4 IN RE: )







11 above-entitled cause at the Midland Hotel, 172

12 West Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois, on the 18th

13 day of July, A.D. 1997, at 9:06 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:



16 appeared on behalf of the Chicago

17 District Council of Laborers.










1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I believe

2 that you are going to cross-examine agent

3 O'Rourke.

4 MR. CARMELL: Yes, Mr. Vaira. The last item

5 we had was, you were going to consider our motions

6 for --

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Subpoena duces tecum.

8 MR. CARMELL: Right.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: And for all the

10 O'Rourke documents, that is in effect notes and

11 work papers.

12 And you also want to request

13 certain -- well, you didn't name them, but we

14 pretty much can figure out who they are -- all the

15 nonconfidential witnesses that he spoke to.

16 Nature of this proceeding is that this

17 is a trusteeship. And it's far less formal than

18 even the disciplinary matter. And the

19 disciplinary matters, the subpoenaing of the

20 records, is not, it just isn't permitted. To do

21 that would make this some sort of another

22 proceeding.

23 In reference to the Teamsters, I once

24 represented the Teamsters in the takeover of an



1 organization in Philadelphia. And the hearings

2 are very short. And this is almost the nature of

3 a probable cause type of a hearing.

4 And so the discovery, even though it

5 might be helpful, and even though it might be

6 desirable, is not generally found in these type of

7 proceedings. And I'll deny your motion.


9 called as a witness herein, having been previously

10 duly sworn and having testified, was examined and

11 testified further as follows:



14 Q. Mr. O'Rourke --

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. -- you remember Exhibits 44 and 45,

17 which are the Spingola information, and the

18 Spingola jury verdicts of guilty?

19 A. Yes, sir, I do.

20 Q. Are you, were you aware when you

21 testified that the conviction had been reversed by

22 the Seventh Circuit?

23 A. No, sir, I was not.

24 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira, I would like to have



1 you take judicial notice of United States versus

2 Spingola, 464 Fed.2nd, 909, Seventh Circuit, 1972,

3 reversing the convictions.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: The issue, underlying

5 issue in that case was the willful, willful

6 nonfiling of LM2 reports. There was no doubt, I

7 don't think the Circuit Court changed the fact

8 that the LM2s were not filed.

9 I remember that case, because they

10 attempted to file them after we brought the,

11 brought the charges. Yes, it was reversed. But

12 if the case can be held for anything, there is an

13 indication that that particular union hadn't filed

14 LM2s for something like twelve years. That didn't

15 change the reversal of the conviction.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, we would stipulate

17 to the admission of that document. It basically

18 says what it says.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll accept that. I

20 don't know on what grounds it was. I know it

21 didn't change the underlying -- it might have gone

22 into willfulness, some area. I think that was

23 tried in front of Judge Hoffman, Julius Hoffman.

24 Do you have a copy of that opinion?



1 MR. CARMELL: I do.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'd be curious to

3 glance at it.

4 MR. CARMELL: Sure. I saw no need to put it

5 in the record, since you can get it.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: I can read it too. But

7 let me just read it, okay?

8 Anyway, we will move on, and I mean,

9 I'll note it. I'll take acceptance, and we note

10 that that case has been reversed.

11 MR. CARMELL: Will you also note that

12 Mr. Spignola was never retried on those charges?

13 There is nothing in the record to show that he was

14 ever retried.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I think

16 that's probably right. I don't know. I am pretty

17 sure that he was not retried.

18 MR. CARMELL: In reference to what you were

19 saying concerning the case, Mr. Vaira, the fact

20 that one does not file is not a violation of the

21 statutes. It's required of willful violation.

22 What was introduced here was

23 information and a conviction and it was to show,

24 obviously, that Mr. Spignola had been indicted --



1 charged on an information and convicted of a

2 violation of Lanham-Griffin and that was

3 reversed. He hasn't been retried.

4 Everybody can draw whatever inferences

5 they want from that.


7 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, I want to begin with

8 Exhibit 49, which is the 302 from Gerald H.

9 Scarpelli.

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. I want to review with you so we'll know

12 the circumstances which gave rise to the 302 in

13 July of 1988.

14 Mr. Scarpelli was arrested by the FBI

15 for being a felon in possession of a firearm, is

16 that correct?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And Mr. Scarpelli had a very long

19 history of convictions and incarcerations, isn't

20 that correct?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And Mr. Scarpelli faced an

23 extraordinarily long sentence -- strike that --

24 faced a long sentence for conviction for being a



1 convicted felon in possession of a firearm, isn't

2 that correct?

3 A. He faced conviction and imprisonment,

4 yes, sir.

5 Q. And before that time Mr. Scarpelli had

6 been a partner of James Peter Basile, Duke Basile,

7 is that correct?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And Basile had had a wire at that time

10 while they were running together as partners, is

11 that correct?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. And Scarpelli was unaware that Basile

14 had had a wire, is that correct?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And up to that point Scarpelli had not

17 been a cooperating witness with the Federal Bureau

18 of Investigation, is that correct?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. So, the information that came from the

21 302 was the first time, to your knowledge, sir,

22 that Mr. Scarpelli had given any information to

23 the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. Now, under the FBI's criteria,

2 Mr. Scarpelli's statement would not give rise to

3 him being able to identify a made member of the

4 mob, is that correct?

5 A. No, sir, that's not correct.

6 Q. All right. Let me read to you and see

7 if this is a correct statement of your testimony

8 on page 232 of July 16.

9 They would have to be proven, reliable

10 informants and individuals, is that a criteria?

11 A. That's one of them, yes, sir.

12 Q. Who are in fact themselves involved in

13 organized crime, identifiable organized crime

14 activities that have inside information, is that

15 correct?

16 A. That would apply to Mr. Scarpelli, that

17 portion of it, yes, sir.

18 Q. A portion would apply to him?

19 A. Yes, sir. He is a member of organized

20 crime. He was an insider. He was a hit man and

21 he was an enforcer and he had talked with Peter

22 Basile, James Peter Basile, on a number of

23 occasions. There were recordings and then he

24 confirmed what we already knew from the recordings



1 and from Basile.

2 Q. But with respect to what Mr. Scarpelli

3 was telling you concerning the organization of

4 organized crime, which is the first nine pages of

5 the 302, Mr. Scarpelli in July of 1988 had not

6 provided proven, reliable -- been a proven,

7 reliable informant, is that correct?

8 A. Prior to that, he had not, no, sir.

9 Q. All right.

10 A. But the information he provided was

11 already known in most part and had been confirmed

12 through recordings, had been confirmed through

13 debriefing of Mr. Basile. So --

14 Q. Sorry. I understand that,

15 Mr. O'Rourke. Mr. Scarpelli himself in July of

16 1988 had not then up to that time been a proven,

17 reliable informant; he had never been an

18 informant?

19 A. That's correct, he was not an

20 informant.

21 Q. He was not an informant. Now, is it

22 also true, as an example, that two informants, for

23 instance, who would be reporting on cartage thiefs

24 and would not have access would not be acceptable,



1 is that correct?

2 A. The weight would not be given to them

3 if it was just their word out of the blue unless

4 there was other information that in fact they had

5 been talking with a member of organized crime or a

6 relative or there were some other factors.

7 The fact that somebody is a bartender

8 in a tavern where mobsters go and so on, all of

9 those things are weighed and the information

10 provided is then weighted in that regard. That

11 was an example, yes, sir.

12 Q. That was an example. Mr. O'Rourke, the

13 testimony I am reading from you was in respect to

14 a question that the Hearing Officer asked you and

15 I am reading to you what you said.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I have a page number on

17 this?

18 MR. CARMELL: 232, as I can see.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: On which day?

20 MR. CARMELL: July 16.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: 233?

22 MR. CARMELL: Yes.


24 Q. Now, let's go to your testimony of



1 yesterday. I'd like you to take a look at General

2 Executive Board Attorney Exhibits 97 and 98.

3 Now, Exhibit 97 is part of a

4 transcription of a tape. Do you know the date

5 that that was taken?

6 A. No, sir. It was not on the document.

7 So I do not know.

8 Q. I want you to look at Exhibit 98. The

9 earliest of those tabs is, says a date of

10 transcription of 2/19/83. Do you see that, sir,

11 up in the upper right --

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. -- first tab. And if you look through

14 it, I think we'll confirm that that's the earliest

15 of the dates of the transcriptions.

16 A. Well, that's the date of the typing of

17 the document.

18 Q. All right.

19 A. The date of the interview was on the

20 lower left, sir.

21 Q. Right. But if you will -- all right.

22 Using the lower left, I think you'll find, sir,

23 that that tab A has the earliest date dictated,

24 and the earliest investigation date. What I'm



1 just trying to do is just get the gist.

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Now, using a reference of tab A to

4 Exhibit 98, can you tell me whether tab A came

5 before Exhibit 97 or after Exhibit 97?

6 A. I do not know, sir. I was not present.

7 Q. From looking at it, and based on your

8 testimony, that 97 was what has been called I

9 think sometimes the deathbed, the deathbed tape.

10 Would it seem logical to you that 98 -- wait,

11 strike that.

12 Mr. Eto became a cooperating witness

13 only after he was shot, is that correct?

14 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

15 Q. And at the time that 97 was taken, he

16 was on what the FBI at least thought might be his

17 deathbed, correct? He had just been shot?

18 A. He had just been shot. And they, it

19 was explained to me that the reason that they

20 taped the interviews was that they were, there was

21 some concern that he might not survive. And so

22 that's why they did it.

23 Q. So it's fair to say that Exhibit 98,

24 which are 302s, came after 97?



1 A. I don't know when 97 was taken, sir.

2 But you're probably right. Again, I have no idea

3 on the dates. I'm sorry. I wasn't there.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think that the logic

5 flows, Mr. O'Rourke, looking at that. We can be

6 wrong. But that is a logical conclusion you can

7 derive from that.

8 MR. CARMELL: I would think, sir, that it's

9 either contemporaneously, that is, they took the

10 tape and maybe in the same day or next day, but it

11 just seems logical if they thought he was dying

12 and did the tape, and then go to a 302

13 transcription, that it must have been subsequent.

14 All right.


16 Q. Now, I want to go through with you, Mr.

17 O'Rourke, matters which you testified to

18 concerning the named and confidential informants.

19 And I want to begin with Rich Mara.

20 Rich Mara was, according to your

21 testimony, a member of, a former member of the

22 26th Street crew, is that correct?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. And what was the last year in which



1 Mr. Mara had been a member of the 26th Street

2 crew?

3 A. He was interviewed in approximately

4 1980, and he had been arrested in Florida sometime

5 before that. So I'm not exactly sure.

6 It would have been sometime probably in

7 the late 1970s when he was still in the

8 neighborhood.

9 Q. So that Mr. Mara's firsthand knowledge

10 of the operation of the 26th Street crew would

11 have ended sometime, let's say, in the late '70s,

12 or possibly early 1980s?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. Now, Mr. Mara gave a 302, which is

15 Exhibit 46, dated 7/29/80, which is in evidence.

16 Do you recall that one?

17 A. Yes, sir, I do, Mr. Carmell.

18 Q. Now, in that 302 there is no mention of

19 Bruno Caruso, is there?

20 A. Not that I recall, no, sir.

21 Q. And there is no mention of Leo Caruso,

22 is there?

23 A. Not that I recall.

24 Q. And there is no mention of John



1 Matassa, is there?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. Now, looking at the 26th Street crew

4 listing which is on Exhibit 163, Bruno Caruso and

5 Leo Caruso are on there as members of the 26th

6 Street crew, is that correct?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: I believe it reads "Select

9 Members and Associates" on there.


11 Q. I should say -- thank you. They are

12 under the rubric of 26th Street crew as being a

13 member or an associate of that crew?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Is that a fair statement, sir?

16 A. Yes, sir.

17 Q. All right. Now, in General Executive

18 Board Attorney Exhibit 73, those are the

19 applications and affidavits for the Title III

20 wiretaps?


22 Mr. Carmell, which one was that?

23 MR. CARMELL: 73, sir.




1 Q. Do you have that, sir?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Now, behind Tab 2 is this enormous

4 affidavit which begins with the name of Edwin C.

5 Barnett, special agent of the FBI. Are you

6 familiar with that?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. And within that enormous affidavit

9 is -- are references to statements by Rich Mara,

10 aren't there?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. And would you turn to those and tell me

13 what paragraph they begin on.

14 A. Can you tell me what page they are on,

15 sir?

16 Q. That's what I am going to find. I

17 thought I would get you into it first. It begins

18 on page 27, sir.

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. It's headed "Information Obtained from

21 Richard Mara."

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Now, isn't it correct that there is

24 nothing in that entire affidavit that relates to



1 information obtained from Richard Mara that

2 mentions Bruno Caruso?

3 A. Yes, sir, that's right.

4 Q. And nothing in that information

5 obtained from Richard Mara that mentions Leo

6 Caruso?

7 A. That's correct, sir.

8 Q. Sir, if you'd look at page 27, I think

9 maybe to come closer to the date on which Mr. Mara

10 ended his active association and that would be --

11 it says he began cooperating with federal

12 authorities in 1980 and on July 11 of 1980 entered

13 the witness security program. So that your memory

14 is quite good.

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And according to your testimony, the

17 first -- well, the first time -- strike that.

18 The first time that Richard Mara in any

19 way mentions Bruno Caruso is from your testimony

20 of your interview with him beginning in September

21 of 1996, is that correct?

22 A. Yes, sir, that's not correct.

23 Q. You have another 302?

24 A. No, sir, I do not.



1 Q. We have nothing else in this record

2 from Richard Mara, do we, other than Exhibit 46

3 and Exhibit 73?

4 A. That's what's in the record, sir.

5 But --

6 Q. I don't want a but. You can get that

7 later.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: Your Honor, I'd object to

9 that. If he asks a question, Mr. O'Rourke can

10 certainly answer if there is an explanation.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me put it this

12 way. Just mark that and remember that and on

13 redirect you can go back and ask him to explain

14 his answer.

15 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I have the question and

16 the answer read back, please.

17 (WHEREUPON, the record was read

18 by the reporter as requested as

19 follows: Q. We have nothing

20 else in this record from Richard

21 Mara, do we, other than Exhibit 46

22 and Exhibit 73?

23 A. That's what's in the record,

24 sir. But --")




2 Q. Now, staying with Mr. Mara, I would

3 like to show you --

4 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, I want to

5 show the witness a piece of his testimony so he

6 can have an opportunity to look at it. Is that

7 all right? I'd like to help him out so he can see

8 it.



11 Q. What I am going to show you is the

12 mini-transcript of the proceedings yesterday, and

13 I am asking you to look at pages 506 through 507

14 and it begins with the question, "Why don't you

15 start with the first Mr. Mara and tell us when you

16 spoke to him and what he told you," and look for

17 your answer.

18 I will point it out to you if it's

19 okay.

20 A. That's fine.

21 Yes.

22 Q. Having looked at that, sir, does that

23 accurately reflect, as you sit here now, what

24 Mr. Mara told you, at least in part, concerning



1 Leo Caruso?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And that Mr. Mara told you that Leo

4 Caruso was the son of Frank Skids Caruso, is that

5 correct?

6 A. No, sir. I corrected that, I believe.

7 He is not. He is the son of Skids Caruso's

8 brother. And he is the first cousin to Bruno and

9 Frank.

10 Q. Right. You corrected it. But did Mr.

11 Mara state that he was the son of --

12 A. No, sir. I misspoke.

13 Q. Is it correct that Rich Mara had been a

14 reliable, proven informant for the FBI, both at

15 the time that he gave his 302 in 1980, and when

16 information was given which became the wiretap?

17 A. No, sir. He was not an informant. He

18 was never an informant of the FBI. He was a

19 cooperating subject. He was under investigation.

20 He was charged, was sent to prison, and cooperated

21 with the government and testified.

22 Q. Were you satisfied that Rich Mara had

23 given the truth and the whole truth in the 302

24 which is Exhibit 47?



1 A. To the best of his knowledge, yes, sir,

2 at that time.

3 Q. And that the information contained in

4 Exhibit 73 would have been truth, the whole truth,

5 to the best of his knowledge in, when the wiretap

6 was requested?

7 A. I assume that it was, yes, sir. I

8 didn't do that interview.

9 Q. Did you have any reason to doubt it?

10 A. No, sir. I'm sure that's what he

11 believed to be the truth, yes, sir.

12 Q. Now, I want to go to Joseph Granata,

13 Junior.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Are we going to

15 something? Are we going to a document, or are

16 you --

17 MR. CARMELL: I just asked him about Joseph

18 Granata.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I saw him rooting

20 around there. I thought he was looking for a

21 document.


23 Q. According to your testimony, Joseph

24 Granata, Junior gave you information that Bruno



1 Caruso was a made member of organized crime, is

2 that correct?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. And did Joseph Granata meet the

5 criteria for the FBI's inventory of accepting

6 whether a person is a made member?

7 A. Joseph Granata was a, was not an

8 informant. He was wearing a wire. He was a

9 cooperating witness. He wore a wire, made

10 hand-to-hand purchase of narcotics, provided

11 information on crimes, which were confirmed

12 through investigation.

13 Actually, he didn't have to testify,

14 because everybody pled guilty that he was involved

15 in. But he was not, he was not a confidential

16 informant who was not going to testify. And

17 therefore, the criteria wouldn't apply to him.

18 Q. Okay. Now, I want to go to James

19 LaValley. I notice that there's a different

20 spelling in the transcript. Do we have an

21 accurate spelling of James LaValley?

22 A. It's LaValley, sir, L-A-V-A-L-L-E-Y.

23 Q. The transcript is right.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: Is the V capitalized?



1 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is, correct.


3 Q. Now, let me have you look again at the

4 transcript at Page 421, which relates to Mr.

5 LaValley and John Matassa, Junior. You can keep

6 that, sir. Just pick up your head when you're

7 finished reading.

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: What page do you have

10 there?

11 THE WITNESS: It's Page --

12 MR. CARMELL: 421.



15 A. Yes, sir.


17 Q. According to that testimony, Mr.

18 LaValley had heard that John Matassa was the boss

19 of a crew, is that correct?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And one of the reasons that you had

22 placed John Matassa as a made member is the

23 testimony we are going over now regarding James

24 LaValley, is that correct?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. And isn't it correct that you would,

3 the FBI would not accept in its inventory as made

4 members a statement by a person that another

5 person had told him, that that person was a made

6 member?

7 A. No, sir. That's not correct.

8 Q. So if witness 1 told you that witness 2

9 told him that he had heard that so-and-so was a

10 made member, would you have accepted that?

11 A. Mr. LaValley had discussions on a

12 regular basis with known members of organized

13 crime; Lenny Patrick, who was the boss, Mario

14 Ranone, John DiFronzo, and so on.

15 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, I asked a

16 simple question.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: You have to answer his

18 question. You may expand upon it. But you have

19 to answer his question.


21 A. Yes, sir.


23 Q. If a witness had told you that he had

24 heard that another person was a made member, would



1 that fit the inventory of calling the person a

2 made member?

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I clarify? That and that

4 alone, is that --


6 Q. That and that alone.

7 A. It depends on, the weight would be put

8 on it as to who the person heard it from and who

9 he was known to be in contact with, sir.

10 Q. Now, in that testimony of James

11 LaValley, concerning James LaValley, you stated

12 that Mr. LaValley said he had seen John Matassa at

13 the Brookwood Country Club, its golf club. Is

14 that a private golf club?

15 A. I don't know what the status of it is,

16 sir. I was there once to arrest Marshall

17 Caifano. Other than that, I have no intimate

18 knowledge of whether it's public or private.

19 Q. Would you, from your experience in law

20 enforcement, would you agree that there are people

21 who are not either associates or members of

22 organized crime who would use the Brookwood

23 Country Club?

24 A. Absolutely, yes, sir.



1 Q. Do you know whether John Matassa was on

2 the Board of Directors of the country club at the

3 time that he was seen in the company of Jack

4 Cerone?

5 A. No, sir, I do not.

6 Q. Do you know how Jack Cerone -- whether

7 Jack Cerone was a member of the country club?

8 A. I understood that he was, but I don't

9 have any direct knowledge that he was. I know he

10 frequented it on a regular basis.

11 Q. And did Mr. LaValley tell you what he

12 meant by in the company of Jack Cerone at the

13 Brookwood Country Club?

14 A. Talking with Jack Cerone.

15 Q. Where was he talking with him?

16 A. This came up over several interviews

17 back when we were originally debriefing him. We

18 were more interested in Jackie Cerone at that

19 point. But they would -- I don't recall. Golfing

20 together, talking together in the club.

21 Q. You are saying they golfed together?

22 A. I don't recall, sir. He said that he

23 would see him in the company of Jackie Cerone. I

24 don't recall specifically what they were doing at



1 the exact moment. That was his recollection.

2 Q. With respect to the Brookwood Country

3 Club, can you fix the time period in which this

4 was to have occurred?

5 A. No, sir. Best I can recall, it would

6 have been in the early 1980s but no more than

7 that.

8 Q. Sir, James LaValley, when did he first

9 become -- when did he cease having any connection

10 with organized crime?

11 A. After he was arrested by myself and

12 other agents of the FBI.

13 Q. When was that, sir?

14 A. I don't recall the exact date, but I

15 believe it was like approximately 1989, possibly

16 1990. He was then incarcerated at the MCC and he

17 continued to deal with the mobsters there who were

18 locked up, Rocky Infelise and so on, until he

19 decided to cooperate.

20 Q. But it's fair to say that the statement

21 that you attribute to Mr. LaValley concerning the

22 Brookwood Country Club had to occur before, say,

23 1989?

24 A. Yes, sir, absolutely.



1 Q. Now, I want you to look at the ninth

2 line. They are marked, sir, beginning there. It

3 says, "And had him identify and knew him as a

4 member of organized crime, a made member."

5 Is that what Mr. LaValley told you?

6 A. Yes, sir. That was his statement.

7 Knew him as a member of organized crime, a made

8 member.

9 Q. Were the statements of Mr. LaValley

10 that are the subject of this page 421 of this

11 transcript, were they reduced to a 302?

12 A. I don't recall, sir. He was debriefed

13 days and days and days at a time and generally the

14 302s concerned specific extortions and beatings

15 and specific crimes that he was under

16 investigation for that were going to be utilized

17 in Federal Court.

18 So, I don't recall -- he was also

19 debriefed by other agents of the FBI. So, I don't

20 specifically recall if every single person that he

21 ever mentioned was documented in a 302.

22 Q. Before coming to testify here, did you

23 review any of the 302s of James LaValley?

24 A. No, sir, I did not. I don't have



1 access to them.

2 Q. The statement that is attributed by you

3 to James LaValley were made in your September,

4 1996 interview with him, is that correct?

5 A. Both, sir.

6 Q. Well, you talked to him in 1989 when

7 you were special agent of the Federal Bureau?

8 A. Yes, sir, and the most recent --

9 Q. Just a moment. Let me break it down,

10 sir.

11 And at that time you -- there was a

12 302, at least one 302 created concerning your

13 debriefing or the debriefing in which you

14 participated with Mr. LaValley in 1989, is that

15 correct?

16 A. There were probably 30 or 40, possibly

17 more 302s created, each on a different subject

18 matter.

19 Q. And it's your testimony that in the

20 debriefings in 1989 James LaValley made the

21 statements that are attributed to him by you at

22 page 421 of the transcript?

23 A. That was my recollection, yes, sir, and

24 then I reinterviewed him, directed his attention



1 to Mr. Matassa at the time I talked to him in

2 September.

3 Q. In September of '96 when you met with

4 James LaValley, as you say, you directed his

5 attention to James Matassa, didn't you?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. And you had told Mr. LaValley what your

8 position was at the time, that is, you were with

9 the Inspector General's office, is that correct?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. You told him that the Inspector General

12 was investigating the Chicago District Council of

13 Laborers?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. You told him you were going -- you were

16 trying to build a case against them, didn't you?

