelli stated a second crew was

2 headed by James La Pietra, a/k/a Jimmy La Pietra,

3 the brother of Angelo La Pietra and was centered

4 around the old Italian neighborhood at 26th and

5 Princeton Street in Chicago and was referred to by

6 Scarpelli as the Chinatown crew.

7 Scarpelli stated that this crew was

8 headed by Jimmy La Pietra and consists of Frank

9 Calabrese, Ronald Jarrett, presently in federal

10 prison, John Fecarotta, who was murdered last

11 year, would have been in 1987, and a number of

12 others from the neighborhood.

13 Q. Okay. Now, I will stop you there. We

14 have got the 26th Street crew here and under it it

15 says select members and associates on Exhibit

16 163. Some of the individuals you just read

17 relating to the 26th Street crew appear on this

18 chart?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. For example, James La Pietra?

21 A. Correct. Angelo La Pietra.

22 Q. Angelo La Pietra. And Frank?

23 A. Frank Calabrese.

24 Q. But not all?


1 A. Correct.

2 Q. All right. Go ahead. Continue.

3 A. Scarpelli disclosed that a third crew

4 was headed by John Di Fronzo, also known as Johnny

5 Bananas, Johnny No Nose, and was centered in the

6 Elmwood Park, Illinois area.

7 Scarpelli stated that the Di Fronzo

8 crew was very tight, very strong, commented that

9 you can't do anything in Elmwood Park without

10 permission.

11 Scarpelli stated that one of the

12 principal members of this crew was Marco Damico, a

13 long time --

14 Q. Let me stop you there. Marco Damico is

15 on this chart?

16 A. Yes, sir, he is under others.

17 Q. Okay. That is Exhibit 163?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. And who is -- who did Mr. Scarpelli

20 indicate that Marco Damico was?

21 A. He said he was a long-time member of

22 the Chicago crime syndicate and owned several

23 hot dog stands along the north side of the city.

24 Scarpelli stated that Vincent Solano,


1 the president of the Laborers International Union,

2 runs the north side crew and Rush Street.

3 Scarpelli advised --

4 Q. Okay. Let me stop you there. We have

5 north side crew on this chart of the Chicago

6 Outfit?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. Select members and associates. Vince

9 Solano appears on that?

10 A. Yes, sir, he does.

11 Q. These are in alphabetical order, is

12 that correct?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. Mr. Solano is highlighted. What is the

15 reason for that?

16 A. He is highlighted because of his direct

17 association with the Laborers International Union.

18 Q. The International Union?

19 A. Excuse me. The Laborers International

20 Union, Chicago District Council and Local 1. He

21 is a delegate to the Chicago District Council.

22 MR. CARMELL: Just to clarify. That is not

23 what Scarpelli said. It's what Mr. O'Rourke is

24 clarifying.


1 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

2 MR. CARMELL: Just a moment.


4 MR. CARMELL: He did read correctly what

5 Mr. Scarpelli said as being, quote, "president of

6 the Laborers International Union," and the next

7 questions that came were clarification from

8 Mr. O'Rourke, is that correct?

9 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

10 MR. CARMELL: Scarpelli didn't make any

11 clarifications concerning this.

12 MR. BOSTWICK: That's right.


14 Q. My clarification, and just so you are

15 clear, Mr. O'Rourke, and then your testimony is

16 clear, is what is the reason that Vince Solano is

17 highlighted? Why is he highlighted on that chart,

18 Exhibit 163?

19 A. Because of his direct connection with

20 the Chicago District Council and Local 1 of the

21 laborers union.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: He mentioned him

23 generically. Mr. Scarpelli mentioned him

24 generically as being associated with the LIUNA


1 wherever he is, and these gentlemen took that

2 generic definition and put it on this chart.

3 I presume that the purpose of this

4 chart is taking information other persons have

5 given to him, taking and putting a yellow marker

6 on.

7 MR. BOSTWICK: That's right.



10 Q. Then you were continuing about another

11 crew?

12 A. Yes, sir. Scarpelli advised that this

13 crew was headed by Albert -- let's see -- that

14 this crew was headed by Albert Caesar Tocco, a/k/a

15 Al Tocco, and runs the south Chicago suburbs,

16 Chicago Heights, Calumet City and parts of Lake

17 County.

18 Scarpelli referred to this as the

19 Chicago Heights crew and identified Al Tocco as

20 the boss of this crew.

