563

1 OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER

2 LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA

3

4 IN RE: )

5 TRUSTEESHIP PROCEEDINGS ) No. 97-30T

6 CHICAGO DISTRICT COUNCIL )

7

8

9

10 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS had in the

11 above-entitled cause at the Midland Hotel, 172

12 West Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois, on the 18th

13 day of July, A.D. 1997, at 9:06 a.m.

14

15

16 BEFORE: MR. PETER F. VAIRA, Hearing Officer

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

_

564

1 PRESENT:

2

3 COMEY, BOYD & LUSKIN,

4 (1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.,

5 Washington, D.C. 20007-5243), by:

6 MR. ROBERT M. THOMAS, JR.,

7 MR. DWIGHT P. BOSTWICK,

8 appeared on behalf of the GEB Attorney;

9

10 CARMELL, CHARONE, WIDMER, MATHEWS & MOSS,

11 LTD.,

12 (225 West Washington Street, Suite 1000,

13 Chicago, Illinois 60606), by:

14 MR. SHERMAN CARMELL,

15 MR. MARTIN P. BARR,

16 appeared on behalf of the Chicago

17 District Council of Laborers.

18

19 ALSO PRESENT:

20 MS. CHERYL MARQUARDT

21

22 REPORTED BY: MARY KAY BELCOLORE, CSR, RPR.

23 CORINNE T. MARUT, CSR, RPR.

24

_

565

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I believe

2 that you are going to cross-examine agent

3 O'Rourke.

4 MR. CARMELL: Yes, Mr. Vaira. The last item

5 we had was, you were going to consider our motions

6 for --

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Subpoena duces tecum.

8 MR. CARMELL: Right.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: And for all the

10 O'Rourke documents, that is in effect notes and

11 work papers.

12 And you also want to request

13 certain -- well, you didn't name them, but we

14 pretty much can figure out who they are -- all the

15 nonconfidential witnesses that he spoke to.

16 Nature of this proceeding is that this

17 is a trusteeship. And it's far less formal than

18 even the disciplinary matter. And the

19 disciplinary matters, the subpoenaing of the

20 records, is not, it just isn't permitted. To do

21 that would make this some sort of another

22 proceeding.

23 In reference to the Teamsters, I once

24 represented the Teamsters in the takeover of an

_

566

1 organization in Philadelphia. And the hearings

2 are very short. And this is almost the nature of

3 a probable cause type of a hearing.

4 And so the discovery, even though it

5 might be helpful, and even though it might be

6 desirable, is not generally found in these type of

7 proceedings. And I'll deny your motion.

8 JOHN J. O'ROURKE,

9 called as a witness herein, having been previously

10 duly sworn and having testified, was examined and

11 testified further as follows:

12 CROSS-EXAMINATION

13 BY MR. CARMELL:

14 Q. Mr. O'Rourke --

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. -- you remember Exhibits 44 and 45,

17 which are the Spingola information, and the

18 Spingola jury verdicts of guilty?

19 A. Yes, sir, I do.

20 Q. Are you, were you aware when you

21 testified that the conviction had been reversed by

22 the Seventh Circuit?

23 A. No, sir, I was not.

24 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Vaira, I would like to have

_

567

1 you take judicial notice of United States versus

2 Spingola, 464 Fed.2nd, 909, Seventh Circuit, 1972,

3 reversing the convictions.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: The issue, underlying

5 issue in that case was the willful, willful

6 nonfiling of LM2 reports. There was no doubt, I

7 don't think the Circuit Court changed the fact

8 that the LM2s were not filed.

9 I remember that case, because they

10 attempted to file them after we brought the,

11 brought the charges. Yes, it was reversed. But

12 if the case can be held for anything, there is an

13 indication that that particular union hadn't filed

14 LM2s for something like twelve years. That didn't

15 change the reversal of the conviction.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Mr. Vaira, we would stipulate

17 to the admission of that document. It basically

18 says what it says.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll accept that. I

20 don't know on what grounds it was. I know it

21 didn't change the underlying -- it might have gone

22 into willfulness, some area. I think that was

23 tried in front of Judge Hoffman, Julius Hoffman.

24 Do you have a copy of that opinion?

_

568

1 MR. CARMELL: I do.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'd be curious to

3 glance at it.

4 MR. CARMELL: Sure. I saw no need to put it

5 in the record, since you can get it.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: I can read it too. But

7 let me just read it, okay?

8 Anyway, we will move on, and I mean,

9 I'll note it. I'll take acceptance, and we note

10 that that case has been reversed.

11 MR. CARMELL: Will you also note that

12 Mr. Spignola was never retried on those charges?

13 There is nothing in the record to show that he was

14 ever retried.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Carmell, I think

16 that's probably right. I don't know. I am pretty

17 sure that he was not retried.

18 MR. CARMELL: In reference to what you were

19 saying concerning the case, Mr. Vaira, the fact

20 that one does not file is not a violation of the

21 statutes. It's required of willful violation.

22 What was introduced here was

23 information and a conviction and it was to show,

24 obviously, that Mr. Spignola had been indicted --

_

569

1 charged on an information and convicted of a

2 violation of Lanham-Griffin and that was

3 reversed. He hasn't been retried.

4 Everybody can draw whatever inferences

5 they want from that.

6 BY MR. CARMELL:

7 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, I want to begin with

8 Exhibit 49, which is the 302 from Gerald H.

9 Scarpelli.

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. I want to review with you so we'll know

12 the circumstances which gave rise to the 302 in

13 July of 1988.

14 Mr. Scarpelli was arrested by the FBI

15 for being a felon in possession of a firearm, is

16 that correct?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And Mr. Scarpelli had a very long

19 history of convictions and incarcerations, isn't

20 that correct?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And Mr. Scarpelli faced an

23 extraordinarily long sentence -- strike that --

24 faced a long sentence for conviction for being a

_

570

1 convicted felon in possession of a firearm, isn't

2 that correct?

3 A. He faced conviction and imprisonment,

4 yes, sir.

5 Q. And before that time Mr. Scarpelli had

6 been a partner of James Peter Basile, Duke Basile,

7 is that correct?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And Basile had had a wire at that time

10 while they were running together as partners, is

11 that correct?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. And Scarpelli was unaware that Basile

14 had had a wire, is that correct?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And up to that point Scarpelli had not

17 been a cooperating witness with the Federal Bureau

18 of Investigation, is that correct?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. So, the information that came from the

21 302 was the first time, to your knowledge, sir,

22 that Mr. Scarpelli had given any information to

23 the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

24 A. Yes, sir.

_

571

1 Q. Now, under the FBI's criteria,

2 Mr. Scarpelli's statement would not give rise to

3 him being able to identify a made member of the

4 mob, is that correct?

5 A. No, sir, that's not correct.

6 Q. All right. Let me read to you and see

7 if this is a correct statement of your testimony

8 on page 232 of July 16.

9 They would have to be proven, reliable

10 informants and individuals, is that a criteria?

11 A. That's one of them, yes, sir.

12 Q. Who are in fact themselves involved in

13 organized crime, identifiable organized crime

14 activities that have inside information, is that

15 correct?

16 A. That would apply to Mr. Scarpelli, that

17 portion of it, yes, sir.

18 Q. A portion would apply to him?

19 A. Yes, sir. He is a member of organized

20 crime. He was an insider. He was a hit man and

21 he was an enforcer and he had talked with Peter

22 Basile, James Peter Basile, on a number of

23 occasions. There were recordings and then he

24 confirmed what we already knew from the recordings

_

572

1 and from Basile.

2 Q. But with respect to what Mr. Scarpelli

3 was telling you concerning the organization of

4 organized crime, which is the first nine pages of

5 the 302, Mr. Scarpelli in July of 1988 had not

6 provided proven, reliable -- been a proven,

7 reliable informant, is that correct?

8 A. Prior to that, he had not, no, sir.

9 Q. All right.

10 A. But the information he provided was

11 already known in most part and had been confirmed

12 through recordings, had been confirmed through

13 debriefing of Mr. Basile. So --

14 Q. Sorry. I understand that,

15 Mr. O'Rourke. Mr. Scarpelli himself in July of

16 1988 had not then up to that time been a proven,

17 reliable informant; he had never been an

18 informant?

19 A. That's correct, he was not an

20 informant.

21 Q. He was not an informant. Now, is it

22 also true, as an example, that two informants, for

23 instance, who would be reporting on cartage thiefs

24 and would not have access would not be acceptable,

_

573

1 is that correct?

2 A. The weight would not be given to them

3 if it was just their word out of the blue unless

4 there was other information that in fact they had

5 been talking with a member of organized crime or a

6 relative or there were some other factors.

7 The fact that somebody is a bartender

8 in a tavern where mobsters go and so on, all of

9 those things are weighed and the information

10 provided is then weighted in that regard. That

11 was an example, yes, sir.

12 Q. That was an example. Mr. O'Rourke, the

13 testimony I am reading from you was in respect to

14 a question that the Hearing Officer asked you and

15 I am reading to you what you said.

16 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I have a page number on

17 this?

18 MR. CARMELL: 232, as I can see.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: On which day?

20 MR. CARMELL: July 16.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: 233?

22 MR. CARMELL: Yes.

23 BY MR. CARMELL:

24 Q. Now, let's go to your testimony of

_

574

1 yesterday. I'd like you to take a look at General

2 Executive Board Attorney Exhibits 97 and 98.

3 Now, Exhibit 97 is part of a

4 transcription of a tape. Do you know the date

5 that that was taken?

6 A. No, sir. It was not on the document.

7 So I do not know.

8 Q. I want you to look at Exhibit 98. The

9 earliest of those tabs is, says a date of

10 transcription of 2/19/83. Do you see that, sir,

11 up in the upper right --

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. -- first tab. And if you look through

14 it, I think we'll confirm that that's the earliest

15 of the dates of the transcriptions.

16 A. Well, that's the date of the typing of

17 the document.

18 Q. All right.

19 A. The date of the interview was on the

20 lower left, sir.

21 Q. Right. But if you will -- all right.

22 Using the lower left, I think you'll find, sir,

23 that that tab A has the earliest date dictated,

24 and the earliest investigation date. What I'm

_

575

1 just trying to do is just get the gist.

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Now, using a reference of tab A to

4 Exhibit 98, can you tell me whether tab A came

5 before Exhibit 97 or after Exhibit 97?

6 A. I do not know, sir. I was not present.

7 Q. From looking at it, and based on your

8 testimony, that 97 was what has been called I

9 think sometimes the deathbed, the deathbed tape.

10 Would it seem logical to you that 98 -- wait,

11 strike that.

12 Mr. Eto became a cooperating witness

13 only after he was shot, is that correct?

14 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

15 Q. And at the time that 97 was taken, he

16 was on what the FBI at least thought might be his

17 deathbed, correct? He had just been shot?

18 A. He had just been shot. And they, it

19 was explained to me that the reason that they

20 taped the interviews was that they were, there was

21 some concern that he might not survive. And so

22 that's why they did it.

23 Q. So it's fair to say that Exhibit 98,

24 which are 302s, came after 97?

_

576

1 A. I don't know when 97 was taken, sir.

2 But you're probably right. Again, I have no idea

3 on the dates. I'm sorry. I wasn't there.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think that the logic

5 flows, Mr. O'Rourke, looking at that. We can be

6 wrong. But that is a logical conclusion you can

7 derive from that.

8 MR. CARMELL: I would think, sir, that it's

9 either contemporaneously, that is, they took the

10 tape and maybe in the same day or next day, but it

11 just seems logical if they thought he was dying

12 and did the tape, and then go to a 302

13 transcription, that it must have been subsequent.

14 All right.

15 BY MR. CARMELL:

16 Q. Now, I want to go through with you, Mr.

17 O'Rourke, matters which you testified to

18 concerning the named and confidential informants.

19 And I want to begin with Rich Mara.

20 Rich Mara was, according to your

21 testimony, a member of, a former member of the

22 26th Street crew, is that correct?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. And what was the last year in which

_

577

1 Mr. Mara had been a member of the 26th Street

2 crew?

