I have a news article from the day after his was hit. According to witnesses 2 cars were chasing Chuck Nicoletti's car and they ended up in a strip mall parking lot where the gunman got out and shot Chuckie. It mentioned that his car was left on and overheated while paramedics took him away. He didn't immediatly die. I think he died 6 hours later. My theory is that he was loyal to Mooney and the new faction of Aiuppa/Cerone had not use for a aging hitman.

I always thought that there was another person in the car with Chuck and did the job,but i never knew about two cars chasing him down.Thanks for the info

Last telephone call Nicoletti received was from Jimmy Marcello.

Where did you hear that?

In a newspaper article dated April 3, 1977, the Chicago Crime Commission indicated that Nicoletti MAY have been killed because he had terminal cancer and MIGHT have been prepared to say the wrong things to the right people.

Apparently he may also have been deep in narcotics.

Nicoletti had no cancer although the street thought he did because he was in the hospital for a couple of weeks in July. The word was the new faction used his possible ID in the Milwaukee thing as a reason to make him look weak combined with the Cancer rumor.

Plain and simple, he was in the way of bigger expansion by the young Turks, he was still dangerous, he lost his power and he was one of a few last true threats to Joe Batters if he flipped.

They looked at Louie the Mooch and Marcello as one of the shooters.

Last seen alive at Aurie's in Melrose.

Yeah, the purging was a given that I didn't mention. No doubt some of these guys were simply taken out because of their allegiance to a prior regime.

Appreciate the info about not having cancer. This one newspaper article was the only place I recall seeing anything about Nicoletti having a terminal illness.

Also about Louie "The Mooch" and Marcello.

Never heard of this before,thanks GaryMartin.Giancana and his underlings were known for distributing narcotics....

Also thanks to realnoname for the additional info

Here's the newspaper article. Hope you can get it to open.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19770403&id=nN8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=DKEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6226,869906

Thanks for the article

If the cancer was on his brain....maybe....if not i realy dont think that he was killed becase of that

hicago was involved in the kennedy plot by the way of jack ruby. he was told by Chicago to use his police connections to have Oswald killed. that way the police could frame him as the killer,tippit was going to kill Oswald, Oswald killed him instead. therefore ruby had to do it himself.carlos marcelllo,santos trafficante,moe giancana had kennedy murdered.

Who knows ?

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1977/...-of-mob-kingpin

I saw something on AHC about JFK that I hadn't seen. They had "evidence" that they had the hit in Chicago and he cancelled on the SS recommendation, then it was in Tampa and Trafficante called it off, and then Marcello got it done.

They showed basically the same setup as Dallas in downtown Chicaago on the route with the unattended open windows and I think the guy bolted and they found his weapons (4 hit man team).

Sorry I was 1/2 asleep. But it was something new.

I saw that show as well. It was very interesting.

The thing is that the FBI had bugs on the Mafia all over the country and not a single one even hinted at a connection to the JFK assassination. Most were shocked. Ralph Salerno went over this either before the Warren Commission or the HSCA. I went over to the National Archives in College Park around 2003 (years before Mary Ferrell put them up -- and are still incomplete) and went thru this material and more. The support for the Mafia conspiracy just wasn't there. A prisoner named James Files (real name Sutton) claimed to have been Nicoletti's driver. I've seen no evidence that he was, and I have maybe two hundred FBI files beside what's on the Mary Ferrell site. The guy's a hoaxer.

Bill Bonanno claimed that an attorney he knew named Roy Cohn, who was the investigator for the McCarthy hearings and later a criminal defense attorney for Carmine Galante, had incriminating photos of J. Edgar Hoover, and that's what kept him quiet. Ronald Kessler went thru all that and showed it was bogus and there were no photos. There was even a interview with Jimmy "Blue Eyes" Alo in a Miami paper and he was asked about that. He said if Lansky had photos (that's the other claim), then why did the FBI investigate and harass him so much? He said there were no photos.