21 Scarpelli stated that he knows Albert

22 Rosetti, Michael Guzzino and a few other members

23 of this crew but is not too involved familiar or

24 involved with the Tocco crew.


1 Q. We have got Mr. Tocco, Albert Tocco,

2 down at the bottom of the others section on

3 Exhibit 163, is that correct?

4 A. Yes, sir, correct.

5 Q. And Gerald Scarpelli actually appears

6 there as well?

7 A. Yes, he does.

8 Q. And I believe you mentioned Michael

9 Guzzino, but we have a Nicholas Guzzino there?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. But that is not the Michael that you

12 just referred to, right?

13 A. I believe it was meant to be Nicholas,

14 but it was -- he said Michael.

15 Q. Okay. Well, in other words, that is

16 not the Michael that we have put up there. We

17 have put -- Nicholas Guzzino is not on this chart

18 because he is referenced in here as Michael?

19 A. This was from the interview and the

20 notes at the time. Michael Guzzino.

21 Q. Fine.

22 A. There is one more.

23 Q. One more little portion down there at

24 the bottom.


1 A. With regards to the Grand Avenue crew,

2 Scarpelli stated that this crew was previously run

3 by Joseph Lombardo, a/k/a Joey the Clown Lombardo,

4 who was convicted of racketeering at Kansas City

5 Missouri, and was presently serving a lengthy

6 federal prison sentence as of 1988.

7 Q. Did you also indicate that James

8 Marcello at the bottom -- do you see that?

9 A. Yes, sir. Scarpelli advised that James

10 Marcello, also known as Jimmy Marcello, was also a

11 boss in the Outfit and was very close to Black Sam

12 Carlisi, who was then the boss of the Chicago

13 family.

14 Q. There is a James Marcello on this chart

15 as well?

16 A. Yes, sir, he is.

17 Q. Under the others section in Exhibit

18 163?

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, did Mr. Scarpelli admit

21 to criminal conduct in the course of his interview

22 with you?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. Conduct related to organized crime?


1 A. Yes, he did.

2 Q. Very briefly what was the nature of

3 those admissions?

4 A. He admit -- he admitted his involvement

5 in four murders, organized by or ordered by

6 organized crime bosses. He admitted involvement

7 in beatings, extortion, shake-downs of individuals

8 and planned robberies of an armored truck, a

9 planned robbery that he was arrested for, and

10 possession of a submachine gun.

11 Q. Those are not described, those murders

12 and that activity is not described in the first

13 ten pages but in the pages that we are not going

14 to use as part of the exhibit, is that correct?

15 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

16 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, who is Richie Mara?

17 A. Richard Mara, Richie Mara was a former

18 resident of the 26th Street neighborhood, a member

19 of the 26th Street crew. He was a burglar, armed

20 robber, cartage thief, jewelry robber, who

21 operated in the 1960s and 1970s.

22 Q. Did Mr. Mara testify in any federal

23 criminal trial relating to organized crime?

24 A. Yes, he did.


1 Q. Do you recall which ones?

2 A. Mr. Mara testified in a theft

3 interstate shipment case in federal court. And he

4 may have testified in other federal organized

5 crime cases. I do not recall now.

6 Q. Of the ones you recall, was there, were

7 there convictions that resulted from, in part,

8 from his testimony?

9 A. Yes, there were.

10 Q. Do you recall how many?

11 A. At least one, and possibly others. He

12 was cooperating witness in a case in which he was

13 a subject. And because of his cooperation and

14 testimony, all of the defendants in that case

15 entered pleas of guilty before the trial.

16 Q. Do you recall how many pleas of guilty

17 there were?

18 A. Yes. Anthony Gallichio, Gerald

19 Shallow, Jeffrey Paul Ater, three, and Richard

20 Mara, four.

21 Q. Can I refer you to Exhibit 78?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. You can put that back. We are done

24 with the Scarpelli exhibit.


1 MR. CARMELL: What number was that?


3 MR. CARMELL: 78?


5 THE HEARING OFFICER: What period of time was

6 Mara cooperating witness, Mr. O'Rourke?

7 THE WITNESS: Late 1970s through early 1980s,

8 Mr. Mara.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: He has dropped out

10 since that time?

11 THE WITNESS: He entered the witness security

12 program, yes.


14 A. What was the -- I'm sorry.


16 Q. Exhibit 78. Mr. O'Rourke --

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: 78, go ahead.