3 A. He was interviewed in approximately

4 1980, and he had been arrested in Florida sometime

5 before that. So I'm not exactly sure.

6 It would have been sometime probably in

7 the late 1970s when he was still in the

8 neighborhood.

9 Q. So that Mr. Mara's firsthand knowledge

10 of the operation of the 26th Street crew would

11 have ended sometime, let's say, in the late '70s,

12 or possibly early 1980s?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. Now, Mr. Mara gave a 302, which is

15 Exhibit 46, dated 7/29/80, which is in evidence.

16 Do you recall that one?

17 A. Yes, sir, I do, Mr. Carmell.

18 Q. Now, in that 302 there is no mention of

19 Bruno Caruso, is there?

20 A. Not that I recall, no, sir.

21 Q. And there is no mention of Leo Caruso,

22 is there?

23 A. Not that I recall.

24 Q. And there is no mention of John

_

578

1 Matassa, is there?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. Now, looking at the 26th Street crew

4 listing which is on Exhibit 163, Bruno Caruso and

5 Leo Caruso are on there as members of the 26th

6 Street crew, is that correct?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: I believe it reads "Select

9 Members and Associates" on there.

10 BY MR. CARMELL:

11 Q. I should say -- thank you. They are

12 under the rubric of 26th Street crew as being a

13 member or an associate of that crew?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Is that a fair statement, sir?

16 A. Yes, sir.

17 Q. All right. Now, in General Executive

18 Board Attorney Exhibit 73, those are the

19 applications and affidavits for the Title III

20 wiretaps?

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry.

22 Mr. Carmell, which one was that?

23 MR. CARMELL: 73, sir.

24 BY MR. CARMELL:

_

579

1 Q. Do you have that, sir?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Now, behind Tab 2 is this enormous

4 affidavit which begins with the name of Edwin C.

5 Barnett, special agent of the FBI. Are you

6 familiar with that?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. And within that enormous affidavit

9 is -- are references to statements by Rich Mara,

10 aren't there?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. And would you turn to those and tell me

13 what paragraph they begin on.

14 A. Can you tell me what page they are on,

15 sir?

16 Q. That's what I am going to find. I

17 thought I would get you into it first. It begins

18 on page 27, sir.

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. It's headed "Information Obtained from

21 Richard Mara."

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Now, isn't it correct that there is

24 nothing in that entire affidavit that relates to

_

580

1 information obtained from Richard Mara that

2 mentions Bruno Caruso?

3 A. Yes, sir, that's right.

4 Q. And nothing in that information

5 obtained from Richard Mara that mentions Leo

6 Caruso?

7 A. That's correct, sir.

8 Q. Sir, if you'd look at page 27, I think

9 maybe to come closer to the date on which Mr. Mara

10 ended his active association and that would be --

11 it says he began cooperating with federal

12 authorities in 1980 and on July 11 of 1980 entered

13 the witness security program. So that your memory

14 is quite good.

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And according to your testimony, the

17 first -- well, the first time -- strike that.

18 The first time that Richard Mara in any

19 way mentions Bruno Caruso is from your testimony

20 of your interview with him beginning in September

21 of 1996, is that correct?

22 A. Yes, sir, that's not correct.

23 Q. You have another 302?

24 A. No, sir, I do not.

_

581

1 Q. We have nothing else in this record

2 from Richard Mara, do we, other than Exhibit 46

3 and Exhibit 73?

4 A. That's what's in the record, sir.

5 But --

6 Q. I don't want a but. You can get that

7 later.

8 MR. BOSTWICK: Your Honor, I'd object to

9 that. If he asks a question, Mr. O'Rourke can

10 certainly answer if there is an explanation.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let me put it this

12 way. Just mark that and remember that and on

13 redirect you can go back and ask him to explain

14 his answer.

15 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I have the question and

16 the answer read back, please.

17 (WHEREUPON, the record was read

18 by the reporter as requested as

19 follows: Q. We have nothing

20 else in this record from Richard

21 Mara, do we, other than Exhibit 46

22 and Exhibit 73?

23 A. That's what's in the record,

24 sir. But --")

_

582

1 BY MR. CARMELL:

2 Q. Now, staying with Mr. Mara, I would

3 like to show you --

4 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, I want to

5 show the witness a piece of his testimony so he

6 can have an opportunity to look at it. Is that

7 all right? I'd like to help him out so he can see

8 it.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: Sure.

10 BY MR. CARMELL:

11 Q. What I am going to show you is the

12 mini-transcript of the proceedings yesterday, and

13 I am asking you to look at pages 506 through 507

14 and it begins with the question, "Why don't you

15 start with the first Mr. Mara and tell us when you

16 spoke to him and what he told you," and look for

17 your answer.

18 I will point it out to you if it's

19 okay.

20 A. That's fine.

21 Yes.

22 Q. Having looked at that, sir, does that

23 accurately reflect, as you sit here now, what

24 Mr. Mara told you, at least in part, concerning

_

583

1 Leo Caruso?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And that Mr. Mara told you that Leo

4 Caruso was the son of Frank Skids Caruso, is that

5 correct?

6 A. No, sir. I corrected that, I believe.

7 He is not. He is the son of Skids Caruso's

8 brother. And he is the first cousin to Bruno and

9 Frank.

10 Q. Right. You corrected it. But did Mr.

11 Mara state that he was the son of --

12 A. No, sir. I misspoke.

13 Q. Is it correct that Rich Mara had been a

14 reliable, proven informant for the FBI, both at

15 the time that he gave his 302 in 1980, and when

16 information was given which became the wiretap?

17 A. No, sir. He was not an informant. He

18 was never an informant of the FBI. He was a

19 cooperating subject. He was under investigation.

20 He was charged, was sent to prison, and cooperated

21 with the government and testified.

22 Q. Were you satisfied that Rich Mara had

23 given the truth and the whole truth in the 302

24 which is Exhibit 47?

_

584

1 A. To the best of his knowledge, yes, sir,

2 at that time.

3 Q. And that the information contained in

4 Exhibit 73 would have been truth, the whole truth,

5 to the best of his knowledge in, when the wiretap

6 was requested?

7 A. I assume that it was, yes, sir. I

8 didn't do that interview.

9 Q. Did you have any reason to doubt it?

10 A. No, sir. I'm sure that's what he

11 believed to be the truth, yes, sir.

12 Q. Now, I want to go to Joseph Granata,

13 Junior.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Are we going to

15 something? Are we going to a document, or are

16 you --

17 MR. CARMELL: I just asked him about Joseph

18 Granata.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I saw him rooting

20 around there. I thought he was looking for a

21 document.

22 BY MR. CARMELL:

23 Q. According to your testimony, Joseph

24 Granata, Junior gave you information that Bruno

_

585

1 Caruso was a made member of organized crime, is

2 that correct?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. And did Joseph Granata meet the

5 criteria for the FBI's inventory of accepting

6 whether a person is a made member?

7 A. Joseph Granata was a, was not an

8 informant. He was wearing a wire. He was a

9 cooperating witness. He wore a wire, made

10 hand-to-hand purchase of narcotics, provided

11 information on crimes, which were confirmed

12 through investigation.

13 Actually, he didn't have to testify,

14 because everybody pled guilty that he was involved

15 in. But he was not, he was not a confidential

16 informant who was not going to testify. And

17 therefore, the criteria wouldn't apply to him.

18 Q. Okay. Now, I want to go to James

19 LaValley. I notice that there's a different

20 spelling in the transcript. Do we have an

21 accurate spelling of James LaValley?

22 A. It's LaValley, sir, L-A-V-A-L-L-E-Y.

23 Q. The transcript is right.

24 MR. BOSTWICK: Is the V capitalized?

_

586

1 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is, correct.

2 BY MR. CARMELL:

3 Q. Now, let me have you look again at the

4 transcript at Page 421, which relates to Mr.

5 LaValley and John Matassa, Junior. You can keep

6 that, sir. Just pick up your head when you're

7 finished reading.

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: What page do you have

10 there?

11 THE WITNESS: It's Page --

12 MR. CARMELL: 421.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Thanks.

14 BY THE WITNESS:

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 BY MR. CARMELL:

17 Q. According to that testimony, Mr.

18 LaValley had heard that John Matassa was the boss

19 of a crew, is that correct?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And one of the reasons that you had

22 placed John Matassa as a made member is the

23 testimony we are going over now regarding James

24 LaValley, is that correct?

_

587

1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. And isn't it correct that you would,

3 the FBI would not accept in its inventory as made

4 members a statement by a person that another

5 person had told him, that that person was a made

6 member?

7 A. No, sir. That's not correct.

8 Q. So if witness 1 told you that witness 2

9 told him that he had heard that so-and-so was a

10 made member, would you have accepted that?

11 A. Mr. LaValley had discussions on a

12 regular basis with known members of organized

13 crime; Lenny Patrick, who was the boss, Mario

14 Ranone, John DiFronzo, and so on.

15 MR. CARMELL: Mr. Hearing Officer, I asked a

16 simple question.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: You have to answer his

18 question. You may expand upon it. But you have

19 to answer his question.

20 BY THE WITNESS:

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 BY MR. CARMELL:

23 Q. If a witness had told you that he had

24 heard that another person was a made member, would

_

588

1 that fit the inventory of calling the person a

2 made member?

3 MR. BOSTWICK: Can I clarify? That and that

4 alone, is that --

5 BY MR. CARMELL:

6 Q. That and that alone.

7 A. It depends on, the weight would be put

8 on it as to who the person heard it from and who

9 he was known to be in contact with, sir.

10 Q. Now, in that testimony of James

11 LaValley, concerning James LaValley, you stated

12 that Mr. LaValley said he had seen John Matassa at

13 the Brookwood Country Club, its golf club. Is

14 that a private golf club?

15 A. I don't know what the status of it is,

16 sir. I was there once to arrest Marshall

17 Caifano. Other than that, I have no intimate

18 knowledge of whether it's public or private.

19 Q. Would you, from your experience in law

20 enforcement, would you agree that there are people

21 who are not either associates or members of

22 organized crime who would use the Brookwood

23 Country Club?

24 A. Absolutely, yes, sir.

_

589

1 Q. Do you know whether John Matassa was on

2 the Board of Directors of the country club at the

3 time that he was seen in the company of Jack

4 Cerone?

5 A. No, sir, I do not.

6 Q. Do you know how Jack Cerone -- whether

7 Jack Cerone was a member of the country club?

8 A. I understood that he was, but I don't

9 have any direct knowledge that he was. I know he

10 frequented it on a regular basis.

11 Q. And did Mr. LaValley tell you what he

12 meant by in the company of Jack Cerone at the

13 Brookwood Country Club?

14 A. Talking with Jack Cerone.

 

15 Q. Where was he talking with him?

16 A. This came up over several interviews

17 back when we were originally debriefing him. We

18 were more interested in Jackie Cerone at that

19 point. But they would -- I don't recall. Golfing

20 together, talking together in the club.

21 Q. You are saying they golfed together?

22 A. I don't recall, sir. He said that he

23 would see him in the company of Jackie Cerone. I

24 don't recall specifically what they were doing at

_

590

1 the exact moment. That was his recollection.

2 Q. With respect to the Brookwood Country

3 Club, can you fix the time period in which this

4 was to have occurred?

5 A. No, sir. Best I can recall, it would

6 have been in the early 1980s but no more than

7 that.

8 Q. Sir, James LaValley, when did he first

9 become -- when did he cease having any connection

10 with organized crime?

11 A. After he was arrested by myself and

12 other agents of the FBI.

13 Q. When was that, sir?

14 A. I don't recall the exact date, but I

15 believe it was like approximately 1989, possibly

16 1990. He was then incarcerated at the MCC and he

17 continued to deal with the mobsters there who were

18 locked up, Rocky Infelise and so on, until he

19 decided to cooperate.

20 Q. But it's fair to say that the statement

21 that you attribute to Mr. LaValley concerning the

22 Brookwood Country Club had to occur before, say,

23 1989?

24 A. Yes, sir, absolutely.

_

591

1 Q. Now, I want you to look at the ninth

2 line. They are marked, sir, beginning there. It

3 says, "And had him identify and knew him as a

4 member of organized crime, a made member."

