Fighters that were involved or managed by the MOB

@klompton2 -- This is from LaMotta's May 11, 1960, statement, taken in LaMotta's attorney's office with his attorney present. I'm giving the pertinent parts as the statement is long:

Q: In this case, your brother, Joe LaMotta, was the one who told you about the bribe offer?
A: Yes
Q: The committee has received certain information that Bill Daly and Frank "Blinky" Palermo were mentioned in connecting with the $100,000 bribe offer: is that right?
A: What offer I hard was from my brother.
Q: Your brother did mention Bill Daly and "Blinky" Palermo?
A: Their names were mentioned, but I am not sure if it was in connection with the bribe offer.

They pressed further and said Jake said his brother mentioned them and Jake said he could not swear to it, it was 13 years ago and he could not even be 90 percent certain.

In the hearing he was pressed further:

Q: Let me ask you this: Isn't it a fact that Daly and Palermo, to the best of your recollection, where mentioned in connection with the bribe offer by your brother, Joseph LaMotta.
A: They were not.
Q: Who was mentioned by your brother in connection with the bribe offer?
A: Somebody was mentioned, but I don't remmeber.

So:

A) Jake didn't mention names, the questioner did.

B) Jake didn't say they offered him a bribe. He said, quite clearly, that his brother brought him the offer. He said Blinky and Daly were mentioned but did NOT say they were mentioned in connection with the bribe offer.

As you well know, some boxing figures did testify in the trial that resulted in Blinky's conviction. As you well know, Jake was not among them. So somehow he gets hailed as the man who 'stood up to the mob' when in fact he didn't testify against them (look up omerta). Don Chargin and others did.

 

Yeah, its all worse than admitting to two rapes, attempted murder, etc. Sure buddy...

Talk about completely mischaracterizing the statements in this to suit your argument. If you are going to be dishonest about what was said then whats the point. Again, you obviously have some weird axe to grind here to go to the lengths you go to twist things around. Lamotta literally says he didnt know DiCarlo well. He says he met him MAYBE once or twice during his boxing career. And why is that so hard to believe? Again, LaMotta was from New York. DiCarlo was from Youngstown. How many times did Jake fight in Youngstown? ZERO. They lived 500 miles apart. And Jake never says he was buddies with the guy, he says specifically he became better acquainted with him after he moved to Miami. And again, the entire discussion around DiCarlo was in reference to a bribe offer Jake TURNED DOWN to throw a fight to Youngstown fighter Tony Janiro. Not really sure how that makes Jake a mob fighter. But in your mind...

And just because he was convicted doesnt mean he wasnt framed. You are welcome to believe what you want. But again, there was never a whiff of mob activity involved in this incident. Thats just entirely based on your imagination.

You do realize that he was actually cleared of the prostitutions charge right? He was only convicted of operating the bar where she supposedly plied her trade. Your characterization is like saying a guy who owns a bar is guilty of pouring booze down a 15 year olds throat if the 15 year old sneaks in and has an under age drink. In legal terms the bar owner is still legally culpable for serving the underage patron alcohol but its a far cry from encouraging their behavior. In reality the girl was arrested a month earlier at an apartment that was being operated as a house of prostitution. She later told the police that she was taken by her madame to ply her trade at Jakes nightclub. There she met Melvin Stollar who paid her $20 dollars for sex. When Stollar both he and the girl pled out and said it was Jake who introduced them. Unfortunately for your narrative that charge didnt stick. The problem with Stollar's story was that it was Stollar's apartment building that was being used as the house of prostitution. So you figure out how an ***** house gets raided, arrests are made of two whores, a madam, a john, and a pimp and a month later Jake gets arrested because they said that they went to Jakes to meet customers... But you want to paint Jake as some pimp because they fingered him as part of their plea agreement? And yeah, that fourteen year old girl (some reports say she was 15) was as pure as the driven snow seeing as how she was living as man and wife in an incestuous relationship with her father who was also her pimp. But you knew all of that didnt you?

Getting strongarmed out of lucrative businesses is not handing them over.

The operative phrase here is "MY GUESS." You have no details of what Im even talking about and yet youve concocted a scenario whereby Jake owes the mob money... from something... and just handed over his businesses to them.

Hey buddy, simple question: Who fought the better competition? Just answer me that.

Oh I thought we were talking about who got title shots. Not who got to fight in small clubs in Algeria...