Another source for all this is "Double Deal" by Sam and Chuck Giancana. Sam is the son of the late Chuck Giancana, and Chuck was the Outfit boss's brother. Chuck WAS a made member, but I think that Sam the nephew probably embellished what his father told him. Or else Chuck was a story teller, or Sam the boss told his younger brother embellished stories. The book is vague where it should be clear and sometimes the timelines are off. Most of it consists of Chuck's claims, but Sam didn't write the book as a question and answer dialogue, he changed his father's telling into an exciting story meant to sell books, and I'm not sure if any facts got lost in the process. It's a very different style than what Ovid Demaris did with Jimmy Fratianno. Demaris put Fratianno's words in quotes and when he needed to provide background it was clear it was separate. That wasn't the case in Sam Giancana's book.

faithful 1 the house assinations committee in 1979 said there was clear evidence of organized crime involvent in the killing of jfk. now that you can check on, there were fbi wiretaps that concluded that o.c. was involved. namely Marcello, trafficante, and giancana. oswalds uncle worked for Marcello, his name was I think dutz. Marcello was deeply involved.

as far as hoover denying there was a mafia, of course they had something on him. he gave them all a pass. the fbi only went after lansky after hoover was dead. in died in 1972.hoover was responsible for the growth of the mob,he refused to investigate them , and he never bothered the klan in the south either, as long as he was the head of the fbi. under hoover the fbi was a political organization not a crime fighting organization. all the time and energy was spent going after a handful of commies, j. edgar hoover was the biggest fraud in American history.

I looked into the actual House Assassinations Committee evidences at the National Archives. I looked at the wiretaps. The evidence isn't there.

As for Hoover, you're wrong on both points. The FBI under Hoover did an investigation in the 1940s called "Re-Investigation of the Capone Gang" until it was shut down by the attorney general. There was limited investigation until Apalachin in December 1957, then he believed that the Mafia was a national problem and authorized all those bugs. Who do you think handled Joe Valachi and Greg Scarpa? The FBI. The FBI under Hoover also investigated the Mississippi Burning case (the one where they used Scarpa to put the fear of God into a Klansman).

Ok,so what about all the politicans that were murdered by the mob throughout the years and other state officals?What about all of the CIA connections and plots?What about all of the corruption?What aboout all of the voting frauds?In the past special prosecutors reported details of voter intimidation,murder,kidnappings.After all of these examples of mob violence,murder,frauds,secret plots and corruption over government officals,i think that the entire mob in general,took a part in the JFK election and also assassination.

The same tactics were used even before,with the Cermak situation.Zangara was an anarchist and had mental problems,blah,blah,blah and thats why he wanted to kill the president but instead he killed Cermak?!I mean common,thats bollocks.It was written "MAFIA" all over it.After that Zangara was executed after 10 days without any real investigation.(Does this remind you of some1?)Corrupt politicans usually get killed by the mob and Cermak was corrupt.I have the same opnion about JFk but later he changed his mind(or maybe his brother became the problem) and that was the end of him and Oswald was publicly executed in a very fast time period

All of Hoovers operations were bollocks.He didnt go after the mob for real.Bobby Kennedy went after the mob for real.

I dont belive in national archives so much,they provide you with the informations that they think you should be provided with.I look at the examples throughout the history and i form my own opinion.Why do you think that they will provide you with the real infos and all of the wiretaps?Maybe a lot of government people would be implicated in the situation right?!Think outside the box

If you belive your government,than"there was no voting frauds","there was no conspiracy in the assassination","Oswald acted alone" and "Ruby killed Oswald out of patriotism"

Sorry but i dont belive in any government.And thats because street criminals,and organized crime in general,are the governments heritage and they use them for many favours and own greedy purposes.The government,the secret intelegence agencies know that with control over organized crime,they also control the lives of countless people around the countries.So the criminals expect something in return and if they dont get it,than theres a problem.

Okay, so your an anarchist. You can believe in what you want about the government. I'm about seeking out the best evidence without jumping to conclusions, especially about some tin-foil hat conspiracy. Sometimes conspiracies are real, like the conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln, but there has to be evidence for them.

Yes, the Outfit has murdered all kinds of politicians and state officials. The Outfit has engaged in voter fraud...and murder...and bribery...and corruption. Nevertheless it's quite a leap from that to killing a President.

Hoover did go after the Mob for real starting in 1958. Convictions were hard to come by until the application of RICO laws in the 1980s and the Witness Protection Program. Why testify if they're going to kill you or your family? Even newspapers were part of the problem because they used to give out the names and addresses of jurors, leaving them vulnerable.

