Interesting news paper article about the beef between Vito and Frank and how Frank saved Vitos life in prison,according to George Wolf,Franks lawyer....

http://books.google.mk/books?id=JugCAAAA...own&f=false

I don´t know, perhaps it´s hairsplitting, but there are holes in George Wolfe´s story. If you read the story carefully, he claims this incident happened in 1958 but Vito Genovese was not in Atlanta Penitentiary at that time. He wasn´t sent there until after his conviction in 1960. A typo? I really don´t think so. It´s more likely that Wolf enlarged his involvement in order to sell more books.

However, there was some kind of a reconsiliation between Genovese and Costello. The two of them compared notes (according to an informant) and discovered that they had been used by Tony Bender, Vito Genovese´s right hand man. Bender had apparently attempted to pit Genovese and Costello against eachother by creating discord and distrust for the purpose of gaining power within the Genovese Family. According to the same informant, this was the reason why Tony Bender was killed.

I found this article also a lil bit suspicious cuz the whole article sounds like Wolf is protecting the image of Frank Costello...maybe as you said Wolf is tryin to sell more books or this is just another example of how Frank used to bring the image as more of a robin hood gangster than a cold blooded killer...I dont belive the story that Frank saved Vitos life in prison,but on the other end Vito fucked it all up with the Apalachin meeting and the conflict with Costello,he even failed to kill him and thouse are just some of the reasons why some of the mobsters hated Genovese...who knows...

I think there was an FBI document or two that said the same thing, so it wasn't just Wolf claiming this. I believe even Valachi said it.

thanks for this toodoped

Yes, interesting post. Thank you!

Instead of starting a new thread, I'll bump this one up....

I've always been really confused about this story. I read the book years ago, but couldn't figure out why the inmates wanted to hurt Vito. There isn't a popular theory that Genovese set up Costello with the IRS. If anything, you'd figure the inmates would have been mad about the murder attempt on Frank, which most authorities at the time attributed to Genovese.

Either way, why would the black/hispanic/non connected prisoners care about the beef between Costello and Genovese?

Also, what would the photo have done? And why send the photo to NYC?

I forgot to get back to this, but with respect to Hairy Knuckles, Costello surrendered to serve his tax sentence in Atlanta on October 21, 1958, and remained there until 1961. On June 21, 1961 he finished his term at Atlanta and was driven to serve a 15-day contempt sentence at Rikers Island. Genovese was convicted of narcotics trafficking on April 17, 1959, but was free on appeal. He lost the appeal on January 12, 1960. So from around January 13, 1960 to June 21, 1961, Costello and Genovese were in Atlanta together.

The FBI account of their meeting his here: https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=981009

Thank you Faithful. This clearly shows that Costello and Genovese were not in Atlanta together in 1958, something that Wolf claims. I´m usually skeptical about any article´s truthfulness when the phrase "boss of bosses" is used in connection with any other boss than Morello, D´Aquila, Masseria, Messina and Maranzano. I can´t help to think that when it is, the phrase is used only for selling purposes. And the phrase is used numerous of times in the article. However, I´m not dissing the article Toddo posted as a whole, which I believe is an excerpt from Wolf´s book. He did have a close working relationship with Costello and he did know Costello well. But he was certainly looking to cash in by using sensationalism when writing the book. And who can blame him?

It's hard to tell which words came from Wolf and which came from Joseph DiMona, the writer. Can more easily see DiMona adding the "boss of bosses" phrase more than Wolf. I think it's very possible the story happened, just that the date was off by a year or two. For people writing many years after the event it's very common. After all, how many of us can remember what we ate for breakfast yesterday?

I think the story, or a version of it, happened too. There was some kind of reconciliation between the two of them just like it says in the document you posted. But Wolf´s part in this reconciliation (and of course this is just my opinion) may have been embellished and/or enlarged to make the book sell better. If he´s wrong on the year of when he set up the meeting between the two of them, there is a possibility he is wrong on other stuff in the story as well.

