Who knew Fredo's treason?

When Michael returned from Havana, he asked Rocco and Neri to leave the room before querying Tom about Fredo. Michael assumed Tom knew about Fredo’s treason because he said, “Tell him I know Roth misled him…” But evidently, Michael didn’t want R&N to know about it—at least at that point. That would be consistent with his character as a controller and as one who kept all info close to himself.

Later, when Fredo and Michael had it out in the boathouse, Michael had Neri wait outside, unseen by Fredo. Probably he did that to make Fredo think they were alone, and to encourage him to tell all. It’s also possible he wanted Neri to be ready to defend him in case Fredo made a move against him—not totally inconceivable given Fredo’s treason with Roth. Neri would have known by that time that Fredo and Michael were on the outs because Fredo was no longer at the compound. But, do you think at that point he knew why? I can’t dismiss the possibility that Michael hadn’t told Neri exactly why—but wanted him to overhear Fredo’s treason from his own lips so that Neri could be that much more motivated to kill Fredo at the appropriate time.

Also, when Connie got on her knees and beseeched Michael to forgive Fredo during Mama’s wake, do you think she knew that Fredo had betrayed Michael to Roth? Michael wouldn’t have told her, and Fredo may not have told her everything. Also, she prefaced her plea by confessing that “I hated you…until I realized that you were just being strong for all of us.” She wanted back in. Do you think that her plea for Fredo was a ploy to come back into the compound and be taken care of?

Well TB, there's alot there. First, I have never bought into the Micahel as controller theme of so many posts. Michael was the head of an organization where, every day, being murdered was a real possibility. So, Michael managed his environment to minimize that possibility. I don't find that management exceptional.

Who knew about Fredo's betrayal? Well, how did Tom find out? I'm sure Michael didn't tell him. Besides, why did Tom think that Fredo was in NY? Why would he know about Fredo's whereabouts in the first place? Or, if he did know, why would he only think he was in NY? Why wouldn't he know for sure if he knew at all?

I don't think Fredo was ever a physical threat to Micahel. I can't remember where Neri was physically located at the time of Fredo's confession. Also, I don't think Neri had any qualms about murdering or needed any motivation to murder anybody.

As far as Connie goes, I don't think she knew. That Fredo had been a stranger to the compound after Cuba (I guess he was), Connie was aware and, like anyone, would figure that something had gone drastically wrong in Fredo's and Michael's relationship. I also think that Connie had been back in the compound for awhile. Her statement about hating Michael I understood as being her feeling in the past.

The aside to Tom is a offhand admission that Tom is not as stupid as Michael thinks he is. It also could indicate that Fredo had already tried calling Tom and Tom told Michael or Michael would just figure Fredo would get in touch with Tom.

In the boathouse I still think that Fredo still had a tiny chance (perhaps a 1 in a 1,000,000,000 chance) to escape the full force of Michael's wrath if he had almost literally turned on his back and bared his throat. But no, he lost his temper, showed his deep resentments and also revealed he knew more about Roth's plans than he had let on. That did it.

I don't think Michael or Tom or any of the employees would have told Connie anything. But she's been around; she can pick up cues, especially from people she grew up with. I don't think she had any idea of what Fredo had actually done or the fact that Michael was planning his murder. She just wanted things to be good again. She knew her brothers were angry and wanted to make peace.

I tried to address all those questions here:

http://www.gangsterbb.net/threads/ubbthr...true#Post472494

Well, I checked out the link. It prompts me to ask why Michael thought Tom would know Fredo's whereabouts. Of course, there's no indication why Tom would answer a question about Fredo by telling Michael about Roth. Also, I think that in the evident confusion that followed on the heels of Castro's imminent invasion of Havana, Fredo escaped just like many Americans escaped by obtaining passage on a boat. I don't think there was any time for Fredo to arrange passage with friends. Heck, Michael barely escaped.

Well, that's the thing that intrigued me about that scene, and prompted my earlier thread. Michael just assumed Tom would know Fredo's whereabouts because he knew or surmised that Fredo would be close to Tom, and that in a panic, he'd call Tom first. Don Cardi posted a convincing bit of made-up dialog to that point in the thread I referenced.