5 Is that what Mr. LaValley told you?

6 A. Yes, sir. That was his statement.

7 Knew him as a member of organized crime, a made

8 member.

9 Q. Were the statements of Mr. LaValley

10 that are the subject of this page 421 of this

11 transcript, were they reduced to a 302?

12 A. I don't recall, sir. He was debriefed

13 days and days and days at a time and generally the

14 302s concerned specific extortions and beatings

15 and specific crimes that he was under

16 investigation for that were going to be utilized

17 in Federal Court.

18 So, I don't recall -- he was also

19 debriefed by other agents of the FBI. So, I don't

20 specifically recall if every single person that he

21 ever mentioned was documented in a 302.

22 Q. Before coming to testify here, did you

23 review any of the 302s of James LaValley?

24 A. No, sir, I did not. I don't have

_

592

1 access to them.

2 Q. The statement that is attributed by you

3 to James LaValley were made in your September,

4 1996 interview with him, is that correct?

5 A. Both, sir.

6 Q. Well, you talked to him in 1989 when

7 you were special agent of the Federal Bureau?

8 A. Yes, sir, and the most recent --

9 Q. Just a moment. Let me break it down,

10 sir.

11 And at that time you -- there was a

12 302, at least one 302 created concerning your

13 debriefing or the debriefing in which you

14 participated with Mr. LaValley in 1989, is that

15 correct?

16 A. There were probably 30 or 40, possibly

17 more 302s created, each on a different subject

18 matter.

19 Q. And it's your testimony that in the

20 debriefings in 1989 James LaValley made the

21 statements that are attributed to him by you at

22 page 421 of the transcript?

23 A. That was my recollection, yes, sir, and

24 then I reinterviewed him, directed his attention

_

593

1 to Mr. Matassa at the time I talked to him in

2 September.

3 Q. In September of '96 when you met with

4 James LaValley, as you say, you directed his

5 attention to James Matassa, didn't you?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. And you had told Mr. LaValley what your

8 position was at the time, that is, you were with

9 the Inspector General's office, is that correct?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. You told him that the Inspector General

12 was investigating the Chicago District Council of

13 Laborers?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. You told him you were going -- you were

16 trying to build a case against them, didn't you?

17 A. No, sir, I just asked him -- reminded

18 him of our previous conversations and said did he

19 recall John Matassa. He said yes, I recall him

20 being with Jackie Cerone at the Brookwood Country

21 Club. I recall him being in organized crime and I

22 believe he is a made member. That's what he said.

23 Q. You were the one that first raised Mr.

24 Matassa, quote, "reminding" Mr. LaValley of what

_

594

1 he had said in 1989?

2 A. That was the purpose of the interview,

3 yes, sir.

4 Q. And your reminding Mr. LaValley was

5 based solely on your recollection of debriefings

6 you had had with Mr. LaValley in 1989, is that

7 correct?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And how many debriefings have you

10 participated in while you were with the Federal

11 Bureau of Investigation between 1989 and your

12 retirement?

13 A. Of Mr. LaValley?

14 Q. Of everyone.

15 A. Quite a few, sir. I don't recall.

16 Q. 100?

17 A. Sure. At least 100, maybe more.

18 Q. Probably more, wouldn't it have been?

19 Some of them very extensive, too, weren't they?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And you had a specific recollection in

22 September of 1996 what Mr. LaValley supposedly had

23 told you in 1989, is that correct?

24 A. Yes, sir. It's not very complicated.

_

595

1 Q. Well, that's correct, it's not very

2 complicated and apparently it didn't seem enough

3 to appear in a 302 of Mr. LaValley before. So how

4 significant was it?

5 MR. BOSTWICK: I think that is a

6 mischaracterization of the testimony.

7 MR. CARMELL: It's cross-examination, sir.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: You may ask him that

9 and he may answer if he understands your question.

10 BY THE WITNESS:

11 A. I don't recall if it was in a 302 or

12 not, sir. We don't -- when you're talking to

13 someone for eight hours a day, day upon day upon

14 day, you don't take down every single word that he

15 says because it would be incredibly voluminous,

16 particularly if the individual mentioned is one

17 of, say, dozens and that individual is not the

18 target of your investigation or not involved in

19 any specific crime that's going to be coming up in

20 a future court date.

21 Q. Do you in fact have notes of your --

22 MR. CARMELL: I understand your ruling,

23 Mr. Hearing Officer, but I want to ask him.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay.

_

596

1 BY MR. CARMELL:

2 Q. Do you have notes of your interview

3 with -- interview or interviews with Mr. LaValley

4 in September, 1996 or any time thereafter?

5 A. I have rough notes, yes, sir.

6 Q. Were those notes shown to Mr. LaValley

7 at any time?

8 A. No, sir.

9 Q. Did you go over your notes with

10 Mr. LaValley?

11 A. The notes were taken as we discussed

12 the matter.

13 Q. And I want to make it clear that you

14 still do have those notes?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's not your

17 procedure -- you followed the procedure as the --

18 as you did when you were in the Bureau to take the

19 rough notes and then transcribe them into polished

20 notes, you follow that procedure or just keep them

21 for your own investigation?

22 THE WITNESS: I keep the notes as I have it

23 from when I was an FBI agent.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: In rough form.

_

597

1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: There is no requirement

3 of your Inspector General's department to -- there

4 is no formal protocol as to preserving notes like

5 that.

6 THE WITNESS: No, sir, not to my knowledge.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Like all investigators

8 or detectives, they seem to keep a file of old

9 notes.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, that's correct.

11 BY MR. CARMELL:

12 Q. Did you review those rough notes before

13 you came to testify?

14 A. Yes, sir, last week I did.

15 Q. How many pages of notes do you have

16 concerning Mr. LaValley, sir?

17 A. Several pages. I can't recall exact

18 number.

19 Q. I hate the game we play, more than

20 five, more than six. Do you have any reasonable

21 opinion as to how many pages it is?

22 A. Possibly ten pages.

23 Q. With respect to Leo Caruso, sir, and

24 Mr. LaValley, Mr. LaValley told you he did not

_

598

1 know Leo Caruso personally, is that correct? That

2 would be on Page 508.

3 No one can say I'm trying to sandbag

4 you, sir.

5 A. What part of it is it?

6 Just a second. I think I have it.

7 Yes, sir.

8 Q. Do you recall the question, that

9 LaValley told you that he did not know Leo Caruso

10 personally?

11 A. Yes, sir. That's correct.

12 Q. He told you that whatever information

13 he had concerning Leo Caruso had, quote, "come

14 from other O.C. figures," is that correct?

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. And based upon what these other O.C.

17 figures had told him, LaValley considered Leo

18 Caruso to be a mob associate?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. If I may borrow it back, sir.

21 A. Sure. There you go.

22 Q. Now, with respect to James Basile?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. Mr. Basile, according to your

_

599

1 testimony, was a, worked for the Cicero crew, is

2 that correct?

3 A. Yes, sir, he did.

4 Q. And that's a separate crew from the

5 26th Street crew, is that correct?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. Or at the time, it was?

8 A. Yes, it was, at the time.

9 Q. Now, Umberto Fillippi, is it "Fillippi"

10 or "Fillippi," as you recall?

11 A. I really don't know, sir. He, Umberto

12 Fillippi, I think is the way he pronounced it.

13 Q. Did you -- when did you first come in

14 contact with Umberto Fillippi?

15 A. Let me check my notes. In 1996, sir.

16 Q. Were you aware, or did you become aware

17 at that time or before that time that Umberto

18 Fillippi was an alcoholic?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Were you aware at that time or became

21 aware that Umberto Fillippi was a heavy drug

22 abuser?

23 A. Yes, sir. He informed me that he had,

24 had had a problem with cocaine, yes, sir.

_

600

1 Q. And were you aware that Mr. Fillippi

2 had been in a, I don't know what the word is now,

3 but mental institution?

4 A. He -- yes, sir, I was. He had been

5 hospitalized, I think in Europe, for his cocaine

6 addiction for a period of time.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Is that the mental

8 institution you are referring to? Or is that

9 something else?

10 MR. CARMELL: I thought I'm asking whether --

11 no, I would not consider being in for detox, in a

12 substance abuse program, to be a mental

13 institution.

14 BY MR. CARMELL:

15 Q. Separating that, did you ever become

16 aware that he had been in an institution for

17 emotional problems, distinct from being in a

18 substance rehab program?

19 A. I believe he had been in hospitals, as

20 a result of, resulting from his cocaine addiction,

21 yes.

22 Q. Okay. Now, you identified the person

23 by name of Sal Mango, M-A-N-G-O. Do you recall

24 that?

_

601

 

1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. And who was Sal Mango in 1989?

3 A. Sal Mango in 1989 was involved in a

4 business called NCI -- I don't know the full name

5 of it now -- and that later was involved in a

6 business called Health Marketing, Incorporated,

7 HMI, as I understand it. He died I think in 1994

8 of cancer.

9 Q. Was Sal Mango, to your knowledge, in

10 1989 a made member of organized crime?

11 A. I don't know if he was a made member.

12 But he was definitely a member of organized crime,

13 and met with John DiFronzo, and was known to the

14 FBI and police intelligence as an organized crime

15 figure.

16 Q. Was he an organized crime figure

17 because he had a business which dealt with

18 organized crime?

19 A. No, sir.

20 Q. In your testimony, you never identified

21 Mr. Mango as being a member of organized crime.

22 You only identified him as having a company called

23 NCI. Do you recall that?

24 A. I don't believe I was asked if he was a

_

602

1 member of organized crime. But he was.

2 Q. What crew, what group, was Sal Mango a

3 member of?

4 A. He was not the object of my

5 investigation. So I really don't know, sir.

6 Q. Well, you're saying that, you're coming

7 out and saying that this dead man was a member of

8 organized crime. And I'm asking you, where did

9 he -- where? Where in the organized crime

10 structure?

11 A. I don't know, sir. I could guess, but

12 I don't know for a fact.

13 Q. In your testimony concerning what Mr.

14 Fillippi told you, that on weekends John Matassa,

15 Tom Matassa and John Serpico went to Sal Mango's

16 apartment, do you remember that testimony?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And Fillippi's position at that time

19 was to cook breakfast?

20 A. Yes, sir. He was living with Mr.

21 Termini in the apartment, taking care of him,

22 cooking his food, and acting as an associate,

23 secretary, driver, whatever.

24 Q. And what, in what year did these

_

603

1 weekend meetings occur, according to Mr. Fillippi?

2 A. Starting in 1993.

3 Q. And through what period of time?

4 A. Until sometime before Mr. Mango or Mr.

5 Termini became too ill from cancer, and then

6 eventually died. So early '94, I believe it would

7 have been.

8 Q. Has Mr. Fillippi's statement to you as

9 you recounted it been referred to the United

10 States Attorney's office?

11 A. Well, it has been provided to them.

12 And I believe he has also been interviewed by FBI

13 agents prior to me talking to him.

14 Q. To your knowledge, has Mr. Matassa been

15 indicted on any, arrested or indicted for any of

16 the matters that are the subject of these weekend

17 episodes?

18 A. Not as of this date, no, sir.

19 Q. And would the same be true of John

20 Serpico and Tom Matassa?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. According to Mr. Fillippi, as you

23 recount it, Mr. Fillippi initially met John

24 Matassa through Salvatore Termini, Termini, or Sal

_

604

1 Mango. Mr. Fillippi wasn't sure, was he?

2 A. Oh, yes, sir. He indicated that

3 Salvatore Termini and Sal Mango were one and the

4 same person. And apparently he used the name Sal

5 Mango, but as I believe his real name was

6 Salvatore Termini.

7 Q. According to your testimony on 4/22, it

8 says, initially met John Matassa, quote, "through

9 Salvatore Termini or Sal Mango." Did you mean

10 that those were one and the same person?

11 A. Yes, sir, I did.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Again, my notes are

13 confused on that line too. So that I know that

14 Sal Mango was used -- is the name of a fellow with

15 an Italian background; it was Termini, right?

16 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Termini or Terminini?

18 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. They are one and the

19 same person.