17 A. No, sir, I just asked him -- reminded

18 him of our previous conversations and said did he

19 recall John Matassa. He said yes, I recall him

20 being with Jackie Cerone at the Brookwood Country

21 Club. I recall him being in organized crime and I

22 believe he is a made member. That's what he said.

23 Q. You were the one that first raised Mr.

24 Matassa, quote, "reminding" Mr. LaValley of what



1 he had said in 1989?

2 A. That was the purpose of the interview,

3 yes, sir.

4 Q. And your reminding Mr. LaValley was

5 based solely on your recollection of debriefings

6 you had had with Mr. LaValley in 1989, is that

7 correct?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And how many debriefings have you

10 participated in while you were with the Federal

11 Bureau of Investigation between 1989 and your

12 retirement?

13 A. Of Mr. LaValley?

14 Q. Of everyone.

15 A. Quite a few, sir. I don't recall.

16 Q. 100?

17 A. Sure. At least 100, maybe more.

18 Q. Probably more, wouldn't it have been?

19 Some of them very extensive, too, weren't they?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And you had a specific recollection in

22 September of 1996 what Mr. LaValley supposedly had

23 told you in 1989, is that correct?

24 A. Yes, sir. It's not very complicated.



1 Q. Well, that's correct, it's not very

2 complicated and apparently it didn't seem enough

3 to appear in a 302 of Mr. LaValley before. So how

4 significant was it?

5 MR. BOSTWICK: I think that is a

6 mischaracterization of the testimony.

7 MR. CARMELL: It's cross-examination, sir.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: You may ask him that

9 and he may answer if he understands your question.


11 A. I don't recall if it was in a 302 or

12 not, sir. We don't -- when you're talking to

13 someone for eight hours a day, day upon day upon

14 day, you don't take down every single word that he

15 says because it would be incredibly voluminous,

16 particularly if the individual mentioned is one

17 of, say, dozens and that individual is not the

18 target of your investigation or not involved in

19 any specific crime that's going to be coming up in

20 a future court date.

21 Q. Do you in fact have notes of your --

22 MR. CARMELL: I understand your ruling,

23 Mr. Hearing Officer, but I want to ask him.





2 Q. Do you have notes of your interview

3 with -- interview or interviews with Mr. LaValley

4 in September, 1996 or any time thereafter?

5 A. I have rough notes, yes, sir.

6 Q. Were those notes shown to Mr. LaValley

7 at any time?

8 A. No, sir.

9 Q. Did you go over your notes with

10 Mr. LaValley?

11 A. The notes were taken as we discussed

12 the matter.

13 Q. And I want to make it clear that you

14 still do have those notes?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's not your

17 procedure -- you followed the procedure as the --

18 as you did when you were in the Bureau to take the

19 rough notes and then transcribe them into polished

20 notes, you follow that procedure or just keep them

21 for your own investigation?

22 THE WITNESS: I keep the notes as I have it

23 from when I was an FBI agent.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: In rough form.



1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: There is no requirement

3 of your Inspector General's department to -- there

4 is no formal protocol as to preserving notes like

5 that.

6 THE WITNESS: No, sir, not to my knowledge.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Like all investigators

8 or detectives, they seem to keep a file of old

9 notes.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, that's correct.


12 Q. Did you review those rough notes before

13 you came to testify?

14 A. Yes, sir, last week I did.

15 Q. How many pages of notes do you have

16 concerning Mr. LaValley, sir?

17 A. Several pages. I can't recall exact

18 number.

19 Q. I hate the game we play, more than

20 five, more than six. Do you have any reasonable

21 opinion as to how many pages it is?

22 A. Possibly ten pages.

23 Q. With respect to Leo Caruso, sir, and

24 Mr. LaValley, Mr. LaValley told you he did not



1 know Leo Caruso personally, is that correct? That

2 would be on Page 508.

3 No one can say I'm trying to sandbag

4 you, sir.

5 A. What part of it is it?

6 Just a second. I think I have it.

7 Yes, sir.

8 Q. Do you recall the question, that

9 LaValley told you that he did not know Leo Caruso

10 personally?

11 A. Yes, sir. That's correct.

12 Q. He told you that whatever information

13 he had concerning Leo Caruso had, quote, "come

14 from other O.C. figures," is that correct?

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. And based upon what these other O.C.

17 figures had told him, LaValley considered Leo

18 Caruso to be a mob associate?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. If I may borrow it back, sir.

21 A. Sure. There you go.

22 Q. Now, with respect to James Basile?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. Mr. Basile, according to your



1 testimony, was a, worked for the Cicero crew, is

2 that correct?

3 A. Yes, sir, he did.

4 Q. And that's a separate crew from the

5 26th Street crew, is that correct?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. Or at the time, it was?

8 A. Yes, it was, at the time.

9 Q. Now, Umberto Fillippi, is it "Fillippi"

10 or "Fillippi," as you recall?

11 A. I really don't know, sir. He, Umberto

12 Fillippi, I think is the way he pronounced it.

13 Q. Did you -- when did you first come in

14 contact with Umberto Fillippi?

15 A. Let me check my notes. In 1996, sir.

16 Q. Were you aware, or did you become aware

17 at that time or before that time that Umberto

18 Fillippi was an alcoholic?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Were you aware at that time or became

21 aware that Umberto Fillippi was a heavy drug

22 abuser?

23 A. Yes, sir. He informed me that he had,

24 had had a problem with cocaine, yes, sir.



1 Q. And were you aware that Mr. Fillippi

2 had been in a, I don't know what the word is now,

3 but mental institution?

4 A. He -- yes, sir, I was. He had been

5 hospitalized, I think in Europe, for his cocaine

6 addiction for a period of time.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Is that the mental

8 institution you are referring to? Or is that

9 something else?

10 MR. CARMELL: I thought I'm asking whether --

11 no, I would not consider being in for detox, in a

12 substance abuse program, to be a mental

13 institution.


15 Q. Separating that, did you ever become

16 aware that he had been in an institution for

17 emotional problems, distinct from being in a

18 substance rehab program?

19 A. I believe he had been in hospitals, as

20 a result of, resulting from his cocaine addiction,

21 yes.

22 Q. Okay. Now, you identified the person

23 by name of Sal Mango, M-A-N-G-O. Do you recall

24 that?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. And who was Sal Mango in 1989?

3 A. Sal Mango in 1989 was involved in a

4 business called NCI -- I don't know the full name

5 of it now -- and that later was involved in a

6 business called Health Marketing, Incorporated,

7 HMI, as I understand it. He died I think in 1994

8 of cancer.

9 Q. Was Sal Mango, to your knowledge, in

10 1989 a made member of organized crime?

11 A. I don't know if he was a made member.

12 But he was definitely a member of organized crime,

13 and met with John DiFronzo, and was known to the

14 FBI and police intelligence as an organized crime

15 figure.

16 Q. Was he an organized crime figure

17 because he had a business which dealt with

18 organized crime?

19 A. No, sir.

20 Q. In your testimony, you never identified

21 Mr. Mango as being a member of organized crime.

22 You only identified him as having a company called

23 NCI. Do you recall that?

24 A. I don't believe I was asked if he was a



1 member of organized crime. But he was.

2 Q. What crew, what group, was Sal Mango a

3 member of?

4 A. He was not the object of my

5 investigation. So I really don't know, sir.

6 Q. Well, you're saying that, you're coming

7 out and saying that this dead man was a member of

8 organized crime. And I'm asking you, where did

9 he -- where? Where in the organized crime

10 structure?

11 A. I don't know, sir. I could guess, but

12 I don't know for a fact.

13 Q. In your testimony concerning what Mr.

14 Fillippi told you, that on weekends John Matassa,

15 Tom Matassa and John Serpico went to Sal Mango's

16 apartment, do you remember that testimony?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And Fillippi's position at that time

19 was to cook breakfast?

20 A. Yes, sir. He was living with Mr.

21 Termini in the apartment, taking care of him,

22 cooking his food, and acting as an associate,

23 secretary, driver, whatever.

24 Q. And what, in what year did these



1 weekend meetings occur, according to Mr. Fillippi?

2 A. Starting in 1993.

3 Q. And through what period of time?

4 A. Until sometime before Mr. Mango or Mr.

5 Termini became too ill from cancer, and then

6 eventually died. So early '94, I believe it would

7 have been.

8 Q. Has Mr. Fillippi's statement to you as

9 you recounted it been referred to the United

10 States Attorney's office?

11 A. Well, it has been provided to them.

12 And I believe he has also been interviewed by FBI

13 agents prior to me talking to him.

14 Q. To your knowledge, has Mr. Matassa been

15 indicted on any, arrested or indicted for any of

16 the matters that are the subject of these weekend

17 episodes?

18 A. Not as of this date, no, sir.

19 Q. And would the same be true of John

20 Serpico and Tom Matassa?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. According to Mr. Fillippi, as you

23 recount it, Mr. Fillippi initially met John

24 Matassa through Salvatore Termini, Termini, or Sal



1 Mango. Mr. Fillippi wasn't sure, was he?

2 A. Oh, yes, sir. He indicated that

3 Salvatore Termini and Sal Mango were one and the

4 same person. And apparently he used the name Sal

5 Mango, but as I believe his real name was

6 Salvatore Termini.

7 Q. According to your testimony on 4/22, it

8 says, initially met John Matassa, quote, "through

9 Salvatore Termini or Sal Mango." Did you mean

10 that those were one and the same person?

11 A. Yes, sir, I did.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Again, my notes are

13 confused on that line too. So that I know that

14 Sal Mango was used -- is the name of a fellow with

15 an Italian background; it was Termini, right?

16 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Termini or Terminini?

18 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. They are one and the

19 same person.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Who was cooking for

21 whom? Who was dying of cancer? Who was cooking

22 for whom?

23 THE WITNESS: Mr., call him Sal Mango --

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's call him Sal



1 Mango.

2 THE WITNESS: That is the name he apparently

3 utilized mostly, as I understand it -- was dying

4 of cancer, and did die of cancer.

5 And Mr. Fillippi was his, was taking

6 care of him, right up until the end, and cooking

7 for him and so on.



10 Q. Was Mr. Fillippi at that time an

11 associate of organized crime?

12 A. No, sir. He, other than his

13 relationship with Sal Mango, he was not, no, sir.

14 Q. Well, the relationship was he was his

15 caregiver, is that correct?

16 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

17 Q. And by being a caregiver you don't

18 automatically become a member or associate of

19 organized crime, is that fair?

20 A. That's correct, sir.

21 Q. So, according to Mr. Fillippi's

22 testimony -- according to what you say

23 Mr. Fillippi told you, Mr. Fillippi is not only in

24 earshot but sometimes present when these three



1 individuals are cutting up money from HMI, is that

2 correct?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. And this happened in 1993, '94, is that

5 correct?

6 A. That's what he said, yes, sir.

7 Q. At that time he did have a drug and

8 alcohol problem, is that correct?

9 A. I don't know when he had the drug and

10 alcohol problem. It probably is correct. I'm not

11 sure.

12 Q. Now, Sam Louis, Sam Louis did not meet

13 the criteria for a person who could establish for

14 the FBI inventory a made member, isn't that

15 correct?

16 A. Sam Louis is not a confidential

17 informant.

18 Q. He wasn't anything. He was a former

19 Chicago police officer and a business agent for

20 H.E.R.E.? You know what H.E.R.E. is?

21 A. Yes, sir, absolutely.

22 MR. CARMELL: Hotel Employees Restaurant

23 Employees, hotel and restaurant employees union.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: We called it the old



1 bartenders union.

2 MR. CARMELL: You called it the old

3 bartenders. Okay, sir.


5 Q. That was his position?

6 A. Yes, sir. That was his previous

7 position.

8 Q. What was his -- what did he do -- he

9 had been -- according to your testimony,

10 Mr. Hanley had fired him as a business agent for

11 H.E.R.E.?

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. When did that occur?

14 A. July -- I believe it was July of 1996.

15 Q. And when did you interview Mr. Louis?

16 A. There were a number of interviews. Let

17 me see. In 1996 and thereafter in 1997.

18 Q. Sir, I'm going to try and not bore you

19 to death and so I am going to ask you with respect

20 to -- you have already talked about it with one of

21 them.

22 With respect to Mr. Granata, we have

23 already established Mr. LaValley, Mr. Basile, Sam

24 Louis, do you have what we call rough notes of



1 your interviews with those persons?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And would that be true of William

4 Wemette, William Jahoda and Leonard Patrick?

5 A. It would be true with William Jahoda.

6 I no longer have access to them with the other

7 two, sir.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's because those

9 are the FBI's notes.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


12 Q. Now, I want to turn to what you have

13 termed as confidential and we are going to be

14 using the numbers that are attributed here which

15 caused us all -- you confusion. So, we are going

16 to use the 1 through 11 numbers.

17 Will that work for you?

18 A. Sure, that's fine, sir.

19 Q. Confidential No. 2 was a former

20 burglar/jewel thief, according to your testimony,

21 is that correct?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. You said that he also was a mob

24 associate, is that correct?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. With respect to Confidential No. 2,

3 when did he end his active association with the

4 mob?

5 A. As far as I know he still has an

6 association with the mob, sir.

7 Q. And what is his position within the mob

8 according to Confidential No. 2?

9 A. I wouldn't want to characterize it,

10 sir, for -- he is fearful of his safety.

11 Q. So, what we know now is that you

12 characterize him as a mob associate but we do know

13 that he was a burglar and jewel thief, is that

14 right?

15 A. In the past, yes, sir.

16 Q. Now, Confidential No. 4 was a person

17 who had a relationship with the 26th Street crew,

18 is that correct?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Does he have a present relationship?

21 A. No, sir.

22 Q. When did the relationship end?

23 A. Several years ago, sir, but I don't

24 recall the exact time frame.



1 Q. Would it be fair to say that it's no

2 more than five years ago, if you can, sir?

3 A. It was several years ago.

4 Q. All right. Now, confidential --

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: He is out of the crew

6 now.

7 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. He was never an

8 insider. He did some work for them. He also was

9 associated with the Cicero crew as well and that

10 has also ended.


12 Q. Confidential No. 4 is not one of the

13 persons who you identified as having given you any

14 information concerning Bruno Caruso, is that

15 correct?

16 A. I believe that's correct, yes, sir.

17 Q. Confidential No. 6 had had a

18 relationship with the 26th Street crew, is that

19 correct?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Has that relationship ended?

22 A. No, sir.

23 Q. And that is one of the persons who did

24 not give you any information concerning Bruno



1 Caruso, is that correct?

2 A. No, sir, I believe that he did although

3 he was not --

4 Q. He is not one that you testified to, is

5 that correct?

6 A. I can't recall, sir, if I did or not.

7 If I omitted him, it was a mistake. He basically

8 indicated that he knew Bruno Caruso, knew all the

9 Carusos, knew they were organized crime-related.

10 Q. The question is whether he testified --

11 MR. CARMELL: Number one, if he wants to come

12 back at some other time, he can do it.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: He may ask him to

14 explain it. Since you are the one asking the

15 questions, you have the right to ask to have it

16 stricken.

17 MR. CARMELL: Thank you. You got me again

18 for the last time.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I agree with you.

20 MR. CARMELL: No, you got me from what I had

21 done the last time when I said something wasn't

22 responsive.

23 Can I have just a moment?

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Take your time. If you



1 need a short break or something --

2 MR. CARMELL: Can we take a break, and let me

3 review the notes?


5 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.)

6 MR. CARMELL: No further questions.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. That was short.

8 All right. No further questions, Mr. O'Rourke.

9 You have a couple questions?

10 MR. BOSTWICK: Yeah, I have a couple.



13 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, one of the questions I

14 believe that Mr. Carmell asked was something to

15 the effect of Exhibit 8 -- Exhibit 73, affidavit

16 for wiretaps, and Exhibit 46, Richie Mara. He

17 asked the question, questions, were these the

18 truth and the whole truth, etcetera. And you

19 answered yes.

20 Do you recall that testimony?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. Did you mean to indicate that those

23 documents compose the sum total of those

24 individuals' knowledge about all the activities of



1 the 26th Street crew, and all the members of the

2 26th Street crew?

3 A. No, sir. Those documents were

4 primarily aimed at the targets of the proposed

5 wiretaps.

6 Q. So there's information that he told you

7 in addition to these, what, the information

8 contained in the documents?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. Source No. 6, Mr. Carmell asked you a

11 few questions about source No. 6, and his

12 understanding, or her understanding, for that

13 matter, of the Carusos.

14 Can you expand on your understanding of

15 that?

16 A. Yes, sir. Source No. 6 indicated

17 that --

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: What was that question

19 again now?


21 Q. Mr. Carmell asked you about source

22 No. 6, and that individual's understanding of the

23 Carusos.

24 Do you have a, can you clarify what



1 that individual's understanding of the Carusos

2 was?

3 A. The quote was --

4 MR. CARMELL: I object to the form of the

5 question. I didn't ask him what his understanding

6 was. I said that nothing had been said in his

7 testimony. If he wants to clarify now, you know,

8 that is what you would offer him for.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's right.

10 MR. CARMELL: It's only the form of his

11 question.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: The form of his

13 question, I understand. He said there was nothing

14 in his testimony, or something like that, or the

15 last question.

16 MR. CARMELL: Correct.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Correct. I think your

18 question is, is there something else.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.


21 Q. Is there something else to add to your

22 direct testimony relating to source No. 6 and

23 their knowledge of the Carusos and their

24 relationship to the outfit?



1 A. Just that the source indicated that

2 they run the neighborhood, the Carusos run the

3 neighborhood, that they're mob associates, that

4 the father was the boss, and that Frank is a made

5 guy, in the source's opinion; Bruno is an

6 associate, as is Leo.

7 That was basically the sum of the

8 source's information.

9 MR. BOSTWICK: No further questions.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. All right,

11 Mr. O'Rourke, thank you.

12 (Witness Excused.)

13 MR. THOMAS: At this time, the GEB Attorney

14 calls Robert Pecoraro to the stand.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Where is Pecoraro?

16 MR. THOMAS: He is out in the hall, I'm

17 sure.

18 (WHEREUPON, there was a short

19 interruption.)

20 MR. THOMAS: Can you administer the oath?

21 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly

22 sworn.)


24 called as a witness herein, having been first duly



1 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:



4 Q. Could you state your full name for the

5 record, please, and spell your last name?

6 A. Robert C. Pecoraro; P, as in poppa,

7 E-C-O-R-A-R-O.

8 Q. Where are you employed, sir?

9 A. I'm in the special investigations unit

10 with a major insurance carrier.

11 Q. How long have you been so employed?

12 A. Two years.

13 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. This goes -- the

14 witness was here all day yesterday.

15 MR. THOMAS: No. He came in late in the

16 afternoon, by a late afternoon flight.

17 MR. CARMELL: He has been here for

18 testimony. There is a sequestering order except

19 with respect to, as I understand it, staff of the

20 IG, or GEB, and some representatives and

21 delegates.

22 Let me finish. He is a witness. So he

23 has violated your order, as far as we are

24 concerned.



1 MR. THOMAS: May I be heard?

2 I have heard no -- I've been here the

3 entire time, your Honor. I haven't heard any

4 request for the rule.

5 We would be happy to abide by that.

6 But there has been no request for it.

7 I would also like to point out that the

8 subject matter of Mr. Pecoraro's testimony will

9 not in any way relate to the previous testimony.

10 It is a whole new topic.

11 He came in late in the afternoon

12 yesterday, from an out-of-town flight, came into

13 the room for perhaps the last half hour or so of

14 testimony.

15 But unless I was out of the room when

16 it was discussed, I have not heard any specific

17 requests for sequestration.

18 MR. CARMELL: I recall in our telephone

19 conversation that you had said -- I'll get the

20 record -- that you had said that, that

21 sequestering of witnesses, and there would be a

22 reasonable number of representatives on either

23 side who would be permitted, but there was a

24 sequestering, there was going to be sequestering



1 of witnesses.

2 I didn't raise it, because I understood

3 that was the ruling that had already been made in

4 the prehearing conference.

5 MR. BOSTWICK: I think we better clarify it

6 from this point forward. We understood that there

7 is no specific limitation on it.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I have a

9 vague recollection that the subject was raised. I

10 mean, this was in our telephone conference. And I

11 just have a recollection that -- all right. Let's

12 assume that there is an order.

13 Mr. Pecoraro, what time did you come

14 here yesterday afternoon?

15 THE WITNESS: It was approximately 4:30. I

16 was here for the last question, I believe it was.

17 I didn't even hear the question that was posed to

18 Mr. O'Rourke.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did you hear testimony

20 at all?

21 THE WITNESS: I think Mr. O'Rourke was on the

22 stand for about a minute. I think there was one

23 question posed to him. I don't even recall the

24 question. But I was told I was allowed in here so



1 I came in.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: So forget that. You

3 came in. Nobody places any blame on you.

4 So he heard the last part of O'Rourke's

5 testimony having to do probably with Caruso or

6 someone like this. Is his testimony relating to

7 anything concerning that?

8 MR. THOMAS: No, I would proffer that his

9 testimony relates to the Al Tocco organization and

10 the U.S. vs. Tocco conviction and the U.S. vs.

11 Guzzino and Palermo convictions.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't think there is

13 going to be overlap here. We could agree that he

14 wasn't in here for any great extensive time. All

15 right.

16 MR. THOMAS: Is it our understanding that

17 counsel wishes the rule to be invoked from this

18 point on?

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Obviously he does. He

20 obviously does. Let's do it.

21 MR. CARMELL: No, no, I didn't say that. I

22 didn't mean that. I understood that that was the

23 order.

24 MR. THOMAS: We did not understand that.



1 MR. CARMELL: And I don't care --

2 MR. THOMAS: What I am asking --

3 MR. CARMELL: I am not asking you to invoke

4 the rule.

5 MR. THOMAS: Oh, okay.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Then gentlemen.

7 MR. THOMAS: The reason I ask, your Honor, is

8 that we need to know whether to instruct future

9 witnesses whether they can come in the room or

10 not.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Since the rule has not

12 been invoked, we will proceed and forget what we

13 asked you, Mr. Pecoraro. Here we go.

14 MR. CARMELL: Okay, as long as we

15 understand. The only reason I raised it I thought

16 there was an order in effect. That's the reason.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I remember some

18 vague -- just a vague recollection of it in our

19 discussion, but I don't actually -- well, it's

20 irrelevant.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: If it's not going to be

22 invoked, one of the reasons I didn't raise it at

23 the start was because I saw a lot of the officers

24 in here who are on our witness list and I just



1 thought that if they were going to be in here, our

2 witnesses could be in here and it didn't make any

3 difference because there was no order.

4 If we are not going to deal with it at

5 all, then anybody can come in and go as they

6 please and that's fine with us. If we are, we

7 should talk about which officers can stay.

8 MR. CARMELL: I'm not. All I am saying is

9 that I understood that there was an order. I am

10 not asking for it. If there hadn't been an order,

11 I wouldn't have asked for an order.

12 MR. BOSTWICK: Let's go on.



15 Q. You were talking about your current

16 employment.

17 A. Yes. I am a special investigator with

18 a major insurance carrier.

19 Q. I think you said that's been for the

20 last two years?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. How were you previously employed?

23 A. I was special agent with the FBI for --

24 Q. When did you first start with the FBI?



1 A. November of 1970.

2 Q. In what jurisdiction? Where was it?

3 A. The first 18 months I have spent in the

4 Louisville, Kentucky and Oklahoma City divisions.

5 I was transferred to New York City in

6 approximately March of 1972.

7 Q. After you were transferred to New York

8 City in March of 1972 did there come a time that

9 you began to work on the organized crime matters?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Have you worked on organized crime

12 matters more or less continuously from 1972 until

13 you retired from the Bureau?

14 A. I worked on organized crime matters

15 from approximately May of 1972 until I left the

16 Chicago division, which was December of 1993.

17 Q. When did you start working organized

18 crime cases in Chicago?

19 A. Upon my arrival in January of '78.

20 Q. And then continuously through the time

21 of your retirement?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Were you assigned to any particular

24 squad or any particular geographic area?



