In the Matter of Local 1058
Laborers’ International Union of North America
Independent Hearing Officer
Docket No. 00-08T
Decided March 9, 2001
Order and Memorandum
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This Order and Memorandum addresses the Complaint for Trusteeship filed by the General Executive Board Attorney (GEB Attorney) on March 21, 2000, against Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local Union 1058 (Local 1058) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The Independent Hearing Officer (IHO) granted the GEB Attorney’s request to hold the hearing on July 10-13, 2000, and July 24-27, 2000.
Prior to the hearing, Local 1058 filed a Motion for Full Disclosure, a Motion for Full Disclosure of Documents, and a Motion for Witness List. The IHO granted the motions in part and denied them in part. See IHO Order of May 31, 2000. Thereafter, Local 1058 filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania to prohibit the GEB Attorney from proceeding with the hearing. The Court denied the motion. See Construction, Gen. Laborers and Material Handlers, Local Union 1058 v. Laborers Int’l Union North America, No. 00-934 (W.D. Pa. filed June 9, 2000).
The GEB Attorney’s Complaint for Trusteeship sets forth, in 21 numbered paragraphs, the factual allegations surrounding the charges. In the Complaint, the GEB Attorney sets out the alleged structure of the Pittsburgh La Cosa Nostra family and Local 1058’s association with that organization. The factual allegations assert that most current and former officers of Local 1058 knowingly associate or associated with members of organized crime. The GEB Attorney’s Complaint names the following as current Local 1058 officers: Joseph LaQuatra,[1] Louis Dennis Martire, Gerald Pecora Jr., John LaRocca Jr., Joseph Frydrych, Philip Ameris, and Michael LaQuatra. The Complaint alleges that a trusteeship is necessary to eradicate Local 1058’s ties to organized crime and to restore democratic practices within the union. The Complaint also alleges that the Local 1058 officers’ failure to investigate the alleged organized crime ties of its officers warrants a trusteeship.
TRUSTEESHIP REQUIREMENTS
The Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) gives a governing body, in this case LIUNA, discretion in placing its member organizations in trusteeship to correct certain problems. See 29 U.S.C. §§ 461-466; LIUNA International Union Constitution (International Constitution), Article IX, Section 7. Courts will only override this discretion if the union brings its complaint in bad faith or for an improper purpose. See 29 U.S.C. § 464(c). Permissible purposes for establishing a trusteeship include, inter alia, “correcting corruption or financial malpractice, . . . [and] restoring democratic procedures . . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 462. In addition, the International Constitution and the Ethics and Disciplinary Procedure (EDP) permit LIUNA to impose a trusteeship over a subordinate body to correct mismanagement and corruption caused by the officers’ knowingly associating with organized crime.
A governing body seeking to impose a trusteeship upon its subsidiary must give the targeted entity a full and fair hearing. See 29 U.S.C. § 464(c). Under 29 U.S.C. § 462, the minimum requirements for a fair hearing are: notice of the charges; presentation of evidence and witnesses; and an opportunity for cross-examination. See Int’l Bhd. of Boilermakers v. Local Lodge D461, Cement, Lime, Gypsum and Allied Workers Div. of Int’l Bhd. of Boilermakers, 663 F. Supp. 1031, 1034 (M.D. Ga. 1987), aff’d, 667 F. Supp. 835 F.2d 1439 (11th Cir. 1987). In this matter, Local 1058 received proper notice of the hearing. The hearing consisted of ten days of testimony. At the hearing, the GEB Attorney presented five witnesses and 123 exhibits. The attorneys for Local 1058, a former United States Attorney and a former Assistant United States Attorney, engaged in extensive cross-examination. Following the GEB Attorney’s presentation there was a recess of one week, after which Local 1058 presented its defense. The union attorneys called 21 witnesses and entered eight exhibits into the record. Each party filed extensive post-hearing briefs.
EVIDENTIARY CONSIDERATIONS
Burden of Proof
The GEB Attorney must establish the grounds for a trusteeship by a preponderance of the evidence. See In the Matter of Local 225, IHO Order and Memorandum, 97-54T (March 17, 1998), citing, In the Matter of Construction & Laborers’ District Council of Chicago and Vicinity (Chicago District Council), IHO Order and Memorandum, 97-30T (February 7, 1998). In this case, the GEB Attorney avers that, inter alia, the current and former Local 1058 Executive Board members’ knowing association with organized crime figures warrants the imposition of a trusteeship. Under the EDP, the term “knowingly associate” means that: (a) an individual knew that the person with whom he or she was associating was a member or associate of the La Cosa Nostra (LCN); (b) the association related directly or indirectly to the affairs of the union; and, (c) the association was more than fleeting or casual. EDP Section 1.
The requirement that the knowing association be “directly or indirectly related to the affairs of the union” is liberally construed to effect the purpose of the EDP. In the Matter of Rocco J. Napoli and Thomas J. Fallacara (Fallacara), IHO Order and Memorandum, 96-65D (September 25, 1997). The major goal of the LUINA reform process is to rid the union of the influence of organized crime.[2] Id. The phrase “directly or indirectly related to the affairs of the union” encompasses any reasonable relationship to the affairs of the union, its members, or its officers. Id. The relationship to the affairs of the union need only reflect that the “knowing association” permits undesirable individuals to have easy access to the union officers. Id.
Under the EDP, the GEB Attorney must demonstrate that the charged parties’ association was “more than fleeting or casual.” EDP Section 1; Cf., United States v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters), 824 F. Supp. 410, 414 (S.D.N.Y. 1993); United Sates v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 745 F. Supp. 908, 909 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)(contact that was “knowing, purposeful and not fleeting” constituted “knowing association”) aff’d, 941 F.2d 1292 (2d Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1091 (1992).[3] In order to establish knowing association, the GEB Attorney must first prove that the charged party knew that the person with whom they were associating was a member or an associate of the LCN. EDP Section 1. “Knowledge” can be established in three ways: (1) the individual had actual knowledge that the person with whom they were associating was and LCN member; (2) the individual reasonably should have known that the person with whom they were associating was an LCN member; and, (3) the individual deliberately remained ignorant of facts that would demonstrate that the person with whom they were associating was an LCN member. See Fallacara, 96-65D.