20 THE HEARING OFFICER: Who was cooking for

21 whom? Who was dying of cancer? Who was cooking

22 for whom?

23 THE WITNESS: Mr., call him Sal Mango --

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's call him Sal

_

605

1 Mango.

2 THE WITNESS: That is the name he apparently

3 utilized mostly, as I understand it -- was dying

4 of cancer, and did die of cancer.

5 And Mr. Fillippi was his, was taking

6 care of him, right up until the end, and cooking

7 for him and so on.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right.

9 BY MR. CARMELL:

10 Q. Was Mr. Fillippi at that time an

11 associate of organized crime?

12 A. No, sir. He, other than his

13 relationship with Sal Mango, he was not, no, sir.

14 Q. Well, the relationship was he was his

15 caregiver, is that correct?

16 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.

17 Q. And by being a caregiver you don't

18 automatically become a member or associate of

19 organized crime, is that fair?

20 A. That's correct, sir.

21 Q. So, according to Mr. Fillippi's

22 testimony -- according to what you say

23 Mr. Fillippi told you, Mr. Fillippi is not only in

24 earshot but sometimes present when these three

_

606

1 individuals are cutting up money from HMI, is that

2 correct?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. And this happened in 1993, '94, is that

5 correct?

6 A. That's what he said, yes, sir.

7 Q. At that time he did have a drug and

8 alcohol problem, is that correct?

9 A. I don't know when he had the drug and

10 alcohol problem. It probably is correct. I'm not

11 sure.

12 Q. Now, Sam Louis, Sam Louis did not meet

13 the criteria for a person who could establish for

14 the FBI inventory a made member, isn't that

15 correct?

16 A. Sam Louis is not a confidential

17 informant.

18 Q. He wasn't anything. He was a former

19 Chicago police officer and a business agent for

20 H.E.R.E.? You know what H.E.R.E. is?

21 A. Yes, sir, absolutely.

22 MR. CARMELL: Hotel Employees Restaurant

23 Employees, hotel and restaurant employees union.

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: We called it the old

_

607

1 bartenders union.

2 MR. CARMELL: You called it the old

3 bartenders. Okay, sir.

4 BY MR. CARMELL:

5 Q. That was his position?

6 A. Yes, sir. That was his previous

7 position.

8 Q. What was his -- what did he do -- he

9 had been -- according to your testimony,

10 Mr. Hanley had fired him as a business agent for

11 H.E.R.E.?

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. When did that occur?

14 A. July -- I believe it was July of 1996.

15 Q. And when did you interview Mr. Louis?

16 A. There were a number of interviews. Let

17 me see. In 1996 and thereafter in 1997.

18 Q. Sir, I'm going to try and not bore you

19 to death and so I am going to ask you with respect

20 to -- you have already talked about it with one of

21 them.

22 With respect to Mr. Granata, we have

23 already established Mr. LaValley, Mr. Basile, Sam

24 Louis, do you have what we call rough notes of

_

608

1 your interviews with those persons?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And would that be true of William

4 Wemette, William Jahoda and Leonard Patrick?

5 A. It would be true with William Jahoda.

6 I no longer have access to them with the other

7 two, sir.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's because those

9 are the FBI's notes.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

11 BY MR. CARMELL:

12 Q. Now, I want to turn to what you have

13 termed as confidential and we are going to be

14 using the numbers that are attributed here which

15 caused us all -- you confusion. So, we are going

16 to use the 1 through 11 numbers.

17 Will that work for you?

18 A. Sure, that's fine, sir.

19 Q. Confidential No. 2 was a former

20 burglar/jewel thief, according to your testimony,

21 is that correct?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. You said that he also was a mob

24 associate, is that correct?

_

609

1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. With respect to Confidential No. 2,

3 when did he end his active association with the

4 mob?

5 A. As far as I know he still has an

6 association with the mob, sir.

7 Q. And what is his position within the mob

8 according to Confidential No. 2?

9 A. I wouldn't want to characterize it,

10 sir, for -- he is fearful of his safety.

11 Q. So, what we know now is that you

12 characterize him as a mob associate but we do know

13 that he was a burglar and jewel thief, is that

14 right?

15 A. In the past, yes, sir.

16 Q. Now, Confidential No. 4 was a person

17 who had a relationship with the 26th Street crew,

18 is that correct?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Does he have a present relationship?

21 A. No, sir.

22 Q. When did the relationship end?

23 A. Several years ago, sir, but I don't

24 recall the exact time frame.

_

610

1 Q. Would it be fair to say that it's no

2 more than five years ago, if you can, sir?

3 A. It was several years ago.

4 Q. All right. Now, confidential --

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: He is out of the crew

6 now.

7 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. He was never an

8 insider. He did some work for them. He also was

9 associated with the Cicero crew as well and that

10 has also ended.

11 BY MR. CARMELL:

12 Q. Confidential No. 4 is not one of the

13 persons who you identified as having given you any

14 information concerning Bruno Caruso, is that

15 correct?

16 A. I believe that's correct, yes, sir.

17 Q. Confidential No. 6 had had a

18 relationship with the 26th Street crew, is that

19 correct?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Has that relationship ended?

22 A. No, sir.

23 Q. And that is one of the persons who did

24 not give you any information concerning Bruno

_

611

1 Caruso, is that correct?

2 A. No, sir, I believe that he did although

3 he was not --

4 Q. He is not one that you testified to, is

5 that correct?

6 A. I can't recall, sir, if I did or not.

7 If I omitted him, it was a mistake. He basically

8 indicated that he knew Bruno Caruso, knew all the

9 Carusos, knew they were organized crime-related.

10 Q. The question is whether he testified --

11 MR. CARMELL: Number one, if he wants to come

12 back at some other time, he can do it.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: He may ask him to

14 explain it. Since you are the one asking the

15 questions, you have the right to ask to have it

16 stricken.

17 MR. CARMELL: Thank you. You got me again

18 for the last time.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: I agree with you.

20 MR. CARMELL: No, you got me from what I had

21 done the last time when I said something wasn't

22 responsive.

23 Can I have just a moment?

24 THE HEARING OFFICER: Take your time. If you

_

612

1 need a short break or something --

2 MR. CARMELL: Can we take a break, and let me

3 review the notes?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay.

5 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.)

6 MR. CARMELL: No further questions.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. That was short.

8 All right. No further questions, Mr. O'Rourke.

9 You have a couple questions?

10 MR. BOSTWICK: Yeah, I have a couple.

11 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

12 BY MR. BOSTWICK:

13 Q. Mr. O'Rourke, one of the questions I

14 believe that Mr. Carmell asked was something to

15 the effect of Exhibit 8 -- Exhibit 73, affidavit

16 for wiretaps, and Exhibit 46, Richie Mara. He

17 asked the question, questions, were these the

18 truth and the whole truth, etcetera. And you

19 answered yes.

20 Do you recall that testimony?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. Did you mean to indicate that those

23 documents compose the sum total of those

24 individuals' knowledge about all the activities of

_

613

1 the 26th Street crew, and all the members of the

2 26th Street crew?

3 A. No, sir. Those documents were

4 primarily aimed at the targets of the proposed

5 wiretaps.

6 Q. So there's information that he told you

7 in addition to these, what, the information

8 contained in the documents?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. Source No. 6, Mr. Carmell asked you a

11 few questions about source No. 6, and his

12 understanding, or her understanding, for that

13 matter, of the Carusos.

14 Can you expand on your understanding of

15 that?

16 A. Yes, sir. Source No. 6 indicated

17 that --

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: What was that question

19 again now?

20 BY MR. BOSTWICK:

21 Q. Mr. Carmell asked you about source

22 No. 6, and that individual's understanding of the

23 Carusos.

24 Do you have a, can you clarify what

_

614

1 that individual's understanding of the Carusos

2 was?

3 A. The quote was --

4 MR. CARMELL: I object to the form of the

5 question. I didn't ask him what his understanding

6 was. I said that nothing had been said in his

7 testimony. If he wants to clarify now, you know,

8 that is what you would offer him for.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's right.

10 MR. CARMELL: It's only the form of his

11 question.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: The form of his

13 question, I understand. He said there was nothing

14 in his testimony, or something like that, or the

15 last question.

16 MR. CARMELL: Correct.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: Correct. I think your

18 question is, is there something else.

19 MR. BOSTWICK: That's correct.

20 BY MR. BOSTWICK:

21 Q. Is there something else to add to your

22 direct testimony relating to source No. 6 and

23 their knowledge of the Carusos and their

24 relationship to the outfit?

_

615

1 A. Just that the source indicated that

2 they run the neighborhood, the Carusos run the

3 neighborhood, that they're mob associates, that

4 the father was the boss, and that Frank is a made

5 guy, in the source's opinion; Bruno is an

6 associate, as is Leo.

7 That was basically the sum of the

8 source's information.

9 MR. BOSTWICK: No further questions.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. All right,

11 Mr. O'Rourke, thank you.

12 (Witness Excused.)

13 MR. THOMAS: At this time, the GEB Attorney

14 calls Robert Pecoraro to the stand.

15 THE HEARING OFFICER: Where is Pecoraro?

16 MR. THOMAS: He is out in the hall, I'm

17 sure.

18 (WHEREUPON, there was a short

19 interruption.)

20 MR. THOMAS: Can you administer the oath?

21 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly

22 sworn.)

23 ROBERT C. PECORARO,

24 called as a witness herein, having been first duly

_

616

1 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

2 DIRECT EXAMINATION

3 BY MR. THOMAS:

4 Q. Could you state your full name for the

5 record, please, and spell your last name?

6 A. Robert C. Pecoraro; P, as in poppa,

7 E-C-O-R-A-R-O.

8 Q. Where are you employed, sir?

9 A. I'm in the special investigations unit

10 with a major insurance carrier.

11 Q. How long have you been so employed?

12 A. Two years.

13 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. This goes -- the

14 witness was here all day yesterday.

15 MR. THOMAS: No. He came in late in the

16 afternoon, by a late afternoon flight.

17 MR. CARMELL: He has been here for

18 testimony. There is a sequestering order except

19 with respect to, as I understand it, staff of the

20 IG, or GEB, and some representatives and

21 delegates.

22 Let me finish. He is a witness. So he

23 has violated your order, as far as we are

24 concerned.

_

617

1 MR. THOMAS: May I be heard?

2 I have heard no -- I've been here the

3 entire time, your Honor. I haven't heard any

4 request for the rule.

5 We would be happy to abide by that.

6 But there has been no request for it.

7 I would also like to point out that the

8 subject matter of Mr. Pecoraro's testimony will

9 not in any way relate to the previous testimony.

10 It is a whole new topic.

11 He came in late in the afternoon

12 yesterday, from an out-of-town flight, came into

13 the room for perhaps the last half hour or so of

14 testimony.

15 But unless I was out of the room when

16 it was discussed, I have not heard any specific

17 requests for sequestration.

18 MR. CARMELL: I recall in our telephone

19 conversation that you had said -- I'll get the

20 record -- that you had said that, that

21 sequestering of witnesses, and there would be a

22 reasonable number of representatives on either

23 side who would be permitted, but there was a

24 sequestering, there was going to be sequestering

_

618

1 of witnesses.

2 I didn't raise it, because I understood

3 that was the ruling that had already been made in

4 the prehearing conference.

5 MR. BOSTWICK: I think we better clarify it

6 from this point forward. We understood that there

7 is no specific limitation on it.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Gentlemen, I have a

9 vague recollection that the subject was raised. I

10 mean, this was in our telephone conference. And I

11 just have a recollection that -- all right. Let's

12 assume that there is an order.

13 Mr. Pecoraro, what time did you come

14 here yesterday afternoon?

15 THE WITNESS: It was approximately 4:30. I

16 was here for the last question, I believe it was.

17 I didn't even hear the question that was posed to

18 Mr. O'Rourke.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did you hear testimony

20 at all?

21 THE WITNESS: I think Mr. O'Rourke was on the

22 stand for about a minute. I think there was one

23 question posed to him. I don't even recall the

24 question. But I was told I was allowed in here so

_

619

1 I came in.

2 THE HEARING OFFICER: So forget that. You

3 came in. Nobody places any blame on you.