19 Q. Do you recognize this document?

20 A. Yes, sir. I do.

21 Q. What is it?

22 A. It is a report of interview, prepared

23 on September 17th through 25th of 1980, by a

24 special agent Ray Shryock, of Richie, who was


1 actually Richard John Mara, the cooperating

2 subject.

3 Q. Did you have personal interviews and

4 contact with Mr. Mara relating to the structure

5 and workings of organized crime in Chicago?

6 A. Yes, sir, I did.

7 Q. Does this 302 accurately reflect the

8 types of information that he provided to you?

9 A. Yes, sir, it does.

10 Q. What is the date on that 302?

11 A. September 17th through the 25th, 1980.

12 There were several days of debriefing.

13 MR. BOSTWICK: I'd move admission of Exhibit

14 78.

15 MR. CARMELL: One second, please. Is this

16 basically for the highlighted part?

17 MR. BOSTWICK: That's exactly right. It's a

18 five-page document.

19 MR. CARMELL: For the purposes you stated, no

20 objection.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: You may go ahead, with

22 that admission.

23 (WHEREUPON, said document,

24 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit


1 No. 78, for identification, was

2 offered and received in evidence as

3 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 78.)


5 Q. I'd ask you to refer, if you can,

6 simply to the -- you can read it, if you wish, but

7 if you want to summarize that information based on

8 what Mr. Mara told you, that's fine. I'd just

9 like for you to relate some of the individuals

10 that he told you about as being members of the

11 organized crime structure here in Chicago.

12 A. Yes, sir. First paragraph: Joseph

13 Aiuppa was the boss of the Chicago mob. Jackie,

14 he is, the last name, Jackie Cerone, was the

15 underboss.

16 Tony Accardo was definitely retired,

17 but was still a consultant in part of the inner

18 circle.

19 Gus Alex, Butch Blasi, Bruno, an

20 attorney, and Pat Marcy are also part of the inner

21 circle. Gus Alex has long been known as the one

22 in charge of loop activities. Butch Blasi is

23 troubleshooter for Joey Aiuppa and Tony Accardo.

24 Bruno, the attorney, is Accardo's attorney.


1 Pat Marcy is the biggest fix man

2 political influence for the mob.

3 Q. Let's just clarify that, so there are

4 no misunderstandings. We have a Bruno Caruso up

5 there. The Bruno referred to there has nothing to

6 do with that?

7 A. No, sir. It does not. He is a now

8 deceased Chicago attorney who was a long time

9 attorney for Tony Accardo.

10 Q. That is the last name, that's Bruno?

11 A. His last name is Bruno, yes, sir.

12 Q. Who is Marcy?

13 A. Marcy is a Pat Marcy, now deceased, who

14 was the former ward committeeman of the first ward

15 in City of Chicago, who died prior to his trial on

16 racketeering and corruption activities.

17 Q. Was this information provided before

18 Mr. Marcy was indicted?

19 A. Yes, it was.

20 Q. A number of those names, I would go

21 through them, but are up on this chart, is that

22 not correct?

23 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

24 Q. The chart meaning Exhibit 163, okay.


1 Go ahead and continue about the --

2 A. Mara stated there were four crews

3 operating in Chicago area, Grand Avenue crew,

4 headed by Tony Spilotro, and run by Joey Lombardo,

5 as Spilotro oversees the Chicago mob's interest in

6 Las Vegas.

7 Q. Let me stop you there, clarify that as

8 well. We also have a Joe Lombardo, Junior up

9 there. Is it your understanding from your

10 discussions with Mr. Mara that that's Joe

11 Lombardo, Junior or Senior that we are talking

12 about here in this 302?

13 A. He was referring to Joseph Lombardo,

14 Senior, the father of Mr. Lombardo.

15 Q. Okay. Go ahead and continue.

16 A. 26th Street crew or south side crew was

17 headed by Angelo LaPietra. Strongest crew is the

18 Taylor Street crew, headed by Joe Ferriola, the

19 mob's chief enforcer. The Heights area, or the

20 Chicago Heights area, was controlled by Al Tocco.

21 Pilotto was Al Pilotto, was told to retire.

22 Pilotto is now only involved in labor union

23 activities, and is not an active boss anymore. He

24 knows well what happened to Cataura, which is


1 James, Jimmy "The Bomber" Cataura, who was

2 murdered when "The Bomber" refused to retire.