1 A. When I first arrived in Chicago I was

2 assigned to a downtown Chicago organized crime

3 squad and in 1980 or '81 I was assigned to what

4 they call the south resident agency, which covered

5 the south suburbs and I was an organized crime

6 agent in that office.

7 Q. Sir, during your tenure with the FBI in

8 Chicago how many convictions -- how many cases

9 leading to convictions do you think you were

10 involved in involving organized crime? And I am

11 not asking for a specific figure here.

12 A. Numerous cases. I don't recall -- I

13 have no idea how many cases, but they were

14 certainly I would say numerous.

15 Q. Have you received any law enforcement

16 awards during the course of your career?

17 A. I have received numerous awards and

18 letters of commendation. The last award I

19 received was the year after I retired from the

20 FBI. I was called back to Chicago and I was given

21 an award from the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

22 for excellence in law enforcement.

23 Q. Can you describe for us, please, the

24 nature of the organized crime activity that you



1 investigated during your two decades here in

2 Chicago?

3 A. Cases involving extortion, murder,

4 racketeering.

5 Q. What do you mean by racketeering?

6 A. Racketeering enterprise, RICO cases,

7 cases where there is a criminal enterprise.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Cases based upon the

9 RICO statute.


11 THE HEARING OFFICER: And all the predicate

12 acts.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


15 Q. Anything else?

16 A. That's enough for now.

17 Q. Beginning in the mid-'70s, who were the

18 major mob players in the area that you were

19 working? Who were the major bosses?

20 A. In the mid-'70s?

21 Q. Right. Let's take it from the past and

22 work forward.

23 A. In the mid-'70s I was in the New York

24 office.



1 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. So the early '80s

2 you arrived in Chicago?



5 Q. Late '70s, then. When you arrived in

6 Chicago, started working organized crime in the

7 south side, south suburbs, who were the major

8 bosses that you were investigating?

9 A. The major bosses that I -- in the south

10 suburbs at that time were known as Al Pilotto and

11 Albert Tocco.

12 Q. And Al Pilotto was a member of LIUNA?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. The Laborers union?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And also specifically a member of the

17 District Council and an officer of the District

18 Council?

19 A. Yes, and he was the head of Local 5.

20 Q. And what relationship did Tocco, Albert

21 Tocco, have to Mr. Pilotto?

22 A. Albert Tocco was a very close associate

23 of Al Pilotto. He was his chauffeur and

24 bodyguard.



1 Q. And did the names Nicholas Guzzino and

2 Dominick Palermo come up at all during that time

3 period?

4 A. Yes, they did eventually.

5 Q. Who were they?

6 A. They were members of the Laborers

7 Local 5 in Chicago Heights.

8 Q. And with respect to the mob, did they

9 have any relationship to Mr. Pilotto or Mr. Tocco?

10 A. Yes, they did.

11 Q. What was that?

12 A. They had a relationship. They knew

13 each other and it became known to me later on that

14 they were involved together criminally.

15 Q. How about with respect to rank, who was

16 above whom?

17 A. Well, Al Pilotto was active prior to

18 his conviction in Florida, Al Pilotto was the

19 known boss of organized crime out of Chicago

20 Heights. Upon Al's conviction and incarceration,

21 Al Tocco more or less became the acting boss in

22 Chicago Heights.

23 Q. And where did Mr. Guzzino and

24 Mr. Palermo, the LIUNA Local 5 representatives,



1 fit into the Tocco organization at that point?

2 A. Well, later learned or as best we could

3 ascertain that actually Dominick Palermo, who

4 lived in Chicago Heights, and Al Tocco, who lived

5 in Chicago Heights, kind of had different

6 jurisdictions.

7 Albert Tocco was the main guy in the

8 south suburbs of Chicago and Dominick Palermo

9 controlled criminal activities in northern

10 Indiana.

11 Q. Prior to Mr. Pilotto's conviction in

12 1982 -- by the way, was that the Mob 11 case down

13 in Florida?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. All right. Prior to that conviction

16 had the Indiana --

17 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. I didn't get your

18 question.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: What was that, the Mob

20 11?

21 MR. THOMAS: It's a case that in the law

22 enforcement circles is referred to as the Mob 11

23 case. It's the Accardo, Pilotto, Caporale group

24 of Defendants who were convicted of defrauding the



1 LIUNA health and welfare funds.

2 MR. CARMELL: CSA, is that what we are

3 talking about? Consulting.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Consultants and

5 administrators. I thought you were talking about

6 that. But there were only about two convictions

7 in that case, am I right?

8 MR. THOMAS: Eleven Defendants and it's also

9 been referred to as the Mob 11 case.


11 Q. The question -- let me repeat it or

12 paraphrase it.

13 Prior to Mr. Pilotto's conviction in

14 that Florida case, had the area that you described

15 as eventually coming under Mr. Palermo's control,

16 had that been under Mr. Pilotto's control?

17 A. I believe so. Mr. Pilotto and others

18 in northern Indiana.

19 Q. So, are you saying then that after

20 Pilotto's conviction essentially there was a

21 splitting up of his territory?

22 A. As best we could ascertain, yes, sir.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Pecoraro, you

24 testified to conclusions. We are getting certain



1 editorial summary. How do you know this? How do

2 we know that Al Pilotto fell out of favor or

3 stepped aside and these other gentlemen moved in?

4 THE WITNESS: Well, I didn't know it in

5 1982. It became apparent later on in the late

6 '80s and early '90s through investigations that I

7 was involved in and the eventual convictions of

8 both Albert Tocco and Dominick Palermo and

9 Nicholas Guzzino.

10 MR. THOMAS: Just for the record, Mr. Vaira,

11 that is eventually where we are heading is to talk

12 about those two cases.

13 THE WITNESS: This actually evolved over a

14 number of years.


16 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, you have before you a

17 stack of exhibits which I have distributed to

18 counsel and to the Hearing Officer beginning with

19 GEB Attorney Exhibit 109. Do you see that?

20 Putting 107 and 108 aside for the

21 moment and go to 109.

22 A. I have 109, sir.

23 Q. Could you describe that for us?

24 A. This is an indictment of Albert Tocco



1 and Clarence Crockett that came out of the

2 Northern District of Illinois.

3 Q. Were you the co-case agent on this

4 matter?

5 A. Yes, sir, I was.

6 Q. How much time and effort did you put

7 into this investigation that led to this

8 indictment?

9 A. This actual investigation that I look

10 at before me started approximately 1987. There

11 were a number of investigations before this where

12 sources were identified and schemes were

13 identified. This indictment came down in

14 September of 1988.

15 Q. Could you describe the kinds of law

16 enforcement investigative techniques that you had

17 used in the course of your investigation which led

18 up to this indictment?

19 A. Well, the interviews, development of

20 sources and confidential informants, numerous

21 interviews and surveillances.

22 Q. We are not going to read this

23 verbatim. It's a very lengthy document.

24 Can you describe what this indictment



1 was about?

2 A. This is a 49 count indictment, over

3 170-some-odd acts of racketeering, describing the

4 Tocco organization as a criminal enterprise, which

5 existed to extort money from car thieves, chop

6 shop operators, who ran businesses, and dealt in

7 stolen auto parts, houses of prostitution, that

8 type of thing.

9 They extorted the street tax from

10 them. The people that I described, and have been

11 in business, I described, were involved in

12 criminal activities themselves. So they

13 ordinarily would not go to local authorities or

14 seek help.

15 They were told to pay the street tax.

16 If they didn't pay it, they would be, there were

17 implied threats that they would be hurt or killed

18 or be out of business. And in fact, in this

19 indictment, there were three murders alleged that

20 were directed by Albert Tocco.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Are these Hobbs Act

22 indictments here? Many of these racketeering acts

23 here are Hobbs Act --

24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.




2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


4 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, when you use the term

5 street tax, we have heard that before, but if you

6 could put in your own words what that term of art

7 means.

8 A. Well, street tax was a way that

9 organized crime had of exacting monies from people

10 who were involved in illegitimate businesses.

11 They had to pay a street tax to members of

12 organized crime, or they would be threatened with,

13 you know, bodily harm, or being put out of

14 business, or as I said before, or being murdered.

15 Q. Based on your experience in this case

16 as well as your overall experience dealing with

17 organized crime in Chicago, what happened to

18 people who either refused to be part of an

19 organization such as the Tocco organization, or

20 refused to pay street tax?

21 A. Well, they would be hurt or murdered or

22 put out of business. I mean, it was a very good

23 way for organized crime to get money.

24 Q. Is that largely what this case was



1 about?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, at this time, I

4 would offer Exhibit 109 in evidence.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Accepted, admitted.

6 (WHEREUPON, said document,

7 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

8 No. 109, for identification, was

9 offered and received in evidence as

10 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 109.)

11 MR. CARMELL: Could I have --

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Do you have a --

13 MR. CARMELL: -- an explanation what it's

14 offered for, since it's a street tax indictment?

15 MR. THOMAS: It's offered, your Honor, to

16 show the linkage between the LIUNA officials who

17 are coming in the description of the next case,

18 Guzzino and Palermo, were involved in the Tocco

19 organization. There are evidentiary links in the

20 two cases.

21 MR. CARMELL: That's enough for me. I

22 understand it; put in for who Tocco was.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: And his organization.

24 MR. CARMELL: And his organization.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. All right.


3 Q. Very quickly then, if we could, Mr.

4 Pecoraro, were the defendants convicted in this

5 case?

6 A. Yes, they were.

7 Q. Please take a look at Exhibit 110 and

8 111.

9 A. I have 110 in front of me.

10 Q. Is this the verdict form as to Albert

11 Tocco?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Does it accurately reflect that with

14 respect to a high number of the counts, he was

15 convicted?

16 MR. CARMELL: It's a document. I don't know

17 that it does any more to have Mr. Pecoraro --

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: It says what it says.

19 He was convicted of a number of counts.

20 MR. THOMAS: Then I move the admission of GEB

21 Exhibits 110 and 111, 111 being the racketeering

22 acts, as reflected in Count II.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will admit those.

24 (WHEREUPON, said documents,



1 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibits

2 Nos. 110 and 111 for identification was

3 offered and received in evidence as

4 GEB Attorney Exhibits Nos. 110 and

5 111.)

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: I notice here we have a

7 discerning jury, who is picking, especially in the

8 racketeering acts, which those are often

9 difficult, I notice that they picked at least ten

10 and found him not guilty of those.


12 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, what sentence did Al

13 Pilotto -- excuse me, Albert Tocco and his

14 codefendant, Mr. Crockett receive?

15 A. Mr. Crockett received a 20-year

16 sentence, and Mr. Tocco received a 200-year

17 sentence.

18 Q. And since this was in 1988, these were

19 nonparoleable guideline sentences, is that right?

20 A. Yes, I believe so.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: I have a question about

22 that. I have a question about that. Under the

23 guidelines, I don't think you get a 200-year

24 sentence. I think some of these took place before



1 1987, am I right, some of these charges? This may

2 be a pre, preguidelines case?

3 THE WITNESS: I believe so, sir.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Preguidelines case,

5 yeah. So that he may be eligible for parole.

6 MR. THOMAS: It is a point that we don't need

7 to worry about, I don't think. 200 years ought to

8 be enough to prove the point, I suppose.


10 Q. Now, with respect to that sentence,

11 could you take a look at Exhibit 112?

12 A. Yes, sir. I have 112 in front of me.

13 Q. Is that the judgment and commitment

14 order for Albert Tocco, sentencing him to a term

15 of imprisonment for 200 years?

16 A. It is.

17 MR. CARMELL: It is what it is.

18 I don't know why we have to burden Mr.

19 Pecoraro with reading an official court document.

20 I respect his knowledge as an FBI agent. If he

21 can make out all of that, he is a better person

22 than sometimes I am.

23 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Hearing Officer, I'm going

24 to go through this very quickly. I have a right



1 to put this on the record, have a witness describe

2 it, and have union member members hear it.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand. Briefly,

4 he said 200 years, and the document says 200

5 years, so --


7 Q. Is that what this document is?

8 A. Yes.

9 MR. THOMAS: I offer it, Mr. Vaira.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's admitted. I have

11 not seen a 200-year sentence in some time; except

12 in murder cases, you get those.

13 (WHEREUPON, said document,

14 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

15 No. 112, for identification, was

16 offered and received in evidence as

17 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 112.)


19 Q. Did the trial judge in that case impose

20 a number of counts of -- the sentences with

21 respect to counts of conviction consecutively?

22 A. Yes, he did.

23 Q. If you could, were the convictions

24 affirmed on appeal?



1 A. Yes, sir, it was.

2 Q. Could you take a look at Exhibit 113,

3 please?

4 A. I have 113 in front of me.

5 Q. Is that a Court of Appeals affirmance

6 of those convictions?

7 A. Yes, it is.

8 MR. THOMAS: I would offer it at this time.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's admitted, sir.

10 (WHEREUPON, said document,

11 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

12 No. 113, for identification, was

13 offered and received in evidence as

14 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 113.)


16 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, who were the major

17 witnesses in that case?

18 A. There were numerous witnesses in that

19 case.

20 Q. Did the defendant's wife, Betty Tocco,

21 testify?

22 A. Yes, she did.

23 Q. What was the general subject matter of

24 her testimony?



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did she testify for the

2 government, or as a defense witness?

3 THE WITNESS: She testified for the

4 government. And the gist of her testimony were

5 numerous illegal acts that her husband was

6 involved in.

7 One of the, one of her points of

8 testimony was regarding the burial of the Spilotro

9 brothers in the cornfield in northern Indiana.


11 Q. We will come back to that in just a

12 moment.

13 Did she talk about any of the

14 substantive allegations with respect to extortion

15 or street tax and the like?

16 A. I believe she did.

17 Q. Did a guy by the name of Guy Bills

18 testify in that case?

19 A. Yes, he did.

20 Q. Who was Guy Bills?

21 A. Guy Bills was a chop shop car thief and

22 street tax collector for Albert Tocco.

23 Q. And if you could take a look at GEB

24 Exhibit 114, please.



1 A. I have 114 in front of me.

2 Q. This is a public document and pleading

3 in that case, is it not?

4 A. It's government's offer of proof, as to

5 the existence of a conspiracy.

6 Q. Have you had a chance in preparation

7 for your testimony to briefly review this paper?

8 A. Briefly.

9 Q. All right. Among other things, does it

10 describe the nature and subject matter of Guy

11 Bills' testimony as to the conspiracy?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. And the name Dauber, who was Mr.

14 Dauber?

15 A. Billy Dauber was a chop shop man, a car

16 thief, a street tax collector, and a, from my law

17 enforcement experience, he was the main enforcer

18 at one time for Albert Tocco.

19 Q. What happened eventually to Mr. Dauber?

20 A. He was murdered.

21 Q. For what reasons, according to the

22 trial testimony?

23 A. According to the trial testimony, he

24 was murdered because Albert Tocco thought that he



1 was cooperating.

2 Q. Was Albert Tocco right about that, or

3 do you know?

4 A. Yes, I do know. He was partially

5 right. Mr. Dauber had just began cooperating with

6 the government.

7 MR. THOMAS: I would offer 114, Mr. Vaira.


9 Q. All right. Now, you started to talk

10 about Mr. Tocco's --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let there be a ruling,

12 gentlemen.

13 MR. THOMAS: Sorry.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: 114 is the government's

15 offer of proof as to the existence of a

16 conspiracy, right?

17 MR. THOMAS: Yes.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: And this is probably

19 offered to establish the threshold, to prevent the

20 testimony of one to use against the other, is that

21 correct?

22 MR. THOMAS: Yes, it is. Specifically, well,

23 the reason the government wrote the document is

24 different from the reason that I'm offering it.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: I realize that. But

2 I'm trying to get the picture. This is something

3 to get over evidentiary threshold.

4 MR. THOMAS: Correct, so the co-conspirators'

5 statements could be admissible.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Now, tell me why you

7 are offering. This is something that comes from a

8 public record. I'm trying to figure out where it

9 fits in here.

10 MR. THOMAS: In the course of this hearing,

11 you will hear extensive testimony with respect to

12 chop shop operations in the south side, Pilotto,

13 Tocco organizations. There is substantial

14 discussion in this pleading with respect to that.

15 We are not asking you to read every

16 word of it. But it is corroboration of testimony

17 that you will hear.

18 MR. CARMELL: If I could clarify, we might

19 move on quickly.

20 If this is being offered solely for the

21 purpose of Mr. Tocco and his conviction, and the

22 basis of it, and that's all there is, then it

23 doesn't mean anything as far as I'm concerned,

24 because you have the convictions on racketeering.



1 You have the judgment on them. And you have the

2 appeal.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think, Mr. Carmell,

4 they go a little further.

5 I think what they would like us to look

6 at, or someplace -- I mean, this is also a

7 memorandum of law, too. And sometimes in a

8 prosecution case, the judge will require the

9 prosecutor to make an oral presentation.

10 Sometimes, if it's so complicated, that the

11 government will write it out, and put it in this

12 form. So --

13 MR. CARMELL: To that extent, that he is

14 attempting to say that this is proof of existence

15 of these chop shop operations in a certain area,

16 no, then I don't believe that this is appropriate

17 proof.

18 This is simply, as you said, a

19 threshold, a memorandum of the government.

20 Whatever he wants to offer --

21 MR. THOMAS: May I make a proffer as to the

22 relevance?

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Go right ahead.

24 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, this chart embodies



1 a fact already proven in this case, that is, that

2 Al Pilotto, the vice-president of District Council

3 of the Laborers' Union, was the boss of the south

4 side of Chicago mob.

5 Included in that operation that he

6 controlled were various chop shops, and other

7 criminal activities involving street tax and the

8 like.


10 MR. THOMAS: This pleading is in part a

11 narrative description of that operation, as it

12 continued after Pilotto's incarceration.

13 MR. CARMELL: Well --

14 MR. THOMAS: Let me finish.

15 MR. CARMELL: Sorry.

16 MR. THOMAS: Under the direction of Mr.

17 Tocco, with knowing involvement of Mr. Guzzino and

18 Mr. Palermo, who were also delegates to the

19 District Council.

20 There is an ongoing connection here,

21 your Honor. This is just simply one small piece

22 of the puzzle. I also have a proffer to you,

23 without being specific, that it does relate to

24 future testimony next week.



1 MR. CARMELL: Let's break it down.

2 According to what I just heard Mr.

3 Thomas say, Pilotto came in after Tocco, which

4 means that this has --

5 MR. THOMAS: No, no.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Other way around.

7 MR. CARMELL: But to the extent that it is

8 anything other than the government's narrative in

9 a case of what they intended to prove, what Mr.

10 Thomas wants it to be is the proof with respect to

11 Albert Pilotto, Dominick Palermo, and the

12 gentleman named Guzzino, who had nothing to do

13 with the union.

14 MR. THOMAS: Could I ask a question of the

15 witness on that, your Honor?

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. Go ahead.


18 Q. The testimony that is outlined in that

19 pleading, Mr. Pecoraro, is that substantially

20 similar to the testimony that was adduced at

21 trial, with respect to the operation of these chop

22 shops and the like?

23 A. Yes, it is substantially similar.

24 I was not present during all of the



1 testimony, but I would assume that was

2 substantially the same.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: The reason I'm just

4 asking, gentlemen, I do know where you are going.

5 We have, there is a lot of information to be put

6 in, to be connected up later. I'm just looking at

7 it as an offer of proof.

8 When you have these offers of proof, I

9 have no doubt that there was a conviction in this

10 case, so there was substantial evidence. It was

11 accepted by the jury. I'm looking over here. I

12 just have a question about relying on an offer of

13 proof, when we have a case, when you have a case

14 that's in, or the testimony is -- you can do

15 this. I mean, this is, there is no question this

16 is a public document. Anyone can go see it and

17 look at it.

18 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, if I could. All

19 these arguments go to the weight, not to the

20 admissibility.

21 MR. CARMELL: No, there is one more point,

22 your Honor.


24 MR. CARMELL: One more point, Mr. Vaira.




2 MR. CARMELL: If you look at the verdict

3 form, for example, there is a not guilty on

4 Count 14. Count 14 is a chop shop, supposedly

5 chop shop count.

6 So, we don't know with this, because as

7 you pointed out, which is correct, there are a

8 number of not guilties on this. This proffer may

9 have been a proffer at the time, but it's apparent

10 that the jury didn't believe all of it.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: The proffer is purely

12 to energize a rule of evidence so the order of

13 proof then can come in and then the judge will

14 then instruct the jury, ladies and gentlemen, I

15 have now found the existence of the conspiracy.

16 Sometimes the judge will delay in doing

17 that. You may from here on out view the testimony

18 of one of these conspirators as being in aid of

19 the other conspirators. It's an evidentiary guide

20 is what it is.

21 Here is what I will do. Offers of

22 proof sometimes don't become proof and probably

23 other ways to talk about this.

24 Here is what we are going to do with



1 Exhibit 114 in this particular proceeding. If one

2 accepts the document, that doesn't mean the

3 document has any weight.

4 MR. THOMAS: Right.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Somebody has got to

6 connect it up. I right now have some question

7 about the evidence in the proposed offer of proof

8 here. I am not going to throw this away. We will

9 take 114, but 114 has to be corroborated in some

10 fashion. I am just saying --

11 MR. THOMAS: That is all I am asking.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am just saying we are

13 not going to accept the Government's offer of

14 proof because the judge doesn't do that either.

15 The judge says okay, you have proved one, proved

16 two, proved three. I will go along with that so

17 far, but that doesn't mean that it ever became

18 proved.

19 MR. THOMAS: I completely accept that. You

20 are admitting the document and its relevance or

21 its weight is to be determined as the hearing

22 proceeds.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: More than that, more

24 than relevance or weight. That is a different



1 proceeding. Its probative value is going to be

2 proved. Weight, forget that. It's going to be

3 proved or demonstrated that it has some probative

4 value and what portion of it is.

5 MR. THOMAS: I understand your ruling.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's corroborated by

7 something else. Just because the Government said

8 and used this to be a threshold doesn't mean that

9 was all the proof.

10 Mr. Pecoraro was probably right in some

11 of it. Some of it was substantially the same, but

12 that's to be seen. But keep in mind that this

13 is -- its probative value must be demonstrated.

14 MR. THOMAS: Okay.


16 Q. If we could, very briefly,

17 Mr. Pecoraro, did Guy Bills testify in that case?

18 A. Yes, sir, he did.

19 Q. Did Mr. Soteras testify in that case?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Pecoraro, you were

22 the case agent. Were you present at counsel table

23 throughout the trial?

24 THE WITNESS: No, sir.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Were you in the

2 courtroom throughout the trial?

3 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Were you in the

5 courtroom throughout the trial?

6 THE WITNESS: No, sir.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: You didn't sit besides

8 the prosecutors.

9 THE WITNESS: I don't make it a practice to

10 sit next to prosecutors.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: The case agent always

12 sits beside the prosecutor.

13 THE WITNESS: Mr. Vaira, we had Special Agent

14 Wayne Zydron was the administrative special

15 agent. I was the street case agent.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. That is my

17 question. You weren't the one who sat through the

18 entire testimony.

19 THE WITNESS: No, sir. What I meant was I

20 don't prefer to do that when I don't have to.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Somebody from

22 the FBI or whoever, whichever agency is doing it,

23 sits besides the prosecutor.




1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Hands him documents and

2 so forth.

3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: And that's always been

5 the case since I first became a prosecutor. I

6 remember one time I told an FBI agent that I don't

7 think that was necessary and the message was sent

8 down to me this is the way that this is done, you

9 jerk, and this man is here to help you. Now keep

10 him in it. So, that was it. I know that that

11 occurs.

12 So, you were the street man.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


15 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, with respect to Exhibit

16 114, I just want to go through some of the names.

17 Did Mr. Bills testify?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. And these are names coming out of the

20 exhibit so that everyone understands.

21 Did Mr. Soteras testify?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Did Mr. Kulma testify?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. Did a Mr. Rosenstein testify?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Did a Ms. Karen Cepil, C-E-P-I-L,

4 testify?

