The Milwaukee family is also grossly underestimated. Even though there hasn't been a mob case there since the 1980's, they're still going strong under the radar.

See what I did there?

It's easy to make claims, especially on the internet. Providing demonstrable evidence is another matter. But believe what you want.

And someone like Scott B. hasn't given demonstrable evidence?

I'll start with my disclaimer once again. I like Scott. He's long provided a lot of good info about Detroit over on the Real Deal forum. And he's always been cordial, even when we've disagreed. But that said, to answer your question, no he really hasn't. At least nothing beyond anecdotal information he passes on.

Over the past 5 years his charts on the family have changed a number of times. And, to a point, that's understandable because an LCN family chart will likely never be 100%. But if you take his charts at face value, there's over 50 members still in Detroit. And not only does this conflict with FBI estimates from 15 years ago which had the family at no more than 30, Scott has said himself he's not 100% sure every name on those charts is made. He also talks about rumors of there being a few making ceremonies in recent years, but again that's anecdotal, and it's unlikely the family would be able to almost double in size even with adding additional members.

Then there's the problem of discernible activity. If the Detroit family had as much of a presence and was as active as he claims, one would think there would be more evidence of it. At least comparable to New England, New Jersey, or Philadelphia. But there's been only one significant case involving the family over the past decade - a gambling case involving about 15 people in 2006. Before that you have to go back to the mid 1990's when Tocco and several other top guys were indicted.

Do I think the mob in Detroit is entirely defunct? No. But it's a safe bet it doesn't have more than a couple dozen members at most at this point and doesn't have a whole lot of activity beyond the standard bookmaking and loansharking. It's not this powerhouse family thriving under the radar that some believe it to be.

I agree to you're arguments. I don't know that much about Detroit, but I assume that Scott B. (who I believe can be called a Detroit mob expert) knows his stuff.

40-50 members is about as much as Philly, and there's a lot of news about Philly in recent years up until now. Unless the Detroit mob has mastered their efforts to keep under the radar, I think it's unlikely they have over 40 members, probably less.

But you know at least as well as I do that the FBI isn't always accurate and clear about its estimations too. A good example is the Outfit. Over the years they have given various estimations about the Outfit's size ranging from 50 to 25.

Are you Ontario?

Does Tocco have an Underboss or close confidant? Is there a named administration?

No he`s not me If I have something to say to IVyLeague I will say it I Don`t hide behind strawmen But MR BArrett I see how u thought that as he capitalizes alot which also did before

It's not that Scott doesn't know his stuff when it comes to Detroit. It's that he, in my opinion, succumbs so the same thing other authors do when they tend to "hype" their subjects. It's why Lamothe and Humphreys called the Rizzutos the "Sixth Family." It's why Volkman referred to the Lucchese family in his book Gangbusters as the "crown jewel" of the Mafia, even though they never were.

And the Detroit family somehow figuring out a way to avoid law enforcement is another convenient excuse that some have used. As if Tocco and Company are smarter and sneakier than the other families. Of course, going along that same line of thinking, one could argue that the same applies to Kansas City, or Pittsburgh, or Los Angeles. Heck, the Dallas mob must really be a slippery bunch. No news from them since the 1960's.

My point being that more activity usually means more indictments. Less activity means less indictments. Two significant cases in Detroit over the last 15 years should tell people all the need to know. But there will always be a certain group who want to believe there is still a strong family in Detroit or wherever. So they go on wishful thinking more than demonstrable facts.

This is a little bit off-topic, but now you mention it, do you also think that Tommy Lucchese was the top boss others on the real deal forum make him out to be? Just curious.

Lucchese had quite a bit of political clout himself (comparable to Costello) and his family was pretty diversified for being one of the smaller NY ones but I don't think he was ever the top boss.

but he had been around way before gambino and gambino would n ot have been capo di tutti capi without luchese`s support and intermarriage had Luchese sided with bonanno and profaci gambino would never have lasted

luchese was not the top boss but he was def a strong 3rd. back in those days the bonnano's and colombo's were def back seat to the luchese family.

In the 1960s they probably were.

yeah back when tommy luchese was running things.