If Fredo came clean...

..would Micheal have spared his life?

Some will argue that Micheal was always going to kill the traitor in his family, however, in the case of Fredo, I'm not so sure.

If Fredo had admitted that he was in cahoots with Ola/Roth immediately following the Lake Tahoe shooting, I think it would have gone a long way in convincing Micheal that Fredo 'never knew it was gonna be a hit'.

Also, Fredo had recieved indication that Frank may be killed , but he chose not to share this with Micheal. He even let Micheal continue doing business with Roth/Ola knowing that they had tried to kill him.

Was it Fredo's silence that led Micheal to believe that Fredo deserved to die? If Fredo had come clean, he could have helped Micheal take his revenge and saved Frank's life. This may have convinced Micheal to spare Fredo.

Opinions?

I am repeating myself here, but IMHO Fredo could have never "come clean" because by doing so he would have had to reveal he knew it was going to be a hit, and that it was he who let Manolo in to open the drapes.

I don't know if mike would have let him live because at that point he was so paranoid. I'm not saying Fredo didn't do anything wron but its not like he wanted his brother dead. Fredo was a dumbass but he was a good guy at heart. Now a guy like Carlo on the otherhand deserved to die since he beat women, and basically was an accomplice in murder knowing full well that Sonny would be killed. Fredo didn't know it was gonna be a hit. Stupid? yes Premediatated? No

In a deleted scene, Fredo is seen talking to Manolo and pointing toward the house. It's not clear if it was Fredo or Manolo who was asking about gettingin.

I have thought, at times, that Michael might have been ready to give his brother a pass. But Fredo's outburst in the boat house showed the depths of his resentment of Michael. I think Michael concluded at that point that Fredo would alays be a danger to him.

Keep in mind that Fredo knew the Feds had Pentangeli. And, after the outburst, he tells Michael that "the Senate lawyer, Questadt, belongs to Roth." That was info Michael didn't have. Had Fredo wanted to get back into Michael's good graces, he could have told him that long before Michael perjured himself five times. That tells me (as it must have told Michael) that, even after his perfidy was exponsed in Havana, Fredo was still unrepentant.

You know TB, several of us have also asked why Fredo had to be murdered. Why couldn't he have simply been excluded from the family? Afterall, Michael had already pretty much excluded him prior to their reconsiliation at the funeral. It's obvious that if Fredo wasn't privy to any information, then his value to Michael's enemies would be nil. No, Fredo's murder was simply a functionof Michael's personality.

Agreed, Oli.

Michael's conduct toward Fredo - allowing him to live as long as Mama does, giving him access to the compound, etc. - shows clearly that Michael does not view Fredo as a threat.

Michael killed him out of rage and retribution, not as a calculated self-defense mechanism. This is affirmed in GFIII during the confession to Lamberto, when he explains his murder of Fredo by saying "He injured me."

While Michael may have regretted killing Fredo by the time he confessed to Lamberto, at the time, it was necessary that Michael kill Fredo. Michael was the head of a criminal empire, and when traitors and enemies got in the way it was mandatory they be killed. Anything short of that would be a sign of weakness, at least in Michael's mind. I am sure if he had asked Tom Hagen for advice on this issue Tom would have come up with some kind of arrangement that allowed Fredo to live.

Sums up what I was thinking. When Micheal says "you're still my brother" and when he tells Tom to tell Fredo "not to be scared" makes me think he wasn't decided that he would kill Fredo. Something convinced him, probably the realisation that Fredo knew more than he let on and that he was in a position to help Micheal but didn't.

Was he really? What makes you think this?

I'm not saying he didn't make bad choices but he never killed anyone he cared about his family even Mike says this. Your welcome to your opinion but it seems like u think fredo is the devil lol. I mean on the otherhand there is mike who commits som pretty horrific acts

I don't think Fredo is the devil but I don't have as much sympathy for him as many people do.

He jeapordised his own family, including his niece and nephew, because of jealousy. Thats pretty low in my opinion.

He could have helped Micheal with the senate hearing but chose not to.

He could have, or atleast attempted to, save Frank Pentangelli but chose not to.

This is all before we even consider if he 'knew it was going to be a hit'.

Fact is, most of the reasons used to condemn Micheal, came about because he was Don. He had to make strong decisions. Fredo would also have been guilty of making 'immoral' decisions if he was smart enough to be Don, something we know he craved.