Actual knowledge may be established by drawing rational inferences from the facts and circumstances surrounding the case which support that the charged party knew that their conduct was unauthorized or illegal. See, e.g., Liparota v. United States, 471 U.S. 419, 434 (1985); United States v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 764 F. Supp. 797, 801-02 (S.D.N.Y. 1991), aff’d without opinion, 956 F.2d 1161 (2d Cir. 1992). In the absence of direct evidence of knowledge of a person’s organized crime ties, knowledge may be inferred from the duration and quality of the association. See, e.g., Investigations Officer v. Senese, Decision of Independent Administrator (July 12, 1990), aff’d, United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters (Senese and Talerico), aff’d, 941 F.2d 1292 (2d Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1091 (1992). Facts establishing constructive knowledge sufficiently prove violations of the EDP. See Fallacara, 96-65D. Finally, intentional ignorance is the legal equivalent of knowledge. See, e.g., United States v. Antzoulatos, 962 F.2d 720, 724 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 919 (1992); United States v. Jewell, 532 F.2d 697, 700 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 951 (1976). Intentional ignorance exists where a person “recognizing the likelihood of wrongdoing, nonetheless consciously refuses to take basic investigatory steps.” United States v. Saint Michael’s Credit Union, 880 F.2d 579, 585 (1st Cir. 1989).
Hearsay Evidence
GEB trusteeship proceedings are similar to administrative proceedings in which the “rules governing the admission of evidence . . . are considerably more relaxed.” United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters (Wilson, Dickens & Weber), 978 F.2d 68, 72 (2d Cir. 1992); Rocker v. Celebrezze, 358 F.2d 119, 122 (2d Cir. 1966) (footnote omitted). Accordingly, reliable hearsay evidence is admissible in labor arbitration. See, e.g., Associated Cleaning Consultants and International Bhd. of Printing and Allied Trades Local 327, 94 LA 1246 (1990); In the Matter of Joseph P. Crincoli (Crincoli), IHO Order and Memorandum, 97-04D (Oct. 27, 1997); Chicago District Council, 97-30T; Elkouri and Elkouri, How Arbitration Works (4th ed. 1994). The hearing officer in union disciplinary proceedings arising under the Teamsters Consent Decree regularly admits hearsay evidence. See United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters (Cimino), 964 F.2d 1308, 1312 (2d Cir. 1992) aff’g, 777 F. Supp. 1130 (S.D.N.Y. 1991); Senese & Talerico, 941 F.2d at 1297. As is the practice and custom of labor arbitrators, the IHO bases hearsay evidence decisions on a thorough review of what is probative and reliable. See Chicago District Council, 97-30T; see also Senese & Talerico, 941 F.2d at 1298, citing, Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 402 (1971).
In the past, the IHO accepted informant information under strict qualifications. Those restrictions are repeated here. Informant information will only be accepted if it serves as the basis of a qualified law enforcement person’s expert opinion. Further, the informant must have provided the information to a professional law enforcement agency. That law enforcement agency must have a formal system of evaluating and qualifying informant information. Acceptance of informant information is not automatic; the IHO evaluates each law enforcement agency on a case by case basis. See In the Matter of John Matassa Jr. (Matassa Jr.), IHO Order and Memorandum, 98-43D (May 12, 1999); In the Matter of Bruno Caruso, Frank Caruso, Leo Caruso (Caruso), IHO Order and Memorandum, 99-12D (January 10, 2001). The IHO’s evaluation method is similar to the procedure employed by the Independent Administrator of the teamsters union.[4] See Senese and Talerico, 745 F. Supp. 908 (S.D.N.Y. 1990).
At the hearing, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent Greenbank explained how the FBI develops a confidential informant. Initially, the FBI opens a “suitability inquiry” file, assigning the individual a number and a code name. Hearing Transcript (Tr.) 65. In the first three months, the handling agent and the agent’s immediate supervisor evaluate information received from the source. Tr. 65-66. During that time, any indication that the informant is providing false information prevents the FBI from converting the individual to “full informant” status. Id. Following a successful “suitability inquiry,” which can extend up to six months, the FBI deems an informant reliable and operates the informant on a continuing basis. Id. Special Agent Greenback added that, in the 1980s, the United States Attorney General issued specific guidelines for all federal agencies handling informants. Id. Federal agents give these guidelines to each informant and specifically explain every guideline. Id.
WITNESSES
GEB Expert Witnesses
Special Agent Greenbank
Special Agent Greenbank (Agent Greenbank) began his FBI employment in 1975. Tr. 31. He was first assigned to the Philadelphia office for two years, and then assigned to the FBI’s Pittsburgh office in 1979. Id. Agent Greenbank primarily investigates organized crime and narcotics in the Pittsburgh area. Id. Agent Greenbank is fully knowledgeable about the various organized crime investigative techniques employed by the FBI. During his 26 years of investigating organized crime, Agent Greenbank has been the case agent on numerous investigations. Tr. 31-33. He has executed search warrants, contributed to affidavits for search warrants and electronic surveillance, and testified numerous times in criminal prosecutions.[5] Id.
Agent Greenbank’s knowledge of the Pittsburgh LCN prior to 1979 stems from working with other agents assigned to the office, reviewing FBI intelligence files, and talking to other state and local law enforcement agencies. Tr. 35. He has also interviewed cooperating witnesses with first hand knowledge of Pittsburgh’s organized crime activities. Tr. 36. Agent Greenbank offered his opinion as an expert on organized crime; the IHO accepted Agent Greenbank as an expert in this area.
Agent Greenback based his expert opinion, in part, on two informants set out below as Confidential Sources 12 and 13.
Agent Greenbank identified Confidential Source 12 (Source 12) as an employee of the Allegheny Car Wash (Car Wash) from 1974 until 1977. Tr. 64. The Car Wash was owned by Pittsburgh LCN boss, John LaRocca Sr. (LaRocca Sr.). Tr. 36, 63. Source 12’s Car Wash employment began before Source 12 become an FBI informant. Tr. 67. At the time Source 12 began cooperating with the FBI, this informant had a criminal record. Tr. 76. Source 12 received some payments from the FBI for providing information. Tr. 78.