4 So he heard the last part of O'Rourke's

5 testimony having to do probably with Caruso or

6 someone like this. Is his testimony relating to

7 anything concerning that?

8 MR. THOMAS: No, I would proffer that his

9 testimony relates to the Al Tocco organization and

10 the U.S. vs. Tocco conviction and the U.S. vs.

11 Guzzino and Palermo convictions.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I don't think there is

13 going to be overlap here. We could agree that he

14 wasn't in here for any great extensive time. All

15 right.

16 MR. THOMAS: Is it our understanding that

17 counsel wishes the rule to be invoked from this

18 point on?

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: Obviously he does. He

20 obviously does. Let's do it.

21 MR. CARMELL: No, no, I didn't say that. I

22 didn't mean that. I understood that that was the

23 order.

24 MR. THOMAS: We did not understand that.

_

620

1 MR. CARMELL: And I don't care --

2 MR. THOMAS: What I am asking --

3 MR. CARMELL: I am not asking you to invoke

4 the rule.

5 MR. THOMAS: Oh, okay.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Then gentlemen.

7 MR. THOMAS: The reason I ask, your Honor, is

8 that we need to know whether to instruct future

9 witnesses whether they can come in the room or

10 not.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Since the rule has not

12 been invoked, we will proceed and forget what we

13 asked you, Mr. Pecoraro. Here we go.

14 MR. CARMELL: Okay, as long as we

15 understand. The only reason I raised it I thought

16 there was an order in effect. That's the reason.

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I remember some

18 vague -- just a vague recollection of it in our

19 discussion, but I don't actually -- well, it's

20 irrelevant.

21 MR. BOSTWICK: If it's not going to be

22 invoked, one of the reasons I didn't raise it at

23 the start was because I saw a lot of the officers

24 in here who are on our witness list and I just

_

621

1 thought that if they were going to be in here, our

2 witnesses could be in here and it didn't make any

3 difference because there was no order.

4 If we are not going to deal with it at

5 all, then anybody can come in and go as they

6 please and that's fine with us. If we are, we

7 should talk about which officers can stay.

8 MR. CARMELL: I'm not. All I am saying is

9 that I understood that there was an order. I am

10 not asking for it. If there hadn't been an order,

11 I wouldn't have asked for an order.

12 MR. BOSTWICK: Let's go on.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let's go.

14 BY MR. THOMAS:

15 Q. You were talking about your current

16 employment.

17 A. Yes. I am a special investigator with

18 a major insurance carrier.

19 Q. I think you said that's been for the

20 last two years?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. How were you previously employed?

23 A. I was special agent with the FBI for --

24 Q. When did you first start with the FBI?

_

622

1 A. November of 1970.

2 Q. In what jurisdiction? Where was it?

3 A. The first 18 months I have spent in the

4 Louisville, Kentucky and Oklahoma City divisions.

5 I was transferred to New York City in

6 approximately March of 1972.

7 Q. After you were transferred to New York

8 City in March of 1972 did there come a time that

9 you began to work on the organized crime matters?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Have you worked on organized crime

12 matters more or less continuously from 1972 until

13 you retired from the Bureau?

14 A. I worked on organized crime matters

15 from approximately May of 1972 until I left the

16 Chicago division, which was December of 1993.

17 Q. When did you start working organized

18 crime cases in Chicago?

19 A. Upon my arrival in January of '78.

20 Q. And then continuously through the time

21 of your retirement?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Were you assigned to any particular

24 squad or any particular geographic area?

_

623

1 A. When I first arrived in Chicago I was

2 assigned to a downtown Chicago organized crime

3 squad and in 1980 or '81 I was assigned to what

4 they call the south resident agency, which covered

5 the south suburbs and I was an organized crime

6 agent in that office.

7 Q. Sir, during your tenure with the FBI in

8 Chicago how many convictions -- how many cases

9 leading to convictions do you think you were

10 involved in involving organized crime? And I am

11 not asking for a specific figure here.

12 A. Numerous cases. I don't recall -- I

13 have no idea how many cases, but they were

14 certainly I would say numerous.

15 Q. Have you received any law enforcement

16 awards during the course of your career?

17 A. I have received numerous awards and

18 letters of commendation. The last award I

19 received was the year after I retired from the

20 FBI. I was called back to Chicago and I was given

21 an award from the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

22 for excellence in law enforcement.

23 Q. Can you describe for us, please, the

24 nature of the organized crime activity that you

_

624

1 investigated during your two decades here in

2 Chicago?

3 A. Cases involving extortion, murder,

4 racketeering.

5 Q. What do you mean by racketeering?

6 A. Racketeering enterprise, RICO cases,

7 cases where there is a criminal enterprise.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: Cases based upon the

9 RICO statute.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: And all the predicate

12 acts.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 BY MR. THOMAS:

15 Q. Anything else?

16 A. That's enough for now.

17 Q. Beginning in the mid-'70s, who were the

18 major mob players in the area that you were

19 working? Who were the major bosses?

20 A. In the mid-'70s?

21 Q. Right. Let's take it from the past and

22 work forward.

23 A. In the mid-'70s I was in the New York

24 office.

_

625

1 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. So the early '80s

2 you arrived in Chicago?

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: '78.

4 BY MR. THOMAS:

5 Q. Late '70s, then. When you arrived in

6 Chicago, started working organized crime in the

7 south side, south suburbs, who were the major

8 bosses that you were investigating?

9 A. The major bosses that I -- in the south

10 suburbs at that time were known as Al Pilotto and

11 Albert Tocco.

12 Q. And Al Pilotto was a member of LIUNA?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. The Laborers union?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And also specifically a member of the

17 District Council and an officer of the District

18 Council?

19 A. Yes, and he was the head of Local 5.

20 Q. And what relationship did Tocco, Albert

21 Tocco, have to Mr. Pilotto?

22 A. Albert Tocco was a very close associate

23 of Al Pilotto. He was his chauffeur and

24 bodyguard.

_

626

1 Q. And did the names Nicholas Guzzino and

2 Dominick Palermo come up at all during that time

3 period?

4 A. Yes, they did eventually.

5 Q. Who were they?

6 A. They were members of the Laborers

7 Local 5 in Chicago Heights.

8 Q. And with respect to the mob, did they

9 have any relationship to Mr. Pilotto or Mr. Tocco?

10 A. Yes, they did.

11 Q. What was that?

12 A. They had a relationship. They knew

13 each other and it became known to me later on that

14 they were involved together criminally.

15 Q. How about with respect to rank, who was

16 above whom?

17 A. Well, Al Pilotto was active prior to

18 his conviction in Florida, Al Pilotto was the

19 known boss of organized crime out of Chicago

20 Heights. Upon Al's conviction and incarceration,

21 Al Tocco more or less became the acting boss in

22 Chicago Heights.

23 Q. And where did Mr. Guzzino and

24 Mr. Palermo, the LIUNA Local 5 representatives,

_

627

1 fit into the Tocco organization at that point?

2 A. Well, later learned or as best we could

3 ascertain that actually Dominick Palermo, who

4 lived in Chicago Heights, and Al Tocco, who lived

5 in Chicago Heights, kind of had different

6 jurisdictions.

7 Albert Tocco was the main guy in the

8 south suburbs of Chicago and Dominick Palermo

9 controlled criminal activities in northern

10 Indiana.

11 Q. Prior to Mr. Pilotto's conviction in

12 1982 -- by the way, was that the Mob 11 case down

13 in Florida?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. All right. Prior to that conviction

16 had the Indiana --

17 MR. CARMELL: Excuse me. I didn't get your

18 question.

19 THE HEARING OFFICER: What was that, the Mob

20 11?

21 MR. THOMAS: It's a case that in the law

22 enforcement circles is referred to as the Mob 11

23 case. It's the Accardo, Pilotto, Caporale group

24 of Defendants who were convicted of defrauding the

_

628

1 LIUNA health and welfare funds.

2 MR. CARMELL: CSA, is that what we are

3 talking about? Consulting.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Consultants and

5 administrators. I thought you were talking about

6 that. But there were only about two convictions

7 in that case, am I right?

8 MR. THOMAS: Eleven Defendants and it's also

9 been referred to as the Mob 11 case.

10 BY MR. THOMAS:

11 Q. The question -- let me repeat it or

12 paraphrase it.

13 Prior to Mr. Pilotto's conviction in

14 that Florida case, had the area that you described

15 as eventually coming under Mr. Palermo's control,

16 had that been under Mr. Pilotto's control?

17 A. I believe so. Mr. Pilotto and others

18 in northern Indiana.

19 Q. So, are you saying then that after

20 Pilotto's conviction essentially there was a

21 splitting up of his territory?

22 A. As best we could ascertain, yes, sir.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Pecoraro, you

24 testified to conclusions. We are getting certain

_

629

1 editorial summary. How do you know this? How do

2 we know that Al Pilotto fell out of favor or

3 stepped aside and these other gentlemen moved in?

4 THE WITNESS: Well, I didn't know it in

5 1982. It became apparent later on in the late

6 '80s and early '90s through investigations that I

7 was involved in and the eventual convictions of

8 both Albert Tocco and Dominick Palermo and

9 Nicholas Guzzino.

10 MR. THOMAS: Just for the record, Mr. Vaira,

11 that is eventually where we are heading is to talk

12 about those two cases.

13 THE WITNESS: This actually evolved over a

14 number of years.

15 BY MR. THOMAS:

16 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, you have before you a

17 stack of exhibits which I have distributed to

18 counsel and to the Hearing Officer beginning with

19 GEB Attorney Exhibit 109. Do you see that?

20 Putting 107 and 108 aside for the

21 moment and go to 109.

22 A. I have 109, sir.

23 Q. Could you describe that for us?

24 A. This is an indictment of Albert Tocco

_

630

1 and Clarence Crockett that came out of the

2 Northern District of Illinois.

3 Q. Were you the co-case agent on this

4 matter?

5 A. Yes, sir, I was.

6 Q. How much time and effort did you put

7 into this investigation that led to this

8 indictment?

9 A. This actual investigation that I look

10 at before me started approximately 1987. There

11 were a number of investigations before this where

12 sources were identified and schemes were

13 identified. This indictment came down in

14 September of 1988.

15 Q. Could you describe the kinds of law

16 enforcement investigative techniques that you had

17 used in the course of your investigation which led

18 up to this indictment?

19 A. Well, the interviews, development of

20 sources and confidential informants, numerous

21 interviews and surveillances.

22 Q. We are not going to read this

23 verbatim. It's a very lengthy document.

24 Can you describe what this indictment

_

631

1 was about?

2 A. This is a 49 count indictment, over

3 170-some-odd acts of racketeering, describing the

4 Tocco organization as a criminal enterprise, which

5 existed to extort money from car thieves, chop

6 shop operators, who ran businesses, and dealt in

7 stolen auto parts, houses of prostitution, that

8 type of thing.

9 They extorted the street tax from

10 them. The people that I described, and have been

11 in business, I described, were involved in

12 criminal activities themselves. So they

13 ordinarily would not go to local authorities or

14 seek help.

15 They were told to pay the street tax.

16 If they didn't pay it, they would be, there were

17 implied threats that they would be hurt or killed

18 or be out of business. And in fact, in this

19 indictment, there were three murders alleged that

20 were directed by Albert Tocco.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Are these Hobbs Act

22 indictments here? Many of these racketeering acts

23 here are Hobbs Act --

24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

_

632

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: 1951?

2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

3 BY MR. THOMAS:

4 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, when you use the term

5 street tax, we have heard that before, but if you

6 could put in your own words what that term of art

7 means.

8 A. Well, street tax was a way that

9 organized crime had of exacting monies from people

10 who were involved in illegitimate businesses.

11 They had to pay a street tax to members of

12 organized crime, or they would be threatened with,

13 you know, bodily harm, or being put out of

14 business, or as I said before, or being murdered.

15 Q. Based on your experience in this case

16 as well as your overall experience dealing with

17 organized crime in Chicago, what happened to

18 people who either refused to be part of an

19 organization such as the Tocco organization, or

20 refused to pay street tax?