I think just because Fredo is stupid he gets cut a lot of slack that he doesn't neccessarily deserve.

I think what so many of you are missing here is the horror of fratricide. Vito couldn't even conceive of murdering one of his children and would turn over in his grave even at the thought of fratricide. What makes Michael's murder of Fredo so insidious, so odius is his keeping him around, accepting him back into the family, deceiving his sister into believing that he had forgiven Fredo, and then using his sister and Michael's son to facilitate Fredo's murder. Thus, Fredo's murder goes well beyond fratricide.

Making strong decisions because he was the Don? A strong decision must be based on necessity. What was the necessity? There was none. What was Michael's percentage? You know what it was? He satisfied his own need, not that of his crime family. In doing so, he showed that he was willing to involve his sister and son in a murder scenario. Madonne! I wish I could think of a stronger adjective to state about him other than insidious.

I agree. I think it was Fredo's outburst that got him killed.

When the revolution is about to set in and Michael yells to Fredo "Come with me, you're still my brother", I think he was sincere.

Michael killed Fredo nevertheless out of principle. He already gave Neri the signal that Fredo was a dead man walking. If he did change his mind it could have been interpretated as a sign of weakness. Or maybe Michael thought he had to make an example to others in his organisation; "it doesn't matter who you are, if you betray me, you get killed".

RE: olivant

Micheal ordered the killing of his own brother. Fredo betrayed the family which almost led to the death of his own brother/brothers family. He then continued to allow Micheal to remain in danger instead of helping. Yes Micheal was 'insidious' but Fredo was not much better.

Most of Micheal's 'immoral' decisions were strong business decisions, ones that Vito had to make and ones that Fredo/Sonny would have had to make if they were Don. Perhaps, the murder of Fredo doesn't fall into this category but it's debateable. If you conclude that Fredo 'knew it was going to be a hit' then most people agree that killing Fredo was a 'neccessity'.

I can't really accept the notion that Micheal was innately worse moralistically than any of the other males in the family .

I think it was more frustration than stupidity on Fredo's behalf.

Good point.

Fredo is stupid so no one trusts him with any major aspects of the business. Thus, he is never asked to behave as immorally as others. This doesn't make him a 'good guy at heart' is my point.

Yes, fraticide is horrible (and, as Lamberto said, "Those are terrible crimes and it is just(ice) that you suffer." And I'm sure that anger and revenge entered into Michael's decision. But, as a matter of business, Michael was dealing with a brother whose betrayal almost resulted in fraticide of his own. Plus, he could have saved Michael from the perjury rap he was facing. Sure, he could have made arrangements to see to it that Fredo never was in a position to learn anything of use to a strong foe. But, he'd still have the memory that his dumb, incompetent brother nearly had him killed. Not a big incentive to let him live.

How this seems to escape people is beyond me!

I agree olivant. Yes the Godfather is fiction but i'm surprised some people say that even though Fredo is his brother just to kill him. I hope they dont feel that way about real life stuff lol

In the end of the novel, Kay leaves Michael and returns to New Hampshire. Tom Hagen goes up to talk to her. She asks him about Carlo's death, about the fact that Carlo had turned it around, was a good husband and father now, never beat Connie any more, was a good worker, etc. She asked why he couldn't be forgiven, and Tom says, "In this world, he could be."

Fredo would always be a danger, especially after his rampage in the boathouse revealed the depth of his resentment toward Michael. Michael couldn't let Fredo live, because he would always be a threat to the Family and the family.

Sure, it bothered Michael. Yes, it was the one murder that plagued him, but I still think that if he had the opportunity to turn back time, he would have done it again.

Many posts about this controversy are replete with statements such as yours. However, noone ever states what the danger is that Fredo would always be?

His potential for future treachery was the danger. If Fredo was truly penitent for his transgression, then why was he still so angry and resentful? His rant in the boathouse proved to Michael that Fredo was not simply duped, he went outside the family for his own interests, spurred on by his envy of his younger brother. That meant that he would always be capable of betraying the Family in the future.

All you've done is restate Fredo's state of mind. Again, how would he physically betray the Family?

Because an enemy of the family could approach him again in the future, just as Roth did. Because he was so jealous of Michael, he might betray his brother again, especially if someone promised Fredo that it would be something good for him and good for the Family.