Source 12 knew the Car Wash owner’s identity and many of the Car Wash visitors. Id. Source 12 reported information several times a month to FBI handling agents.[6] Tr. 64. The information Source 12 reported included: all the license plate numbers of every car entering the Car Wash property, particularly any cars that entered for the sole purpose of seeing LaRocca Sr.,[7] and the subject matter of meetings that occurred between LaRocca Sr., various LCN members, associates, and Local 1058 officers. Tr. 67-124. Agent Greenbank reviewed Source 12’s file, which was replete with the handling agents’ verifications deeming Source 12 accurate and reliable. Id.
During the 1970s and 1980s, the FBI penetrated the Pittsburgh LCN family with a confidential informant known as Confidential Source 13 (Source 13). Tr. 125. Source 13 was closely associated with the LaRocca LCN family since the 1950s. Id. Source 13 was a member of Local 1058 and held an executive position with the union at some point. Id. The FBI designated Source 13 as a top echelon informant. Id. Independent FBI surveillance corroborated Source 13’s information; Source 13 was often observed with LCN members. Id. Agent Greenbank never met this informant; he based his knowledge on information garnered by various agents that handled the individual. Tr. 124-125.
Professor Clyde Summers
Professor Clyde Summers (Professor Summers), a Professor of Labor and Employment Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School for the past 25 years, participated in drafting the LMRDA, and has authored numerous articles on the rights of union members. Tr. 496-503. Professor Summers testified generally about organized crime’s impact on union democratic practices. Id.
In preparation for this hearing, Professor Summers reviewed all of the depositions taken by the GEB Attorney in the case, as well as a collection of minutes from the Executive Board and general membership meetings. Tr. 506. The minutes Professor Summers reviewed pertained specifically to the selection, nomination, and election of officers. Id. The IHO accepted Professor Summers as an expert witness in the field of democratic rights of union members and union democracy. Tr. 505. Professor Summers previously testified before the IHO in a similar capacity. Tr. 494.
Other GEB Witnesses
Ronald Fino
Ronald Fino (Fino) was a member of LIUNA Local 210 Buffalo, New York (Local 210) from 1965 through 1988, and was Business Manager from 1973 until early 1988. See In the Matter of Bifulco, IHO Order and Memorandum, 96-48D (March 17, 1998). Fino became the Local 210 Business Manager in 1973 with the LCN’s assistance. Tr. 573. Fino is the son of Joe Fino, now deceased, who was the acting boss of the Buffalo LCN from 1968 through 1972. Tr. 572; see also Bifulco, 96-48D. Fino secretly cooperated with the FBI for 18 years, including the entire time he was Business Manager. Tr. 576, 577. The FBI interviewed Fino over a thousand times during that period. See Bifulco, 96-48D.
In the instant hearing, Fino testified about conversations he had with members of Local 1058 while attempting to bid jobs in Pittsburgh for his Buffalo based company, Hazardous Waste Management (HWM). Tr. 570, 581. Fino stated that, in the fall of 1989, he traveled to Pittsburgh for a pre-bid walk through of a project at USX Steel. Tr. 581. Fino met with Joseph LaQuatra (Joe LaQuatra), Local 1058’s Business Manager, who he knew from conferences sponsored by the International Union. Tr. 582. Fino sought out Joe LaQuatra “because he [Joe LaQuatra] was the head of the Pittsburgh local and I [Fino] wanted to line up laborers for the job that I [Fino] was bidding.” Id. Fino testified that Victor Sansanese (Sansanese), Director of the Buffalo Training Center for LIUNA and a member of the Buffalo LCN, met him when he returned to Buffalo. Tr. 583. Sansanese purportedly told Fino that he had no authority to bid Pittsburgh jobs without the approval of the Buffalo LCN. Id. Consequently, Fino said that he did not bid the USX Steel job. Tr. 584. The GEB Attorney contends that this episode indicates that the LCN controls Local 1058.
The GEB Attorney previously offered Fino’s testimony in the disciplinary hearing of over 20 Buffalo LCN members and associates, including Sansanese. See Bifulco, 96-48D. That hearing was directed toward, inter alia, proving that Sansanese was a LCN member. Id. Fino testified extensively about his interactions with Sansanese; however, his Bifulco testimony did not include any references to the alleged Pittsburgh meetings or to Sansanese’s admonition to obtain permission from Buffalo before bidding jobs in Pittsburgh. Id. In the Bifulco hearing, the IHO credited Fino’s testimony about his various LCN relationships. Id. The IHO did not credit Fino’s testimony regarding his HWM business ventures or his business ventures outside of Buffalo, New York; the IHO was not impressed with Fino’s version of his dealings with Sansanese on these matters.
The IHO does not credit Fino’s testimony in this hearing, after comparing it to his Bifulco testimony on the same subject matter. As mentioned, Fino omitted incidents from his Bifulco testimony, the Pittsburgh visit and his meeting with Sansanese, that would have been both memorable and factually pertinent to the Bifulco case. In the instant hearing, Fino did not testify that anyone in Pittsburgh either asked him for a kickback for the work, or directed him to seek permission from the Buffalo LCN when he attempted to bid the USX Steel job. While the Buffalo LCN may have had some interest in controlling Fino’s activities, Fino’s current testimony is not probative of any Local 1058 LCN affiliation.
Richard Marchese
Richard Marchese (Marchese) testified for the GEB Attorney via telephone. Tr. 594. Marchese is currently serving a 75-month federal prison sentence. Marchese’s extensive criminal record includes convictions for drug trafficking, possession, and counterfeiting. Tr. 597.
Marchese testified that he knew LaRocca Sr. and Michael Genovese (Genovese), LaRocca Sr.’s successor as LCN boss, from his East Liberty neighborhood. Tr. 600-601. Marchese stated that Genovese was the neighborhood contact for acquiring jobs with Local 1058. Tr. 603. At Marchese’s request, Genovese contacted Theodore R. Cozza (Teddy Cozza), President of Teamsters Local 211 at the time, to get Marchese a job as a Teamster. Tr. 603-604. Thereafter, Marchese began working for the Triangle News stocking shelves. Id. Marchese wanted a more lucrative truck driving position with the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. Id. Marchese testified that Joe LaQuatra arranged for him to meet LaRocca Sr. at the Rosa Villa Restaurant to discuss Marchese getting the job he wanted. Tr. 608. One month later, Marchese got a job driving trucks. Id.