5 A. To the best of my recollection she

6 did.

7 Q. Did a Mr. Robert Brecka testify?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Did a Mr. Robert Walker testify?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Did a Mr. Walter Blumenthal testify?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Did a Mr. Sheldon Fishman testify?

14 A. Yes, sir. I am relying on my memory

15 now. I believe all of these individuals have

16 testified in that case.

17 Q. Did a Mr. Roger Senese, S-E-N-E-S-E,

18 testify?

19 A. Mr. Senese, yes, sir.

20 Q. Did a Ms. Valerie Walker testify?

21 A. I believe so.

22 Q. And did someone with the last name of

23 Panice, P-A-N-I-C-E, testify?

24 A. Herb Panice, yes, sir.



1 Q. I will stop there. That tracks the

2 names listed in the offer of proof.

3 Now, you were talking, Agent Pecoraro,

4 about Betty Tocco's testimony. I think you

5 mentioned the Spilotro brothers. Who were the

6 Spilotro brothers?

7 A. Tony and Michael Spilotro. They were

8 Chicago -- from Chicago. Tony was known to law

9 enforcement authorities as an organized crime

10 figure. He had been out in Las Vegas for years.

11 His brother Michael owned a restaurant in Chicago.

12 Q. And with respect to organized crime

13 activity, what was the relevance of Las Vegas?

14 What connection is there between that city and the

15 Chicago mob?

16 A. Well, there is a lot of connection

17 between Las Vegas and the Chicago mob. Tony

18 Spilotro was one of the Chicago mob's main guys,

19 so to speak, in Las Vegas.

20 Q. And we'll talk about this with another

21 witness, but there is a criminal case involving

22 skimming of gambling receipts from Las Vegas where

23 people from the Chicago mob were convicted?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. Including Joe Lombardo, Sr.?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Did the Spilotro brothers to your

4 knowledge have any involvement with any such

5 skimming activities?

6 Again, without specific knowledge but

7 based on your law enforcement sources.

8 A. Well, they were not involved I don't

9 believe in the case that you referred to, but

10 there were other activities. I can't really go

11 into that. I don't really recall.

12 Q. We will move on then.

13 What ultimately happened to the

14 Spilotro brothers?

15 A. They were murdered in June of 1986 and

16 found in a shallow grave in a cornfield in

17 Indiana.

18 Q. Was there testimony relating to that

19 murder or those murders in the Tocco case?

20 A. There was testimony -- I'm not sure if

21 during the actual trial there was testimony. I

22 don't recall. There were hearings of that sort

23 where Betty Tocco offered information about the

24 burial of the Spilotro brothers.



1 Q. So, in that testimony or in those

2 debriefings, what did Ms. Betty Tocco as a

3 cooperating witness relate about either

4 Mr. Tocco's involvement or anyone else's

5 involvement in the burial of the Spilotro

6 brothers?

7 A. Mrs. Tocco related that on Father's

8 Day, I believe it was June 16, 1986, she was going

9 to have a family barbecue. Early that morning

10 about 6 a.m. she received a telephone call from

11 her husband, Albert Tocco.

12 He was very upset and irate and

13 screaming and yelling at her to come and pick him

14 up. He had to give her directions. He was

15 approximately 50 miles away in northern Indiana.

16 Following his directions, Betty Tocco

17 drove to an area. I think it was Route 41. I

18 really don't recall. To an area that was

19 approximately a mile away.

20 Now, this occurred in 1986. She was

21 telling us about it in 1989. Approximately a mile

22 from where the Spilotro brother's bodies were

23 recovered.

24 She related that she drove down there



1 and picked Albert up. He got in the car. He was

2 dressed in blue work clothes and he was all dirty

3 and his clothes were dirty and he got in the car

4 and he started not so much speaking to her but

5 speaking. He was angry and telling her we --

6 using bad language and we -- Nicky, Tootsie and

7 Chickie, who were described to us as Nicky

8 Guzzino, Tootsie Palermo --

9 Q. Tootsie Palermo is Dominick Palermo?

10 A. Dominick Palermo.

11 Q. The man who is also a delegate to the

12 District Council?

13 A. Yes. And Chickie Roviero from northern

14 Indiana had just -- the night before had buried

15 the Spilotro brothers and that something had

16 occurred that night that frightened the three

17 individuals and they split up in the dark in what

18 is a wooded area. It's a very remote area.

19 Q. Let me stop you just so we are clear on

20 this. This is Ms. Tocco relating what her husband

21 told her when she picked him up?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Okay. Please continue.

24 A. And that they got split up, one or two



1 people -- two people in the group had a

2 walkie-talkie. Albert Tocco didn't have a

3 walkie-talkie. The other two eventually left him

4 there.

5 He spent hours or all night in the

6 area. He couldn't get back until he found a phone

7 booth on U.S. 41 I believe it was, and that's when

8 he called his wife and she went down there to pick

9 him up.

10 They then proceeded to his sanitation

11 company -- first they went to Chickie Roviero's

12 house, Mrs. Tocco said, and knocked at the door

13 and Chickie Roviero was not there.

14 They then went to Albert Tocco's

15 sanitation company, and there were several calls

16 made to try to locate these individuals and they

17 were negative.

18 Mrs. Tocco then drove with her husband

19 back to their residence.

20 Q. Are you familiar, sir, with the

21 findings of the coroner's report with respect to

22 the Spilotro brothers?

23 A. Vaguely. I never saw the coroner's

24 report. There was some talk that the brothers



1 were badly beaten. They were not shot or there

2 weren't any stab wounds, that they may possibly

3 have been buried alive.

4 Q. And just so the record is clear,

5 Ms. Tocco's testimony and information related --

6 that she related to you was that four people had

7 been involved in that, in the burial?

8 I just want to go over the names is

9 all.

10 A. I think I said three.

11 Q. I'm sorry. Mr. Tocco.

12 A. I'm sorry. Counting Albert Tocco.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Counting Albert is

14 four.


16 Q. Mr. Tocco, Albert Tocco. Who else?

17 A. Nicholas Guzzino, Dominick Palermo and

18 I think it's Albert Roviero, Chickie Roviero.

19 Q. I think I misspoke earlier when I made

20 reference to Mr. Guzzino as a delegate of District

21 Council. Did he have any LIUNA ties to your

22 knowledge?

23 A. Yes, he did.

24 Q. And what was that?



1 A. I believe he was involved with the

2 Laborers Pension Board. He was a trustee on the

3 pension board and he was on the Local 5 Executive

4 Board.

5 Q. But not actually a delegate to the

6 District Council? Sorry.

7 A. I believe, to the best of my

8 knowledge. I never really got involved in that

9 portion of the Laborers union.

10 Q. You mentioned he was a trustee on the

11 pension fund. Based on your knowledge of

12 Mr. Guzzino and the testimony of Betty Tocco and

13 the conviction we are going to talk about later

14 on -- did Mr. Guzzino, by the way, have any

15 qualifications to be a trustee on a pension fund?

16 MR. CARMELL: Object.


18 A. I have --

19 MR. CARMELL: I am going to object. That is

20 not within his --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: If he was on, he was

22 on. That's all.

23 MR. THOMAS: I will do that through another

24 witness.



1 MR. CARMELL: He was never a trustee

2 besides. But he wasn't.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: But it doesn't --

4 MR. CARMELL: Besides all that.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will worry about

6 that when we get to this. I don't think this

7 witness is in a position to judge that.

8 MR. THOMAS: I will move on.


10 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, did you corroborate

11 Mrs. Tocco's story as it evolved three years

12 later? Did you do anything to corroborate that

13 she was telling the truth?

14 A. We tried to corroborate that situation

15 as much we could. We had corroborated most of

16 what Betty Tocco told us.

17 The way we attempted to corroborate her

18 story of going down and picking up Albert Tocco

19 who said he had just buried the Spilotros, we

20 asked Betty Tocco if she could take us back to

21 that area and she did and she took us to the phone

22 booth where Albert Tocco allegedly made his

23 telephone call from.

24 Q. Now --



1 A. We also --

2 Q. Let me stop you. Were you familiar

3 with that area?

4 A. I had been there when the bodies were

5 recovered.

6 Q. Okay.

7 A. She had never been to the grave, actual

8 grave site.

9 Q. How close were the two spots to each

10 other?

11 A. To the best I recall -- I would have to

12 say the telephone booth was on U.S. 41 and the

13 bodies were buried about a mile off on a side

14 road, roughly.

15 Q. Well, what I am getting at is to what

16 extent did Mrs. Tocco's ability to drive you to

17 the phone booth, corroborate her story? Was this

18 a location that would have been easy to find

19 without having been there before?

20 A. No, I don't think so. If you drive

21 down U.S. 41 you pass every point. She passed a

22 telephone booth that was almost adjacent to the

23 road that the bodies were found off of in a

24 cornfield.



1 Q. Okay. Thank you. In the debriefing of

2 Ms. Tocco and indeed during her testimony as well,

3 when Mr. Tocco got in the car, did he say anything

4 to her with respect to whether this kind of thing

5 would have happened under Al Pilotto's

6 organization?

7 A. He made a statement according to

8 Mrs. Tocco that this would have never happened if

9 Al was there.

10 Q. Where was Al in 1986?

11 A. He was incarcerated.

12 Q. And who took his place as head of that

13 organization?

14 A. As best I know Albert Tocco and

15 Dominick Palermo shared that responsibility.

16 Q. Okay. Moving on then, when -- you had

17 ongoing debriefings and workings with Betty Tocco

18 as a witness, did you not?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. As part of that cooperative

21 relationship did she identify other ties between

22 Mr. Guzzino and Mr. Palermo to Albert Tocco,

23 specifically with respect to transfers of any

24 money?



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume that

2 question -- he has debriefed Mrs. Tocco prior to

3 this trial a number of times.

4 MR. THOMAS: This is coming from his

5 debriefings of her at the time, your Honor.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's what I am

7 saying.

8 MR. THOMAS: Not recently.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: No. I mean as part of

10 your investigation you debriefed Mrs. Tocco,

11 that's where you are getting this information

12 from.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. You interviewed

15 her in the course of your duties. Okay.


17 Q. What, if anything, did Ms. Tocco relate

18 with respect to any transfers of any money between

19 Mr. Tocco and Mr. Guzzino and Mr. Palermo after

20 Mr. Tocco's arrest and incarceration?

21 A. Well, there were a number of episodes

22 of which you're speaking. On several occasions

23 Albert Tocco -- Betty Tocco would visit Albert in

24 prison and on three occasions that I was aware of



1 Albert asked Betty to go with Nick Guzzino on two

2 occasions to get money from Nick, $5,000 on each

3 of two occasions, for Clarence Crockett's defense

4 and then on a -- for his lawyer and then on

5 another occasion he told Betty to tell Nick that

6 he needed I think the figure was $20,000 or

7 something and Nick said it will be taken care of.

8 There were several situations where

9 Nick Guzzino gave Betty several hundred dollars in

10 an envelope for Albert in jail or for commissary

11 or whatever, and on at least one occasion that I

12 recall Betty Tocco went to Al Pilotto's house and

13 received an envelope with money.

14 Q. Even when Mr. Pilotto was actually

15 convicted and incarcerated there was still money

16 changing hands between these parties?

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I believe you mean

18 Mr. Tocco.

19 MR. THOMAS: Actually right now I am

20 referring to Mr. Pilotto who was convicted in

21 1982.


23 A. Mrs. Tocco received the money from

24 Mr. Pilotto's wife according to Betty Tocco.



1 Q. And who was that money for, Mrs. Tocco

2 or Mr. Tocco or someone else?

3 A. I don't recall specifically.

4 Q. During the course of the Tocco trial,

5 was there testimony about Mr. Tocco's interest in

6 having certain witnesses not testify against him?

7 A. Yes, sir, there was.

8 Q. Could you relate what that was,

9 specifically with respect to someone by the name

10 of Panice?

11 A. Yes, on one occasion Albert Tocco

12 instructed his wife Betty to go to Dominick

13 Palermo and Nick Guzzino and tell them that he

14 wished Herb Panice would drop dead of a heart

15 attack.

16 And Betty was -- Betty Tocco was very

17 upset about this because she thought -- she felt

18 as if it was a contract to have him killed, and

19 she relayed that information to myself and

20 Assistant U.S. Attorneys involved.

21 And we had Betty go speak to Dominick

22 Palermo and Nicholas Guzzino and pass that

23 information along and report back to us what was

24 answered and the reply was --



1 Q. Did that happen?

2 A. Yes. And the reply was that Dominick

3 Palermo told her that they couldn't get to Herb

4 Panice, there were too many people around him, in

5 other words, I would assume law enforcement, and

6 in fact he was being guarded by FBI agents. So.

7 Q. But the conversation between Ms. Tocco

8 and Mr. Palermo did in fact occur relaying

9 Mr. Tocco's request?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Moving on then to the Palermo and

12 Guzzino case. I want you to take a look at

13 Exhibits 107 and 108, please.

14 Were you involved not as case agent but

15 as one of many law enforcement officers in the

16 case known as U.S. vs. Dominick Palermo, et al.?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And that was a case brought in the

19 Northern District of Indiana, is that right?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. In summary, you have got Exhibit 107 in

22 front of you which again is a very lengthy

23 indictment. We are not going to read it verbatim

24 obviously. Could you tell us what that case was



1 about?

2 A. This was also a racketeering case and

3 it was I believe a 30-count indictment. It

4 involved acts of racketeering, interstate travel

5 in aid of racketeering, conspiracy, interstate

6 gambling violations. That's what it was about.

7 Q. And you've touched upon this in your

8 earlier testimony. But what relationship, if any,

9 did this have to the kinds of activity that you

10 described occurring in the south side of Chicago?

11 A. This case also involved the collection

12 of street tax, the collection, the illegal

13 collection of gambling debts, that type of

14 situation, all of which occurred in northern

15 Indiana.

16 Q. And were monies from that operation

17 transported over state lines into Illinois?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. And was that part of the charging

20 aspect of this case?

21 A. Yes, sir. The FBI had electronic

22 surveillance, in other words, microphones,

23 installed at a restaurant, The Taste of Italy,

24 which is in Calumet City, Illinois.



1 And as best I recall, for a period of

2 three or four or five months, we monitored those

3 microphones.

4 And frequently, regularly, almost

5 regularly, Dominick Palermo and Nicky Guzzino

6 would go to that restaurant, sit there, and have

7 conversations with people that worked for them,

8 collecting their street tax from Bob Louis' games,

9 and illegal gambling and vending machines from

10 northern Indiana. They did that several hours a

11 day for a period of time.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did you have, the FBI,

13 an actual bug in the restaurant?

14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. We had several.


16 Q. And was that, the evidence from that

17 bug, a large part of the evidence in the case

18 known as U.S. vs. Palermo, et al.?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Were the defendants convicted in that

21 case?

22 A. Yes, they were.

23 Q. Did they go to jail?

24 A. Yes, they did.



1 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, at this time I would

2 offer 107 and 108, the indictment and the

3 appellate decision affirming the convictions.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll admit them.

5 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

6 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibits

7 No. 107 and 108 for identification was

8 offered and received in evidence as

9 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 107 and 108.)


11 Q. Now, Mr. Pecoraro, you mentioned The

12 Taste of Italy. That was a restaurant in, I think

13 you said Calumet City here in Illinois, Chicago

14 suburb?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. During any of those reported

17 conversations, were Guzzino and Palermo picked up

18 actually talking to Al Tocco about any matters in

19 particular?

20 A. As I recall, on one occasion, Albert

21 Tocco came to the Taste of Italy restaurant, and

22 notified Nicholas Guzzino that the Chicago Heights

23 police had stopped a strange car that appeared to

24 be surveilling the home of Nicholas Guzzino, and



1 they confronted this gentleman driving the car,

2 who was a downtown Chicago FBI agent. He

3 eventually identified himself as an FBI agent.

4 And that information somehow got to

5 Albert Tocco, who we picked up on the wire telling

6 Nicholas Guzzino that his house was being

7 surveilled.

8 Q. Warning him, in effect?

9 A. I would imagine that's what he was

10 doing.

11 Q. Sir, based on your career in law

12 enforcement, and specifically your career working

13 organized crime cases, are you familiar with the

14 term, made member and associate of organized

15 crime?

16 A. Yes, I am.

17 Q. Was Al Tocco a made member?

18 A. I would assume so. He's believed by

19 law enforcement authorities to be a made member.

20 Q. How about Dominick --

21 MR. CARMELL: Hold it.

22 MR. THOMAS: Sorry.

23 MR. CARMELL: I appreciate the candor of the

24 witness. But I don't believe that that is



1 responsive, from his knowledge. He said he

2 assumed so. And I trust that he means he doesn't

3 have personal knowledge.

4 I think I'd like to have that answer

5 stricken, and get into what his knowledge is, if

6 that's going to be --

7 MR. THOMAS: That is for cross.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: He said he assumed so.

9 It stands for that. It stands for the fact that

10 he assumes rather than he knows; his knowledge

11 that doesn't at least at this point appear to be

12 substantiated.

13 MR. CARMELL: Fine.


15 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, based on your familiarity

16 with both the Tocco case as well as the Palermo

17 case, is it your opinion that Mr. Palermo was, at

18 a minimum, an associate of organized crime?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. And do you have an opinion as to

21 whether or not he was a made member?

22 A. The made members here in Chicago is

23 quite different than a made member might be in New

24 York, let's say.



1 Q. How is that?

2 A. To rise to the levels of being a boss

3 in the Chicago outfit, the boss of a street crew,

4 I would assume, from my almost 25 years experience

5 in the FBI, that you have to be a made member.

6 And I would assume that Dominick

7 Palermo and Albert Tocco were both made members.

8 Although I did not ever view a ceremony

9 or overhear a ceremony where they were being made

10 members, they were made.

11 Q. Mr. Palermo, to the best of your

12 knowledge, in addition to being -- both Mr.

13 Guzzino and Mr. Palermo were affiliated with Local

14 5 here in Chicago, correct?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And to the best of your knowledge, Mr.

17 Palermo was a delegate to this District Council,

18 is that right?

19 A. He was an officer of some sort to the

20 District Council.

21 MR. THOMAS: Thank you. Nothing more.

22 MR. CARMELL: No questions.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: No questions? Thank

24 you, sir.



1 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

2 (Witness Excused.)

3 MR. THOMAS: Is it your pleasure to keep

4 moving? I'd be happy to do that.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, gentlemen, we

6 got -- it's only 10 to 12. We could go a little

7 further, I'm sure.

8 MR. THOMAS: Why don't we keep moving then.

9 We call John Dineen to the stand.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: John Dineen, okay.

11 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly

12 sworn.)

13 MR. THOMAS: Couple housekeeping matters,

14 your Honor. I just want to make sure I get the

15 exhibits.

16 MR. CARMELL: Can we have a physiological

17 break?


19 MR. CARMELL: My hand is up for a

20 physiological break.


22 understand that very well, sir. Okay, a

23 physiological break, okay. Ten minutes.

24 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.)



1 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Vaira, may we proceed?

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes. I was waiting for

3 you fellows to be ready.

4 MR. THOMAS: The record should reflect Mr.

5 John Dineen has taken the stand. Could you

6 administer the oath?

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: That was already

8 accomplished.


10 called as a witness herein, having been first duly

11 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:



14 Q. Could you state your full name for the

15 record, please, and spell your last name?

16 A. John Dineen, D-i-n-e-e-n.

17 Q. Where are you employed, sir?

18 A. Chicago Police Department.

19 Q. How long have you been employed in the

20 Chicago Police Department?

21 A. 38-plus years.

22 Q. Did you start in or about 1959?

23 A. Yes, March of 1959.

24 Q. And were your first duties as routine



1 patrol officer?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And when did you move on to something

4 other than routine patrol?

5 A. 1963, I was promoted to detective. And

6 I worked in the homicide section on the west side

7 of Chicago, until February, 1967, when I went into

8 the intelligence division, Chicago Police

9 Department.

10 Q. What is the intelligence division of

11 the Chicago Police Department?

12 A. The intelligence division of the

13 Chicago Police Department was a section devoted to

14 gathering information for analytical purposes on

15 individuals identified as being connected with

16 organized crime, syndicated crime, in the Chicago

17 area.

18 Q. What types of surveillance reports and

19 activities do you analyze in the intelligence

20 section? What types of activities do you monitor,

21 and then the reports from which you had to look

22 at?

23 That's a terrible question. Let me

24 withdraw that whole question, and start over.



1 What types of activity are the focus of

2 the intelligence section?

3 A. Those crimes which have been identified

4 as providing funds for the people known as the mob

5 in the City of Chicago, gambling, prostitution,

6 pornography, extortion, lately, narcotics.

7 Q. And the people who work in the

8 intelligence section, are they limited to analysis

9 of surveillance reports, or do they actually

10 engage in surveillance themselves?

11 A. No. The main portion are street

12 officers who engage in surveillance.

13 Q. And are there analysts whose specialty

14 is putting the pieces together?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. From 1967 to 1980, will you describe

17 your work with the intelligence section?

18 A. I worked on the street as a street

19 officer conducting surveillances.

20 For a period of time, we had a gambling

21 squad which was an enforcement squad. I worked in

22 the gambling squad of the intelligence section,

23 which is, was separate from the vice control

24 division. Then --



1 Q. Let me interrupt you. What time frame

2 were you focusing on the gambling activities?

3 A. In the late '60s, early '70s.

4 And then we went out of the enforcement

5 type of work on the gambling and went into

6 strictly surveillance, obtaining the intelligence

7 information.

8 Q. When you say surveillance for

9 intelligence purposes, does that mean monitoring

10 suspected outfit people, and seeing who they are

11 associating with?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. In 1980, did your career take a slight

14 turn?

15 A. Yes, sir, it did.

16 Q. What did you do then?

17 A. In late '79, the City of Chicago had an

18 election for representation within the police

19 department. I was active in a police organization

20 known as the Fraternal Order of Police. And we

21 won the election to represent the police

22 officers.

23 And I was in a, from late '79 until mid

24 1993, in a detached position, operating as the



1 president of the police union.

2 Q. In the 13 years that you were head of

3 the police union, did you actively work as the

4 Chicago police officers do?

5 A. No, sir. I was on the payroll, for

6 contractual purposes. But I was not a police

7 officer on the street.

8 Q. So to the extent that you have any

9 testimony to offer, during that 13-year period,

10 it's based on a review of records, not from your

11 own personal observations?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Fine. In 1993, what did you do?

14 A. I returned to the roles of, the active

15 roles of the police department, and I returned to

16 the intelligence section of the Chicago Police

17 Department.

18 Q. And have you been there ever since?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. And from 1993 to the present, could you

21 describe the types of investigations you have been

22 involved in?

23 A. Surveillance of known or suspected

24 organized crime figures, to identify the locations



1 that they go to, the people they meet, ones who

2 may or may not be involved in criminal activities.

3 Q. Do you coordinate with other law

4 enforcement agencies?

5 A. Yes, sir, we do.

6 Q. Including the Cook County Sheriff's

7 Office and the FBI?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Let's turn first to your gambling work

10 that you did. I think you said it was starting in

11 the late '60s.

12 What areas of Chicago did you find

13 organized crime activity with respect to gambling?

14 A. In the late '60s, it was citywide and

15 suburbanwide.

16 Q. Well, let's start with the city, I

17 guess.

18 A. There was different, we identified

19 different facets of the gambling, as far as

20 sections of the city divided up into different

21 crews.

22 There was a north side crew, at that

23 time, a west side crew still operating in the

24 city, a south side crew.



1 Q. And who were the relevant bosses as you

2 came to understand them of those crews?

3 A. On the west side, it was Jack Cerone,

4 and a gentleman named Joseph Gagliano. On the

5 north side, it was Vince Solano, Joseph DiVarco,

6 Joseph Arnold.

7 And on the south side, it was Ralph

8 Pierce, and the area around the University of

9 Chicago, and somewhat into the loop; and it was

10 Frank Caruso in the area we have identified as

11 Chinatown area.

12 Q. Now, there are a number of, there are

13 at least two Frank Carusos that have been

14 mentioned. And I'm going to add their nicknames

15 to the picture, see if we can clarify who you are

16 talking about.