3 Q. Let's stop there and explain that a

4 little bit, from your conversation with Mr. Mara,

5 if we can. First of all, Al Pilotto, he is on

6 this chart, is he not?

7 A. Yes, sir, he is.

8 Q. Under here, under this selection of

9 others?

10 A. Correct.

11 Q. And again, why is he highlighted in

12 bold on the chart that is marked as Exhibit 163?

13 A. He is highlighted in bold, because he

14 was in charge of the Local 5 of LIUNA, Chicago

15 Heights, for many years, and was convicted of

16 labor related racketeering charges in a trial in

17 Miami, Florida back in 1984.

18 Q. Did he also hold a position in Chicago

19 District Council?

20 A. Yes, sir, he did. He was a delegate,

21 and he was the coordinator of committees.

22 Q. I believe you got that wrong. But

23 that's, the record is going to reflect his

24 position. Are you certain that he was involved in


1 Chicago District Council?

2 A. I believe that he was, as a delegate.

3 I could be mistaken.

4 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, what does this, it says

5 in 302 here, he well knows what happened to

6 Cataura, when "The Bomber" refused to retire.

7 What does that refer to?

8 A. Informant information, provided to me,

9 and as well as review of FBI files and Chicago

10 police files at that time indicated that James,

11 known as Jimmy "The Bomber" Cataura, was an

12 old-time mob boss operating in 26th Street,

13 Chinatown area.

14 He was told to retire by

15 representatives of organized crime. Reportedly he

16 refused to do so. And he was then found shot to

17 death around Western and Hubbard Avenue on the

18 near north side of Chicago in the Grand Avenue

19 neighborhood by mob hit men; discovered by

20 police. The murder has never been solved.

21 Q. Okay. And why don't you continue. We

22 don't need any more on that page.

23 Why don't you continue on Page 3.

24 A. Yes, sir.


1 Q. The portion that refers to the south

2 side crew.

3 A. Mara stated that Angelo LaPietra is the

4 boss of the south side crew. His two enforcers

5 are Ronnie Jarrett and Frank Calabrese. Jarrett

6 handles juice for Angelo LaPietra. Two additional

7 individuals with LaPietra's crew are Angelo and

8 Anthony Imperato. Anthony, also known as Toburk,

9 is not a made guy.

10 Angelo Imperato, also known as Durgie

11 Imperato, is a made member, handles mostly

12 gambling for LaPietra. James Cordovano is made,

13 and handles gambling and juice.

14 Jerry Scalise and Gerry Scarpelli are

15 also part of LaPietra's crew. These two have been

16 operating on the far south side with Tocco's

17 group. Skid Caruso is now retired. His enforcers

18 were Joe LaMantia and Poopy Meenzy, Skid's area.

19 Chinatown has been given to LaPietra.

20 Q. Okay. Let me ask you questions about

21 that, before we turn the page.

22 Did Gerry Scarpelli, is that the same

23 Gerry Scarpelli which we just referred to in the

24 previous exhibit, who you interviewed?


1 A. Yes, sir. It is.

2 Q. And this is information being provided

3 some years before he spoke to you and delineated

4 his involvement in --

5 A. Correct, 1988, following his arrest.

6 This interview occurred in fall of 1980.

7 Q. Skids Caruso, who is referred to at the

8 bottom of the page, does he have any relationship

9 that you are aware of with any of these

10 individuals that are on that Chicago Laborers'

11 District Council chart which is marked as Exhibit

12 145?

13 A. Yes, sir. Frank Tony Caruso, known as

14 Skids Caruso, is the father of Bruno Caruso, and

15 Frank Michael Caruso, also known as "Toots"

16 Caruso, and he is the uncle of Leo Caruso, and he

17 would be the brother-in-law of Fred Roti, an

18 alderman from the first ward.

19 Q. How do you know that?

20 A. I know that from review of FBI files,

21 Chicago police files, interview of informants,

22 interview of cooperating witnesses, such as

23 Richard Mara, over the years, interview of Mr.

24 Bruno Caruso and Leo Caruso in the course of the


1 IG's inspection process.

2 Q. Okay. These individuals, some of these

3 individuals, let's just talk about the one here,

4 Frank Tony Caruso, that's the individuals

5 identified --

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. -- highlighted portion on Exhibit 163,

8 Frank Tony Caruso is Skids Caruso?

9 A. Frank Tony Caruso is Skids Caruso, now

10 deceased.