Marchese’s testimony pertained to events that occurred sometime in the 1960s. Tr. 603. Marchese did not offer the names of any persons who received LIUNA jobs through the LCN, nor did he mention any particular construction sites that may have been LCN controlled. Further, the bulk of Marchese’s testimony pertained to Teamsters’ Local 210. Therefore, the IHO does not find Marchese’s testimony probative in this matter.
Other Confidential Informants
The GEB Attorney presented the hearsay testimony of two other confidential informants through Agent Greenbank’s testimony, designated Confidential Sources 1 and 9. Tr. 178-181. The IHO finds their testimony vague and uncorroborated. Accordingly, the hearsay testimony of Confidential Sources 1 and 9 are given no weight.
The GEB Attorney also attempted to elicit the anonymous hearsay testimony of three individuals who “could have qualified as informants” through the testimony of John Poerstel, a LIUNA inspector. Tr. 657-692. This evidence did not meet the informant hearsay requirements discussed supra. Id. The IHO rejected the evidence as unreliable and it was not made of record. Id.
Local 1058 Members and Officers Testifying for the Union
Shirley Kaczmarek
Shirley Kaczmarek (Kaczmarek) is the office manager of Local 1058. Tr. 859. Local 1058’s attorneys called Kaczmarek to testify about the election notice mailings that were regularly sent to all members, and about the regular process for dealing with member complaints. Tr. 862, 863, 877; Defense Exhibits (Def. Exs.) 2-7. Kaczmarek also testified that Philip Ameris worked for six months with no pay before being hired as a business agent. Tr. 909.
Gerald J. Pecora Jr.
Current President, Gerald J. Pecora Jr. (Gerald Pecora), was Recording Secretary from 1975 to May 2000. See Def. Ex.6; Tr. 1039, 1150. In addition to his position as President, Gerald Pecora is a business agent in the public employee sector. Tr. 1041-1042. As business agent, Gerald Pecora, handles employee grievances and negotiates top contracts. Tr. 1043-1044, 1051. He serves the Zoological Society, the Convention Center, Water and Sewer Authority, and Kane Hospitals. Tr. 1045-1046. Gerald Pecora described Local 1058’s nomination process. Tr. 1060-1066.
Louis Dennis Martire
Louis Dennis Martire (Dennis Martire) became Local 1058’s Business Manager in May 2000. See Def. Ex. 6; Tr. 1569. Dennis Martire testified about Local 1058’s procedure for filling mid-term vacancies. Tr. 1591. He explained that the Business Manager always makes a recommendation to the Executive Board and the Executive Board votes on the recommendation. Id. The Executive Board members have never objected to any of the Business Manager’s suggestions because the recommended people are always well known to them. Tr. 1591-1593. During his Executive Board tenure, Dennis Martire has never personally recommended anyone for office. Tr. 1610.
When asked about his alleged association with LaRocca Sr., Dennis Martire testified that LaRocca Sr. knew his father, Dante Martire. Tr. 1595. However, Dennis Martire testified that he first met LaRocca Sr. with Thomas Pecora (Tom Pecora), then Local 1058’s Business Manager, when Tom Pecora introduced them at the Car Wash. Id. Following that introduction, Dennis Martire testified that he got his car washed once every two weeks at the Car Wash. Id. Dennis Martire disputes the GEB Attorney’s allegations that he went to the Car Wash more frequently and for any reason other than to get his car washed. Tr. 1597.
When questioned about other alleged LCN associations, Dennis Martire admitted that that he visited LaRocca Sr.’s home at Christmastime. Tr. 1599. He denied having any business meetings with Anthony A. “Wango” Capizzi (Wango Capizzi) at the Rose Ridge Country Club; Wango Capizzi was simply there playing golf. Tr. 1604.
Clinton Wright, Richard Campbell, and Frank Braun
Clinton Wright, a Local 1058 member for 15 years, Richard Campbell, a Local 1058 member since 1983, and Frank Braun, a member of Local 1058 for 29 years, all testified on the union’s behalf. Tr. 1288-1329. These men testified that the officers are doing a good job, the membership is satisfied with their leadership, and that the membership feels no need to run opposition candidates. Id. In each witness’s opinion, the members’ satisfaction explains why there are no contested elections. Id.
Louis Elesie
Louis Elesie (Elesie) is a retired International Representative and formerly a Local 1058 business agent. Tr. 1539-1543. Elesie’s territory as an International Representative included parts of Pennsylvania and Delaware. Id. According to Elesie, a large number of local unions across the country do not have contested elections for long periods of time. Tr. 1550. Elesie estimated that twenty percent (20%) of the LIUNA locals have non-contested elections. Tr. 1552.
Pittsburgh Attorneys Testifying on Behalf of Local 1058
Ralph Scalera
Ralph Scalera (Scalera), formerly an Assistant United States Attorney and Federal Judge, is senior counsel in the law firm of Thorpe, Reed & Armstrong. Tr. 1094-1095. Scalera sat on the Pennsylvania Labor Relation Board (PLRB) with Dennis Martire, Local 1058’s current Business Manager. Tr. 1100. Governor Thornburg appointed Dennis Martire to the PLRB in 1983. Id. Governor Ridge re-appointed Dennis Martire, and he continues to serve on the PLRB. Id. In Scalera’s opinion, Martire always displayed a high level of integrity in his position on the PLRB. Tr. 1102.
Thomas Sebastian Giotto
Thomas Sebastian Giotto (Giotto) specializes in labor law and is a shareholder in the law firm of Klett, Rooney, Lieber & Schorling. Tr. 1252. Giotto has represented many employers negotiating labor contracts with Local 1058. Tr. 1253-1254. Giotto testified that his dealings with Local 1058 are very professional; Local 1058 officers are always willing to meet, are prepared, are willing to negotiate for long hours, and represent their members very well. Tr. 1255.