I keep asking, how? Michael exiled him from the Family. He was only allowed cursory contact with his mother. He was banned from the Corleone hotels. It took Connie's entreaty to get Michael to give Fredo even a brief respite bewteen their mother's death and Fredo's murder. So, what is it that someone expected to obtain from Fredo in exchange for a promise of something good?

Fredo possibly remaining a threat is uncertain which is why I think Michael killed him out of principle, and perhaps also out of anger and revenge.

Everyone please keep in mind Fredo's attitude when Michael found out about his treachery. Fredo wasn't the least bit contrite. Instead he went off on a rant about how he was passed over, how he had to run mickey mouse night clubs and take people to the airport. So even after the attempted hit, and with the knowledge Micael was facing a perjury rap, Fredo was still angry and resentful. IMHO the only reason he gave
Michael the information that they had Pentangeli (which Michael already knew) and that Roth owned Questadt was a lame attempt to keep Michael from killing him.

There are a number of possibilities.

For example, he could expose the inner workings of the compound or he could provide information to Micheal's enemies - such as the fact that Senator Gearry 'belongs' to him. Not to mention how much he already knows about Micheal, factors that could be used against him, such as the murders he has committed etc.

Its ridiculous to assert that theres absolutely no way Fredo could have hurt Micheal if he was allowed to live. Where theres a will, theres a way.

1) Of course, the inner workings of the compound could not possibly have been know to the two assassins who attempted to murder Michael nor to the person or persons who murdered the two assassins. Oh no.

2) Senator Geary's belonging to anyone was moot long before Fredo's murder.

3) Michael only committed two murders both of which were judicially disposed of long ago. Fredo was not privy to any murders Michael ordered nor would such knowledge, had he possessed it, placed Michael in any legal jeopardy as the attorney's on the Board will so confirm.

I doubt Mike would appear weak in people's eyes. I mean he whacked 4 top bosses at once for god sake. Roth was smart but he made a dumb move by making of move on mike. All Mike had to do is banish Fredo. but like I've said mike was close to a psychopath

Before the betrayal, Fredo obviously wasn't a part of the business, and knew nothing about the Cuba deal. But Johnny Ola told him about the Cuba deal, and found in Fredo a willing partner--because Fredo had a grudge against Michael. Banished or not, he still had a grudge, which would have deepened with banishment. Anyone who knew him would know that--and might find out something of value from Fredo because he'd be willing to seek revenge--again.

Michael had several options: banishment to some very remote place, imprisonment within the compound, or (my personal favorite) institutionalization.

The head of the Family was (as Michael told Kay) "responsible for other people." As Vito's son and Michael's brother, Fredo was one of the people Michael was responsible for. For Michael to place Fredo in a position where Fredo could be manipulated was Michael's failure, and Michael should have taken responsibility for it.

Fredo knew of the murder of Johnny Ola and the initial attempt on Roth's life. He also knew of the incident with took place in his brothel between Gearry, Neri and the prostitute.

Fredo was Micheals brother, he had inside knowledge of his operations and knew what his weak points were. I may not be able to point to specific instances in which Fredo could use these attributes, but to dismiss them completely is ignorant.

Even as a worse case scenario, Fredo could have himself attempted to take Micheals's life, angered at being banished from the family. Considering the resentment he felt towards Micheal, this situation is quite plausible.

What would that entail exactly in your opinion?

Exactly.

People seem to take it as a given that if Fredo was banished, Micheal would never see him again. In reality, Fredo's resentment toward Micheal would have probably worsened and could have manifested itself in any number of ways. Having someone that hates you that much and knows that much about you is obviously a precarious situation.

As I hinted above, I think the best solution would have been to have Fredo institutionalized. Stick him in the room of someone who had died, and make him a non-person.

[quote=mustachepeteAs I hinted above, I think the best solution would have been to have Fredo institutionalized. Stick him in the room of someone who had died, and make him a non-person. [/quote]

Put him in a room with Billy Bob Thornton mmmm hmmmm

Again, Michael's own actions regarding Fredo indicate that he was not concerned about any of those things.

Do you really think that if Michael were concerned about Fredo implicating him in a murder or other malfeasance would he have allowed him to roam free?

Or that, if Michael felt Fredo could use knowledge of the inner workings of the compound against him, he would allow Fredo access to the compound?

Sure, we can hypothesize about potential threats posed by Fredo but it is clear that Michael, in the period of his deepest paranoia, did not view Fredo as a threat. So I don't, either.