11 Q. Okay. Why don't you continue on Page

12 4.

13 A. With regards to Chicago Heights or

14 south suburbs crew, Mara stated that Al Pilotto is

15 supposed to have been told to retire because of

16 his age; can still be active in labor matters, but

17 not in the day-to-day operation of the Heights.

18 Tocco is the current street boss.

19 However, Ferriola has sent Rocky Infelise to the

20 Heights to help Tocco run the operation. With

21 the --

22 Q. Okay. Let me refer you down there to

23 the Grand Avenue crew. Just read the first

24 paragraph there. I want to ask you a question


1 about it.

2 A. Yes, sir. Tony Spilotro is boss of the

3 north side crew. However, since he is in Las

4 Vegas, Joey Lombardo was the street boss.

5 Supposedly, Joe DiVarco and his group

6 are part of the Grand Avenue crew. Vince Solano

7 was a made guy, but handles only labor matters for

8 the mob. He is not a street boss of day-to-day

9 operations.

10 Q. Okay. The reference to Joe DiVarco,

11 there is a Vincent DiVarco on the Chicago District

12 Council Laborers' chart, which is Exhibit 145. Do

13 you see that?

14 A. Yes, sir, I do.

15 Q. Is that any relation?

16 A. He is the son of Joseph Vincent

17 DiVarco, also known as Caesar DiVarco, who died

18 years ago.

19 Q. We have not -- would you like to

20 clarify something you heard earlier today, with

21 respect to Vincent DiVarco, that Mr. Gow testified

22 to?

23 A. Yes. I believe Mr. Gow mistakenly

24 believed that Vince DiVarco, who is the son and


1 who was 9 years old or so when his dad died in

2 prison, was identical to the individual on the

3 chart or individual mentioned here.

4 Actually, Vince DiVarco is the son of

5 the person Joseph Vincent DiVarco, or Caesar

6 DiVarco, which is mob boss in charge of Rush

7 Street back in 1980s.

8 Q. We refer you to page 5. And I want you

9 to read those portions if you would.

10 A. Yes, sir. With regards to corruption,

11 Mara stated that John D'Arco's son, John D'Arco,

12 Junior, is the law partner at Robert Cooley,

13 Greco's Restaurants, which is located on the south

14 side of 95th Street in Evergreen Park, according

15 to Mara, was bankrolled by Cooley.

16 Pat Marcy, he stated, was the biggest

17 fix man in Chicago. He and John D'Arco handled

18 all major political problems for the Chicago mob.

19 Q. Let me -- well, go ahead. Continue

20 on.

21 A. He stated that Alderman Roti, which

22 would be Fred Roti of the first ward, has a sister

23 who is married to Skid Caruso; that would be Frank

24 Tony Caruso. Roti's son was recently indicted by


1 a federal grand jury in the motor pool fraud case.

2 Q. On the corruption angle here, are you

3 aware of who John D'Arco and Pat Marcy and

4 Alderman Roti are?

5 A. Yes, sir, I am.

6 Q. Were any of those individuals indicted

7 sometime after the -- your discussions with

8 Mr. Mara in the early 1980s?

9 A. They were indicted I believe in the

10 1990s. Pat Marcy was indicted for racketeering

11 and corruption but died before his trial could

12 commence.

13 Fred Roti went on trial, was convicted

14 and was recently released from federal prison and

15 is back home in the Chinatown area of Chicago on

16 federal parol.

17 Q. Are you aware of any relationship

18 between the Fred Roti you are just referring to

19 and any of the individuals on the Chicago Laborers

20 District Council chart?

21 A. Yes, sir. Fred Roti would be the uncle

22 of Bruno Caruso and Frank Toots Babe Caruso and he

23 is also related to Leo Caruso, all of whom are

24 officials of the LIUNA Chicago District Council or


1 were.

2 Q. For the record we are referring to

3 Exhibit 145 with that question?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, are there other

6 cooperating witnesses and sources that you have

7 spoken to about the leadership and structure of

8 the Chicago Outfit over the course of time when

9 you were in the FBI?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Have you heard reportings that

12 corroborate your understanding of structure in the

13 Outfit?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Now, I'd like for you to take a look at

16 this Exhibit 163, which has been blown up, and I'd

17 like to ask you to describe that in a little more

18 detail, how that was prepared.