17 Does the name Frank Skids Caruso mean

18 anything to you?

19 A. That is the gentleman that was active

20 in the period that I'm speaking of.

21 Q. Did you ever come to understand that

22 someone by the name of Frank "Toots" or "Tootsie

23 Babe" Caruso was acting in that picture?

24 A. Not to my personal knowledge, no, sir.



1 Q. Okay. I want to focus for a moment on

2 the 26th Street crew. Could you describe the

3 gambling activities that you observed in or around

4 that area?

5 MR. CARMELL: I don't believe that there was

6 a crew that he described as the 26th Street.

7 I thought he said north side, west

8 side, south side.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: And south side; north

10 side, south side, going way back, Ralph Pierce,

11 going back in the history.

12 MR. THOMAS: Let me ask the witness that.


14 Q. When you described Mr. Frank Skids

15 Caruso's involvement in gambling activity, what

16 geographic part of the city was that?

17 A. We considered that the Chinatown area,

18 which was the area from 22nd Street over to 31st

19 Street.

20 Q. Do some people refer to that as the

21 26th Street area?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. All right. So I'll use the --

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: There is prior



1 testimony that Chinatown is the 26th Street area.

2 MR. THOMAS: Correct.


4 Q. In the Chinatown or 26th Street area,

5 and with respect to that crew, could you describe

6 the types of organized crime gambling activity you

7 observed when you were patrolling that area?

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: This is back in the

9 '60s, right?

10 MR. THOMAS: Early '70s.



13 A. Well, at that time, they were operating

14 the dice games in the area, and horse book was the

15 big betting process back then.


17 Q. Sorry. I didn't hear you.

18 A. Horses, horse racing was a big betting

19 action for the bookmakers at that time.

20 Q. And how would you surveil this activity

21 without being detected? How would you engage in

22 police activity?

23 A. Well, we used nondescript vehicles. We

24 had targets assigned. And we would follow people



1 who in the past had been identified or arrested

2 for gambling, surveil them to see what their

3 present activities were.

4 If they were going to a location not

5 their home during the hours of about 11 in the

6 morning until 1:30 in the afternoon, it was

7 usually indicative that they could be operating a

8 horse bet wire room in those locations.

9 We identified some of the operators and

10 players in the dice games, and they would be

11 surveilled until we could identify a location as

12 an active dice game location.

13 Q. Now, when we talk about gambling and

14 dice, those types of activities, what's the, what

15 was the attraction to organized crime with respect

16 to that type of activity?

17 A. Profit.

18 Q. Were the games of such a size that the

19 stakes involved would be that profitable?

20 A. I would imagine some of the dice games

21 used to run from Friday evening until Sunday

22 afternoon. The horse books would operate every

23 day except Sunday because back in those days they

24 did not race on Sunday.



1 Also in regards to the dice games and

2 perhaps some of the heavy betters on the horses,

3 there was the juice loans that could be given out,

4 money loaned right at the site of the dice games

5 to get a person who is a heavy better into

6 gambling on the horses or sports, they fall behind

7 a little bit, you put them on juice and now you

8 are collecting two sides, the bets they lose plus

9 the exorbitant interest they were getting from the

10 juice loans.

11 Q. Would organized crime provide

12 protection for these activities, specifically

13 gambling? In other words, were there lookouts as

14 you were surveying?

15 A. In the dice games there would be. In

16 the wire rooms, the horse books they would just

17 try to fortify the locations they were in. If

18 they were taking bets on the street or in a tavern

19 or something, it was catch as catch can.

20 Q. Was this area difficult to surveil, if

21 that in fact is a verb, to engage in surveillance?

22 A. It was to a point that if you're not a

23 resident of the area and they have lookouts, they

24 look on you kind of suspiciously to start out, so



1 you have a hard time sitting in one location for a

2 long time.

3 Q. Would the locations for this activity

4 move around a little bit within the neighborhood?

5 A. Yes, they would continually move the

6 dice game around.

7 Q. Let me ask you about a couple of

8 particular names and ask you if you have any

9 recollection of these people being involved in

10 organized crime activity in the Chinatown 26th

11 Street area.

12 Angelo La Pietra?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 MR. CARMELL: His definition of organized

15 crime activity is a conclusion. If he wants to

16 ask him whether he was engaged in horse book or

17 dice or what he was or then he could establish

18 through this witness how he identifies organized

19 crime.

20 But he has both of them together. He

21 has said this is organized crime activity.

22 MR. THOMAS: I will have the witness break

23 that down, your Honor.




1 Q. Did you come to know the name Angelo

2 La Pietra during the course of your police work?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. Who did you come to -- how did you come

5 to know that name?

6 A. Originally Angelo La Pietra was

7 identified as part of the operation out in the

8 Cicero area. He was residing in Berwyn at that

9 time and he was active with Joseph Aiuppa who was

10 the underboss of the mob.

11 Q. Richie Catazone?

12 A. Richie Catazone was a known gambler,

13 resident of the 26th Street area, previously

14 arrested for gambling.

15 Q. Was he to your knowledge was he tied in

16 with the mob at all?

17 A. Pardon?

18 Q. Was he tied in with the Outfit at all?

19 A. Definitely an associate, yes, sir.

20 Q. Shorty LaMantia. Did you come across

21 that name?

22 A. Yes, sir, we did.

23 Q. How was that?

24 A. In gambling investigations, later on he



1 was identified as a juice loan operator, arrested,

2 presently incarcerated I believe for his

3 activities.

4 Q. And was he arrested recently with

5 anyone by the name of Frank Caruso, to your

6 knowledge?

7 A. He had been in the past, yes, sir.

8 Q. And which Frank Caruso are we talking

9 about?

10 A. Frank Michael, I believe, Caruso.

11 Q. Not Skids?

12 A. No. He is deceased.

13 Q. The other Frank Caruso?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. With respect to the north side crew and

16 the organized crime activity that may have

17 occurred out there, at what points in your career

18 did you engage in surveillance of that area?

19 A. Started in 1967.

20 Q. And what types of criminal activity

21 went on up there?

22 A. Gambling, prostitution in that area

23 with the Rush Street area. Undoubtedly juice

24 operations were rather prevalent, fronting for



1 tavern keepers, people who wanted to open up is a

2 loans in the area. There was identification of

3 some of the people over there being involved in

4 the policy operation of the City of Chicago.

5 Q. Was the operation of adult and

6 pornographic bookstores part of the north side

7 crew?

8 A. It was. I never investigated it.

9 Q. That was left to other people?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. In those early years of your career who

12 were the major players on the north side?

13 A. Vince Solano, Joseph DiVarco, Joseph

14 Arnold were the main players originally.

15 Q. And since you have been back at the

16 police force from 1993 to the present day who are

17 the major players out there today?

18 A. From the surveillance and analysis that

19 we have conducted it would appear to be John

20 Matassa, Jr.

21 Q. Would you recognize him by sight?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Do you see him here today?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. Could you identify him, please.

2 A. At the second table, the last gentleman

3 on the left with the glasses.

4 Q. Glasses. And could you describe his

5 shirt?

6 A. Light-colored shirt.

7 Q. And that's -- do you know him to have

8 an affiliation with the Laborers union at all?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. What is that?

11 A. He is the president of Local 2 of the

12 Laborers, the sewer and tunnel workers union.

13 Q. Do you also understand him to have an

14 officer position with the District Council?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. At my request have you reviewed the

17 police files with respect to John Matassa during

18 the years that you were not a police officer but

19 involved in the union?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. According to the police files of

22 surveillance reports was Mr. Matassa observed

23 associating with known mob figures in the decade

24 of the 1980s?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 MR. CARMELL: All right, Mr. Hearing Officer,

3 are we going to get these files?


5 MR. CARMELL: Are we going to get these files

6 that he has just made his conclusions on? By

7 allowing me to question and answer to see whether

8 he has a conclusion.

9 MR. THOMAS: May I respond? I think I can

10 save us some time.


12 MR. THOMAS: In Exhibit 100 you will -- which

13 I intend to offer at the end of his testimony, you

14 have several of the surveillance reports that he

15 is talking about.

16 There are with respect to the 1990s,

17 and this is very important, a number of actual

18 surveillances that he will talk about with respect

19 to ongoing investigations and I have made the

20 commitment to the Police Department that we are

21 not going to compromise any ongoing investigations

22 by allowing those surveillance reports to be made

23 part of the record.

24 I am going to have this witness



1 describe his involvement in those and who he

2 understands the players to be and what he has

3 observed, but I do not intend to offer any

4 surveillance reports from the 1990s.

5 MR. CARMELL: Let me understand this. This

6 witness is going to testify concerning his

7 involvement in ongoing investigations, which I

8 would assume thereby compromises the investigation

9 if he is going to testify concerning it. Maybe I

10 am missing something someplace.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Put him on the stand

12 and he is currently a police officer conducting

13 surveillances, whatever. You are going to ask him

14 about now in the last three years or whatever what

15 have you observed looking out of your police car

16 or whatever it is.

17 MR. THOMAS: Correct.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: And have you seen any

19 of the persons mentioned in this case.

20 MR. THOMAS: Correct.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: And he is going to say

22 yes, no, saw him when, whatever the best of his

23 knowledge. That he is intending to do.

24 MR. THOMAS: Correct.



1 MR. CARMELL: That is not my problem.


3 MR. CARMELL: My problem will be if he is

4 testifying not what he saw, smelled and did, but

5 from review of other police surveillance reports

6 what he -- other people supposedly said he did.

7 That's my difficulty. If he is going to testify

8 as what he has gathered from reports, then I'd

9 like -- I want to see those reports.

10 MR. THOMAS: Well, the matters that he was

11 not directly involved in are -- is the 1980s

12 period for the reasons that he has already

13 described. Counsel has those reports in Exhibit I

14 think it's 100.

15 MR. CARMELL: That's the whole entirety of

16 all the reports.

17 MR. THOMAS: I don't know whether it's the

18 entirety. It's certainly most of them.

19 MR. CARMELL: Okay.

20 MR. THOMAS: But the 1993 to the present

21 period relates or may relate to ongoing

22 investigations which the Police Department feels

23 is sensitive and Mr. Dineen is aware of the

24 parameters of what he is allowed to talk about and



1 what he is not allowed to talk about.

2 MR. CARMELL: Well, I don't have a problem if

3 he is going to only say what he saw and did. If

4 he is going to weave through the parameters of

5 what he read, you can't do that and not give me

6 those reports.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't know about

8 that. But just for the sake of clarity here, I

9 understand you have given Mr. Carmell some

10 reports.

11 MR. THOMAS: Correct.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Those have to do with

13 what period of time?

14 MR. THOMAS: 1980s. And, by the way, it's

15 corroborative and duplicative of some testimony

16 yesterday. So it is very little surprise or

17 newness.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Where do we get the

19 reports of the '80s? What is the source of those

20 reports?

21 MR. THOMAS: Ultimately the Police Department

22 and the Inspector General's office.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Now you are going to

24 ask him about the last three years, Mr. Dineen,



1 what did you see, who did you see and what were

2 they doing.

3 MR. THOMAS: Correct.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. I guess he could

5 say.

6 MR. CARMELL: Sure.


8 MR. THOMAS: We are all vigorously agreeing

9 here.

10 MR. CARMELL: On that part, yes.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: If we run into

12 something else, we will let you know.

13 MR. THOMAS: Fair enough.


15 Q. Mr. Dineen, have you had a chance to

16 look at some of the surveillance reports that were

17 generated in the 1980s when you were head of the

18 police union?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. And those are surveillances that were

21 conducted by your colleagues in -- while you were

22 off doing union activity, is that right?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. Could you summarize for us what, if



1 any, information is reflected in those reports in

2 the 1980s?

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: Is that document around

4 somewhere?

5 MR. THOMAS: We are going to come to Exhibit

6 100. First I want to have him describe it before

7 we get into any kind of detail.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, I think he has

9 described it. He said surveillance reports and

10 it's of the 1980s. Why don't you pull it out and

11 then we can see how well he is doing as he is

12 summarizing it.

13 MR. THOMAS: I am going to do that. I will

14 represent that I will do that. I just want to

15 have him say it before we actually get into the

16 paper.


18 Q. Mr. Dineen, could you describe for us

19 what types of activities are reflected in those

20 reports specifically with respect to John Matassa,

21 the current vice president of the District

22 Council?

23 A. Yes, there was surveillances done of

24 some locations, specifically Giannotti's



1 restaurant located in Norridge, I believe, and of

2 individuals known to be involved in gambling and

3 extortion and the people who they would meet with.

4 Q. And who were some of those individuals?

5 A. The main individual that I observed a

6 report on was a gentleman known as Solly

7 Delaurantis.

8 Q. Who is Solly Delaurantis?

9 A. Solly Delaurantis was a confidant of

10 organized crime in Chicago, an enforcer with

11 Ernest Rocco Infelise, both presently incarcerated

12 for lengthy sentences in the penitentiary for

13 racketeering.

14 Q. Were there other associations with

15 known Outfit members?

16 A. There was a registration of a meeting

17 in the Giannotti restaurant in February of '88

18 where Mr. Matassa was observed conversing with one

19 Joseph Spadavecchio.

20 Joseph Spadavecchio is a known gambler,

21 supervisor in the Elmwood Park area, associate of

22 Donald Angelini and Dominick Cortina, both

23 previously convicted for gambling and served time

24 in the federal penitentiary.



1 Q. Were there any others that came to

2 mind? Does the name Bobby Dominic mean anything

3 to you?

4 A. Bobby Dominic, but what I saw was

5 really the -- in the report the same thing that

6 Tom Bohling referred to yesterday.

7 Q. So you were here for that testimony?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. So, in other words, you have seen the

10 same surveillance reflecting meetings with Bobby

11 Dominic?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Who do you know Bobby Dominic to be?

14 A. Bobby Dominic is involved in

15 pornography in the City of Chicago, eventually

16 went out to Las Vegas to open up a strip club.

17 Q. Let me ask you to look at Exhibit 100,

18 please, which I think you have in front of you.

19 Unfortunately in --

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Thomas, we are

21 about 12:30 here. Shall we have a break? How

22 about coming back in about an hour?

23 MR. CARMELL: We could but I -- it would also

24 save time because I want to review this report



1 with Mr. Matassa obviously.


3 MR. CARMELL: Either I would take the break

4 to make it a little longer.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Take a little longer.

6 MR. CARMELL: Thank you. It will save us

7 time because I can go directly into the

8 examination.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand.

10 MR. THOMAS: Could we have a time you want us

11 to resume?

12 MR. CARMELL: Let's do it at 1:45.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's fine.

14 MR. CARMELL: 1:45.

15 (WHEREUPON, at 12:30 p.m. the

16 hearing was recessed until

17 1:45 p.m., this date, July 18, 1997.)













4 IN RE: )






10 July 18, 1997

11 1:56 p.m.


13 The hearing resumed pursuant to recess

14 at the Midland Hotel, 172 West Adams Street,

15 Chicago, Illinois.



18 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:



16 appeared on behalf of the Chicago

17 District Council of Laborers.










1 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Dineen, you are still under

2 oath. Okay. We are back on the record.


4 called as a witness herein, having been previously

5 duly sworn and having testified, was examined and

6 testified further as follows:



9 Q. Mr. Dineen, do you still have a copy of

10 Exhibit 100 with you?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Could you identify what this document

13 is?

14 A. It appears to be a background report of

15 John Matassa, Jr.

16 Q. Is this Chicago Police document

17 maintained in the ordinary course of business?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. I want to direct your attention to Page

20 10 of that document, if you would. And just for

21 the record, so that we're all on the same page,

22 that heading there in the upper right-hand corner

23 says 16 September, the year is cut off, it says

24 Page 10, heading, G. Criminal/Organized Crime



1 Associates.

2 Do you have that page?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. What does this page reflect?

5 A. It would apply to those people that an

6 analyst had culled off of the reports where Mr.

7 Matassa's name had been mentioned, and at one time

8 or another had company with these people.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: Can I ask a question?

10 Looking at Exhibit 100 here, Mr.

11 Dineen, this is an official report from Chicago

12 Police Department?

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: And you have seen it

15 before obviously.

16 How did you get it, gentlemen? How did

17 it get here?

18 MR. THOMAS: I'm not sure I can answer that

19 question, your Honor. I don't know. It's been a

20 while.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: But you certify, sir,

22 that it is an official report?

23 THE WITNESS: The heading says it, yes, sir.

24 Today is the first time I've seen this in this



1 form.

2 MR. THOMAS: Maybe I can clarify with the

3 witness.


5 Q. Are there pages of this document that

6 you have seen before?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. But not every single page?

9 A. Not the entirety, yes.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: I guess if we are

11 relying on the fact that this came from the

12 Chicago Police, I'd like for some sort of a

13 direction as to how we got it.

14 I mean, whether we got it legally or

15 illegally, it's here. But I want to know if it's

16 a portion of the -- I mean, what it is it purports

17 to be.

18 MR. THOMAS: Certainly, this witness can say

19 that, and he has said that. He said that this is

20 a document maintained in the ordinary course of

21 business by the Chicago Police Department.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: He has. But he hasn't,

23 he didn't bring it out. He didn't pick it up. He

24 said it looks like it.



1 Am I right, sir? Or is that the form

2 of, that these are generally in?

3 THE WITNESS: That is the form that they

4 usually maintain background reports in, yes, sir.


6 Q. On Page 1 of the document, it says

7 Organized Crime Division, Intelligence Section.

8 Is that a section of the Chicago Police

9 Department?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. And you are familiar with that section,

12 are you not?

13 A. That's where I work, yes, sir.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Bostwick, at some

15 time, would your organization certify to me that,

16 where this came from?

17 MR. BOSTWICK: We can do that.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: I know that from time

19 to time, you have documents. And from time to

20 time, I've been in hearings, and how the case

21 goes, and your organization will bring in some

22 government report which looks on its face to be

23 where it comes from.

24 And that is a -- I'm just looking for



1 some sort of certification.

2 MR. BOSTWICK: Lawyer's certification, or

3 something along those lines?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: No, I'll accept it just

5 orally; Mr. Vaira, we obtained this from X. I'll

6 listen to a lawyer's certification, unless it's so

7 far out that no one can connect it.

8 But you may continue. He has made a

9 prima facie identification of it. Since we, it's

10 talking about some, looks like some pretty

11 sensitive stuff, I'll look for some certification

12 from somebody about where you gentlemen got this.

13 MR. THOMAS: Very well.


15 Q. With respect to Page 10, Mr. Dineen,

16 the list there going from 1 to 13, once again,

17 that's a list of whom?

18 A. Of people that have been identified by

19 the analyst as participants in some sort of

20 organized crime activity and who have been

21 associated through investigation with Mr. Matassa.

22 Q. You mentioned some of the names on this

23 report. I wonder if we could go over a couple of

24 them.



1 Joseph Arnold, does that name mean

2 anything to you?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. Who is Joseph Arnold?

5 A. He was partners with Joseph DiVarco, in

6 the supervision of the activities for the mob in

7 the Rush Street area.

8 Q. Frank Caruso, does that mean anything

9 to you?

10 A. I have heard it mentioned here, yes,

11 sir.

12 Q. Okay. Frank Tornabene, line 6. Does

13 Frank Tornabene mean anything to you?

14 A. Frank Tornabene was an often-arrested

15 gambling operator in the Rush Street/near north

16 area of Chicago.

17 Q. And, finally, No. 8, Robert Dominic.

18 Does that mean anything to you?

19 A. Bobby Dominic operates bookstores

20 selling which at one time was pornographic

21 literature. I guess in today's world some of it

22 is acceptable.

23 Q. Finally, if you could just tell us what

24 restaurants does the report indicate Mr. Matassa



1 has frequented?

2 A. Mr. Edward's restaurant.

3 Q. If you could turn the page, please, to

4 subheading H, "Surveillances."

5 When you described the 1980s

6 surveillance reports and so forth that you had

7 reviewed for your testimony, is this in part a

8 summary of those surveillances?

9 A. That is some that I have seen. I did

10 not testify to them here.

11 MR. CARMELL: I didn't hear the end of the

12 answer.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I didn't hear the

14 answer. What was that again, Mr. Dineen?

15 THE WITNESS: Those were some of the reports

16 that I observed in our file, but I was not asked

17 to -- except for the meeting with Mr. Dominic or

18 the association with Mr. Dominic, I was not asked

19 to enumerate on any of those during my time here.


21 Q. So, in other words, some of the items

22 1 through 6 you may have reviewed the actual

23 surveillance reports but not all?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. And finally from there, turn seven

2 pages back or forward I should say, there appears

3 to be a police form. Do you see that with a

4 grid-like pattern and a narrative at the bottom?

5 A. Yes, sir.

6 Q. There are three such pages, are there

7 not?

8 MR. CARMELL: Are they the ones that are

9 headed "Crime Prevention Data"?


11 A. Yes, there are three.

12 MR. CARMELL: Is that the one?

13 MR. THOMAS: Yes.


15 Q. Now, Mr. Dineen, the surveillance

16 reports that you were describing having read from

17 the 1980s period, are these some of the reports

18 that you read?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. These three pages. All right. So for

21 the first page and, again, for identifiers, the

22 upper right-hand corner says 125, over on the left

23 side it talks about Michael Glitta, Vincent

24 Solano. Does this surveillance report reflect a



1 meeting between Mr. Matassa, Mr. Glitta and

2 Mr. Solano?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. Again, for the record who was

5 Mr. Solano?

6 A. Solano was the supervisor of the mob

7 activities on the near north side and was also

8 affiliated with the Laborers union.

9 Q. And who was Mr. Glitta to your

10 knowledge?

11 A. Mike Glitta was a member of the mob who

12 was in charge of all of their obscene literature

13 and bookstore activity.

14 Q. If you could turn the page, please.

15 For identification purposes in the upper left-hand

16 portion of the document it says Giannotti's

17 Restaurant and Joseph Spadavecchio. Do you have

18 that page?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Is this one of the reports that you

21 reviewed prior to your testimony?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. And what does this reflect with respect

24 to Mr. Matassa's associations?



1 A. In February of 1988 Mr. Matassa was

2 observed in Giannotti's restaurant conversing at a

3 table with Joseph Spadavecchio.

4 Q. Who is Joseph Spadavecchio?

5 A. Joseph Spadavecchio was a gambling

6 supervisor for the mob operating out of the

7 Elmwood Park area, an associate of Donald Angelini

8 and Dominick Cortina.

9 Q. If we could turn one more page. In the

10 upper left-hand portion of the document it

11 indicates 2126 Hilton, Park Ridge, Illinois,

12 Robert Rocco Dominic and Mr. Edward's restaurant.

13 Is this one of the reports you reviewed

14 prior to your testimony?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And what does this reflect with respect

17 to Mr. Matassa's association?

18 A. That he was observed in March of '90 at

19 Mr. Edward's restaurant at Diversey and

20 Naragansett in the company of Frank DeMonte and

21 Robert Dominic.

22 Q. And who were those two gentlemen?

23 A. Frank DeMonte was a crime syndicate

24 member operating in the near north side area and



1 Robert Dominic is an associate who was involved in

2 the pornography business.

3 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Vaira, at this time, with

4 the proviso that you have stated on the record, I

5 would offer GEB Attorney Exhibit 100 in evidence.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: The entire exhibit?

7 MR. THOMAS: It could be redacted if you

8 wish. The portions of it that I wish to have the

9 Hearing Officer focus on are the ones that we just

10 covered, those five pages, but if you wanted to

11 redact it, we would be happy to do that.

12 MR. CARMELL: Before you accept it.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand but go

14 ahead. I have some questions myself.

15 MR. CARMELL: At some point in

16 cross-examination, maybe during mine, I want to

17 establish, or maybe you would, that this document

18 100, who prepared it, when was it prepared. It

19 has a date of '93 on it. It has other dates in

20 it. Does it contain all the surveillance?