It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe in the government, it has to do with evidence. Until you visit the National Archives and go through their materials, and other archives around the country, you shouldn't be so quick to criticize. I already stated I know voter fraud exists, so don't put words in my mouth. If you want to convince people, show them the evidence and present a logical, reasonable case, just like they do in courts across the world everyday. I've gone out of my way to look at as much original evidence as possible and I've got an open mind, I suggest you do the same.

Im not an anarchist...or maybe i am i dunno know.Just because i dont belive in some governments that doesnt make me an anarchist.And belive me i dont jump to conclusions.I grew up with the idea that there was no conspiracy but when i started to research the mob i had to change my mind.Because "where there's smoke there's fire" and to refresh your memory it means that if something looks wrong then it probably is wrong.



There,you just gave yourself an answer and belive me its not a "quite a leap".Just see what happend before JFK.Hisotry repeats its self quite often.



Sorry if i offended your opinion but what the hell i disagree with you on this one and im not tryin to put words in your mouth.I dont criticize you because i respect you as a decent researcher but you dont have an opened mind because you need a document paper wich has to be written by a government offical.What if the government was invloved in the hit?You think that they will give you an honest answer? So untill theres a strong evidence about your claims,my opnion stays closer to the truth.For example,its like you know that the guy next to you is a criminal but you dont have a real evidence,but you just know it that hes the one...you feeling me?!

EDIT:But in the end,as Jack Ruby once said in front of the cameras,"The world will never know the true facts...."

Yet even after RICO was introduced, people like Gambino, Lombardo, Accardo, Magaddino were never hit by it. The government and law enforcement waited until the really powerful figures died out a natural death. They started to fight the mafia only after most of the characters with really gigantic connections were dead.

But why do you say Toodoped is an anarchist?

It wasn't like the entire mafia would have been informed about it. If they did kill Kennedy, only a few bosses who were involved would have known. The FBI didn't bug every conversation and if there were conspirators, they wouldn't be sitting at their regular hangout chatting about it.

James Files being a liar doesn't prove anything. Tony the Greek Frankos claimed to have killed Jimmy Hoffa and buried him under Giants Stadium. That was a hoax. Does that mean the mafia didn't kill Hoffa?

It's still a mystery what happened. The files are still sealed. Ruby wasn't a fan of Kennedy, so why would he kill Oswald? Why did Oswald claim to be a patsy? Why would Ruby accept the hit on Oswald and end up dying in prison for the mob? Why did 12 policemen storm a movie theater to arrest a man for sneaking into a show when the president was just murdered? Wouldn't they be out looking for the person who just killed the president? At the time, he wasn't a suspect in the murder of either the cop or the president. Lots of things don't make sense.

Because he doesn't believe every story the government tells us. We all know the government would never lie, magic bullets and all. LOL

No, it's because he wrote this:


It's one thing to say that you have reasons not to trust your government, or that you're skeptical of it, it's quite another to say "I don't believe in ANY government." That's anarchism, unless he didn't pick the best words to express what he really meant.

You're right that the FBI didn't bug every boss, but they did place several strategically placed bugs in Chicago which is relevant since most of the conspiracy theorists believe that Chicago was the group behind it (along with Marcello and Trafficante). That's how the FBI found out about the Commission, through a bug that recorded a conversation between Accardo and Giancana.

BTW, have any of you read Vincent Bugliosi's book on the JFK assassination? It deals with just about every possible question about it.

Now whos putting words in other poeples mouths?I showed you respect and now you r the one being disrespectful.Just because i didnt agreed with your opinion that doesnt give you the right to offend me.@mulberry gave you a good sarcastic answer and that was,i dont believe in every story that the government tells us.In other words im not like you.THere you prooved yourself to us again.You are talking about a Deputy District Attorney who wrote total bullshit.A guy who defends the findings of the Warren Commission and states that Oswald acted alone...just another government puppet who jerks it off in the national archives...or in other words someone just like you.

Im goin to say it again,im not an anarchist,becase i do belive in some forms of government.I always vote and i also went in the army.But sorry for not beliveing in your government and opinions.I bet you feel pride when being able to say that you once shook a senators hand or saw the president in person and than you become shocked when the occasional sane person states that the political crooks and government puppets wrote something down and declared it as the truth.So dont try to poison our minds,please.