I just like to comment shortly on the memory thing. It is easier to remember a big event that happened, let´s say, ten years ago than what you had for dinner a week ago. Because dinners are a daily occurence. It´s a daily, natural routine. Big events like the one in this case, setting up a reconciliation meeting between two of the most powerful mobsters in US history, is not.

I liked the part of the article where it said Costello had all the politicians and Judges he helped put in office sign an undated resignation letter which he kept. Then when that Judge Mancuso got on Franks shitlist Costello's people turned in Mancuso's resignation without him even knowing about it. When the press asked him about it he didn't have a clue. Then he fled to Florida and promised Frank he was "going away and never coming back".

Agreed on people recalling big events better than smaller ones. The key is how significant it was to the person doing the remembering. It was probably important to him, which is how this story got out. But even remembering the details of the event is different than recalling when it happened. A person may recall a childhood accident in vivid detail, but when asked when it happened will not be able to give an exact answer. So the chronology and history of the event may be off, but the details could be correct. However there's always perception. People see things through their eyes perceived by their life experiences.

We could take the example of the so-called "Pax Bonanno," the peace that Joe Bonanno claimed he helped maintain between the shooting of Frank Costello and the killing of Albert Anastasia. This was only a matter of months, but the way he remembered it, it stretched out to two years. Because of his position people didn't correct him when he made a mistake so his perception clouded his memory. I know Bonanno lied at times, was self-serving, etc. In this case I think his perception affected his recall. Most people aren't trained to think like historians or detectives and have little sense of chronology. If it wasn't for his interest in history he wouldn't have put out his autobiography at all.

I always had a question about the Pax Bonanno. There isn't an existing thread, so I'll post it here....

IIRC, from A Man of Honor, one of the commission meetings was held to have Tommy Lucchese defend himself against the charges from Albert Anastasia. Supposedly, Anastasia had solid evidence that Lucchese had ordered him murdered. Lucchese was over a barrel and clammed up. Joe Bonanno helped to broker a peace between Anastasia and Lucchese- in other words, Anastasia gave him a pass. Wasn't this part of the Pax Bonanno?

If my memory is accurate above, why hasn't Lucchese's murder plot received more attention by the media and crime historians?

No one's written a book on the Lucchese's during that time period.

Good post. I would like to say though that for example, music to me is an excellent time reference for my memory. Name a song from the 1980s, and I will be able to tell you (by only using my memory) exactly what year the song came out. That´s because of my great interest in 1980s pop/rock music. But for the life of me, I can not remember what I had for dinner last tuesday...



The "Pax Bonanno" lasted from the time of the assassination attempt of Frank Costello til the murder of Anastasia.

I agree with what others have said about why memory can be hazy about dates and details.

I'd also like to add to that that in the world these guys live in, days and months really blend together because their lives aren't structured around dates the way the average person is. These guys are living scheme to scheme, constantly dealing with beefs, sitdowns and the daily hassles of being a criminal. One day they may have to meet someone at 10 am, the next day they're off doing something at 3 am. A lot of standard time just blends together. They'll remember things around seasons, whether it happened in summer or around christmas because those backdrops are ubiquitous (if it's summer, you can't avoid the weather telling you that it is summer. at christmas there's christmas decorations everywhere in the city). Their lives are not structured around common time, so I think it's understandable they often don't have dates. Most of the books the only time you get actual dates is from court records and police notes. It's very rare that the gangsters actually recall exactly when something happened.

Agreed. And these mobsters don´t keep/take notes or keep a diary. I think the authors who are writing about rats and their life stories go carefully through a lot of research (police records, FBI files, newspaper clippings etc) to get the dates and stories right.

Coming into this cold, I too read the article and agree with the suspicion stated here. That said, Hairy Knuckles does a terrific job dissecting the authenticity of statement.

I agree. The only authors worth reading do anyway. That's why I won't get any of philip carlo's books or anyone else with a less than savory reputation for accuracy and accountability.