Samuel Kamin
Samuel Kamin (Kamin) represents a number of municipalities that employ members of Local 1058. Tr. 1271-1272. Kamin has represented the municipalities in numerous job grievances with Local 1058. Tr. 1273. He also negotiated a number of contracts with Local 1058. Id. Kamin testified that the officers of Local 1058 are very professional and represent their members very well. Tr. 1273-1276.
Michael Healy
Michael Healy (Healy) concentrates his legal practice in the field of labor and employment law. Tr. 1613. Formerly a regional coordinator for the 1996 LIUNA International Election Officer, Healy holds a similar position in the 2001 International Election.[8] Id. Healy testified that grievance hot lines were set up during the 1996 International Election to field members’ election complaints. Tr. 1622. There were no hot line complaints about Local 1058’s election. Tr. 1623.
Healy reasoned that Local 1058’s uncontested elections are the result of its craft union membership. Tr. 1614-1616. Unlike the membership of industrial unions who work together at the same plants or mines, craft union workers are scattered across numerous work sites. Id. Consequently, craft union workers do not associate with fellow union members beyond their work site. Id. The diversity in craft unions inhibits wide union interaction. Id. This lack of union interaction accounts for the deficiency of competing slates of election candidates. Id.
Judge Frank Lucchino
The Honorable Frank Lucchino (Judge Lucchino), former Controller of Allegheny County, sits on the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. Tr. 1436, 1437. Judge Lucchino and Dennis Martire are friends; they regularly play golf together at the Rose Ridge Country Club. Tr. 1437. When questioned about the presence of LCN associate Wango Capizzi during some of their golf outings, Judge Lucchino testified that Wango Capizzi is a fellow club member who occasionally rounded out their foursome when there was an opening. Tr. 1441, 1442.
Local 1058 Business Associates
Robert Gary Hecht
Robert Gary Hecht (Hecht) is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Trumbull Corporation; Executive Vice-President of P.J. Dick, Incorporated; President of Allegheny Asphalt; Executive Vide-President of Lindy Construction; and President of SynAggs. Tr. 1123. Hecht served on the Labor Committee of the Constructors’ Association of Western Pennsylvania. Tr. 1125. Hecht’s companies employ between 1500 and 2000 laborers and have annual sales topping $250,000.00. Tr. 1124. Hecht negotiates collective bargaining agreements with Local 1058. Tr. 1127-1130. In his opinion, Local 1058’s bargainers are always knowledgeable, responsible, and reliable. Id.
Joseph Garland
Joseph Garland (Garland), a retired insurance agent, sold insurance to Local 1058. Tr. 1861-1863. Garland testified that he first met Tom Pecora at a political rally. Tr. 1863. Several years later, Tom Pecora contacted Garland about whole life insurance policies for union officers and business agents. Tr. 1863-1864. Garland sold Local 1058 insurance. Id. Garland approached the local about changing their existing policies when the insurance industry originated universal life policies. Tr. 1865, 1866. At that time, Local 1058 switched insurance companies from Massachusetts Mutual to Security Connecticut. Tr. 1867. Garland has never met John LaRocca Sr. Tr. 1869. Garland’s testimony directly contradicts Source 13’s information given to Agent Greenbank.
John Pinto
John Pinto (Pinto) is the Director of Mediation Services for the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. Tr. 1720. Pinto’s testimony pertained to his interactions with Local 1058 officers while he was a Local 66 field representative and a member of the Pittsburgh Joint Collective Bargaining Committee (PJCBC). Tr. 1721-1734. Pinto testified that he worked closely with Gerald Pecora on the PJCBC until 1988, that Gerald Pecora was extremely helpful to him, and that he considered Local 1058 a very stable union. Id. Pinto also dealt with other Local 1058 officers during contract negotiations and was generally impressed with Local 1058. Id.
Structure of Organized Crime
1. The LCN, sometimes referred to as the “Mob” or the “Mafia,” operates in various cities throughout the United States as a tightly structured criminal organization. The LCN’s business is crime for profit.[9]
2. The LCN has its origins in late 19th century secret societies formed in Sicily and Southern Italy. See Symposium – Perspectives on Organized Crime, 16 Rutgers L.J. 439 (1985) (Symposium). Secret societies emerged in the United States toward the end of the 19th century. Id. at 440. These secret societies were the antecedents of the present LCN. Id. at 441.
3. In the late 1920s, one criminal group attempted to form an alliance among all of the groups involved in boot legging. See Symposium, supra at 441, citing, D. Cressey, Theft of the Nation: The Structure and Operations of Organized Crime in America (1969). A power struggle erupted between Sicilian and non-Sicilian groups. This power struggle led to a violent, private vendetta known as the Castellammarese War. See id. at 441.
4. The Castellammarese War lasted six months, from April 1931 until September 1931, in New York. During three days in September 1931, forty Italian and Sicilian organized crime leaders were murdered. See id. at 442. A peace treaty ended the Castellammarese War and created the structure of the Italian/Sicilian organized crime organization in the United States today. The resulting confederation became known as La Cosa Nostra. See id.
5. Although public reports of organized crime throughout the United States date as early as the 1920s, the existence of a national organized crime structure first gained national media attention in 1957. That year, a number of individuals were arrested while attending a secret meeting in the small town of Apalachin, New York. Sixty-two organized crime leaders from across the nation attended what appeared to be a national conference at the home of Joseph Barbara. Attendees included: Sam Giancana of Chicago; Joseph Bonanno and Vito Genovese of New York City; Antonio Magaddino of Buffalo, New York; Russell Bufalino of northeast Pennsylvania; Santos Trafficante of Tampa, Florida; LaRocca Sr. and Gabriel “Kelly” Mannarino (Kelly Mannarino) of Pittsburgh. See Symposium, supra at 443, n. 21. Subsequent investigations identified them as leaders of crime families across the country. See FBI Organized Crime Report, 25 Years After Valachi (1988).