21 MR. THOMAS: May I be heard on that?

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think some of the

23 information --

24 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. Was it prepared for



1 this hearing or is it a document that was in the

2 files.

3 MR. THOMAS: May I be heard on it?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Just a moment.

5 My point is I was trying to determine

6 if somebody determined -- information here is put

7 together by an analyst and what the procedure does

8 the analyst follow? Give us some idea of what

9 this is. Assume that it's a police document.

10 What does the analyst do?

11 And obviously this is a file on John

12 Matassa. I mean police file on John Matassa.

13 They may have files on a lot of persons.

14 Here is what I am going to do. We will

15 just deal with those particular pages that you

16 talked about and I am withhold ruling on it until

17 we hear a little bit more about just how this is

18 put together.

19 MR. THOMAS: Fine. I would respectfully

20 suggest that as a fertile area for

21 cross-examination. Doesn't go to admissibility.

22 Let me see if I can have the witness

23 answer some of those questions.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: It goes to -- let's put



1 it this way.

2 This is a hearing. Admissibility is

3 not the key issue. Its probative value is the

4 issue here.

5 MR. THOMAS: The probative value, if I may,

6 Mr. Vaira --

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Reliability and

8 probative value. It has to be reliable.

9 MR. THOMAS: Probative value is it puts

10 Mr. Matassa with mob figures. That's clear.

11 MR. CARMELL: But from whom?

12 MR. THOMAS: The reliability is what you are

13 focusing on, not probative value. Probative value

14 I think is self-evident.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: They go hand in hand.

16 Let's find out where this document came from. We

17 know it came from the police, at least they say.

18 And I presume that that is where it is. But let's

19 find out how it's put together and some of the

20 techniques that is involved in putting it

21 together.


23 Q. Mr. Dineen, how does the intelligence

24 section compile a police file, a background file



1 of this nature?

2 A. One of the officers would be assigned.

3 It would take surveillance reports that have been

4 turned in, interview reports that have been turned

5 in, cull out of that the main points of the

6 interview or the surveillance or those which

7 pertain to the individual who is the subject of

8 the background report.

9 If there was perhaps five or six

10 different people viewed in Giannotti's restaurant

11 that night, they would not all be named in this

12 portion of the analyst's thing. He would have

13 five or six different sheets identifying the

14 different people who had spoken to

15 Mr. Spadavecchio.

16 Q. So, is it fair to say that this is a

17 way of summarizing and cross-indexing names as

18 they appear on surveillance reports?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Is this police file in substantially

21 the same form that you have seen other such police

22 files?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, Mr. Vaira, I don't



1 know how much further I can go than that.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: I will ask him. What

3 is the mission of the intelligence section of the

4 Police Department? What is the mission of the

5 intelligence section of the Police Department?

6 THE WITNESS: To obtain information as to

7 criminal activities or to identify individuals

8 that are operating in illicit activities in the

9 Chicago area.


11 intelligence division uses, I presume, the normal

12 mechanics of intelligence gathering, such as

13 surveillance?

14 THE WITNESS: Surveillance and interview are

15 the two main ones, yes.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Surveillance,

17 interviews, all right. And occasionally,

18 interviews of confidential informants?

19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. And what's done

21 with the -- I guess that comes in in raw material,

22 does it not? Comes in in a surveillance report?

23 THE WITNESS: Surveillance report or

24 interview reports, yes, sir.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Then what's done with

2 the material that comes in raw, the raw

3 intelligence material?

4 THE WITNESS: That's sent to the analysis

5 section, and they would cull out the information

6 that was pertained to be of importance.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Now, the analyst

8 section, are these trained individuals?

9 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Trained in, better

11 term, intelligence analysis?

12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: I know that some

14 organizations have persons who are intelligence

15 analysts; DEA does, other agencies. Is that the

16 situation with your group?

17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. Perhaps they get it

18 through experience; when the officers who work in

19 the analysis section, that's the only way they

20 would have --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Oh, are these sworn

22 officers?

23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: So they are sworn



1 police officers, who are there by training or by

2 experience?

3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Because there are some

5 places that have nonsworn persons who are --

6 THE WITNESS: No, we do not have.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. And all right.

8 Let me get to this next point.

9 What do you do with the material? You

10 have it. You catalog this report. What are those

11 reports then used for? What is the raw

12 information used for? For search warrants? For

13 arrest warrants, or what?

14 What's the intelligence, the body of

15 raw intelligence used for in the police

16 department?

17 THE WITNESS: Well, the end result would be,

18 hoped for, would be a prosecution.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand.

20 But who calls upon it? Who needs it?

21 I'm the detective, or I'm working homicide, or I'm

22 working organized crime. When do I, the

23 detective, come to the intelligence section, and

24 how do I tap it?



1 THE WITNESS: Say that someone was doing a

2 homicide investigation, or names come up.

3 They would come to the intelligence

4 section, make a request for the information,

5 through the supervisor in charge of the files

6 section, would have to be approved by our

7 commanding officer.

8 They would check the files to see if

9 there was any indication of information on the

10 individuals they wanted, and they would be given

11 the information that was within the files, if the

12 commander saw fit.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: And information in here

14 has been culled, I wouldn't call it rough, but

15 it's not completely refined, is it not?

16 THE WITNESS: No, sir, it is not.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. Now you may

18 continue.

19 MR. THOMAS: Thank you.


21 Q. Moving along, Mr. Dineen, I want to

22 focus the rest of your testimony on the years when

23 you came back to the intelligence section from

24 running the police union, specifically 1993



1 forward.

2 Have you been engaged in surveillance

3 of organized crime figures since you returned to

4 the police department in 1993?

5 A. Yes, sir.

6 Q. In any particular types of, have you

7 focused on any particular types of criminal

8 activity?

9 A. Well, it's a rather broad spectrum.

10 But most of what we have been working

11 on is to identify the people in the upper level of

12 the ranks of the mob in Chicago.

13 Q. During the course of your surveillance

14 activities in the last four years, have you

15 personally engaged in surveillance of John

16 Matassa?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. On approximately how many times?

19 A. At least four times.

20 Q. Working in chronological order, if you

21 could, relay to us what you have observed on those

22 surveillances.

23 A. In February of 1995, I had occasion to

24 be in the vicinity of the Phoenix Restaurant,



1 P-H-O-E-N-I-X, located at the Cumberland and

2 Lawrence Avenue, and observed vehicles of people

3 we had identified as being active in mob activity,

4 that being the vehicle of John Matassa, and the

5 vehicle of one Mickey Marcello, Michael Marcello.

6 Q. Who is Michael Mickey Marcello?

7 A. Michael Marcello is the brother of

8 James Marcello, presently incarcerated in federal

9 prison, as identified and convicted as being the

10 underboss of the mob in the City of Chicago. He

11 was an underling to Sam Carlisi, C-A-R-L-I-S-I,

12 who recently passed away in federal prison.

13 They had taken over the operation of

14 Joey Aiuppa, and upon the passing of -- not the

15 passing, but the incarceration of Aiuppa.

16 Q. And you were beginning to describe

17 Mr. Matassa's meeting with one of those figures?

18 A. Right. We observed the cars in the

19 parking lot. So officers entered the restaurant,

20 and observed Mr. Matassa seated in a booth with

21 Michael Marcello.

22 Q. Is Michael Marcello known to be an

23 active member of the outfit?

24 A. Yes, he is; active in the follow-up



1 gambling activities of his brother.

2 Q. And how long approximately did that

3 meeting between Mr. Matassa and Mr. Marcello take?

4 A. We had it under observation for about

5 one hour.

6 Q. Were there other surveillances?

7 A. Yes, there was.

8 Q. When was the next one?

9 A. The next one was in October of '95. It

10 had occasion to be in the area of Horwath's

11 Restaurant, located in the 1800 block --

12 H-O-R-W-A-T-H-S -- in the 1800 block of North

13 Harlem Avenue in Elmwood Park.

14 They had observed the vehicles of

15 Michael Marcello, John Matassa and Alphonso

16 Tornabene.

17 Q. Now, we have already talked about Mr.

18 Marcello. I don't think we have heard Mr.

19 Tornabene's name.

20 Given your position in the police

21 department, do you have an understanding of who

22 Mr. Tornabene is?

23 A. Yes, sir. Alphonso Tornabene is a

24 cousin of Sam Carlisi. He is active in the



1 gambling operations, supervising it, under the

2 auspices of John Monteleone.

3 Q. What is your understanding of John

4 Monteleone's position, if any, in the outfit?

5 A. John Monteleone had originally came out

6 of the, what you refer to as the 26th Street crew,

7 had risen up through the ranks to be supervisor

8 not only of that area, but to the south, southwest

9 side, some of the west side of Chicago, in

10 gambling.

11 And it was our understanding that about

12 three or four years ago, he was also put in charge

13 of mob infiltration of unions.

14 Q. Do you consider John Monteleone to be a

15 high-ranking member of the outfit?

16 A. Yes, I do.

17 Q. All right. So I think you said April

18 of 1996, is that right?

19 A. No. This was in October of 1995.

20 Q. I'm sorry. Have you told us everything

21 that occurred at that time, at that meeting?

22 A. Except when they exited the restaurant,

23 the three of them, Mr. Tornabene, Mr. Marcello and

24 Mr. Matassa were observed walking together.



1 Q. What was the next one chronologically?

2 A. In April of 1996, I had occasion to be

3 again in the area of Horwath's Restaurant. And I

4 observed the vehicles of Mr. Tornabene, Mr.

5 Marcello and Mr. Matassa parked there.

6 When they exited the premises, Mr.

7 Tornabene got in his car and drove away. Mr.

8 Matassa and Mr. Marcello were engaged in a

9 conversation in the parking lot. And I took

10 photographs of them standing together.

11 Q. Then at some point, did they leave and

12 your surveillance end?

13 A. Right. Mr. Matassa left. Mr. Marcello

14 stayed in the parking lot for several minutes,

15 speaking with an unidentified woman. Then he

16 drove off.

17 Q. Directing your attention to May 2nd,

18 1996, was that the next occasion that you had an

19 opportunity to engage in surveillance of Mr.

20 Matassa?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And could you relate to us what

23 happened on that occasion?

24 A. In the evening of the 2nd of May, '96,



1 I had occasion to be in the area of Andrea's

2 Restaurant, A-N-D-R-E-A, apostrophe S, on

3 Roosevelt Road in Forest Park, Illinois.

4 And I observed the vehicles of Mr.

5 Matassa and Mr. Marcello and Alphonso Tornabene

6 parked in the parking lot.

7 Q. Let me stop you for a second.

8 Am I right, am I hearing you right,

9 these are the same characters meeting on these

10 occasions that you are describing?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. So this is what? The third or fourth

13 such meeting?

14 A. The fourth with Mr. Marcello, the third

15 with Mr. Tornabene.

16 Q. So please continue. What happened on

17 May 2nd, 1996?

18 A. I was able to establish a surveillance

19 of the inside, not enter the restaurant myself,

20 but park in a parking lot across a little side

21 street.

22 And through the window, I was able to

23 observe Mr. Marcello and Mr. Matassa sitting on

24 one side of a booth, Mr. Tornabene on the other



1 side. They appeared to be engaging in a rather

2 heated discussion.

3 Q. What did you observe?

4 A. I observed Mr. Matassa making points of

5 whatever he was saying by pointing his finger

6 across the table at Mr. Tornabene; at which time

7 Mr. Tornabene rose up from his seat in the booth,

8 and returned conversation by pointing down at Mr.

9 Matassa.

10 Q. How would you characterize that

11 conversation?

12 A. It appeared to be a heated conversation

13 of some sort.

14 Q. How long did it continue in that way?

15 A. The entire time that we were present in

16 that area, was approximately two hours. There was

17 surveillance inside of the restaurant.

18 The lights in the restaurant went out.

19 The waitress left in her car. The three gentlemen

20 were still seated in the booth. They eventually

21 came out, and stood in the parking lot for another

22 25 to 30 minutes, holding a conversation, before

23 the three of them left the area.

24 Q. I take it from your testimony that you



1 don't actually know what the substance of the

2 conversation was, is that right?

3 A. Yes, sir, that's true.

4 Q. Is that the last occasion that you have

5 picked up Mr. Matassa on surveillance?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. Based on your training and experience

8 and the substance of your surveillances, do you

9 have a conclusion as to Mr. Matassa's association

10 or involvement with the Chicago Outfit?

11 A. Yes, sir. It's our opinion from the

12 past activities of Mr. Matassa along with the

13 present activities that he is supervising the mob

14 on the near north side of Chicago.

15 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whom he

16 reports in the mob? Is there anyone above him?

17 A. It appears Mr. Tornabene.

18 Q. Does the term made member mean anything

19 to you?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or

22 not based on your training and experience

23 Mr. Matassa is a made member of the mob?

24 A. Yes, sir, I believe he is a made member



1 of the mob.

2 Q. What is the basis of that opinion?

3 A. Surveillance of his activities and

4 interviews with confidential informants.

5 Q. Finally, I want to end by asking you a

6 few questions about these charts that we have got.

7 Does the name James Caporale mean

8 anything to you?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. Who do you know Mr. Caporale to be?

11 A. Back in the late '60s, early '70s,

12 Mr. Caporale was affiliated with the Laborers

13 union but also affiliated with members of the mob

14 who held frequent meetings in a gas station at

15 1801 north on Harlem Avenue. That would be Jack

16 Cerone, Dominick Cortina, Donald Angelini, amongst

17 the many people who were meeting in that gas

18 station.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: What is the testimony,

20 that he actually saw this or surveillance?

21 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. I personally

22 observed these -- some of these meetings going on.


24 Q. Did you have any occasion during the



1 course of your work as a police officer to come

2 across the name Al Pilotto?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. Who was Al Pilotto?

5 A. He was involved, to my knowledge, in

6 the Laborers union in the Chicago Heights area.

7 Q. What position in the mob, if any, in

8 general terms did he occupy?

9 A. He was the supervisor or the boss of

10 the Bob in the Heights and in northwest Indiana.

11 Q. Have you heard the name James DiForti?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Who is Jimmy DiForti?

14 A. Mr. DiForti was recently arrested for

15 murder. Prior to that he was active in Chicago

16 Heights in the Laborers union and prior to that in

17 the area of Cicero, Illinois in contact with

18 members of the mob.

19 Q. And did you understand that at least

20 until recently he was a member of the Laborers

21 union as well?

22 A. Yes, sir, of Local 5.

23 Q. Mr. Dineen, have you ever come across

24 or met somebody by the name of Ernie Kumerow?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. How did you come to know or to meet

3 Mr. Kumerow?

4 A. Mr. Kumerow was the president of the

5 Laborers union that had members from the City of

6 Chicago Streets and Sanitation.

7 Q. Did you ever have occasion to have a

8 conversation with him with respect to his

9 relationship to Mr. Accardo?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Approximately when was this?

12 A. It would have been in the mid-'80s.

13 Q. And during the mid-'80s who was

14 Mr. Accardo, Anthony Accardo?

15 A. Anthony Accardo was the overall boss of

16 the mob in the Chicago area.

17 Q. And tell us about your conversation

18 with Ernie Kumerow in that time period in the

19 early '80s.

20 A. I met him in regards to my activities

21 as president of the police union. They were at a

22 joint meeting and I was talking with him. He made

23 a remark something about I look familiar.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Describe where you



1 were. You were in a joint union meeting or

2 something?

3 THE WITNESS: Right, it was a meeting of all

4 of the different unions that represented employees

5 in the City of Chicago.



8 Q. Let me stop you if I could. This is in

9 the time period when you were president of the

10 Fraternal Order of Police and he was president of

11 the Chicago District Council, is that right?

12 A. He was president of the local. That's

13 all I knew him as, of the local that had the

14 Chicago Streets and Sans.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: You are the FOP. You

16 are at this group. You are having this

17 conversation. Anyone else present in the

18 conversation itself?

19 THE WITNESS: At that time I don't believe

20 so. There was other people in the room. I was

21 talking to Mr. Kumerow.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: Would you tell us what

23 you said, what he said.

24 THE WITNESS: Just we were first talking



1 union business and he knew I was a police

2 officer. He says, John, you look kind of

3 familiar. And I said, well, part of my activity

4 before I came to the union was surveying your

5 father-in-law.


7 Q. And what was Mr. Kumerow's reaction to

8 that?

9 A. Nothing. He just smiled. I was of the

10 opinion he already knew it before we got involved

11 in our conversation.

12 Q. Finally, with respect to the

13 surveillances that you have described involving

14 Mr. Matassa, were these meetings during the day or

15 during the night?

16 A. Two were doing the lunch hour, the two

17 at Horwath's. The one at the Phoenix restaurant

18 was late in the afternoon and the one at Andrea's

19 restaurant was late at night, started about

20 9 o'clock, went until 11 o'clock.

21 Q. And when you mentioned Mr. Matassa's

22 car coming to these meetings, did his car have any

23 particular identifier that tipped you off that it

24 was him coming in?



1 A. License plate was LIU 2 and --

2 Q. What did you understand that to be an

3 acronym for?

4 A. It was registered to the Local 2 of

5 the -- I want to get the right title. Tunnel and

6 miners union over on Diversey Avenue.

7 Q. Local 2 of the Laborers union?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 MR. THOMAS: Nothing further, Mr. Vaira.



12 Q. Mr. Dineen, I want to discuss first

13 this Exhibit 100.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, Exhibit

15 100, we are only talking about -- not the whole

16 thing. We are going to limit it to just a couple

17 of pages that he talked about.

18 MR. CARMELL: All right.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Unless you want to.

20 MR. CARMELL: No, see, there is a number of

21 problems. Not only does it -- it starts to be

22 headed at the beginning, as you know, 16 September

23 1993. Do you see that on the top?




1 MR. CARMELL: But you go all the way over to

2 about the -- if you go just before the crime

3 prevention data that was being discussed there.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: There are page numbers.

5 MR. CARMELL: I don't have a page number, but

6 this is an unnumbered page.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: They have numbers on

8 this pages.

9 MR. CARMELL: No, not when you get --

10 MR. THOMAS: Up to a point.

11 MR. CARMELL: If you keep going, you are

12 going to come to a handwritten one that says

13 8 March '95.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. I have this.

15 MR. CARMELL: Starts out "John Matassa:

16 Laurino's," the page just before you get to the

17 gridded data sheets.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: I have "John Matassa,

19 Pudge."

20 MR. THOMAS: One more page.

21 MR. CARMELL: Next page. Do you see the top

22 it says 8 March '95?


24 MR. CARMELL: What I have here is a document



1 that on one part says '93, another part says '95,

2 some have no dates. I am wondering whether this

3 is a compilation of pieces of paper that were -- I

4 want to ask Mr. Dineen one question.


6 Q. You have never seen this document as it

7 stands now before it was given to you by the GEB

8 Attorney, is that correct?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. And as the Hearing Officer has pointed

11 out -- well, strike that.

12 MR. CARMELL: Obviously the rest of it -- I

13 have a lot of problems with this, sir, Mr. Hearing

14 Officer, because it's -- I don't know when these

15 were actually created. I don't know what the

16 pieces are and I don't want to start examining

17 until I know where this document came from and how

18 you get 8 March '95 within '93 and you get '88

19 surveillances and '86s, which I could understand,

20 you get undated handwritten ones.

21 Just before that 8 March '95, sir,

22 you'll see a handwritten "John Matassa, Pudge,"

23 the page before, that has no date on it.

24 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Vaira, maybe I can shorten



1 this with a proposal.


3 MR. THOMAS: We have read several pages and

4 really that's all I am focusing on. The pages

5 that we have read from are clearly dated. The two

6 introductory pages come from 1993 and are so dated

7 and then the surveillance reports are dated

8 themselves.

9 I am happy to limit the document to

10 that and we can pull the remaining pages if that

11 makes life easier.

12 MR. CARMELL: All right. Then let me point

13 this out because Mr. Dineen is no position.

14 With respect to page 10, which they

15 have relied on, there is to my reading, sir, no

16 surveillance report with respect to Joseph Arnold,

17 Frank Caruso, Frank Tornabene. I am talking about

18 a surveillance report that is in here.

19 In fact, let me -- anybody else but

20 Robert Dominic. I can't really examine off of

21 this because we have a document that says

22 associations and we have no surveillance reports

23 containing those person's names. Now there has

24 been testimony as to who those persons are.



1 With that in mind, Mr. Hearing Officer,

2 the fact that Mr. Dineen has never seen this

3 before, I can't examine him, but I trust you will

4 now understand the problems that are compounded

5 problems of what you raised.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. What you are

7 saying, Mr. Carmell, is that you have an objection

8 to either the documents or you can't examine him

9 any further, is that what you are saying?

10 MR. CARMELL: I have an objection to even

11 letting in page 10 because as to the people who

12 counsel examined Mr. Dineen on, there is no

13 surveillance report -- I am talking about those

14 grid reports that we called surveillance

15 reports -- to match it.

16 So, without knowing, without having the

17 analyst on the stand or the surveillance reports

18 from which these names came, I would ask you not

19 to consider any testimony that may have been given

20 who Joseph Arnold is. There is no surveillance

21 report concerning Joseph Arnold, sir.

22 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand that.

23 MR. CARMELL: Okay.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. Do you wish



1 to cross-examine before I make any ruling on any

2 parts of this?

3 MR. CARMELL: I will cross-examine with the

4 understanding that you have heard my issues.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: And you are not waiving

6 anything by cross-examining.

7 MR. CARMELL: Fine.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: If that is what you

9 mean, go ahead.

10 MR. CARMELL: Thank you. That's what I

11 meant.


13 Q. Now, I want -- would you look at page

14 11 of the Document 100, Mr. Dineen.

15 Are you aware that Michael Glitta is

16 related to John Matassa's father?

17 A. I was not until I saw this document,

18 sir, or if the notes in this document are correct.

19 Q. If the notes in the document are

20 correct, then Michael Glitta is a first -- if he

21 is still alive, which I don't know, is a first

22 cousin of John Matassa's father. That's what the

23 notes say?

24 A. That's what the note indicates, yes,



1 sir.

2 Q. All right. Now, Robert Dominic, was

3 Robert Dominic to your knowledge convicted for

4 gambling?

5 A. Gambling.

6 Q. The only conviction of Robert Dominic

7 you know of was on gambling?

8 A. Not that I personally know of, no, sir.

9 Q. Are you aware of any conviction of

10 Robert Dominic for pornography or obscene

11 literature as we used to call it?

12 A. No, sir, I am not.

13 MR. CARMELL: I will give you an aside,

14 Mr. Hearing Officer, that in my very youngest days

15 I represented the Capital News Company when the

16 police would come racing in and confiscate girlie

17 magazines saying that they were obscene and we'd

18 go to criminal court and have to fight that out.

19 They are so tame by the standards that

20 we have now.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Capital News Agency.

22 MR. CARMELL: Yes, it's mentioned in here,

23 but it's well before the time.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: That is Famous News



1 Agency.

2 MR. CARMELL: We had Fleischer come from

3 California to represent on a First Amendment

4 case. So, what goes around comes around I guess.


6 Q. I'm going to leave this document

7 because you don't have any independent knowledge

8 of it and I want to go to the matter that you

9 personally surveiled.

10 I'd like to first talk to you about

11 Tornabene and is that Frank Tornabene?

12 A. Alphonso Tornabene.

13 Q. Tornabene. Alphonso Tornabene, is he

14 alive?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. How old a man is he?

17 A. He was last time I saw him.

18 Q. How old a man was he?

19 A. In his 70s.

20 Q. Now, what public document that you know

21 of from the Chicago Police Department lists

22 Alphonso Tornabene as a member or associate of

23 organized crime in Chicago?

24 A. Public document?



1 Q. Yes.

2 A. I do not know. I do not believe that

3 the records of the intelligence section are public

4 documents.

5 Q. I wouldn't think so, sir.

6 But is there any publication that came

7 out from the Chicago Police Department, like a

8 chart of the outfit in Chicago, which lists

9 Alphonso Tornabene?

10 A. Not issued by the police department,

11 no, sir.