21 A. Well, they would be hurt or murdered or

22 put out of business. I mean, it was a very good

23 way for organized crime to get money.

24 Q. Is that largely what this case was

_

633

1 about?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, at this time, I

4 would offer Exhibit 109 in evidence.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Accepted, admitted.

6 (WHEREUPON, said document,

7 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

8 No. 109, for identification, was

9 offered and received in evidence as

10 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 109.)

11 MR. CARMELL: Could I have --

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Do you have a --

13 MR. CARMELL: -- an explanation what it's

14 offered for, since it's a street tax indictment?

15 MR. THOMAS: It's offered, your Honor, to

16 show the linkage between the LIUNA officials who

17 are coming in the description of the next case,

18 Guzzino and Palermo, were involved in the Tocco

19 organization. There are evidentiary links in the

20 two cases.

21 MR. CARMELL: That's enough for me. I

22 understand it; put in for who Tocco was.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: And his organization.

24 MR. CARMELL: And his organization.

_

634

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. All right.

2 BY MR. THOMAS:

3 Q. Very quickly then, if we could, Mr.

4 Pecoraro, were the defendants convicted in this

5 case?

6 A. Yes, they were.

7 Q. Please take a look at Exhibit 110 and

8 111.

9 A. I have 110 in front of me.

10 Q. Is this the verdict form as to Albert

11 Tocco?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Does it accurately reflect that with

14 respect to a high number of the counts, he was

15 convicted?

16 MR. CARMELL: It's a document. I don't know

17 that it does any more to have Mr. Pecoraro --

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: It says what it says.

19 He was convicted of a number of counts.

20 MR. THOMAS: Then I move the admission of GEB

21 Exhibits 110 and 111, 111 being the racketeering

22 acts, as reflected in Count II.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will admit those.

24 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

_

635

1 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibits

2 Nos. 110 and 111 for identification was

3 offered and received in evidence as

4 GEB Attorney Exhibits Nos. 110 and

5 111.)

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: I notice here we have a

7 discerning jury, who is picking, especially in the

8 racketeering acts, which those are often

9 difficult, I notice that they picked at least ten

10 and found him not guilty of those.

11 BY MR. THOMAS:

12 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, what sentence did Al

13 Pilotto -- excuse me, Albert Tocco and his

14 codefendant, Mr. Crockett receive?

15 A. Mr. Crockett received a 20-year

16 sentence, and Mr. Tocco received a 200-year

17 sentence.

18 Q. And since this was in 1988, these were

19 nonparoleable guideline sentences, is that right?

20 A. Yes, I believe so.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: I have a question about

22 that. I have a question about that. Under the

23 guidelines, I don't think you get a 200-year

24 sentence. I think some of these took place before

_

636

1 1987, am I right, some of these charges? This may

2 be a pre, preguidelines case?

3 THE WITNESS: I believe so, sir.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Preguidelines case,

5 yeah. So that he may be eligible for parole.

6 MR. THOMAS: It is a point that we don't need

7 to worry about, I don't think. 200 years ought to

8 be enough to prove the point, I suppose.

9 BY MR. THOMAS:

10 Q. Now, with respect to that sentence,

11 could you take a look at Exhibit 112?

12 A. Yes, sir. I have 112 in front of me.

13 Q. Is that the judgment and commitment

14 order for Albert Tocco, sentencing him to a term

15 of imprisonment for 200 years?

16 A. It is.

17 MR. CARMELL: It is what it is.

18 I don't know why we have to burden Mr.

19 Pecoraro with reading an official court document.

20 I respect his knowledge as an FBI agent. If he

21 can make out all of that, he is a better person

22 than sometimes I am.

23 MR. THOMAS: Mr. Hearing Officer, I'm going

24 to go through this very quickly. I have a right

_

637

1 to put this on the record, have a witness describe

2 it, and have union member members hear it.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I understand. Briefly,

4 he said 200 years, and the document says 200

5 years, so --

6 BY MR. THOMAS:

7 Q. Is that what this document is?

8 A. Yes.

9 MR. THOMAS: I offer it, Mr. Vaira.

10 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's admitted. I have

11 not seen a 200-year sentence in some time; except

12 in murder cases, you get those.

13 (WHEREUPON, said document,

14 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

15 No. 112, for identification, was

16 offered and received in evidence as

17 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 112.)

18 BY MR. THOMAS:

19 Q. Did the trial judge in that case impose

20 a number of counts of -- the sentences with

21 respect to counts of conviction consecutively?

22 A. Yes, he did.

23 Q. If you could, were the convictions

24 affirmed on appeal?

_

638

1 A. Yes, sir, it was.

2 Q. Could you take a look at Exhibit 113,

3 please?

4 A. I have 113 in front of me.

5 Q. Is that a Court of Appeals affirmance

6 of those convictions?

7 A. Yes, it is.

8 MR. THOMAS: I would offer it at this time.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's admitted, sir.

10 (WHEREUPON, said document,

11 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibit

12 No. 113, for identification, was

13 offered and received in evidence as

14 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 113.)

15 BY MR. THOMAS:

16 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, who were the major

17 witnesses in that case?

18 A. There were numerous witnesses in that

19 case.

20 Q. Did the defendant's wife, Betty Tocco,

21 testify?

22 A. Yes, she did.

23 Q. What was the general subject matter of

24 her testimony?

_

639

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did she testify for the

2 government, or as a defense witness?

3 THE WITNESS: She testified for the

4 government. And the gist of her testimony were

5 numerous illegal acts that her husband was

6 involved in.

7 One of the, one of her points of

8 testimony was regarding the burial of the Spilotro

9 brothers in the cornfield in northern Indiana.

10 BY MR. THOMAS:

11 Q. We will come back to that in just a

12 moment.

13 Did she talk about any of the

14 substantive allegations with respect to extortion

15 or street tax and the like?

16 A. I believe she did.

17 Q. Did a guy by the name of Guy Bills

18 testify in that case?

19 A. Yes, he did.

20 Q. Who was Guy Bills?

21 A. Guy Bills was a chop shop car thief and

22 street tax collector for Albert Tocco.

23 Q. And if you could take a look at GEB

24 Exhibit 114, please.

_

640

1 A. I have 114 in front of me.

2 Q. This is a public document and pleading

3 in that case, is it not?

4 A. It's government's offer of proof, as to

5 the existence of a conspiracy.

6 Q. Have you had a chance in preparation

7 for your testimony to briefly review this paper?

8 A. Briefly.

9 Q. All right. Among other things, does it

10 describe the nature and subject matter of Guy

11 Bills' testimony as to the conspiracy?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. And the name Dauber, who was Mr.

14 Dauber?

15 A. Billy Dauber was a chop shop man, a car

16 thief, a street tax collector, and a, from my law

17 enforcement experience, he was the main enforcer

18 at one time for Albert Tocco.

19 Q. What happened eventually to Mr. Dauber?

20 A. He was murdered.

21 Q. For what reasons, according to the

22 trial testimony?

23 A. According to the trial testimony, he

24 was murdered because Albert Tocco thought that he

_

641

1 was cooperating.

2 Q. Was Albert Tocco right about that, or

3 do you know?

4 A. Yes, I do know. He was partially

5 right. Mr. Dauber had just began cooperating with

6 the government.

7 MR. THOMAS: I would offer 114, Mr. Vaira.

8 BY MR. THOMAS:

9 Q. All right. Now, you started to talk

10 about Mr. Tocco's --

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: Let there be a ruling,

12 gentlemen.

13 MR. THOMAS: Sorry.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: 114 is the government's

15 offer of proof as to the existence of a

16 conspiracy, right?

17 MR. THOMAS: Yes.

18 THE HEARING OFFICER: And this is probably

19 offered to establish the threshold, to prevent the

20 testimony of one to use against the other, is that

21 correct?

22 MR. THOMAS: Yes, it is. Specifically, well,

23 the reason the government wrote the document is

24 different from the reason that I'm offering it.

_

642

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: I realize that. But

2 I'm trying to get the picture. This is something

3 to get over evidentiary threshold.

4 MR. THOMAS: Correct, so the co-conspirators'

5 statements could be admissible.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Now, tell me why you

7 are offering. This is something that comes from a

8 public record. I'm trying to figure out where it

9 fits in here.

10 MR. THOMAS: In the course of this hearing,

11 you will hear extensive testimony with respect to

12 chop shop operations in the south side, Pilotto,

13 Tocco organizations. There is substantial

14 discussion in this pleading with respect to that.

15 We are not asking you to read every

16 word of it. But it is corroboration of testimony

17 that you will hear.

18 MR. CARMELL: If I could clarify, we might

19 move on quickly.

20 If this is being offered solely for the

21 purpose of Mr. Tocco and his conviction, and the

22 basis of it, and that's all there is, then it

23 doesn't mean anything as far as I'm concerned,

24 because you have the convictions on racketeering.

_

643

1 You have the judgment on them. And you have the

2 appeal.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: I think, Mr. Carmell,

4 they go a little further.

5 I think what they would like us to look

6 at, or someplace -- I mean, this is also a

7 memorandum of law, too. And sometimes in a

8 prosecution case, the judge will require the

9 prosecutor to make an oral presentation.

10 Sometimes, if it's so complicated, that the

11 government will write it out, and put it in this

12 form. So --

13 MR. CARMELL: To that extent, that he is

14 attempting to say that this is proof of existence

15 of these chop shop operations in a certain area,

16 no, then I don't believe that this is appropriate

17 proof.

18 This is simply, as you said, a

19 threshold, a memorandum of the government.

20 Whatever he wants to offer --

21 MR. THOMAS: May I make a proffer as to the

22 relevance?

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Go right ahead.

24 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, this chart embodies

_

644

1 a fact already proven in this case, that is, that

2 Al Pilotto, the vice-president of District Council

3 of the Laborers' Union, was the boss of the south

4 side of Chicago mob.

5 Included in that operation that he

6 controlled were various chop shops, and other

7 criminal activities involving street tax and the

8 like.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right.

10 MR. THOMAS: This pleading is in part a

11 narrative description of that operation, as it

12 continued after Pilotto's incarceration.

13 MR. CARMELL: Well --

14 MR. THOMAS: Let me finish.

15 MR. CARMELL: Sorry.

16 MR. THOMAS: Under the direction of Mr.

17 Tocco, with knowing involvement of Mr. Guzzino and

18 Mr. Palermo, who were also delegates to the

19 District Council.

20 There is an ongoing connection here,

21 your Honor. This is just simply one small piece

22 of the puzzle. I also have a proffer to you,

23 without being specific, that it does relate to

24 future testimony next week.

_

645

1 MR. CARMELL: Let's break it down.

2 According to what I just heard Mr.

3 Thomas say, Pilotto came in after Tocco, which

4 means that this has --

5 MR. THOMAS: No, no.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: Other way around.

7 MR. CARMELL: But to the extent that it is

8 anything other than the government's narrative in

9 a case of what they intended to prove, what Mr.

10 Thomas wants it to be is the proof with respect to

11 Albert Pilotto, Dominick Palermo, and the

12 gentleman named Guzzino, who had nothing to do

13 with the union.

14 MR. THOMAS: Could I ask a question of the

15 witness on that, your Honor?

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: All right. Go ahead.

17 BY MR. THOMAS:

18 Q. The testimony that is outlined in that

19 pleading, Mr. Pecoraro, is that substantially

20 similar to the testimony that was adduced at

21 trial, with respect to the operation of these chop

22 shops and the like?

23 A. Yes, it is substantially similar.

24 I was not present during all of the

_

646

1 testimony, but I would assume that was

2 substantially the same.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: The reason I'm just

4 asking, gentlemen, I do know where you are going.

5 We have, there is a lot of information to be put

6 in, to be connected up later. I'm just looking at

7 it as an offer of proof.

8 When you have these offers of proof, I

9 have no doubt that there was a conviction in this

10 case, so there was substantial evidence. It was

11 accepted by the jury. I'm looking over here. I

12 just have a question about relying on an offer of

13 proof, when we have a case, when you have a case

14 that's in, or the testimony is -- you can do

15 this. I mean, this is, there is no question this

16 is a public document. Anyone can go see it and

17 look at it.