Now, that raises a couple of other intereting points (or at least I think they're interesting):

First,Tom surely knew that Michael wouldn't give Fredo a pass, and that when Michael "forgave" Fredo, it was only temporarily until Mama died. Do you think Tom ever contemplated warning Fredo that he was in a trap?


Second, Michael was practically frantic to get Fredo on the plane with him in Havana. But once he was back in Nevada, he just told Tom to "get word" to Fredo, when in fact he could have had Fredo snatched off the streets of NY and hauled to Nevada. Why the sudden shift?

A good deal of this goes back to my belief that Tom gets a bad rap on the boards.

Just as Tom intuited the "secret" Neri regime, he also intuited that there would be an attempt on Michael's life...at Vito's funeral he matter of factly asks "Do you know how they're gonna come after you? And then..."I always thought it would be Clemenza."

As for Fredo, I believe Fredo contacted Tom from New York. Considering the Castro takeover and the escapes by Michael Fredo and Roth, Tom had to know something was up when Fredo called from NY, and being the non-Sicilian, he evaded Michael's questions about Fredo's whereabouts because in his heart he knew that Fredo was a dead man.
As for Connie, it is unclear that she knew what Fredo did to deserve to be killed, but by the time of III, it is clear she knew because when Michael tells her he went to confesion, the firt thing she talks about is Michael's greatest wrong -- fratricide. So she glosses it over with the fiction about "poor Fredo drowning."

Of course, alot of the gaps in interaction between the characters is a function of what FFC wanted to portray on the screen and what was left on the cutting room floor.

Michael explodes at Tom for not directly answering his questions because FFC wanted us to see a new Michael experiencing the stress of betrayal and uncertainty in a world where murder is just a shot away. He wants it all to contrast with Vito's world where Vito was surrounded with people of unquestioned loyalty. I think he also wants to portray Tom as the one thing that remains constant regardless of Michael's attitude toward him.

Maybe there was a phone call between Fredo and Tom that was filmed, but didn't make it into the final cut. But I don't see Fredo telling Tom about his betrayal. It's possible that even at that point Fredo didn't see it as a betrayal. Also, even though Michael knew why Fredo might be scared, Tom didn't. So, why would Michael tell Tom that "I know he's scared"? At that point, if Tom hadn't talked to Fredo, Tom had to be wondering why Fredo was scared and about what Roth had mislead him.

I think it would have been out of character for Tom to contemplate warning Fredo. For all the "non-Sicilian" jibes thrown his way, Tom certainly seemed unmoved when Tessio asked for mercy. His ultimate loyalty, whether out of love, fear, or jealousy, was to Michael.

As to the "sudden shift," I don't find it implausible. In Cuba, Michael had just discovered Fredo's treachery and was, admittedly, heartbroken. I think, in his emotional state, he hadn't decided what to do about it. His urgency was a combination of his agitation, the chaotic scene around him, and his desire to keep Fredo close until he decided on a course of action. Later, Michael has cooled down and his anger has harded, but he still needs to keep tabs on Fredo. So he adopts a different tactic to try to reel him back in.

Here is what i dont get. Fredo gets grief for fumbling the gun but people forget thoe two guys were probably two good buttonmen and fredo had to kill both. i doubt paulie gatto or many other people would be able to prevent two gunman that fast

I always assumed that Fredo's betrayal was common knowledge amongst the Family & the likes of Neri, but Michael wanted to deal with it by himself as much as he could, due to the extreme nature of treachery by an actual family member. Obviously any soldier or capo couldn't kill Fredo Corleone without approval, even if they did happen to find him.
Connie could have known all & still been willing to forgive Fredo, Tom would have been waiting for his Don's orders.

The fact that the Don of the Family wanted to take such a careful & hands-on approach in dealing with this particular traitor emphasised:
- just how serious Fredo's betrayal was;
- how deeply Michael was hurt by it.

I don't think there's much else in the detail.

I kind of saw it a different way. First of all i dont think Fredo "betrayal" was that horrible. everybody with half a brain knows fredo was good hearted and din't want his family members hurt. sure he was stupid and jealous but he wasn't evil enough to kill a member of his family. Hell even Al neri who was one of the most emotionless hitmen in the Godfather kind of had a soft spot for fredo since you can tell he wasn't thrilled about having to kill him

I tend to agree. While he could be truculent when pressed, I don't think Fredo had larceny or worse in his heart. Michael's decision to murder Fredo was based on his outrage over Fredo's outburst. Michael considered that outburst a function of Fredo's unmitigated stupidity and that stupidity is what really governed Michael's decision.