I really don't think Fredo was that stupid to betray Michael again. I think he was too relieved that Mike had forgiven him and that he was allowed to return. Fredo would always be in the position to do damage to Michael, but I think he wouldn't have tried it again. Especially if Michael kept him out of the family business.

RE the last woltz


Well made points but I disagree with the main premise.

For me, Micheals ordering of Fredo's murder indicated that he did see Fredo as a threat, or atleast a potential threat, particularly after the boat-house scene. Other's believe it indicated no more than revenge on Micheals part. In my opinion, both 'reasons' justified the eventual outcome.

As for your other questions, after the boat house scene, perhaps Micheal allowed Fredo to roam free and gave him access to the compound to lure him into a false sense of security, prevent him from running away, knowing that he would eventually be killed.

Before the boat house scene, he may have not been aware of the extent of the resentment that Fredo felt and thus wasn't waware of the 'threat' that Fredo may have posed.

Its all a matter of opinion at the end of the day and makes for an interesting discussion.

He knew Ola was dead/murdered, but he couldn't pin it down on Michael unless Michael had admitted to him that he had given that order.



Which was his brothel and his responsibility. We don't know if Michael himself had actually informed Fredo of that plan.

Disagree.

Fredo seemed quite unrepentent about his reasons for betraying Micheal. Being banished from the family could easily have worsened the resenment he already felt for Micheal and this could have manifested itself in another betrayal. This time he would have much less to lose also.

Micheal admitted to him that he 'had already made his move' and that 'Hymann Roth will never see the new year'.

Yes, but he didn't explicitly said anything about Johnny Ola. And we know that Roth wasn't murdered in Havana.

I know Fredo was dumb but he could have worked out that what happened to Ola was no coincidence. Also, an attempted murder did take place in Roth's hospital room. Anyway, its quite an irrelevant point. I was just pointing out that Fredo did know of some of Micheal's goings on and that he may have tried to use these factors against Micheal in the future. How he would do so is questionable but the possibility still remains, to say that it simply couldn't/wouldn't happen is unreasonable.

Another angle:

Do you think Tom knew that when Michael "forgave" Fredo, he was putting him in a trap and preparing to have him killed? If so, do you think he should have warned Fredo?

No, I think this was something between Michael and Neri only.



Not if he wanted to meet the same fate as Fredo.

The way I've seen it. Mike whacked the whole heads of the five families in one shot. I doubt too many people wanted to fuck with him after that. Roth was a jewish gangster and used his brain more than muscle but he failed. Killing fredo wasn't gonna make Mike look weak. I think new york didn't want to mess with mike since they knew how crazy he was. fredo could have been treated like shit and kept a close eye on but no reason to kill him

He could have rallied other members of the family against Michael: Tom, Connie, the children, other non-kin members of the family like Al Neri (who appeared to have a soft spot for Fredo the way he reacted when Mike gave him the look at the funeral)...Fredo could have also snitched out Mike to the press or the authorities. I don't know any way that Fredo wouldn't have always been a liability to Mike had he spared his life.

Michael may have been able to sequester him from a lot of the family business, but there would always be ways to harm Michael again -- especially if Fredo was still bitter about being cut off from the family business, which you have to believe he always would be, deep down.

Disagree. Even Vito's enemies thought he was slippin', and obviously Roth didn't fear Michael even after he whacked the heads of the families as well as Moe Green, Roth's friend.

No matter how ruthless they were in the past, if someone appears to be weak at a certain time, they can get got.

Probably not because he knew that Michael would have viewed it as a betrayal and then Mike would have had to whack Tom.

Maybe this would have been touched upon in III if Duvall had come back. We'll never know.

My guess is Tom probably knew, but he also probably did not approve of killing Fredol. Ayt that stage of the game Tom knew when to keep his mouth shut. The closest he comes is when he asks Michael "Do you want to take EVERYONE out?" To which Mike replies "No, Just my enemies."

Tom was smart enough to figure things out. I'm sure he didn't accept the accident explanation of Fredo's death. Like Vito, he would never had murdered a member of his family. But his loyalty to Vito's memory probably kept him from overtly reacting to Fredo's murder because that might put Michael in danger. In fact. I'll bet that that his turning to amistress was an effort by Tom to ease the trmendous stress he was feeling over Fredo's murder and his denoument as Consigliere.

Michael would have killed him anyway. He was a sociopath.

Kay always was an idiot. Carlo deserved to die. He wasn't a good husband or father, that was part of him playing the role.