18 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, if I could. All

19 these arguments go to the weight, not to the

20 admissibility.

21 MR. CARMELL: No, there is one more point,

22 your Honor.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, sir.

24 MR. CARMELL: One more point, Mr. Vaira.

_

647

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Yes, sir.

2 MR. CARMELL: If you look at the verdict

3 form, for example, there is a not guilty on

4 Count 14. Count 14 is a chop shop, supposedly

5 chop shop count.

6 So, we don't know with this, because as

7 you pointed out, which is correct, there are a

8 number of not guilties on this. This proffer may

9 have been a proffer at the time, but it's apparent

10 that the jury didn't believe all of it.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: The proffer is purely

12 to energize a rule of evidence so the order of

13 proof then can come in and then the judge will

14 then instruct the jury, ladies and gentlemen, I

15 have now found the existence of the conspiracy.

16 Sometimes the judge will delay in doing

17 that. You may from here on out view the testimony

18 of one of these conspirators as being in aid of

19 the other conspirators. It's an evidentiary guide

20 is what it is.

21 Here is what I will do. Offers of

22 proof sometimes don't become proof and probably

23 other ways to talk about this.

24 Here is what we are going to do with

_

648

1 Exhibit 114 in this particular proceeding. If one

2 accepts the document, that doesn't mean the

3 document has any weight.

4 MR. THOMAS: Right.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: Somebody has got to

6 connect it up. I right now have some question

7 about the evidence in the proposed offer of proof

8 here. I am not going to throw this away. We will

9 take 114, but 114 has to be corroborated in some

10 fashion. I am just saying --

11 MR. THOMAS: That is all I am asking.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: I am just saying we are

13 not going to accept the Government's offer of

14 proof because the judge doesn't do that either.

15 The judge says okay, you have proved one, proved

16 two, proved three. I will go along with that so

17 far, but that doesn't mean that it ever became

18 proved.

19 MR. THOMAS: I completely accept that. You

20 are admitting the document and its relevance or

21 its weight is to be determined as the hearing

22 proceeds.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: More than that, more

24 than relevance or weight. That is a different

_

649

1 proceeding. Its probative value is going to be

2 proved. Weight, forget that. It's going to be

3 proved or demonstrated that it has some probative

4 value and what portion of it is.

5 MR. THOMAS: I understand your ruling.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: It's corroborated by

7 something else. Just because the Government said

8 and used this to be a threshold doesn't mean that

9 was all the proof.

10 Mr. Pecoraro was probably right in some

11 of it. Some of it was substantially the same, but

12 that's to be seen. But keep in mind that this

13 is -- its probative value must be demonstrated.

14 MR. THOMAS: Okay.

15 BY MR. THOMAS:

16 Q. If we could, very briefly,

17 Mr. Pecoraro, did Guy Bills testify in that case?

18 A. Yes, sir, he did.

19 Q. Did Mr. Soteras testify in that case?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Pecoraro, you were

22 the case agent. Were you present at counsel table

23 throughout the trial?

24 THE WITNESS: No, sir.

_

650

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Were you in the

2 courtroom throughout the trial?

3 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: Were you in the

5 courtroom throughout the trial?

6 THE WITNESS: No, sir.

7 THE HEARING OFFICER: You didn't sit besides

8 the prosecutors.

9 THE WITNESS: I don't make it a practice to

10 sit next to prosecutors.

11 THE HEARING OFFICER: The case agent always

12 sits beside the prosecutor.

13 THE WITNESS: Mr. Vaira, we had Special Agent

14 Wayne Zydron was the administrative special

15 agent. I was the street case agent.

16 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. That is my

17 question. You weren't the one who sat through the

18 entire testimony.

19 THE WITNESS: No, sir. What I meant was I

20 don't prefer to do that when I don't have to.

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Somebody from

22 the FBI or whoever, whichever agency is doing it,

23 sits besides the prosecutor.

24 THE WITNESS: Yes.

_

651

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: Hands him documents and

2 so forth.

3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: And that's always been

5 the case since I first became a prosecutor. I

6 remember one time I told an FBI agent that I don't

7 think that was necessary and the message was sent

8 down to me this is the way that this is done, you

9 jerk, and this man is here to help you. Now keep

10 him in it. So, that was it. I know that that

11 occurs.

12 So, you were the street man.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 BY MR. THOMAS:

15 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, with respect to Exhibit

16 114, I just want to go through some of the names.

17 Did Mr. Bills testify?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. And these are names coming out of the

20 exhibit so that everyone understands.

21 Did Mr. Soteras testify?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. Did Mr. Kulma testify?

24 A. Yes, sir.

_

652

1 Q. Did a Mr. Rosenstein testify?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Did a Ms. Karen Cepil, C-E-P-I-L,

4 testify?

5 A. To the best of my recollection she

6 did.

7 Q. Did a Mr. Robert Brecka testify?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Did a Mr. Robert Walker testify?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Did a Mr. Walter Blumenthal testify?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. Did a Mr. Sheldon Fishman testify?

14 A. Yes, sir. I am relying on my memory

15 now. I believe all of these individuals have

16 testified in that case.

17 Q. Did a Mr. Roger Senese, S-E-N-E-S-E,

18 testify?

19 A. Mr. Senese, yes, sir.

20 Q. Did a Ms. Valerie Walker testify?

21 A. I believe so.

22 Q. And did someone with the last name of

23 Panice, P-A-N-I-C-E, testify?

24 A. Herb Panice, yes, sir.

_

653

1 Q. I will stop there. That tracks the

2 names listed in the offer of proof.

3 Now, you were talking, Agent Pecoraro,

4 about Betty Tocco's testimony. I think you

5 mentioned the Spilotro brothers. Who were the

6 Spilotro brothers?

7 A. Tony and Michael Spilotro. They were

8 Chicago -- from Chicago. Tony was known to law

9 enforcement authorities as an organized crime

10 figure. He had been out in Las Vegas for years.

11 His brother Michael owned a restaurant in Chicago.

12 Q. And with respect to organized crime

13 activity, what was the relevance of Las Vegas?

14 What connection is there between that city and the

15 Chicago mob?

16 A. Well, there is a lot of connection

17 between Las Vegas and the Chicago mob. Tony

18 Spilotro was one of the Chicago mob's main guys,

19 so to speak, in Las Vegas.

20 Q. And we'll talk about this with another

21 witness, but there is a criminal case involving

22 skimming of gambling receipts from Las Vegas where

23 people from the Chicago mob were convicted?

24 A. Yes, sir.

_

654

1 Q. Including Joe Lombardo, Sr.?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. Did the Spilotro brothers to your

4 knowledge have any involvement with any such

5 skimming activities?

6 Again, without specific knowledge but

7 based on your law enforcement sources.

8 A. Well, they were not involved I don't

9 believe in the case that you referred to, but

10 there were other activities. I can't really go

11 into that. I don't really recall.

12 Q. We will move on then.

13 What ultimately happened to the

14 Spilotro brothers?

15 A. They were murdered in June of 1986 and

16 found in a shallow grave in a cornfield in

17 Indiana.

18 Q. Was there testimony relating to that

19 murder or those murders in the Tocco case?

20 A. There was testimony -- I'm not sure if

21 during the actual trial there was testimony. I

22 don't recall. There were hearings of that sort

23 where Betty Tocco offered information about the

24 burial of the Spilotro brothers.

_

655

1 Q. So, in that testimony or in those

2 debriefings, what did Ms. Betty Tocco as a

3 cooperating witness relate about either

4 Mr. Tocco's involvement or anyone else's

5 involvement in the burial of the Spilotro

6 brothers?

7 A. Mrs. Tocco related that on Father's

8 Day, I believe it was June 16, 1986, she was going

9 to have a family barbecue. Early that morning

10 about 6 a.m. she received a telephone call from

11 her husband, Albert Tocco.

12 He was very upset and irate and

13 screaming and yelling at her to come and pick him

14 up. He had to give her directions. He was

15 approximately 50 miles away in northern Indiana.

16 Following his directions, Betty Tocco

17 drove to an area. I think it was Route 41. I

18 really don't recall. To an area that was

19 approximately a mile away.

20 Now, this occurred in 1986. She was

21 telling us about it in 1989. Approximately a mile

22 from where the Spilotro brother's bodies were

23 recovered.

24 She related that she drove down there

_

656

1 and picked Albert up. He got in the car. He was

2 dressed in blue work clothes and he was all dirty

3 and his clothes were dirty and he got in the car

4 and he started not so much speaking to her but

5 speaking. He was angry and telling her we --

6 using bad language and we -- Nicky, Tootsie and

7 Chickie, who were described to us as Nicky

8 Guzzino, Tootsie Palermo --

9 Q. Tootsie Palermo is Dominick Palermo?

10 A. Dominick Palermo.

11 Q. The man who is also a delegate to the

12 District Council?

13 A. Yes. And Chickie Roviero from northern

14 Indiana had just -- the night before had buried

15 the Spilotro brothers and that something had

16 occurred that night that frightened the three

17 individuals and they split up in the dark in what

18 is a wooded area. It's a very remote area.

19 Q. Let me stop you just so we are clear on

20 this. This is Ms. Tocco relating what her husband

21 told her when she picked him up?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Okay. Please continue.

24 A. And that they got split up, one or two

_

657

1 people -- two people in the group had a

2 walkie-talkie. Albert Tocco didn't have a

3 walkie-talkie. The other two eventually left him

4 there.

5 He spent hours or all night in the

6 area. He couldn't get back until he found a phone

7 booth on U.S. 41 I believe it was, and that's when

8 he called his wife and she went down there to pick

9 him up.

10 They then proceeded to his sanitation

11 company -- first they went to Chickie Roviero's

12 house, Mrs. Tocco said, and knocked at the door

13 and Chickie Roviero was not there.

14 They then went to Albert Tocco's

15 sanitation company, and there were several calls

16 made to try to locate these individuals and they

17 were negative.

18 Mrs. Tocco then drove with her husband

19 back to their residence.

20 Q. Are you familiar, sir, with the

21 findings of the coroner's report with respect to

22 the Spilotro brothers?

23 A. Vaguely. I never saw the coroner's

24 report. There was some talk that the brothers

_

658

1 were badly beaten. They were not shot or there

2 weren't any stab wounds, that they may possibly

3 have been buried alive.

4 Q. And just so the record is clear,

5 Ms. Tocco's testimony and information related --

6 that she related to you was that four people had

7 been involved in that, in the burial?

8 I just want to go over the names is

9 all.

10 A. I think I said three.

11 Q. I'm sorry. Mr. Tocco.

12 A. I'm sorry. Counting Albert Tocco.

13 THE HEARING OFFICER: Counting Albert is

14 four.

15 BY MR. THOMAS:

16 Q. Mr. Tocco, Albert Tocco. Who else?

17 A. Nicholas Guzzino, Dominick Palermo and

18 I think it's Albert Roviero, Chickie Roviero.

19 Q. I think I misspoke earlier when I made

20 reference to Mr. Guzzino as a delegate of District

21 Council. Did he have any LIUNA ties to your

22 knowledge?

23 A. Yes, he did.

24 Q. And what was that?

_

659

1 A. I believe he was involved with the

2 Laborers Pension Board. He was a trustee on the

3 pension board and he was on the Local 5 Executive

4 Board.

5 Q. But not actually a delegate to the

6 District Council? Sorry.

7 A. I believe, to the best of my

8 knowledge. I never really got involved in that

9 portion of the Laborers union.

10 Q. You mentioned he was a trustee on the

11 pension fund. Based on your knowledge of

12 Mr. Guzzino and the testimony of Betty Tocco and

13 the conviction we are going to talk about later

14 on -- did Mr. Guzzino, by the way, have any

15 qualifications to be a trustee on a pension fund?

16 MR. CARMELL: Object.

17 BY THE WITNESS:

18 A. I have --

19 MR. CARMELL: I am going to object. That is

20 not within his --

21 THE HEARING OFFICER: If he was on, he was

22 on. That's all.

23 MR. THOMAS: I will do that through another

24 witness.