Also, I agree about Neri. In a perfect world, Neri would have given Fredo a pass.

I can't buy into the "Neri felt sorry or Fredo" theory at all. There is no evidence for it. In one scene Michael tells
Neri he doesn't want anything to happen to Fredo while their mother is alive. Neri nods. In another scene Fredo hugs Michael at their mother's funeral and Michael shoots Neri a look telling him to ignore this hugging nonsense. Neri nods slightly as if to say "I understand) and then casts his eyes down. Finally Neri brings the boat around and as soon as Anthony leaves, he obeys Fredo's instruction to go out fishing.
If there were a scene where Neri even asked Mike what he meant
by all this there might be an arguement that Neri disagreed with Mike. But I see no evidence.
I also cannot buy the idea that Fredo was just a stupid bumbling idiot. He betrayed the family and as long as he was alive he would remain angry and bitter. I believe he even lied to Mike in the boathouse about not knowing it was going to be a hit. Fredo was a clear and present danger to the family and he had to go just like any traitor.

DT, when Michael is hugging Fredo and looks over at Neri, Neri looks down as if he's almost embarrassed by the implication in Michael's look. Fratricide under any circumstances would be something that even a hitman would find exceptional.

As far as Fredo not being a bumbling idiot, the film and novel pretty much portray him as such.

I'd hate to be in your family don if i spill a drink you might plan my demise just kidding lol. Im not saying neri love fredo but you can tell he didn't have any problem with him and he thought he was decent. When fredo says "Hey Al you can tell Al knows that he has to kill him but that doesn't mean he is happy about having to do it. Also i agree Fredo wasn't as dumb as some say but he was the most kind hearted of the corleones thats pretty clear. Fredo is probably the only one with a chance to go to heaven lol. sonny had good qualities but is still a murderer and mike went from a decnt guy into a psychopath

Fredo knew the Feds had Pentangeli, and that the Senate lawyer, Questadt, belonged to Roth. Probably he knew that because Roth told him. Had he passed on that info to Michael at any time before the boathouse meeting, he would have been immensely helpful to his brother, and might have earned a pass. He didn't. That tells me that, even after Havana, Fredo was still intent on hurting his brother.

And while we're at it where did all this about Fredo being "sweet" come from. He was always stupid and slow, but I never saw a sweet side to him. Can anyone think of anything "sweet" he ever did?

He picked people up at the airport. There's nothing sweeter than that.

Teaching Anthony how to fish?

Congratulating Michael on enlisting in the Marines?

We don't see much of his sweetness in the trilogy. But there are some hints: When Sonny, Clemenza, Tom and Tessio go downstairs after having talked to Vito, Fredo stays with him. I think he really cared for his father. Vito turned away in disgust and (according to the novel) later put him on his "shitlist". Just because Fredo didn't fit in his expectations. Vito was apparently much more generous towards Johnny Fontane.
When Michael came to Las Vegas, Fredo arranged a party. Michael in turn didn't care about it. He just came for business. Obviously, he didn't even feel like talking to his brother whom he hadn't seen for a long time.

Fredo didn't really throw the party for Michael, he thre it so he and Johnny could bang cocktail waitresses two at a time.

D, I agree with your perception. I also agree that it was Fredo who arranged Michael's greeting. Afterall, Fredo handled the hotel side of the business. I also think that Michael could have admonished Fredo in private instead of in public as he did. There was no need to humiliate Fredo like that.

Well Oli, no one ever accused Michael of being sweet.

well considering the corleones are all killers fredo is probably the only one with a chance to see heaven lol. Sonny was a good family man but he was a vicious murderer. Mike just turned into a controlling psychopath. Fredo is not a saint but he isn't an evil person. He was a womenizer and Ya he was jealous but the film made it pretty clear taht fredo wouldn't harm anybody even if he wanted to. I mean he bonded with nephew so much that Anthony grew to hate his father for killing his uncle.