6. The LCN consists of groups of people organized into entities called families. The hierarchy of leadership in each LCN family consists of the head of a family, the boss; his assistant, the underboss; and, an advisor, the consigliere. The boss, underboss, and consigliere oversee the activities of LCN members and their associates. See United States v. Pungitore, 910 F.2d 1084, 1097 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 915 (1990).
7. LCN members within the family operate in small groups called “crews,” which are headed by men called “capos.” See id.
8. A “made” member is inducted into an LCN family through an initiation ceremony that includes an oath, specific rituals, and formalities. See, e.g., In the Matter of Miceli, IHO Order and Memorandum, 98-11D (May 27, 1999); Pungitore, 910 F.2d 1084. Members share in the organization’s profits. See, e.g., Chicago District Council, 97-30T; Fallacara, 96-65D. “Made” members are also known as “soldiers.” See Miceli, 98-11D. The fact that a member is “made” spreads quickly in the organized crime community because being “made” entitles a member to a certain amount of respect. See id.
9. Mob “associates” work for “made” members facilitating mob activities. “Associates” either run day-to-day illegal operations for the mob or are in legitimate businesses under the influence and control of organized crime. See, e.g., Chicago District Council, 97-30T; Fallacara, 96-65D.
10. The LCN code of conduct dictates that members follow their superiors’ orders without question; refuse to give information or assistance to law enforcement; pay assessments imposed by superiors; respect other members regardless of personal feelings; and, refuse to information about the organization to outsiders. See Pungitore, 910 F.2d at 1097.
11. Part of the LCN criminal conduct involves the infiltration and control of numerous business organizations and labor unions. In these ventures, “it employs illegitimate methods – monopolization, terrorism, extortion, tax evasion – to drive out or control lawful ownership and leadership and to exact illegal profits from the public.” President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: Organized Crime (1967); Blakey & Goldstock, “On the Waterfront”: RICO and Labor Racketeering,” 17 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 341 (1980).
12. The LCN uses its control of labor unions to neutralize competitive bidding and to extort employers for maintaining labor peace. “Sometimes control arises from members of La Cosa Nostra who are also labor officials. Control includes the ability to direct the day-to-day affairs of a labor organization—such things as…who runs for office and who does not, who gets elected to union office…and the use of union power for corrupt purposes.” President’s Commission on Organized Crime, Report to the President and the Attorney General, The Edge: Organized Crime, Business and the Labor Unions, President’s Commission on Organized Crime, 98th Congress, 1st and 2d Sess. 208 (1983-84).
13. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) provisions of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 empower federal prosecutors to bring criminal prosecutions and civil suits against organized crime syndicates. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.
14. In enacting the 1970 RICO statute, Congress principally aimed to prevent organized crime from infiltrating legitimate business. See United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981).
15. Following the passage of the RICO statute, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has embarked on a concentrated effort to rid the labor movement of organized crime. The DOJ prosecutors have filed numerous RICO and civil complaints against international and local labor unions.
16. These suits resulted in consent decrees that appointed independent monitors with the power to hear disciplinary charges against union members for misconduct, including associating with members of organized crime. See United States v. Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union (Agathos), (D.N.J.) Civ. No. 95-4596 (GEB) Memorandum Opinion (May 8, 1997).
17. In 1995, LIUNA entered a voluntary agreement with the DOJ, which required that LIUNA engage in self-policing and internal reform outside of the court system. This voluntary process was designed “to ensure that all locals and other entities within LIUNA are rid of any corrupting influence of any member of organized crime.” Agreement Between Laborers’ International Union of North America and the Department of Justice, (February 13, 1995).
18. On January 18, 1995, LIUNA adopted the EDP to effect reform. The EDP prohibits all current and future LIUNA officers, agents, representatives, employees, and members from engaging in “barred conduct.” The definition of barred conduct includes: committing any act of racketeering; “knowingly associating” with members of an organized crime family, such as the LCN; knowingly allowing an LCN member or associate to influence a LIUNA officer; and, interfering with or obstructing the efforts of the LIUNA Inspector General, the GEB Attorney or the IHO. See EDP Section 1.
19. By agreement, the DOJ terminated direct oversight of LIUNA on January 18, 2000; however, LIUNA is under an obligation to continue the reform effort. The DOJ monitors LIUNA’s progress. See Agreement Between Laborers’ International Union of North America and the Department of Justice, (January 18, 2000).
Structure of Organized Crime in Pittsburgh
20. The Pittsburgh LCN family members operate in designated areas in Western Pennsylvania. Prior to his death LaRocca Sr. operated in the city of Pittsburgh; Kelly Mannarino, and later Thomas “Sonny” Ciancutti (Sonny Ciancutti), controlled New Kensington; Joseph Sica, and later Louis Raucci Sr. (Raucci Sr.), operated in Penn Hills suburbs; and Frank D. Amato Jr., controlled the eastern suburbs such as Braddock and North Versailles. See GEB Exhibit (GEB Ex.) 92 (Pennsylvania Crime Commission, Organized Crime in Pennsylvania: A Decade of Change, 1990 Report (1990 PA Crime Report) at 113); Tr. 49.
21. The Pittsburgh family has fewer “made” members than most other LCN families. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 117). The Pittsburgh family has not “made” a new member since 1987. Tr. 58-61.
Pittsburgh LCN Bosses
22. LaRocca Sr. headed the Pittsburgh LCN from 1957 until his death in 1984. Tr. 36. LaRocca Sr. commanded a nationwide reputation. See GEB Ex. 90 (Pennsylvania Crime Commission, 1985 Report (1985 PA Crime Report) at 33). LaRocca Sr. attended the 1957 Apalachin, New York Summit of top organized crime figures. Tr. 38. LaRocca Sr. owned and operated the Car Wash located at 100 Sandusky Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where he frequently met with LCN associates. Tr. 63. In 1974, the FBI successfully penetrated LaRocca Sr.’s Car Wash operation using a confidential informant. Tr. 64-67.