_

660

1 MR. CARMELL: He was never a trustee

2 besides. But he wasn't.

3 THE HEARING OFFICER: But it doesn't --

4 MR. CARMELL: Besides all that.

5 THE HEARING OFFICER: We will worry about

6 that when we get to this. I don't think this

7 witness is in a position to judge that.

8 MR. THOMAS: I will move on.

9 BY MR. THOMAS:

10 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, did you corroborate

11 Mrs. Tocco's story as it evolved three years

12 later? Did you do anything to corroborate that

13 she was telling the truth?

14 A. We tried to corroborate that situation

15 as much we could. We had corroborated most of

16 what Betty Tocco told us.

17 The way we attempted to corroborate her

18 story of going down and picking up Albert Tocco

19 who said he had just buried the Spilotros, we

20 asked Betty Tocco if she could take us back to

21 that area and she did and she took us to the phone

22 booth where Albert Tocco allegedly made his

23 telephone call from.

24 Q. Now --

_

661

1 A. We also --

2 Q. Let me stop you. Were you familiar

3 with that area?

4 A. I had been there when the bodies were

5 recovered.

6 Q. Okay.

7 A. She had never been to the grave, actual

8 grave site.

9 Q. How close were the two spots to each

10 other?

11 A. To the best I recall -- I would have to

12 say the telephone booth was on U.S. 41 and the

13 bodies were buried about a mile off on a side

14 road, roughly.

15 Q. Well, what I am getting at is to what

16 extent did Mrs. Tocco's ability to drive you to

17 the phone booth, corroborate her story? Was this

18 a location that would have been easy to find

19 without having been there before?

20 A. No, I don't think so. If you drive

21 down U.S. 41 you pass every point. She passed a

22 telephone booth that was almost adjacent to the

23 road that the bodies were found off of in a

24 cornfield.

_

662

1 Q. Okay. Thank you. In the debriefing of

2 Ms. Tocco and indeed during her testimony as well,

3 when Mr. Tocco got in the car, did he say anything

4 to her with respect to whether this kind of thing

5 would have happened under Al Pilotto's

6 organization?

7 A. He made a statement according to

8 Mrs. Tocco that this would have never happened if

9 Al was there.

10 Q. Where was Al in 1986?

11 A. He was incarcerated.

12 Q. And who took his place as head of that

13 organization?

14 A. As best I know Albert Tocco and

15 Dominick Palermo shared that responsibility.

16 Q. Okay. Moving on then, when -- you had

17 ongoing debriefings and workings with Betty Tocco

18 as a witness, did you not?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. As part of that cooperative

21 relationship did she identify other ties between

22 Mr. Guzzino and Mr. Palermo to Albert Tocco,

23 specifically with respect to transfers of any

24 money?

_

663

1 THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume that

2 question -- he has debriefed Mrs. Tocco prior to

3 this trial a number of times.

4 MR. THOMAS: This is coming from his

5 debriefings of her at the time, your Honor.

6 THE HEARING OFFICER: That's what I am

7 saying.

8 MR. THOMAS: Not recently.

9 THE HEARING OFFICER: No. I mean as part of

10 your investigation you debriefed Mrs. Tocco,

11 that's where you are getting this information

12 from.

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. You interviewed

15 her in the course of your duties. Okay.

16 BY MR. THOMAS:

17 Q. What, if anything, did Ms. Tocco relate

18 with respect to any transfers of any money between

19 Mr. Tocco and Mr. Guzzino and Mr. Palermo after

20 Mr. Tocco's arrest and incarceration?

21 A. Well, there were a number of episodes

22 of which you're speaking. On several occasions

23 Albert Tocco -- Betty Tocco would visit Albert in

24 prison and on three occasions that I was aware of

_

664

1 Albert asked Betty to go with Nick Guzzino on two

2 occasions to get money from Nick, $5,000 on each

3 of two occasions, for Clarence Crockett's defense

4 and then on a -- for his lawyer and then on

5 another occasion he told Betty to tell Nick that

6 he needed I think the figure was $20,000 or

7 something and Nick said it will be taken care of.

8 There were several situations where

9 Nick Guzzino gave Betty several hundred dollars in

10 an envelope for Albert in jail or for commissary

11 or whatever, and on at least one occasion that I

12 recall Betty Tocco went to Al Pilotto's house and

13 received an envelope with money.

14 Q. Even when Mr. Pilotto was actually

15 convicted and incarcerated there was still money

16 changing hands between these parties?

17 THE HEARING OFFICER: I believe you mean

18 Mr. Tocco.

19 MR. THOMAS: Actually right now I am

20 referring to Mr. Pilotto who was convicted in

21 1982.

22 BY THE WITNESS:

23 A. Mrs. Tocco received the money from

24 Mr. Pilotto's wife according to Betty Tocco.

_

665

1 Q. And who was that money for, Mrs. Tocco

2 or Mr. Tocco or someone else?

3 A. I don't recall specifically.

4 Q. During the course of the Tocco trial,

5 was there testimony about Mr. Tocco's interest in

6 having certain witnesses not testify against him?

7 A. Yes, sir, there was.

8 Q. Could you relate what that was,

9 specifically with respect to someone by the name

10 of Panice?

11 A. Yes, on one occasion Albert Tocco

12 instructed his wife Betty to go to Dominick

13 Palermo and Nick Guzzino and tell them that he

14 wished Herb Panice would drop dead of a heart

15 attack.

16 And Betty was -- Betty Tocco was very

17 upset about this because she thought -- she felt

18 as if it was a contract to have him killed, and

19 she relayed that information to myself and

20 Assistant U.S. Attorneys involved.

21 And we had Betty go speak to Dominick

22 Palermo and Nicholas Guzzino and pass that

23 information along and report back to us what was

24 answered and the reply was --

_

666

1 Q. Did that happen?

2 A. Yes. And the reply was that Dominick

3 Palermo told her that they couldn't get to Herb

4 Panice, there were too many people around him, in

5 other words, I would assume law enforcement, and

6 in fact he was being guarded by FBI agents. So.

7 Q. But the conversation between Ms. Tocco

8 and Mr. Palermo did in fact occur relaying

9 Mr. Tocco's request?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Moving on then to the Palermo and

12 Guzzino case. I want you to take a look at

13 Exhibits 107 and 108, please.

14 Were you involved not as case agent but

15 as one of many law enforcement officers in the

16 case known as U.S. vs. Dominick Palermo, et al.?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. And that was a case brought in the

19 Northern District of Indiana, is that right?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. In summary, you have got Exhibit 107 in

22 front of you which again is a very lengthy

23 indictment. We are not going to read it verbatim

24 obviously. Could you tell us what that case was

_

667

1 about?

2 A. This was also a racketeering case and

3 it was I believe a 30-count indictment. It

4 involved acts of racketeering, interstate travel

5 in aid of racketeering, conspiracy, interstate

6 gambling violations. That's what it was about.

7 Q. And you've touched upon this in your

8 earlier testimony. But what relationship, if any,

9 did this have to the kinds of activity that you

10 described occurring in the south side of Chicago?

11 A. This case also involved the collection

12 of street tax, the collection, the illegal

13 collection of gambling debts, that type of

14 situation, all of which occurred in northern

15 Indiana.

16 Q. And were monies from that operation

17 transported over state lines into Illinois?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. And was that part of the charging

20 aspect of this case?

21 A. Yes, sir. The FBI had electronic

22 surveillance, in other words, microphones,

23 installed at a restaurant, The Taste of Italy,

24 which is in Calumet City, Illinois.

_

668

1 And as best I recall, for a period of

2 three or four or five months, we monitored those

3 microphones.

4 And frequently, regularly, almost

5 regularly, Dominick Palermo and Nicky Guzzino

6 would go to that restaurant, sit there, and have

7 conversations with people that worked for them,

8 collecting their street tax from Bob Louis' games,

9 and illegal gambling and vending machines from

10 northern Indiana. They did that several hours a

11 day for a period of time.

12 THE HEARING OFFICER: Did you have, the FBI,

13 an actual bug in the restaurant?

14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. We had several.

15 BY MR. THOMAS:

16 Q. And was that, the evidence from that

17 bug, a large part of the evidence in the case

18 known as U.S. vs. Palermo, et al.?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Were the defendants convicted in that

21 case?

22 A. Yes, they were.

23 Q. Did they go to jail?

24 A. Yes, they did.

_

669

1 MR. THOMAS: Your Honor, at this time I would

2 offer 107 and 108, the indictment and the

3 appellate decision affirming the convictions.

4 THE HEARING OFFICER: I'll admit them.

5 (WHEREUPON, said documents,

6 previously marked GEB Attorney Exhibits

7 No. 107 and 108 for identification was

8 offered and received in evidence as

9 GEB Attorney Exhibit No. 107 and 108.)

10 BY MR. THOMAS:

11 Q. Now, Mr. Pecoraro, you mentioned The

12 Taste of Italy. That was a restaurant in, I think

13 you said Calumet City here in Illinois, Chicago

14 suburb?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. During any of those reported

17 conversations, were Guzzino and Palermo picked up

18 actually talking to Al Tocco about any matters in

19 particular?

20 A. As I recall, on one occasion, Albert

21 Tocco came to the Taste of Italy restaurant, and

22 notified Nicholas Guzzino that the Chicago Heights

23 police had stopped a strange car that appeared to

24 be surveilling the home of Nicholas Guzzino, and

_

670

1 they confronted this gentleman driving the car,

2 who was a downtown Chicago FBI agent. He

3 eventually identified himself as an FBI agent.

4 And that information somehow got to

5 Albert Tocco, who we picked up on the wire telling

6 Nicholas Guzzino that his house was being

7 surveilled.

8 Q. Warning him, in effect?

9 A. I would imagine that's what he was

10 doing.

11 Q. Sir, based on your career in law

12 enforcement, and specifically your career working

13 organized crime cases, are you familiar with the

14 term, made member and associate of organized

15 crime?

16 A. Yes, I am.

17 Q. Was Al Tocco a made member?

18 A. I would assume so. He's believed by

19 law enforcement authorities to be a made member.

20 Q. How about Dominick --

21 MR. CARMELL: Hold it.

22 MR. THOMAS: Sorry.

23 MR. CARMELL: I appreciate the candor of the

24 witness. But I don't believe that that is

_

671

1 responsive, from his knowledge. He said he

2 assumed so. And I trust that he means he doesn't

3 have personal knowledge.

4 I think I'd like to have that answer

5 stricken, and get into what his knowledge is, if

6 that's going to be --

7 MR. THOMAS: That is for cross.

8 THE HEARING OFFICER: He said he assumed so.

9 It stands for that. It stands for the fact that

10 he assumes rather than he knows; his knowledge

11 that doesn't at least at this point appear to be

12 substantiated.

13 MR. CARMELL: Fine.

14 BY MR. THOMAS:

15 Q. Mr. Pecoraro, based on your familiarity

16 with both the Tocco case as well as the Palermo

17 case, is it your opinion that Mr. Palermo was, at

18 a minimum, an associate of organized crime?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. And do you have an opinion as to

21 whether or not he was a made member?

22 A. The made members here in Chicago is

23 quite different than a made member might be in New

24 York, let's say.

_

672

1 Q. How is that?

2 A. To rise to the levels of being a boss

3 in the Chicago outfit, the boss of a street crew,

4 I would assume, from my almost 25 years experience

5 in the FBI, that you have to be a made member.

6 And I would assume that Dominick

7 Palermo and Albert Tocco were both made members.

8 Although I did not ever view a ceremony

9 or overhear a ceremony where they were being made

10 members, they were made.

11 Q. Mr. Palermo, to the best of your

12 knowledge, in addition to being -- both Mr.

13 Guzzino and Mr. Palermo were affiliated with Local

14 5 here in Chicago, correct?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. And to the best of your knowledge, Mr.

17 Palermo was a delegate to this District Council,

18 is that right?

19 A. He was an officer of some sort to the

20 District Council.

21 MR. THOMAS: Thank you. Nothing more.

22 MR. CARMELL: No questions.

23 THE HEARING OFFICER: No questions? Thank

24 you, sir.

_

673

1 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

2 (Witness Excused.)

3