12 Q. Have you seen one issued by the Federal

13 Bureau of Investigation, that lists Alphonso

14 Tornabene as a member of the outfit?

15 A. I have not seen one. I don't know if

16 they have issued one or not.

17 Q. Is there -- if I asked you the same

18 questions about Michael Marcello, would your

19 answers be the same, concerning the absence of

20 Chicago Police Department documents, FBI

21 documents, public documents, that would list

22 Michael Marcello as being an associate or member

23 of organized crime?

24 A. I know his connection to his own



1 brother.

2 Q. You do?

3 A. Right.

4 Q. But is there anything that would be out

5 there that we could read, that says, Chicago

6 Police Department has a chart that says Michael

7 Marcello is on such and such a crew, and such and

8 such an associate of organized crime?

9 A. Not the Chicago Police Department.

10 Q. Do you know of any from the Federal

11 Bureau of Investigation, public document, the

12 public could pick up and read, that would show

13 Michael Marcello as an associate or member of

14 organized crime?

15 A. I'm not privy to any.

16 Q. Within the Chicago Police Department,

17 sir, who makes the decision as to whether a

18 particular individual should be referred to as an

19 associate of organized crime?

20 A. Well, it could be done by individual

21 officers from their surveillance, or through

22 analysts' proclamation, or through the command

23 staff.

24 Q. So any one of those persons -- strike



1 that.

2 The statement that you made that

3 Alphonso Tornabene is a member of organized crime,

4 that's based upon your own personal opinion, is

5 that correct?

6 A. Shared with other people in law

7 enforcement, yes, sir.

8 Q. What -- without their names, that is

9 other persons in your intelligence unit?

10 A. In the intelligence section, yes, sir.

11 Q. Anybody from outside the Chicago Police

12 Department?

13 A. People at Chicago Crime Commission,

14 yes, sir.

15 Q. That's a private organization, is that

16 correct?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. Would you say it's fair to say that

19 within the Chicago Police Department Intelligence

20 Division, there are differing opinions as to

21 whether an individual should or should not be

22 listed as an associate of organized crime?

23 A. I have never heard differing opinions,

24 no, sir.



1 Q. Everybody has reached the same opinion

2 about everybody?

3 A. Everybody agrees when somebody makes

4 the statement, yes, sir.

5 Q. What do you rely on for your opinion

6 that an individual is a member of organized crime?

7 A. Personal knowledge gained through my 38

8 years on the police department, surveillances,

9 interviews, with other police agencies or

10 confidential informants.

11 Q. With respect to Alphonso Tornabene, did

12 you have any information from a confidential

13 source that he was a member of organized crime?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. And with respect to Michael Marcello,

16 is the same true? Did you have a confidential

17 source that told you this?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. Does Michael Marcello, to your

20 knowledge, have a job?

21 A. No, sir.

22 Q. Does Michael Marcello -- does Alphonso

23 Tornabene have a job?

24 A. No, sir.



1 Q. That's your knowledge, is that correct?

2 A. Correct.

3 Q. Would it surprise you to know that

4 Alphonso Tornabene has owned a pizza restaurant

5 for over 40 years?

6 A. Would it?

7 Q. Yes.

8 A. Yes, sir. His daughter owns a pizza

9 restaurant.

10 Q. You do know that his daughter is --

11 A. The daughter and son-in-law.

12 Q. Daughter is listed as the owner?

13 A. Daughter and son-in-law, yes, sir.

14 Q. Have you ever surveilled Alphonso

15 Tornabene at the pizza restaurant?

16 A. Pardon?

17 Q. Have you ever seen him at the pizza

18 restaurant?

19 A. Yes, sir; not when it was open to the

20 public.

21 Q. You have seen him either before or

22 after hours at the restaurant?

23 A. When it was not open to the public,

24 yes, sir.



1 Q. Do you know that Michael Marcello has

2 an interest in a business, any business?

3 A. Not to my knowledge, no, sir.

4 Q. Now, do you have any, did you create

5 any records of your surveillances which you've

6 referred to in 1995 and '96; surveillances,

7 reports of the type that are in Exhibit 100?

8 A. That format? No sir.

9 Q. Pardon me?

10 A. Following that format, no, I did not.

11 Q. Did you file any surveillance report

12 concerning this, these incidents?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. Are they in the police files now?

15 A. Are they in the --

16 Q. In the intelligence department files?

17 A. They are in the possession of the

18 intelligence section yes, sir.

19 Q. Do you have any copies of them?

20 A. No, sir.

21 Q. Can you obtain copies of them?

22 A. No, sir.

23 Q. You can't obtain copies of surveillance

24 reports in the intelligence files. But



1 apparently, the people next to me can obtain those

2 surveillance reports, does that appear right?

3 MR. THOMAS: Objection, mischaracterizing

4 which reports he is talking about.


6 Q. Let me ask you, look at 100, Exhibit

7 100.

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Look at the surveillance report of

10 Giannotti's Restaurant.

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Is this the type, although not the

13 exact form, of surveillance report which you have

14 made for these surveillances in '95 and '96?

15 A. That is an analyst's report, sir.

16 Q. Which is the analyst report?

17 A. The reference to Giannotti's

18 Restaurant.

19 Q. So this report -- it says Investigator,

20 Herman-Cody, and it has a signature, supervisor, a

21 sergeant, somebody else -- is not actually the

22 report that was filed?

23 A. No, sir.

24 Q. This is the analyst's analysis of a



1 report?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Do you know if there's any analyst's

4 analysis of your reports in February through May

5 of '96?

6 A. Do I know?

7 Q. Yeah.

8 A. There are not, sir.

9 Q. Each time in '95 and '96 that Mr.

10 Matassa was seen by you, he was driving a car with

11 a license number LIU 2?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. And that is, as counsel points out, a

14 very distinctive license plate, telling anybody

15 who he was, LIUNA 2?

16 A. It may identify it to some people. I

17 wouldn't say everybody.

18 Q. But that was the car that he drove?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. At no time did he attempt to hide his

21 arriving or leaving, is that correct?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. These are very public restaurants,

24 aren't they?



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. When, on February '95, when you saw the

3 vehicles at Phoenix Restaurant, you saw Matassa

4 enter the restaurant, and he was in a booth with

5 Marcello, is that right?

6 A. Did not see him enter the restaurant,

7 sir.

8 I observed the two vehicles in the

9 parking lot. Entrance was made. View was made of

10 the two individuals, Mr. Matassa and Mr. Marcello,

11 sitting together in the booth.

12 Q. And where; were they in the central

13 part of the restaurant?

14 A. If my memory is correct, going into the

15 restaurant, to the west of the restaurant, the

16 right-hand side, when you go in, is a driveway,

17 inside of the strip mall. And they were seated in

18 a booth along the windows on that side.

19 Q. Along the windows. So anybody walking

20 by that area could have seen them from the

21 outside, is that correct?

22 A. Windows were covered over.

23 Q. Oh, they were covered over?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. All right. And were there people

2 around them?

3 A. There was other customers in the

4 restaurant, yes, sir.

5 Q. And the same would be true -- let's go

6 to the October, '95 one in Horwath's Restaurant.

7 You saw them walking together, that is, Marcello

8 and Alphonso Tornabene and Matassa, is that

9 correct?

10 A. Exiting the restaurant, yes, sir.

11 Q. Pardon me?

12 A. Exiting the restaurant, yes, sir.

13 Q. And where are the pictures of the area

14 in April of 1996 in Horwath's Restaurant, outside

15 of it, when Tornabene drove away, and Marcello and

16 Matassa were left? Where are those photographs?

17 A. The intelligence section, Chicago

18 Police Department.

19 Q. Have you gotten permission from the

20 intelligence section of the Chicago Police

21 Department to testify concerning these incidents?

22 A. The four observations I made, yes, sir,

23 and the rest is historical documentation.

24 Q. Have you asked for permission from the



1 intelligence division to bring your surveillance

2 reports?

3 A. No, sir.

4 Q. Would you have a problem asking?

5 A. Perhaps. I don't know.

6 It's an ongoing investigation. That's

7 why it has not been subject to analysis as yet.

8 Q. But it is subject to testimony here? I

9 mean, it was all right with them for you to

10 testify to this?

11 A. The incidents.

12 Q. To these four incidents?

13 A. To those four incidents.

14 Q. Yeah.

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. All right. Just a moment.

17 MR. CARMELL: I have nothing else.

18 MR. THOMAS: I'm sorry. Are you finished?

19 MR. BOSTWICK: Yeah. He said, nothing else.

20 MR. THOMAS: Just one or two, Mr. Vaira, if I

21 could.



24 Q. Mr. Dineen, do you recall Mr. Carmell



1 asking you if you knew or whether the notes

2 reflected that Mr. Glitta was a cousin of Mr.

3 Matassa, or one of Mr. Matassa's relatives?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 Q. When you surveilled or your colleagues

6 surveilled Mr. Glitta and Mr. Solano and Mr.

7 Matassa together, did anyone believe that that was

8 a family meeting?

9 A. No, sir.

10 Q. Did anyone believe that that was a

11 union meeting?

12 A. No, sir.

13 Q. In reference to Tornabene and Marcello,

14 Mr. Carmell asked you what your opinion and your

15 colleagues' opinions were based upon. Do you

16 recall that line of questioning?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. You recall, he asked whether there were

19 any differences of opinions?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Is there any difference of opinion in

22 the police department that Mr. Marcello is an

23 active member of the outfit?

24 A. No, sir.



1 Q. Is there any difference of opinion in

2 the Chicago Police Department that Mr. Tornabene

3 is an active member of the outfit?

4 A. No, sir.

5 Q. Is there any difference of opinion in

6 the Chicago Police Department that Mr. Matassa is

7 an active member of the Chicago outfit?

8 A. No, sir.

9 MR. THOMAS: Nothing further.



12 Q. Mr. Dineen, you don't know what the

13 people who surveiled while you were FOP president

14 thought or didn't think concerning the

15 relationship between Matassa and Glitta, isn't

16 that a fact?

17 A. Except from perusing the files and

18 having conversation with some of those

19 individuals.

20 Q. The first time you saw this file 100

21 was just before you came to testify, is it not?

22 A. This entire file?

23 Q. Yes, sir.

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. And you stated on cross-examination

2 that the first time that you knew that

3 Mr. Matassa's father was the first cousin to

4 Mr. Glitta was when you saw this Document 100,

5 isn't that true?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. You have never gone back and asked the

8 people who did the surveillance whether they knew

9 of the relationship, did you?

10 A. I have had conversation with some of

11 those officers, yes, sir.

12 Q. Since you saw this document?

13 A. Not since I saw that individual

14 document, but in regards to investigations that I

15 have been conducting.

16 Q. And from that conversations with those

17 officers you gathered that they did not know that

18 Michael Glitta and John Matassa, Sr. were first

19 cousins, is that correct?

20 A. The conversation never came up, yes,

21 sir.

22 Q. Never came up. Somehow or other,

23 though, that piece of paper is in an official

24 intelligence division file, isn't it?



1 A. No, it's not in this document. I don't

2 know where it came from, sir.

3 Q. So you don't know whether this

4 document -- of course you don't because you don't

5 know whether this is even a document that came

6 from the intelligence division or any part of the

7 Chicago Police Department?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Is that fair to say?

10 A. Parts of it contain information in the

11 same synopsized way we would do it.

12 Q. But the handwritten note wouldn't tell

13 you one way or another whether it even looks like

14 an intelligence division file?

15 A. The handwritten notes?

16 Q. Yes.

17 A. Appear to be someone's personal notes.

18 Q. Finally, with respect to 100, there is

19 no way you could tell from looking at this

20 document that it in fact was created on the date

21 that it bears up at the top, that is, 16 September

22 1993. All the blanks are typed in, isn't that

23 correct?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. They can be typed in, without anybody

2 being a typewriting expert, they could have been

3 typed in at any time, isn't that correct?

4 A. Correct.

5 MR. CARMELL: I have nothing else.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Dineen, what is the

7 rank of the officer who heads the intelligence

8 section?

9 THE WITNESS: Commander.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Commander, that is a

11 police rank or Civil Service rank?

12 THE WITNESS: It's a police rank. He is a

13 Captain in Civil Service. Career service they

14 call it now.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: So he is commander.

16 What is above him?

17 THE WITNESS: A chief. Deputy chief and a

18 chief.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. How many

20 officers in the intelligence division?

21 THE WITNESS: That is probably known to the

22 commander. I don't know everybody that is in

23 there.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Give me a rough



1 estimate.

2 THE WITNESS: Perhaps 40.


4 All right, gentlemen, here is what I am

5 going to do. I will take this particular document

6 under advisement until you tell me more about it

7 and I will make a decision how much of this will

8 go into the record.

9 MR. THOMAS: Thank you.

10 At this time we call Gene Scaramella to

11 the stand.

12 Thank you, Mr. Dineen.

13 (WHEREUPON, the witness was

14 excused.)

15 MR. THOMAS: Would you administer the oath,

16 please.

17 (WHEREUPON, the witness was sworn.)


19 called as a witness herein, having been first duly

20 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:



23 Q. Could you state your full name for the

24 record, please, and spell your last name.



1 A. My name is Gene Scaramella,

2 S-C-A-R-A-M-E-L-L-A.

3 Q. Where are you employed, sir?

4 A. Cook County Sheriff's Police

5 Department.

6 Q. And what do you do for Cook County?

7 A. I am a detective in their special

8 operations unit.

9 Q. Do you have other forms of employment

10 as well at the present time?

11 A. I do.

12 Q. What are those?

13 A. I am the director of the office of

14 organized crime research at the University of

15 Illinois at Chicago. I am also an adjunct faculty

16 member at the department of criminal justice at

17 the University of Illinois at Chicago.

18 Q. What do you teach at the University of

19 Illinois?

20 A. Variety of criminal justice classes,

21 research methods, organizational behavior and

22 usually organized and white collar crime.

23 Q. How long have you been in law

24 enforcement, sir?



1 A. About 16 years.

2 Q. Where did you start out?

3 A. I started out with the Arlington

4 Heights Police Department.

5 Q. What year was that?

6 A. Worked there from 1981 to 1986.

7 Q. And what did you do in 1986?

8 A. I joined the Chicago Police Department.

9 Q. What was your position there?

10 A. Started as a patrol officer. From 1986

11 to 1991, worked both at the 23rd District at

12 Addison and Halsted, also at the 25th District at

13 Grand and Central.

14 In 1991 I was transferred to the

15 organized crime division's intelligence section as

16 an investigator.

17 Q. And is that the same intelligence

18 section that we have been hearing about from

19 Mr. Dineen and others?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. What -- could you describe the work

22 that you did at the intelligence section from 1991

23 forward.

24 A. Well, a street investigator as well as



1 some crime analysis.

2 Q. So, it's both surveillance as well as

3 analysis of surveillance?

4 A. Correct, sir.

5 Q. And analysis of other information

6 obtained?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. Did you focus on any particular type of

9 criminal activity while you worked there?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. What type?

12 A. Traditional organized crime or LCN,

13 Mafia, syndicate, mob, whatever name you wish to

14 attribute to them.

15 Q. During the course of your duties in the

16 intelligence section were you ever asked to

17 undertake a particularly challenging project in

18 terms of research at that office?

19 A. I was.

20 Q. What was that?

21 A. The commander or Commander William

22 Callahan at the time asked me to update all the

23 records concerning organized crime figures in

24 Chicago. He wanted to put together what he



1 referred to as the book, the organized crime book,

2 which was a quick reference book for law

3 enforcement officials which would identify

4 individuals who we believed to be members and

5 associates of the Chicago LCN.

6 On each page their name would be

7 listed, their aliases, addresses, former

8 addresses, criminal identifiers such as FBI

9 numbers, IR numbers, State Bureau numbers, the

10 criminal activities that they were involved in,

11 which street crew of the Chicago Outfit they

12 belonged to.

13 It would list associates of theirs,

14 places they frequented. That's what it did.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Who was it that asked

16 you to do this, the commander of the --

17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, the commanding

18 officer of the intelligence section.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. And you weren't

20 in here. We were talking about his rank. He is a

21 commander in -- generally commander in the Police

22 Department.

23 THE WITNESS: Yes. He is a police commander

24 of the intelligence section.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Who does he answer to?

2 I know he answers to --

3 THE WITNESS: He would answer to -- I believe

4 one step above him would be the deputy chief of

5 the organized crime division. On top of him would

6 be the chief of the organized crime division, and

7 then I believe it would be the deputy

8 superintendent of investigative services and then

9 to the superintendent of police.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: So this is -- I don't

11 want to call it a staff function. Somewhat of a

12 staff function, the intelligence unit, would you

13 say that, as opposed to line, as opposed to --

14 THE WITNESS: It's part of the bureau of

15 investigative services which is part of the

16 detective division.



19 Q. You were describing the preparation of

20 the compendium that you have described as the

21 book. That sounds like an enormous project. How

22 long did that take you to do?

23 A. Probably a year to a year and a half.

24 Q. And did you get any help from anyone



1 else?

2 A. I did.

3 Q. From whom?

4 A. Detective Dineen.

5 Q. And what source of information did you

6 go to to compile the book?

7 A. There were several. We started with

8 all the documents which were maintained in the

9 intelligence section that would include

10 surveillance reports, the debriefings or proffers

11 of organized crime figures who had, quote-unquote,

12 "flipped," were in the witness protection

13 program, conversations with confidential

14 informants, conversations with FBI agents, DEA

15 agents, law enforcement officials from every rank,

16 federal, state and local level, FBI 302 reports,

17 which are maintained information which are gleaned

18 from confidential informants, documents of that

19 nature.

20 Q. As a result of that project as well as

21 the ongoing surveillance work that you were doing

22 in police activities that you were doing, have you

23 come to have a fairly intimate familiarity with

24 the Chicago Outfit?



1 A. With the names and the members and

2 associates of the LCN, yes, sir. At that time.

3 Q. That was in early 1990?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 Q. Have you continued to do police work in

6 and around the area of organized crime?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. So even though -- is it correct to say

9 that even though you have not updated the book on

10 a periodic basis, in your mind you have stayed

11 active in the field?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Just as an aside, does your preparation

14 of the organized crime book shed any light on GEB

15 Exhibit 100 which is before you and has been the

16 subject of some discussion earlier on the record?

17 A. It does.

18 Q. What can you tell us about that?

19 A. Well, based on the analysis that myself

20 and Detective Dineen had conducted, the commander

21 had called me in and asked me, he said, we need to

22 do more in-depth background investigations on who

23 you believe to be rather high-ranking members of

24 Chicago LCN or individuals who are important in



1 their own sphere of influence.

2 Based on my analysis of those

3 documents, I had submitted names, I believe

4 although I don't really remember now, probably 25

5 names.

6 Q. Was John Matassa one of those?

7 A. It was.

8 Q. Was there a file prepared on John

9 Matassa?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. And is Document 100 either in whole or

12 in part part of that file?

13 A. This is part of it. The background

14 report on an individual is just one small part of

15 a file which is maintained in the intelligence

16 section.

17 Q. And which -- and that file is

18 essentially a collection of different pieces of

19 police data?

20 A. That's correct. Everything that would

21 be pertinent to the criminal activities of the

22 subject.

23 Q. Thank you for clarifying that.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: When did you submit



1 that name? Assume you submitted John Matassa.

2 When was that, sir?

3 THE WITNESS: Shortly before the date that

4 appears on this report, 16 September of '93.

5 Probably a couple of weeks before then, the

6 commander had asked me for about 25 names.


8 history. You are saying when you were there and

9 working in that unit, the commander asked you for

10 some sort of update and this is one of the names

11 you submitted to compile information about it.

12 THE WITNESS: Yes. He wanted an in-depth

13 background investigation on who we believed to be

14 important members of the Chicago mob.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: And this was one of

16 them?

17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


19 Q. Mr. Scaramella, as part of your

20 academic duties, when you are not being a police

21 officer for Cook County, you described that you

22 are doing some teaching at the University of

23 Illinois, is that correct?

24 A. Yes, sir.



1 Q. Are you also obtaining a PhD?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Is it correct to say that you don't yet

4 have it, but that you have completed your course

5 work towards a PhD?

6 A. Right now, I'm at the, what they refer

7 to as the ABD status, all but dissertation.

8 Q. And you are dissertating -- your PhD

9 will be in what field?

10 A. Education, continuing education.

11 Q. Does it relate in any way to the

12 subject matter of the course that you teach on

13 organized crime and other gang related activity?

14 A. It does. Most of my research

15 pertaining to my doctoral studies have related to

16 training in the field of organized crime for local

17 law enforcement officers.

18 Q. Mr. Scaramella, based on your years in

19 law enforcement and your academic studies, have

20 you been asked to review some of the names that

21 have come up in this proceeding by members of the

22 GEB Attorney's staff?

23 A. I have.

24 Q. Let me run down a few of those names



1 for you, if I could.

2 Does the name John Galioto mean

3 anything to you?

4 A. It does.

5 Q. Who is John Galioto?

6 A. The various documents I described

7 earlier, his name has popped up, and has come up

8 in many of them, usually in the field of

9 gambling.

10 I know he is the son of William

11 Galioto, who is a retired Chicago police officer,

12 mob member, brother-in-law of James Marcello, who

13 is a convicted racketeer, and identified as the

14 underboss of the Chicago LCN.

15 Q. Do you view Mr. Galioto as either a

16 made member or an associate of organized crime?

17 A. I would say, my opinion, he is probably

18 an associate.

19 Q. Do the names Nicholas Guzzino and

20 Dominick Palermo mean anything to you?

21 A. They do.

22 Q. Who are those two gentlemen?

23 A. Both former high-ranking members of

24 what was referred to as the Chicago Heights crew;



1 they would control LCN activities in the southern

2 suburbs as well as northwest Indiana, both

3 convicted racketeers as well.

4 Q. Bruno Caruso, Frank Caruso, Leo Caruso,

5 do those names mean anything to you?

6 A. Their names are very popular, very

7 active in the Chinatown crew files, mainly in the

8 area of labor union improprieties, gambling.

9 Q. When you say gambling --

10 A. To my knowledge.

11 Q. When you say gambling, can you be more

12 specific?

13 A. The listed gambling operations, sports

14 betting, bookmaking.

15 Q. Frank Demonte?

16 A. I am not that familiar with Mr.

17 Demonte. I have seen his name in the files;

18 really couldn't shed too much light on that.

19 Q. Jimmy DiForti?

20 A. Jimmy DiForti most recently was

21 arrested for first degree murder. I've seen his

22 name in conjunction with John Monteleone, in the

23 Cicero, the old Cicero crew.

24 Q. By the way, Mr. Monteleone, where do



1 you view him in the Chicago outfit, if anywhere?

2 A. I'd say he is probably in the top three

3 or four spots in the upper echelon of Chicago

4 organized crime.

5 Q. Vincent Solano?

6 A. Deceased, former boss of what was

7 referred to as the Rush Street or north side crew.

8 Q. Vincent DiVarco?

9 A. Again, I've heard the name, have seen

10 it. I really cannot comment on Mr. DiVarco.

11 Q. Al Pilotto?

12 A. Former high-ranking if not the boss of

13 the Chicago Heights street crew, convicted

14 racketeer. I believe he was convicted of labor

15 union improprieties.

16 Q. Joe Lombardo; not Joe Lombardo, Junior,

17 Joe Lombardo, Senior?

18 A. Referred to as Joey The Clown Lombardo,

19 certainly a high-ranking member of Chicago

20 organized crime, another convicted racketeer,

21 former head of the Grand Avenue street crew,

22 before his incarceration in, I believe it was the

23 mid 1980s.

24 Q. Did he have any involvement with



1 enforcement, what is known in the outfit as

2 enforcement?

3 A. I believe he did. He worked his way up

4 the ranks as the head of the Grand Avenue crew at

5 one time. He oversaw all of the criminal

6 activities of those members.

7 Q. Finally, John Matassa, Jr., current

8 vice-president of the District Council?