Didn't he harm Michael by betraying him to Roth, and after that not telling him that Pentangeli had survived and that the Senate lawyer, Questadt, belonged to Roth?

Maybe he meant that Fredo actually administering direct physical violence?

Right Mark. Also sure fredo lied about the lawyer im niot saying that wasn't a mistake but we all know fredo didn't know it was gonna be a hit.

Do we all know that? One of the longest-running discussions on this board is whether or not Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit, or if he really didn't, what did he know or think was going to happen?

it would totally be against character for all of a sudden fredo to be a vicious hitman/organizer. i mean throughout the series fredo has been portrayed as yes stupid weak but he is the most sensitive and less violent. Yes he was jealous but ther is a difference between being jealous and then acting it out through rage. I mean even Mike knew that fredo didn't know it was a hit but at that point mike would kill anybody even if they said hello to him lol

I don't know GF2 as well as others, but to me it is ambiguous as to what Fredo knew about Pentangeli, and when. Tom tells Michael about Frankie, cites the New York detectives as his source, and says that he thinks Fredo doesn't know anything. Fredo does then tell Michael about Pentangeli and Questadt, but there's no way to know how or when he found out about those things.

One thing that seems obvious is that information about Pentangeli became much easier to obtain once the senator announced that a surprise witness was coming. That's natural, as prople with information might open up once they thought the trap had been set up. So it could be that Tom and Fredo were both picking up the same information at the same time.

Yes it would. And, after being portrayed as a doofus and weakling throughout GF and part of II, it makes Fredo's betrayal of Michael all the more shocking--and impactful. Michael (and we) never saw it coming. What's more, the boathouse scene (IMO, John Cazale's best) shows just how deeply he resented Michael and highlights why he betrayed his brother.



Could be. It's possible that the subcommittee chair was required by procedural rules to disclose his witnesses to Tom, acting as Michael's lawyer, and it might have made the newspapers.

But there's only one way Fredo could have known that the Senate lawyer, Questadt, belonged to Roth: Roth told him. And, if Roth told him, it tells me he was in with Roth far deeper than he let on.

True TB. But I don't see why Roth would give Fredo such information. There was no reason for him to do so. Also, Roth certainly was astute enough to have observed that Fredo was hugely amenable to manipulation which would not require his knowing sensitive information.

Of course, I would conclude that since Michael was under subpoena and the subject of the Senate committee's investigation, that disclosure would apply. Thus, Tom would have been informed of Cicci and Pentangeli.

I don't think that Michael would have been entitled to a disclosure of subsequent witnesses. He wouldn't technically be a target of the investigation. The committee would have to target "Organized Crime Penetration of Interstate Commerce" or some such. It would have to be something plausibly related to defined Congressional powers.

It almost would have to be this way: most Congressional hearings are essentially fact finding missions, they can continue for long periods of time, and a committee often won't know who subsequent witnesses will be until they hear what this witness has to say.

it just doesn't fit. Like I said before there is a difference between jealousy and acting on it. Most people are jealous at one point but most do go out and do something violent. I mean ive seen the film hundreds of times and its pretty clear that Fredo is a lot of things but he is not a sadistic person. i mean mike is the only one that i see that murders family members and women

Since we don't know the content of the Senate resolution that established the committee, we can't say for sure what its jurisdiction was. But it is obvious that the hearing was an adversary one. Given that Pentangeli's verbal testimony contradicted his written deposition (as the Committee chair pointed out), we know for sure that he was deposed previous to the hearing, that therein he accused Michael of crimes, and therefore, Michael was a target of the committee's investigation. I think disclosure would have applied.

While this is a logical chain of inference its foundation makes no sense.

As Oli points out, there was no reason to give Fredo such inside details on Roth's plan. Fredo was hardly a vault with information, and he had already told Ola that he didn't want to talk to them anymore after the failed hit. The phone conversation also confirms to me (but, admittedly, not to everyone) that Fredo didn't know it was a hit and he felt deceived by Roth. Nothing here lays the groundwork for continued confidences from Roth to Fredo.

Also, Fredo had no value to Roth after the Tahoe hit attempt. Why would Roth need Fredo's complicitly to kill Michael in Cuba or to have Michael perjure himself? Keeping Fredo in the dark would have been much safer.