So its your contention that during the 1950s TONS. Let me say that again, TONS of fighters made a good living strictly off boxing without being touched by the mob. TONS... Ok. Thats funny because the vast majority of boxers in the 1950s, even headliners who got TV dates, boxing was a side job. It was a gig. It supplemented their income, not the other way around. But its your contention that TONS of fighters made a good living off boxing alone. Ok...

There you go lying again. Show me where I said EVERY champ THREW fights for the mob. Ill be waiting here. Talk about trying to create a straw man argument.

You havent backed up anything. Youve just repeatedly cherry picked, misquoted, lied, and misrepresented the facts.

 

Actually he wasnt. He was convicted of operating a bar where the 14 (some reports say 15) year old plied her trade TWICE. Those are two very different things. He was actually acquitted of procuring her for prostitution and permitting her to use his bar for prostitution. You can go look that up. And you can look up his account, Vikki's, and Joey's (both of whom were estranged from Jake at the time) and they all agree that Jake was framed for not paying kickbacks, which again, jives exactly with what the DA says in his conversation with Vikki.

Again, you are misrepresenting this. Dont sit here and tell me to read it when Im more familiar with it than you and can pick out when you are lying.

And that person is Thomas Milo ; is it right ?
Answer : Yes.
Question : When did Milo assure you that you would get a crack at the title if you lost the Fox fight ?
Answer : The last day.
Question : At that time, did you decide to throw the Fox fight ?
Answer : Yes,

Later

And did you finally receive word that you had the assurance of that person for a shot at the championship ? Is that right ?
And your answer was: “ Yes.”
Question. And that person is Thomas Milo ; is it right ?
And your answer was: “ Yes."

And yet this is what he had to say about that day:

"I kept looking around for my brother Joey. The cocky *******. Here I was about to be hung on the cross and he's nowhere in sight. Wasn't he the one that said, "Ya open your mouth and they'll kill ya"? Simple as that. I still hadnt figured out how I was going to answer the D.A.'s questions and keep on living. Im not the type that scares easy, but Im not stupid either. Nobody rats on the mob and lives to brag about it."

You conveniently neglect this:
Question. Now, will you tell me the events which led up to the Janiro fight ?
Answer. Before I do, I would like to get straight why I did it. I deserved a chance for the championship fight years before and never got it because I was all by myself. I managed myself with my brother and nobody would give me a chance.
Question. You mean, Mr. LaMotta, that you did not have the right connections in order to get a shot at the title, is it right.
Answer . Yes, that is right.
Question . And you did not have a gangster behind you who could secure the title shot for you ?
Answer. That is right.

Joey was Jake's manager the same way Al Silvani was his trainer. Jake was self managed, and self trained and didnt want to have to pay a percentage to anyone. He wanted that money for himself so he used Silvani to work his corner for fights and he used Joey as his manager of record. If you want to charge guilt by association because Joey associated with mobsters youd have a better argument that Joey was Jakes brother than you would that he was his manager because Jake made all of the decisions about his career first second and last.

Actually no. Jake simply says the became better acquainted in Miami. DiCarlo was the son of a Buffalo mobster. When his father died DiCarlo was forced out of Buffalo by a rival gang. He ended up in Youngstown and was operating as a gambler there when Jake fought Janiro. Hence wanting to set up the LaMotta-Janiro fight. He wasnt some big timer or mob boss or front for Carbo or anything even remotely like that. He eventually got chased out of Youngstown by the police and the Pittsburgh mob and wound up in Miami. Again, he wasnt a big timer, wasnt connected with any of the families that had divided up Miami, and was essentially just trying break into the business. The idea that because LaMotta knew the guy he was somehow plugged into or operating at the behest of the mob is beyond comical and shows a complete lack of understanding of these guys. DiCarlo, years later, saw an opportunity when a power vacuum opened up in Buffalo and returned home after being gone for over two decades to reform his dads old gang and only then did he rise to having any power in organized crime and that was 1500 miles away from Miami and years after Jake's conviction there. But hey, why let facts get in the way when youve got such a great imagination.

Apparently I know it quite a bit better than you do.

 

That interrogation technique is as unconventional as it is deplorable.

 

Except the pertinent parts you left out. Like this part:

And that person is Thomas Milo ; is it right ?
Answer : Yes.