23. When LaRocca Sr. died in 1984, Michael Genovese (Genovese) became the Pittsburgh family boss. Tr. 38; see also GEB Ex. 90 (1985 PA Crime Report at 33). Prior to 1984, Genovese served as a capo and controlled the numbers racket in the East Liberty section of Pittsburgh. Genovese attended the Apalachin Summit with LaRocca Sr. and Kelly Mannarino.[10] See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 118). The FBI reported that Genovese often met with LCN members and associates at L.A. Motors, a used car lot in Verona, Pennsylvania, where he was employed as a salesman. See id.
Pittsburgh LCN Underbosses
24. An LCN underboss acts as assistant to the boss of the crime family.
25. Joseph “Jo-Jo” Pecora (Jo-Jo Pecora) was underboss of the Pittsburgh LCN. At one time, Jo-Jo Pecora operated gambling enterprises in West Virginia for the LaRocca family. See GEB Ex. 89 (Pennsylvania Crime Commission, 1983 Report (1983 PA Crime Report) at 19). In 1979, Jo-Jo Pecora was convicted of racketeering and sentenced to five years in federal prison. See id.
26. When Jo-Jo Pecora died in 1987, Charles “Chuckie” Porter (Porter) became underboss. See id. Porter worked closely with LaRocca Sr. to develop sources in New York, Chicago, and Florida. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 118). As a result of Western Pennsylvania’s largest organized crime prosecution, Porter and eight others were convicted of, inter alia, racketeering, narcotics and tax violations. See GEB Exs. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report), 93 (Pennsylvania Crime Commission, 1991 Report (1991 PA Crime Report)). Porter was sentenced to prison for 28 years. See id.
27. In 1999, Porter was purportedly still the Pittsburgh LCN underboss, but had been in jail for in nine years. In December 2000, the DOJ successfully motioned for a 14-year reduction Porter’s sentence based on his significant cooperation while he was incarcerated. These circumstances lead the IHO to question the reliability of the FBI’s classification of Porter as underboss in 1999.[11]
Pittsburgh LCN Consiglieres
28. LCN consiglieres act as advisors to the boss and underbosses of the crime family.
29. Pasquale Macri Ferrucci (Pat Ferrucci) controlled the video poker business in the Canton, Ohio area. Pat Ferrucci met frequently with Kelly Mannarino in New Kensington to discuss vending machine business between Ohio and Pennsylvania. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report). In 1991, Pat Ferruccio was convicted on a RICO charge, sentenced to a thirty-month imprisonment, and ordered to forfeit $100,000.00. See GEB Ex. 93 (1991 PA Crime Report).
30. Joseph Sica (Sica) was convicted of violation of the Hobbs Act in 1975. Sica, with a few exceptions, has been inactive in the Pittsburgh LCN since the mid-1980s. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report). Sica had been involved in gambling activities. GEB Ex. 93 (1991 PA Crime Report). Sica is the father-in-law of deceased LCN capo, Frank Rosa. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report). Sica died in 1991. See GEB Ex. 93 (1991 PA Crime Report).
31. Charles Imburgia (Imburgia), also known as “Charles Murgie,” has been a Pittsburgh LCN consigliere since at least 1989. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 120). Like Sica, he is not active in the day-to-day activities of the Pittsburgh LCN, but is called in to mediate disputes. See id. His nephew, Anthony Murgie, is an LCN associate who is known to have met with Genovese at L.A. Motors. See id.
Pittsburgh LCN Capos
32. Sonny Ciancutti operates illegal gambling in New Kensington. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 119). He took control of Kelly Mannarino’s New Kensington gambling operations after his death.[12] See Id.
33. John Bazzano Jr. (Bazzano Jr.) is the son of Western Pennsylvania’s former crime leader and son-in law of Antonio Ripepi.[13] See id. Bazzano Jr. was released from federal prison early in 1981 after serving a sentence for a 1975 conviction on chargers of running a large-scale gambling operation. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 119). Upon his release, Bazzano Jr. was elevated from soldier to capo, filling the vacancy created by Kelly Mannarino’s death. See GEB Ex. 89 (1983 PA Crime Report).
Pittsburgh LCN Soldiers
34. A “made” member is a person inducted into an LCN family through an initiation ceremony; made members are also known as “soldiers.” Soldiers share in the organization’s profits. See District Council, 97-30T; Fallacara, 96-65D; Miceli, 98-11D.
35. Raucci Sr. is said to “sit on the left side” of Genovese. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 118). Raucci Sr. frequently worked in concert with Porter furthering the affairs of the Pittsburgh LCN. See id. In 1990, Raucci Sr. was convicted with Porter on racketeering, narcotics, and tax violations. See GEB Ex. 93 (1991 PA Crime Report). Raucci was sentenced to 27 years incarceration. See id.
36. Frank D. “Sonny” Amato Jr. (Amato Jr.), whose father was the Pittsburgh LCN boss until 1956, gained control of his father’s East Pittsburgh illegal gambling operation. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report). Kelly Mannarino was Amato Jr.’s brother-in-law. See id.
37. Wango Capizzi frequently visited LaRocca Sr.'s Car Wash. See GEB Ex. 91 (1989 PA Crime Report). In the 1980s, he arranged gambling junkets to Las Vegas for the Bufalino crime family, and ran a Las Vegas credit fraud with “Jo-Jo” Pecora. See id.
Pittsburgh LCN Associates
38. Mob “associates” work for “made” members facilitating mob activities. Associates either run day-to-day illegal operations for the mob or are in legitimate businesses under the influence and control of organized crime. See District Council, 97-30T; Fallacara, 96-65D.
39. Henry A. “Zebo” Zottola (Zottola) was closely associated with “Jo-Jo” Pecora and involved in loan-sharking, gambling, and financing narcotics transactions. See GEB Exs. 92 (Excerpts from: Organized Crime in Pennsylvania: A Decade of Change”, 1990 Report (Pennsylvania Crime Commission), 105 (PA Crime Commission March 1989 Pittsburgh LCN Family Chart); Tr. 53. After Jo-Jo Pecora’s death, Zotolla associated with Porter. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report).
40. Lenine “Lennie” Strollo (Lennie Strollo) is associated with Pat Ferruccio. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 122). Lennie Strollo pled guilty to RICO charges in 1990; he was sentenced to 14 months incarceration and fined $20,000.00. See GEB Ex. 92 (1990 PA Crime Report at 122).