The only reasonable explanation I can see is that, during his interactions with Roth, Fredo somehow came across Questadt. Then, after seeing him at the Hearings, Fredo put two and two together. While that information would have been useful to Michael, it does not mean that Fredo was in deeper with Roth than previously acknowledged and certainly doesn't mean that Fredo knew about Pentangeli and the perjury trap.

To clarify, are you saying that Michael should have been advised of Frankie's affidavit before Michael testified, or after? Even if this were an actual adversarial proceeding, Frankie's value only arises as a rebuttal witness to what Michael might say. The government wouldn't have to disclose his availability to possibly testify if Michael should happen to perjure himself on some undetermined subject.

Michael's subpoena would have been issued only after Pentangeli was deposed (of course, Cicci must have been deposed prior also). So, yes, their depositions should have been made available to Michael or Tom soon after the subpoena was issued.

Not so sure Oli. If Frankie's testimony was to impeach Michael his deposition or affidavit or whatever may have been allowed to be withheld.

Oli and LW:

Logic is on your side. There is no logical reason for Roth to have confided anything to Fredo other than what was required for him to betray Michael. But what we're shown and hear in II indicates otherwise:

--Fredo got out of Cuba and to NY in the same short timeframe that Michael got out and went to Vegas to meet with Tom, Rocco and Neri. Michael had a private plane, Fredo didn't.

--Despite being in Nevada the entire time Michael was away, Tom knew Roth had a stroke, recovered, got out of Cuba on a boat; the bodyguard was dead,and Fredo was in NY.

--Fredo knew the Feds had Pentangeli--and that Questadt belonged to Roth.

What that tells me is that Fredo told Tom about Roth's escape and the bodyguard; and that Fredo escaped Cuba on the same boat that rescued Roth. My conclusion is that he was in with Roth far deeper than he let on--for whatever (illogical) reason.

As for Fredo seeing Questadt with Roth:

Oli and LW: you probably recall an astute catch made by someone on this board: he spotted Questadt sitting behind Roth in Batista's meeting with US businessmen. Someone else posted one of many earlier scripts in which Questadt and Michael met in Cuba. It was dropped from the final cut, leading to the assumption that either FFC overlooked Questadt in that scene, or wanted to save money by not reshooting it (it was filmed in the Dominican Republic) and hoping nobody would notice Questadt in the scene. But: If Fredo had spotted Questadt with Roth, so would have Michael--in the same room with him.

It's immaterial because the Questadt/Michael meeting wasn't in the final cut. That's why I'm convinced thatFredo must have learned about Questadt from Roth or Ola.

The main reason why a defendant might be provided with a witness' statement is so that the defendant has a fair chance to prepare to rebut anything negative that is in it. The two major ways of doing this are cross-examination of the witness and the calling of the defendant's own witnesses to rebut the allegations. A Congressional hearing is a whole different sort of animal, and witnesses don't participate in this way.

Edit: A couple posts were made while I was typing. Apologies for any confusion.

Well, I tried to research Senate committee rules to no avail. All I can say for sure is that the committee would be investigative, able to subpoena witnesses and to swear witnesses. As far as it being an adversarial proceeding, it is probable that the committee's jurisdiction only extends to asking a federal judge to rule on a witness's possible perjury. I think it is unusual that a committee would target an individual. That being the case, Tom should have realized that the committee must have had what it believed was inculpatory evidence against Michael and for Michael to take the fifth regardless of Michael's desire to appear legitimate.

I basically agree with this. I think Michael's choices as counsel were limited to either Tom or a "mob lawyer," because any high-profile white collar guy would have advised him to take the Fifth.

Another possible reason: By having Tom appear as his counsel of record before the Committee, Tom could invoke client/attorney privilege. The FBI chart showed Tom as consigliere of the Corleone Family. He might have been called as a material witness if someone else had represented Michael.

All the motivation Neri needed to do ANYTHING was that it was what Michael wanted hime to do. This is clearly indicated in the 'hugging' scene, where the look on Neri's face indicated he would not enjoy killing Fredo...but it was Michael's order and it was what had to be done.

Apple - good to see you back. It's been a while!

This is exactly what i was thinking. Yes Neri would never refuse an order but you can tell Neri didn't like having to do it which for neri never happenes

Neri's expression was almost sad.