Question : When did Milo assure you that you would get a crack at the title if you lost the Fox fight ?
Answer : The last day.
Question : At that time, did you decide to throw the Fox fight ?
Answer : Yes,

Later

And did you finally receive word that you had the assurance of that person for a shot at the championship ? Is that right ?
And your answer was: “ Yes.”
Question. And that person is Thomas Milo ; is it right ?
And your answer was: “ Yes."

And as we know, Thomas Milo and his brothers were all soldiers in the mafia who operated as the bag men and go betweens in the Fox fix. Jake, after getting death threats, had a bit of selective amnesia a month later here which is understandable but he also wasnt lying. Milo, through Joey, was his point his point of contact. The DA was clearly reading between the lines, which we can too, when they drew the coclusion that Palermo was involved based on Palermo coming to Jake's arena for a meeting shortly before the Fox fight but Jake wasnt stupid enough to finger any of the top guys and get himself a death sentence. When he testified before the committee fingered Joey as his go-between because Joey planned to plead the fifth throughout. And for the record Don Chargin offered zero incriminating testimony of Palermo. His questions were almost entirely in regards to Joe Sica and if you read them they were pretty evasive either due to fear of Sica or his entangled business dealings with him or both.

 

And he said everything came from his brother, not from Milo.

You believe what you wish to believe and paint over the parts that don’t fit. I’m going by his testimony.

Where do you get the death threats? He was asked if he had been threatened or his family had been threatened and he said no and he wasn’t scared of those rats.

The people who testified against Blinky & Co. were obviously not afraid. I’m not aware of any untimely deaths of those witnesses.

 

Jake was convicted by a jury that heard the testimony of witnesses. They believed those witnesses. You don’t so you dismiss it and say he was framed. Jake introduced at least two customers to the underage prostitute operating in his bar for the purposes of prostitution. So how is it that he didn’t even know anything about her but he’s introducing people to her for the purposes of having paid sex?

He was trafficking an underage girl. That’s absolutely sick. Why did Jake deny it? Same reason any criminal denies a crime when charged with it. Did he admit under oath while being prosecuted for **** that he raped two women? No, of course not. He also denied throwing the Fox fight before the commission in New York. Why like about that if he admitted to ****? You figure it out.

Why would Jake later cozy up to and become good friends with a mobster bookie who offered him a bribe to throw a fight if he hated the mob so much and wanted nothing to do with them? That makes no sense. It doesn’t fit the narrative. And he ADMITS that he did indeed become friends with (not just bump into him once or twice) and that he knew his ‘occupation.’ That doesn’t strike you as a bit odd for the ‘anti-mob crusader’ you claim him to be?

Yes, I did make a guess and put forth a plausible explanation and was clear that it was conjecture. Yet you state Jake was ‘framed’ for the promoting prostitution charge as if it was fact when it is, indeed, just your obfuscation.

Jake fought better welterweights than Graziano. I never said Rocky was better than Jake. I said when Rocky fought them he at least had the decency to be within a few pounds of them rather than being a light heavyweight. In your outlook if a heavyweight fights Benny Leonard, Roberto Duran and Pernell Whitaker and a junior welter fights DeJesus, Mancini and Gatti then the heavyweight ‘fought better opposition’ — in my book, the junior welter participated in fairer fights. A light heavyweight beating up a welter isn’t anything to brag about (and some of those welters beat Jake, too).

I said ‘to the extend that the mob controlled boxing.’ You came back and basically said the mob controlled all of boxing. Which is obviously not true. You know this to be the case. The NY mob didn’t control boxing in England or many fights in the U.S. And, yes, a lot of fighters made a living in the sport without mob control — by your own posts, you believe Jake did (you say he wasn’t tied to the mob, he had enough money to turn down $100,000 bridges and pay $20,000 to Cerdan’s management for a title shot — so was Jake making a living or not? Was he mob-tied or not? You can’t have it both ways.

You say Jake HAD to throw a fight to get a title shot. I’m asking (again), why was Jake singled out? Did every title challenger have to throw a fight for the mob to get a title shot? Now you’re saying no, they didn’t. So why did Jake?

My answer: He did business with his mob buddies.

 

There is absolutely no proof anywhere of Jake being framed for the prostitution charges. It’s all in Klompton’s head. He’s been beating this dead horse for years.