19 MR. CARMELL: Are we going to break soon?

20 MR. BOSTWICK: As soon as we get done with

21 this. It will be about -- just a few more

22 questions.


24 MR. BOSTWICK: To finish the chart.



2 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, is this a list of all

3 Outfit members that you are aware of in Chicago?

4 A. No, sir. It's not.

5 Q. Why are -- does it relate specifically

6 to a certain year?

7 A. No, it does not.

8 Q. Why is -- why are these individuals --

9 why have these individuals been selected to be put

10 on this chart?

11 A. The individuals selected have a direct

12 relationship to the Chicago District Council, to

13 LIUNA individuals currently on the Chicago

14 District Council or are mentioned in the course of

15 this investigation and in this hearing that will

16 be discussed and described by myself and in

17 further witnesses appearances.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: When was this prepared,

19 Exhibit 163?

20 THE WITNESS: I don't know the exact date,

21 Mr. Vaira. It was prepared --


23 Q. Prepared in preparation for this

24 hearing?


1 A. Preparation for this hearing, within

2 the last several months, last couple of months.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: There have been some

4 changes then I take it. Anthony Accardo is dead,

5 is he not?

6 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. This is not a

7 current list of people that are necessarily

8 alive. These are historical as well as current

9 people together.


11 Q. In other words, is it fair to

12 characterize this as a list of names of

13 individuals associated with the mob that will come

14 up repeatedly in the hearing as associates of

15 people in the District Council, close associates

16 of people in the District Council or people who

17 are actually in the District Council?

18 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

19 Q. So, it does not, just to clarify again,

20 it does not -- it's not a chart of a snapshot of

21 the Chicago District Council -- I'm sorry -- the

22 Chicago Outfit on a given year or given date?

23 A. That's correct, yes, sir.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: I would move admission of this


1 chart as a helpful tool and aid throughout both

2 Mr. O'Rourke's questioning and the questioning of

3 other individuals.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, you continue

5 to use the chart and if the parts of it are

6 sustained or usable, fine.

7 I have a little reluctance in putting

8 in charts. As I learned in Buffalo, we put up

9 charts and sometimes the witnesses come later and

10 take the charts apart. So, it's for our

11 instructional purpose only. So you can see if you

12 want to scratch on it, do whatever you want to.

13 In other words, it is a continually evolving

14 teaching aid. All right.

15 But we will have to call it something.

16 We will call it what you called it, 163.

17 MR. BOSTWICK: Fine. And that is a very

18 logical breaking point for me, Mr. Vaira. If

19 that's okay.

20 MR. CARMELL: That will be fine for us too.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Now, gentlemen,

22 what time did you say you wanted to start

23 tomorrow?

24 MR. BOSTWICK: 9:00.


1 MR. CARMELL: 9 a.m.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. See you tomorrow

3 then and get a good day's work in and I know that

4 your clients have to have a meeting this evening.

5 MR. CARMELL: Right.


7 (WHEREUPON, at 4:50 p.m. the

8 hearing was adjourned until

9 Thursday, July 17, 1997, at 9:00 a.m.)


















2 ) SS:



5 84-1968, and MARY KAY BELCOLORE, CSR No. 84-1813,

6 Certified Shorthand Reporters of the State of

7 Illinois, do hereby certify that we reported in

8 shorthand the proceedings had at the hearing

9 aforesaid, and that the foregoing is a true,

10 complete and correct transcript of the proceedings

11 of said hearing as appears from our stenographic

12 notes so taken and transcribed under our personal

13 direction.

14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I do hereunto set

15 my hand at Chicago, Illinois, this day of

16 , .


18 CORINNE T. MARUT, C.S.R. No. 84-1968

19 Certified Shorthand Reporter



22 MARY KAY BELCOLORE, C.S.R. No. 84-1816

23 Certified Shorthand Reporter

24 C.S.R. Certificate No. 84-1968.


1 I N D E X



4 By Mr. Bostwick 25 152

5 197

6 By Mr. Carmell 111 154


8 By Mr. Bostwick 218



11 E X H I B I T S


13 GEB Exhibit

14 No. 1 41

15 No. 2 47

16 No. 3 223

17 Nos. 4 and 5 82

18 No. 49 249

19 No. 78 265

20 Nos. 118 through 125 57

21 Nos. 145 through 152 63




Laborers for JUSTICE ©1998 (All Rights reserved)

Return to Laborers.org