Allegations of Local 1058 Members’ Ties to Organized Crime
(Complaint && 5-13)
41. Charge I
Correcting Corruption and Eradicating the Influence of Organized Crime.
In light of the evidence developed by LIUNA’s Inspector General’s office and the facts set forth in paragraphs 1-21 and incorporated herein, the GEB Attorney has formed an opinion that it is necessary to place Local 1058 under trusteeship for the purpose of correcting corruption and eradicating the corrupt influence of organized crime. Because of longstanding influential relationships between members and associates of organized crime and the controlling members of the Executive Board; the complete failure of any of the officers or Executive Board members to take any action either to eradicate or to investigate the influence of organized crime within the union; and the absence of a single contested, democratic election in more than 30 years, a trusteeship is necessary to remove the influence of organized crime from Local 1058.
42. The GEB Attorney’s Complaint alleges that the former and current members of Local 1058’s Executive Board have longstanding associations with members of the Pittsburgh LCN. In support of these allegations, the GEB Attorney presented evidence spanning more than 30 years and garnered from a variety of sources. The evidence pertains to the activities of the following named Local 1058 officials.
Joseph LaQuatra
43. Joe LaQuatra was the President of Local 1058 for 16 years, from 1968 to 1984. Thereafter, he served as Business Manager from 1985 until May 2000 when he retired. See Def. Ex. 6.
44. Between December 1974 and August 1976, Joe LaQuatra visited LaRocca Sr. at his Car Wash 38 times. During those visits, Joe LaQuatra never purchased gas nor had his car washed. On many occasions, Joe LaQuatra met with LaRocca Sr., John LaRocca Jr. (LaRocca Jr.), Dennis Martire, Teddy Cozza,[14] and Wango Capizzi. See GEB Ex. 108 (Allegheny Car Wash Source/Surveillance Log).[15]
45. Joe LaQuatra spent two hours at the Car Wash on June 9, 1980, without purchasing gas or having his car washed. See GEB Ex. 47 (Surveillance Log (FBI), Allegheny Car Wash, 6/9/80). On September 12, 1984, Joe LaQuatra met LaRocca Sr. and Bazzano Jr. at the Car Wash; again, Joe LaQuatra did not purchase gas or have his car washed. See GEB Exs. 38M, N, O, and VV.
46. In 1979, Joe LaQuatra attended the funeral of Louis Ciancutti (brother of Sonny Ciancutti).[16] See GEB Exs. 45A, C.
47. In 1980, Joe LaQuatra attended the funerals of Kelly Mannarino and Anthony LaRocca (LaRocca Sr.’s brother). See GEB Exs. 33N and O, (FBI Surveillance Log; GEB Ex. 47 (FBI Surveillance Log, Allegheny Car Wash, 6/9/80).
48. In 1984, Joe LaQuatra attended the funeral of LaRocca Sr. See GEB Ex. 39D (Photographs: John Larocca Funeral, 12/6/84).
49. Joe LaQuatra attended the funeral of Louis Raucci Jr. (Raucci Jr.) on November 21, 1985. Joe Rosa, Zottola, Genovese, Porter, Joe Scoleri, Michael Rosenfeld and Dennis Martire were also present. See GEB Exs. 40A and B (Photographs: Lou Raucci, Jr. Funeral, 11/21/85); and N (FBI Surveillance Log).
50. In 1988, FBI surveillance observed Joe LaQuatra attending a meeting held at L.A. Motors in Verona, Pennsylvania with Genovese, Raucci Sr., Porter, Zottola, Bazzano Jr., and Charles Pecora. See GEB Ex. 41A (Videotape: L.A. Motors 12/24/88).
51. During the 1990s, Joe LaQuatra was observed playing golf at Rose Ridge with Dennis Martire, Wango Capizzi, and Zottola. T. 176-179. The FBI observed Joe LaQuatra and Philip Ameris leaving a restaurant with Sonny Ciancutti in 1997. See GEB Exs. 43A-K (Photographs: Joseph N. Pecora Funeral, 3/7/87); 43L (FBI Surveillance Log). In 1998, the FBI observed Joe LaQuatra and Mark Machi, then an Executive Board member, briefly meeting with Joseph Tobasco (Tobasco) near the Rosa Villa Restaurant.[17] See GEB Ex. 110 (August 1998 FBI Surveillance Log, Rosa Villa); GEB Exs. 111-122 (Photographs: 1998 FBI surveillance photos of individuals standing in front of Rosa Villa Restaurant (Joe Laquatra, Tabasco, Mark Machi, unknown)); Tr. 822-823. The FBI observed Joe LaQuatra meeting with Tobasco briefly near the Rosa Villa restaurant again in 1999.[18] See GEB Ex. 123 (1999 FBI Surveillance Log of Local 1058 Union Hall on 8th Street (Laquatra, Ameris, Machi); Rosa Villa Restaurant (Joe Laquatra, Tabasco)).
Thomas Pecora
52. Tom Pecora served as Local 1058’s Business Manager for sixteen (16) years, from 1968 until 1984. See Def. Ex. 6. Tom Pecora replaced Dante Martire, Dennis Martire’s father, as Business Manager. Tr. 128. Tom Pecora retired from his position as Local 1058’s Business Manager in 1984. See Def. Ex. 6.
53. Tom Pecora made 13 visits to LaRocca Sr.’s Car Wash in the 1970s. See GEB Ex. 108 (Allegheny Car Wash Source/Surveillance Log).
54. Agent Greenbank testified that Source 13 reported that LaRocca Sr. directed Tom Pecora to make LaRocca Jr. a business agent for Local 1058 in 1976. Tr. 130. The IHO credits this conversation because LaRocca Jr., became a business agent for Local 1058 shortly thereafter.
55. Tom Pecora visited LaRocca Sr.’s Car Wash on June 8, 1981 and on September 12, 1984. See GEB Exs. 34M, O, P (Photographs: Allegheny Car Wash, 6/8/81); JJ (Report of Investigative Activity (Pennsylvania Crime Commission); 38P, Q, R, S, T, VV (Photographs: Allegheny Car Wash, 9/10-9/12/84).