 

Continually repeating something like "Jake was trafficking underage girls" doesnt make it so. Again, he was actually acquitted of that charge. You either didnt know that or once again wish to obfuscate the actual facts because they suit this weird agenda you have against LaMotta, who admittedly was no saint, but you wish to paint him as some arch criminal. Your entitled to weird deluded beliefs which have no basis in fact.

 

I think you guys need to ****ing chill about LaMotta.

 

Yes, it is. The only witness to testify against LaMotta besides the prostitute was Stoller. Now get this. Stoller lived in and owned the apartment where the prostitute lived and operated. He was arrested with the madam and another prostitute. He admitted to sleeping with the 14 year old girl for $20. The day he is supposed to go to trial he has all charges dropped except a misdemeanor contributing to the deliquency of a minor and testifies that despite living in the same apartment complex as the girl, which is operated as a ***** house, he meets the girl at LaMotta's place and then takes her back to their place to have sex... THE FOLLOWING DAY. Now, you explain to me how exactly Jake factors into this and why Jake is the pimp in this arrangement? And if you can please explain to me how a guy solicits a 14 year old prostitute for sex goes through with the transaction in his building thats been shown to be operating as a house of prostitution where both participants live and somehow gets a lesser sentence Jake who owned the bar supposedly hooked up at? Does that make any sense to anyone? No charges of pandering, pedophilia, statutory ****, procuring, operating a house of prositution, nothing but "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" which is the same charge you can get for buying an underage kid a beer. Oh and the judge refrained from sentencing Stoller until after LaMotta's conviction. His sentence? A suspended sentence. No jail time, no fine. "Nothing to see here folks, move along." In fact, all of the participants in the case, the two men who had sex with the girl, one of whom was her pimp, the madam, and the prostitute all got lesser sentences than Jake.

The prostitutes story was that her father had started her out in the business. He later introduced her to the pimp and madam. They took her to LaMotta's bar to pick up men. The newspapers state she looked at least 18 by the way. According to her she sat at the bar drinking a coke and was approached by Jake who asked her why she wasnt drinking alcohol (Jake denied having ever seen or met her). She said she didnt have her ID on her. Jake said "I can tell how old a girl is by kissing her" According to her he then kissed her and determined she was 21. He supposedly then introduced her to Stoller, who as stated above, was just coincidently also the owner of the building she lived in. The following day she went and had sex with Stoller and was paid $20 for it. Now thats her story. Jake denied all of this. But even if you believe her story word for word, which doesnt really make a lot of sense, how would Jake be the person most guilty of anyone? By her own admission he had never met her, didnt know her age, she was lying to him about not having her ID, and at worst he introduced her to some random guy that she later screwed for money. But according to Pat this all makes Jake guilty of running a mob controlled house of prostitution. LOL. Like I said, hes got a great imagination.

 

I think you should change your name to something that doesnt sound like me coughing up phlegm in the morning.

 

According to Pat, Jake’s conviction makes him guilty of promoting prostitution and contributing to a minor being used as a prostitute.

And yes, I believe that anyone operating a nightclub in Miami at that time was almost certainly paying off some shady characters for that privilege, ESPECIALLY since he had prostitution going on there.

You seem to think they had to have sex on a dining table for Jake to be involved. So they went somewhere else to do the deed — Jake introduced not one but two customers to her. He was guilty on TWO counts.

Why do you think Jake was convicted? I say it’s because of the testimony. You claim he was framed … let’s see your proof. My proof is the conviction.

 

"According to Pat" "I believe" thats what youve got. Your imagination. Youve proven it time and time again. And no, he wasnt convicted on two counts of prostitution. He was convicted on one count each of operating a bar for the purposes of lewdness and abetting the girl to engage in prostitution. Again, based on the testimony of two people who got sweetheart deals to testify against him because he wasnt paying off the cops. He was found innocent of procuring her to work as a prostitute and allowing her to use his bar as a place of prostitution. Now figure out how those four things can be. All charges he was convicted of were misdemeanors. The state chose not to pursue felony charges against him. And again, you brought all of this up as some sort of backdrop to your absolute proof that Jake was running this place at the behest of the mob and there was never a hint of anything even remotely related to the mob in this case. This was just another one of your attempts to tenuously tie a guy who spent the better part of his career being victimized by the mob to them as some sort of associate. Pretty pathetic, just like the rest of your arguments.

 

I bet that sounded a lot cooler in your head. Bad day I assume.