Oh and also please stay away from the Outfit's history because when i asked you about some early infos on Paul Ricca,you quoted wikkipedia.THats so shameful because it came from an alleged writer about the early mafia.Stick to your research about the early NY mob because you r realy good at it.Im not being sarcastic,im showing you respect because you r really good about the early NY mob...ofcourse with the help of few other guys.

And yeah...if you wanna learn about whats anarchism go and read a book from Peter Kropotkin for example.Expand your mind a little bit peace!

Don't get mad because I quoted your own words to you. I copied and pasted what you wrote, and you wrote that you don't believe in ANY government. Now you say you believe in SOME governments.

The rest of your attack screed just makes up stuff I don't believe. You said I believe everything the government tells us. I don't and never did. Maybe it makes you feel better to create straw man arguments, but I might be just a little less skeptical than you are. I said I didn't see the evidence for a Mafia committed JFK assassination conspiracy. It doesn't mean I said it's not possible for there to have been one, just that it has to be proven. Big claims require Big proof. Because I said that you get all crazy and write stuff about me shaking hands with a senator or something (which I've never done). You go from a JFK conspiracy to a conspiracy about ME!! LOL!!! I almost feel privileged to be the source of a conspiracy. I can join the ranks of the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the British monarchy, uh, who else...the Rothschilds...hmm...the JEWS! And I thought I was just a rank and file state employee and former union rep and part-time researcher and writer. What little did I know.

Thanks for the half-compliment about my writings. It seems your only familiar with the most recent article. I suggest you read some of the previous issues. Did a lengthy one on Lucky Luciano (actually about a hoax book on him) in a previous issue that I'm quite proud of. You might also like some of my articles on early Boston or Los Angeles.

On Ricca, I didn't get my info from Wikipedia. I've done a few Wikipedia contributions before, but too many people who know little about anything can mess up accurate articles. Some of the Wiki articles have plagiarized material from my articles without attribution. I know you like to write about Chicago. The thing is, I'm working on something on Chicago and I can't give away the farm. You might even like it once it comes out, but I'm kind of OCD about it and it is already quite thick and detailed. Plus I cite my sources. I'm doing it with a published author and we're working as a team.

Finally, who go through all the trouble of denying that you're an anarchist then recommend I read Peter Kropotkin -- the famous Russian anarchist? You're trying to mess with my head, right? I think he assumes an altruism in human nature that isn't real. I think selfishness is more natural and to overcome that natural instinct we have to yield to a Higher Power. Murray Rothbard is considered a right-anarchist as opposed to Kropotkin's being a left-anarchist, but I wonder if they meet in the middle somewhere. Peace be to you too, Toodoped. Goodnight, Gracie.

I dont know what you dont undertsand when i say "ANY government"?!I thought i gave you an explenation and yes it means i belive in some governments but not the one that you belive in.Every government around the world has its own politics.Are you tryin to confuse me or your just playin stupid i dont know?!




Ahhh you little devil you You say that "I said I didn't see the evidence for a Mafia committed JFK assassination conspiracy. It doesn't mean I said it's not possible for there to have been one, just that it has to be proven." oh really?and after that you recomend a book that clearly says that theres no mob involvment...geeshhh



I hope you r not in a situation by making DNA tests on your kids just to see if they are yours



Now you are changing the subject again buddy.Just by calling be an anarchist,for nothing,it makes you a government puppet.JUst because i said something anti-government and objected on your opinion that doesnt give you the right to give me names and stuff.And if you feel privileged to be in a government conspiracy and involved in murder...well than you are not a good person.But you can dream about what ever you want



It was not a half-comliment,it was a full compliment and i really mean it.I know who you work with and if you got offended just by mentioning the guys,well than fuck it



Cant wait to read your Chicago article.Good luck on your work and i hope youll show some new and unknown infos.



I recomended Kropotkin because you obviosly dont know what anarchism is and belive me im not tryin to mess with your head.That statement is just another changing of the subject or as you say"putting words in my mouth".And sorry but i dont think that selfishness is a natural way of life(are you going to fight with me about this also?).But fuck this dick measuring contest,lets agree to disagree,ok buddy?!Goodnight to you 2 and i hope someday youll wake up from your "dream" cheers

@toodoped: Let's do the agree to disagree thing. You get a little too sensitive at my humor. Maybe you need some better dope. They got all kinds of dispensaries here in California and I think Berkeley just passed a law making it free to all who can't afford weed. Might want to check it out.