9 A. I've seen his name in connection with,

10 back in the early '80s, mid '80s, with pornography

11 activities. I know that he has associated with

12 Mr. Solano, and what Mr. Dineen has testified to

13 today.

14 Q. Mr. Scaramella, in June of this year,

15 did you receive notice from our office,

16 specifically the GEB Attorney's office, that we

17 intended to serve a complaint on the officers of

18 the Chicago District Council?

19 A. I did.

20 Q. Were you asked essentially if you were

21 interested in that information in terms of doing

22 surveillance?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. Directing your attention to June 16th,



1 1997, did you in fact set up surveillance on that

2 date?

3 A. We did.

4 Q. Tell me what you did in preparation.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: In this capacity, you

6 were acting as a member of the Sheriff's

7 Department, right?

8 THE WITNESS: That's correct, sir.

9 MR. THOMAS: Let me interject --

10 MR. CARMELL: Was he really acting for the

11 Sheriff's Department, or was he acting on behalf

12 of the GEB Attorney?

13 MR. THOMAS: Let me ask a question.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume they gave him

15 some information and said, go look.

16 MR. THOMAS: Maybe I can clarify that.


18 Q. Mr. Scaramella, did you have any

19 interest, independent of what the GEB Attorney was

20 doing, in whether the officers of District Council

21 might be meeting?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So is it fair to say then that there

24 was some overlapping of interests here?



1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Based on the information you received,

3 what did you do on June 16th, 1997?

4 A. Well, at approximately 6:30 in the

5 morning, myself, two other detectives from the

6 Sheriff's Department, and a sergeant from the

7 intelligence section of the Chicago P.D., set up

8 moving and fixed surveillance.

9 We began at the home or the residence

10 of Bruno Caruso in Darien, Illinois.

11 Q. And why Bruno Caruso? What information

12 had you received?

13 A. We had received information that

14 sometime during the day, he would be served with

15 some union paperwork alleging improprieties.

16 Q. And what were you setting up

17 surveillance for? What were you looking for?

18 A. Well, we were interested in once he was

19 served with the paperwork, who he was going to go

20 meet with afterwards.

21 Q. Did you in fact, you and your

22 colleagues, were you present when Mr. Caruso,

23 Bruno Caruso was served with the papers?

24 A. We were.



1 Q. Where did that occur?

2 A. It occurred in the parking lot of the

3 Old Oak Country Club in Orland Park, Illinois, at

4 143rd and Parker Road, about 9:30 a.m.,

5 approximately.

6 Q. Tell us what happened from there.

7 A. About an hour later, Mr. Caruso,

8 driving in his vehicle, and subject driving in

9 another vehicle, was subsequently identified as

10 Nicholas Gioronda, exited the grounds of the

11 country club.

12 They were followed in their vehicles

13 from the golf course to, again, on the Stevenson

14 Expressway, headed towards the City of Chicago.

15 They exited at the Damen Avenue exit, where they

16 were lost in heavy traffic for about 20 to 25

17 minutes.

18 The officers involved in this

19 surveillance split up, in an attempt to see if we

20 could locate them. All four of us ended up in the

21 Chinatown area, as that is where the Carusos are

22 from.

23 And one of the officers involved in the

24 surveillance spotted both vehicles pulling on to



1 25th place. And they pulled in front of, if I may

2 refresh my recollection, in front of 231 West 25th

3 Place, where they double-parked their vehicles.

4 Both men exited their vehicles and walked towards

5 the front of that residence.

6 Q. And did your officers, were they able

7 to establish who lived at that residence?

8 A. We were.

9 Q. Who was that?

10 A. That is the residence of Fred Roti, the

11 former first ward alderman from the City of

12 Chicago.

13 Q. In addition to being the uncle of Bruno

14 Caruso, what do you know about him with respect to

15 organized crime involvement?

16 A. Well, I know he is a convicted

17 racketeer, organized crime figure, served a term

18 in the federal penitentiary.

19 MR. CARMELL: He said Fred Roti was a

20 racketeer, served time for racketeering?

21 THE WITNESS: I said that he, that my

22 understanding is that he was convicted of

23 racketeering.

24 MR. CARMELL: I just wanted to make sure.



1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.


3 Q. So is it your testimony that Mr.

4 Gioronda and Mr. Bruno Caruso, immediately upon

5 receiving the complaint for trusteeship, went

6 directly to the house of a convicted felon?

7 A. After an hour, about an hour after they

8 were served, yes, sir.

9 Q. And a good bit of that hour was

10 driving, was it not?

11 A. Well, they remained at the country club

12 after they were served for almost an hour.

13 At that time, they left. I said we

14 followed them. We lost sight of them briefly at

15 Damen, and the Stevenson Expressway, for about 20

16 to 25 minutes. They were found then driving,

17 pulling onto 25th Place, in front of the residence

18 at 231 West.

19 Q. And directing your attention to Exhibit

20 163, Pat Marcy, at the bottom, it says Frank

21 Roti. Is that an error? Should that be Fred

22 Roti?

23 A. I believe, yes; Fred Roti I believe it

24 should read.



1 Q. Can you describe the relationship, if

2 any, between Pat Marcy and Fred Roti?

3 A. Well, Pat Marcy was the -- Pasquale

4 Marchona is his real name -- was the chairman of

5 the first ward regular Democratic committee.

6 He was known as a made member of the

7 Chicago outfit, known as the political fixer, who

8 was able to extract a tremendous amount of

9 political influence which would favor organized

10 crime activities.

11 And I believe his relation with Mr.

12 Roti is that they, I don't know if they were blood

13 relatives, but they are both politicians in the

14 first ward.

15 Q. Were they convicted together? Is that

16 your understanding?

17 A. I believe they were.

18 Q. It was to the home of Fred Roti that

19 Mr. Gioronda and Mr. Bruno Caruso assembled upon

20 being served this complaint?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. I'd ask that you take a look at

23 Exhibits 53 and 54, which I believe are before

24 you.



1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. I'm not going to go into any detail

3 here. Can you simply identify those for me?

4 A. Exhibit 53 is the surveillance report

5 which I prepared, concerning the fixed and moving

6 surveillance of Bruno Caruso.

7 Q. That is June 16th, 1997?

8 A. That's correct.

9 Q. And how about 54?

10 A. Exhibit 54 are photographs which one of

11 our detectives took in the parking lot of the Old

12 Oak Country Club, after the subjects were served

13 with the paperwork.

14 Q. And the gentleman with the mustache and

15 cigar, that is Mr. Nicholas Gioronda, is that

16 correct?

17 A. That's correct.

18 MR. THOMAS: I offer 53 and 54.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll admit 53. Let me

20 take a look at 54.

21 MR. CARMELL: I don't know what the purpose

22 of that is. They were all in the country club.

23 MR. THOMAS: Only to show that in fact this

24 surveillance did occur on the date in question.



1 THE HEARING OFFICER: There's several people

2 here. He only spoke about two. I see four here.


4 Q. Mr. Scaramella, other than Mr.

5 Gioronda, in these photographs, do you know who

6 the other people are?

7 A. They were identified -- up until today,

8 no; just from what I've learned from law

9 enforcement officials in this room.

10 MR. THOMAS: I don't intend to inquire unless

11 you want to.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't either. I'm

13 just looking at two pictures. I don't know what

14 they, the probative value.

15 I'll admit them. But the purpose of

16 the surveillance report is, were they there, were

17 they the persons. I don't think there is any

18 doubt about that. So I'll admit both of them,

19 gentlemen. I don't know the -- I don't see any

20 harm in 54.

21 MR. THOMAS: Thank you.

22 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

23 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibits

24 No. 53 and 54, for identification, were



1 offered and received in evidence as

2 GEB Attorney Exhibit Nos. 53 and 54.)

3 MR. THOMAS: Nothing further.



6 Q. Mr. Scaramella, let's go to June 16,

7 '97, shall we?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Were you there when you saw Mr.

10 Gioronda and Mr. Caruso exit their vehicles and

11 walk up the sidewalk?

12 A. At which address, sir?

13 Q. At the address that you claim their

14 cars were double-parked on 25th Place.

15 A. No, I did not.

16 I was there. But I did not observe

17 them personally walk to the front of that

18 residence.

19 Q. What is the next -- the address at 231

20 shares a gangway with 233 West 25th Place, isn't

21 that correct?

22 A. I don't know, sir.

23 Q. You don't know?

24 A. No, I don't.



1 Q. Would it surprise you to know that 233

2 West 25th Place is the residence of Bruno Caruso's

3 mother?

4 A. It would.

5 Q. And it was possible that Mr. Caruso and

6 Mr. Gioronda walked into 233 and not into 231,

7 isn't that correct?

8 A. I suppose it's possible, yes.

9 Q. Yeah. You didn't bother checking what

10 other people resided within that complex, did you?

11 A. I was told by one of the police

12 officers conducting the surveillance that they

13 were walking to the front of the residence at 231.

14 Q. You didn't know then that that was a --

15 that's all you heard, they went towards 231, and

16 you jumped on the fact that this was Alderman

17 Roti's house, and did no further investigation,

18 isn't that correct?

19 A. I investigated and looked into who

20 resided at 231 West 25th Place, and determined it

21 to be Fred Roti.

22 Q. Well, in fact, 233 is where his mother

23 lives.

24 Now, you were aware on June 16 that



1 they were -- Mr. Caruso and Mr. Gioronda were

2 going to be served, as you put it, with papers for

3 this trusteeship, were you not?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 Q. And you set up the original

6 surveillance at the house of Mr. Caruso, isn't

7 that correct?

8 A. That's correct.

9 Q. So that Mr. Caruso could have been

10 served when he came out of that house, couldn't

11 he?

12 A. He could have.

13 Q. Yeah. But whoever served him waited

14 until he was in a public place in a country club

15 to serve him, isn't that correct?

16 A. They were served in the parking lot of

17 the country club. That's my understanding.

18 Q. And the whole purpose of your

19 surveillance was to see where these individuals

20 were going after they had been served, is that

21 correct?

22 A. That's not the only purpose.

23 Q. Well, that was the purpose you

24 testified to, isn't that correct?



1 A. I have to review the transcript of my

2 testimony, but it was not the only purpose of the

3 surveillance.

4 Q. It was one of the purposes?

5 A. Yes, sir.

6 Q. And had Mr. -- it wouldn't have made

7 any difference in your surveillance had Mr. Caruso

8 been served at his home?

9 A. If he was served at his home.

10 Q. Yeah.

11 A. I would have stayed around to see where

12 he went.

13 Q. Right. Just as you stayed around to

14 see where he went after he was served at the

15 country club, is that it?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. You were aware that one of the reasons

18 or were you aware, sir, that one of the reasons

19 that he was served at the country club was to

20 embarrass him in front of all the people who were

21 assembled there?

22 MR. THOMAS: Objection.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: He may answer if he

24 knows. If you know, sir.




2 A. I don't know.


4 Q. Does it seem reasonable to you --

5 A. No.

6 Q. -- that that was the reason?

7 A. No.

8 Q. I didn't think it would.

9 MR. BOSTWICK: I'd like to strike that last

10 little comment.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me. I think we

12 will strike that.


14 Q. Now, with respect to Bruno Caruso, as I

15 understood your testimony, you had seen his name

16 come up in the files of the intelligence division,

17 is that right?

18 A. That's correct, sir.

19 Q. And you have placed him as engaged in

20 illicit gambling in the Chinatown area, by that I

21 mean Mr. Bruno Caruso?

22 A. His name has come up in that regard in

23 several documents, yes, sir.

24 Q. Do you place him sitting here now under



1 oath as having engaged in illicit gambling in the

2 Chinatown area, Bruno Caruso?

3 A. In my opinion, yes. Based on those

4 reports that I have analyzed, yes.

5 Q. How many reports have you analyzed?

6 A. Dozens.

7 Q. Over what span of years?

8 A. Three to four years.

9 Q. Did you know -- what years did they

10 cover?

11 A. The '80s, early '90s.

12 Q. Was Mr. Caruso otherwise employed

13 during that period of time?

14 A. I don't know, sir.

15 Q. The files didn't tell you whether he

16 held any job?

17 A. I'm sure they did. I just --

18 Q. But you don't recall it?

19 A. No, I don't. I believe he worked for

20 the City of Chicago if my memory serves right,

21 Streets and Sanitation.

22 Q. What else did your files tell you

23 concerning illicit activities by Mr. Caruso?

24 A. None that I recall.



1 Q. Except the gambling?

2 A. Gambling.

3 Q. Would the same be true of Leo Caruso?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. What is illicit gambling in your

6 opinion?

7 A. Well, activities that violate the

8 statutes of the State of Illinois. It would be

9 any number of -- in any number of capacities. One

10 would be what is referred to as syndicated

11 gambling in the state, which refers to bookmaking,

12 sports betting, taking bets on the outcomes of

13 sporting events.

14 Q. Let's take those one at a time. Are

15 you saying that Mr. Caruso was engaged in illegal

16 sports betting taking?

17 A. I'm sure that the reports that I

18 reviewed and analyzed alluded to that fact, yes,

19 sir.

20 Q. To that fact, that he took illegal

21 bets?

22 A. That he was involved in illegal

23 gambling activities, to-wit, sports betting.

24 Q. What else?



1 A. That's it.

2 Q. Was he a bookie?

3 A. I believe he was higher than that and

4 I'm sure that he oversaw some of the gambling

5 activities in that area.

6 Q. Who did he oversee?

7 A. Members or associates of the Chinatown

8 crew.

9 Q. So he didn't engage in it himself. He

10 wasn't a better?

11 A. I don't know if he was a better or not.

12 Q. Was any arrest ever made of Mr. Caruso

13 for any illicit gambling?

14 A. Not to my personal knowledge.

15 Q. Would the files have shown it?

16 A. They would have.

17 Q. Did the files show any?

18 A. I don't believe they did, no.

19 Q. Did the files show any arrest of

20 Mr. Caruso for any unlawful -- any arrest for

21 Mr. Caruso, period, other than maybe traffic

22 offense? And I will get to that later.

23 A. Not to my recollection.

24 Q. How far back did the files go that you



1 looked at?

2 A. I couldn't tell you the exact date.

3 Q. If there had been any arrest of

4 Mr. Caruso it would have appeared in your

5 intelligence files, would it not?

6 A. It would have appeared in any criminal

7 history sheet, yes.

8 Q. And none did appear, is that correct?

9 A. Not to my knowledge, no.

10 Q. Now, with respect to your work with the

11 General Executive Board Attorney were you paid for

12 that?

13 A. No, sir.

14 Q. Was that arranged between the General

15 Executive Board Attorney and the Sheriff's

16 department, that surveillance?

17 A. They had informed us of what was going

18 to occur.

19 Q. Your department told you?

20 A. The investigators from the Inspector

21 General's office had informed us of what was going

22 to occur.

23 Q. And did they ask you to set up a

24 surveillance?



1 A. They didn't have to. I think it was a

2 50/50 deal. We wanted to.

3 Q. Had you surveiled Mr. Bruno Caruso

4 before that time?

5 A. Personally, no.

6 Q. Do you have surveillance films of

7 Mr. Caruso that you have seen?

8 A. Just the photos that are right here.

9 Q. Now, you say John Galioto, his name

10 popped up. Do you remember that phrase?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Did his name pop up like Bruno Caruso's

13 name popped up?

14 A. His name has appeared in several law

15 enforcement documents.

16 Q. Are there names of citizens who are not

17 considered by you to be organized crime who appear

18 in these documents, these file documents?

19 A. In the intelligence documents that I

20 referred to?

21 Q. Yes.

22 A. No.

23 Q. So, that every name who's appeared in

24 an intelligence file document, it is the opinion



1 of the intelligence section that they are

2 associates or members of organized crime, is that

3 correct?

4 A. Well, I think it's opinion based on

5 certain criteria.

6 Q. Well, my question is are there people

7 who are in the intelligence files who are not

8 considered by the intelligence section to be

9 associates or members of organized crime?

10 A. There are names of individuals in those

11 files that are members and associates of other

12 criminal organizations besides the LCN.

13 Q. Are there any who are not associates or

14 members of any criminal organization?

15 A. Not that --

16 Q. Are there people who have been seen

17 with people like lawyers? Do lawyers meetings

18 with their clients appear in the files?

19 A. Speaking on my own behalf I would not

20 put the attorney's name in a report.

21 Q. But have you seen reports in files that

22 have things like attorneys meeting with the

23 clients who is believed to be LCN?

24 A. I have frequently seen phrases where



1 investigators have written down that their target

2 or their subject met with their attorney.

3 Q. Now, the names that were given to

4 you -- now, with respect to John Galioto, you used

5 the phrase or referred to him as being involved in

6 gambling. Maybe that's my --

7 A. His name has been mentioned in the

8 reports I have spoken of with respect to illegal

9 gambling activities, yes.

10 Q. And what kind of illegal gambling?

11 A. Sports betting, bookmaking.

12 Q. Has he been arrested for those

13 offenses?

14 A. I do not know.

15 Q. Based upon your examination of

16 Mr. Galioto's file have you found any arrests of

17 him for sports betting, gambling?

18 A. I haven't looked at Mr. Galioto's file

19 in quite a while. I couldn't tell you. He may

20 have been arrested. I really don't know.

21 Q. And he may not have?

22 A. He may not have.

23 Q. Do you recall any conviction of

24 Mr. Galioto for gambling?



1 A. I don't recall any arrests. I would

2 not be able to comment on convictions.

3 Q. You do recall that Dominick Palermo was

4 convicted of racketeering?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. That was a federal case which we have

7 discussed here.

8 And this Nicholas Guzzino was also

9 convicted in Federal Court of racketeering, is

10 that correct?

11 A. That's my understanding, yes, sir.

12 Q. Your understanding. Was Frank DeMonte

13 convicted of any racketeering?

14 A. I do not know.

15 Q. Was Leo Caruso convicted of any

16 racketeering?

17 A. Not to my knowledge.

18 Q. Was he convicted of any state charge

19 that you know of?

20 A. Not that I know of.

21 Q. Do you know of any arrest of Leo

22 Caruso?

23 A. Do not know.

24 Q. Frank Caruso, which Frank Caruso is



1 this?

2 A. The Frank Caruso I'm referring to I

3 believe is the brother of Bruno.

4 Q. And what convictions do you have for

5 Mr. Caruso in your files?

6 A. I am not familiar with Mr. Caruso's

7 arrest record.

8 MR. CARMELL: I have nothing further.

9 MR. THOMAS: Very, very brief, your Honor.



12 Q. Mr. Scaramella, the police officers

13 that you were working with on June 16, 1997, did

14 some of the people that you had positioned have a

15 better view of Mr. Gioronda and Mr. Bruno Caruso

16 as they headed into the house that you referred

17 to?

18 A. They did.

19 Q. And when you compiled your report how

20 far towards either one of those residences did

21 they indicate Mr. Caruso and Mr. Gioronda had

22 headed?

23 A. They said they were walking toward the

24 front of that resident.



1 Q. And did they indicate how close?

2 A. No, they did not.

3 Q. Was there any ambiguity in the report

4 or in what they relayed to you as to whether it

5 was 231 or 233?

6 A. No, sir.

7 Q. And what did they indicate to you?

8 A. 231.

9 Q. Now, finally, with respect to the

10 coordination of the surveillance on that date, the

11 people that you were coordinating with and in

12 setting up and in getting your information, that

13 was the Office of the Inspector General of LIUNA,

14 was it not?

15 A. That's correct.

16 MR. THOMAS: Nothing further.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: How far apart in

18 distance is 231 and 233?

19 THE WITNESS: I cannot answer that, sir. I

20 don't know. If it's a normal city block, I would

21 imagine it's the next home to the east or to the

22 west.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume it's the next

24 home. You can't tell from your surveiling



1 agents. If, for example, where the reporter is

2 sitting would be 231 and if 233 is at the other

3 end of the room, there is a big difference than if

4 233 is 15 feet away.

5 MR. CARMELL: Can I examine on that for a

6 moment?

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: You may examine on it.



10 Q. All right. Did you finally -- I didn't

11 mean it that way.

12 Did you at some point get to the

13 location where the two cars were double parked?

14 A. I was in close proximity.

15 Q. All right. Do you recall seeing -- do

16 you recall seeing a single-family home which was

17 231, I'll call it a gangway, a walkway and then a

18 two-flat directly next to the walkway?

19 A shared walkway between 231 and 233,

20 one was a residence, one was a two-flat. Does

21 that refresh your recollection at all, sir?

22 A. Well, it doesn't, sir, because I was

23 not on that block. That information was relayed

24 to me via radio.



1 Q. I apologize. I thought when you said

2 you got there, you were there close enough to see

3 it.

4 A. No, sir, I was not close enough to view

5 it.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: There were two men

7 walking towards one of the two houses, is that

8 right?

9 MR. CARMELL: Well, they were walking up the

10 gangway and the two houses go like this

11 (indicating).

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Either both of them

13 went to see the former alderman or they went to

14 see his mother.

15 MR. CARMELL: Right. Nothing further.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, let's --

17 MR. BOSTWICK: Discuss Monday.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's discuss Monday.

19 Make it about 10 o'clock. Now where are we

20 meeting, gentlemen?

21 MR. BOSTWICK: I have spoken with Mr. Carmell

22 about this on a couple of occasions. I have tried

23 to -- well, in general terms, we have discussed

24 the protected witnesses and how those are going to



1 be dealt with.

2 What I have tried to do is make

3 arrangements that provide some ability for

4 Mr. Carmell to meet with his clients and discuss

5 cross-examination before he has to do that.

6 I have arranged the following with the

7 FBI office for Monday. We can meet at 10 o'clock

8 in the FBI building on Monday. I can give the

9 name of the first witness now.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: 219 South Dearborn.

11 MR. BOSTWICK: I have even more specific

12 information. 219 South Dearborn, the 9th floor.

13 Contacting supervisor is Special Agent Jim Wagner

14 when you get there. It's the south elevators I

15 guess.

16 And if we could meet there at 10

17 o'clock, I have arranged that the Hearing Officer,

18 one staff member, the GEB officer and one staff

19 member, Mr. Carmell and one member of his legal

20 staff and then we will pipe in the substance of

21 the conversation by telephone to the hearing room

22 which I understand will be in the basement

23 downstairs next week as opposed to here in this

24 room.




2 MR. BOSTWICK: And then the further -- I

3 anticipate we will go the morning probably with

4 this witness and then we could probably arrange to

5 have another witness in the afternoon so that

6 Mr. Carmell would have a chance both to speak with

7 his clients and to get the transcript and then

8 start his cross-examination on Tuesday morning,

9 which is something that is more than we had

10 discussed before but we will provide him with a

11 little more time.

12 Then we could start on Tuesday

13 afternoon I believe with the second protected

14 witness at the same location under the same terms,

15 and then you would be able to have the evening

16 with the transcript to start before the

17 examination.

18 If there is any dead time, we will do

19 our best to fill it with witnesses in the interim.


21 cross-examination of the first witness on Tuesday

22 morning.

23 MR. BOSTWICK: Exactly. I can tell you the

24 name of the first witness now at this time. It's



1 Robert Cooley.

2 (WHEREUPON, at 4:00 p.m. the

3 hearing was adjourned until

4 Monday, July 21, 1997, at 10:00 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 18th day of

16 July, 1997.


18 CORINNE T. MARUT, C.S.R. No. 84-1968

19 Certified Shorthand Reporter



22 Certified Shorthand Reporter





1 I N D E X



4 By Mr. Carmell 566

5 By Mr. Bostwick 612


7 By Mr. Thomas 616


9 By Mr. Thomas 674

10 701 750

11 By Mr. Carmell 732 752


13 By Mr. Thomas 756 792

14 By Mr. Carmell 779 794













1 E X H I B I T S


3 GEB Attorney Exhibit

4 No. 53 779

5 No. 54 779

6 No. 107 669

7 No. 108 669

8 No. 109 633

9 No. 110 635

10 No. 111 635

11 No. 112 637

12 No. 113 638













Laborers for JUSTICE ©1998 (All Rights reserved)

Return to Laborers.org