The Year in Review (2018-2019)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Public Safety Committee
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY LEGISLATURE A regular meeting of the Public Safety Committee of the Suffolk County Legislature was held in the Rose Y. Caracappa Legislative Auditorium of the William H. Rogers Legislature Building, 725 Veterans Memorial Highway, Smithtown, New York on Thursday, May 31, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Legislator Kate Browning, Chairperson Legislator Kara Hahn Legislator John Kennedy Legislator DuWayne Gregory Legislator Lou D'Amaro Legislator William Spencer MEMBERS NOT PRESENT: Legislator Robert Calarco, Vice-Chair ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: D.P.O. Wayne Horsley, Fourteenth Legislative District George Nolan, Counsel to the Legislature Barbara LoMoriello, Deputy Clerk, Suffolk County Legislature John Ortiz, Budget Review Office Terry Pearsall, Chief of Staff Josh Slaughter, Aide to Legislator Browning Bobby Knight, Aide to Presiding Officer Lindsay Michael Pitcher, Aide to Presiding Officer Lindsay Paul Perillie, Aide to Legislator Gregory Lora Gellerstein, Aide to Legislator Spencer Ali Nazir, Aide to Legislator Kennedy Justin little, Aide to Legislator D'Amaro Amy Keyes, Aide to Legislator Calarco Joe Williams, Commissioner, FRES Anthony LaFerrera, SC FRES Commission Jay Egan, Suffolk County FRES Commission Ed Webber, Acting Commissioner, Suffolk County Police Department James Burke, Chief of Department, Suffolk County Police Department Ted Nieves, Deputy Inspector, Suffolk County Police Department Tracy Pollack, Suffolk County Police Department Todd Guthy, Detective, Suffolk County Police Stuart -
Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor Annual Report
FINAL DRAFT WATERFRONT COMMISSION OF NEW YORK HARBOR ANNUAL REPORT 2019-2020 FINAL DRAFT To the Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor To the Honorable Phil Murphy, Governor and the Legislature of the State of New York and the Legislature of the State of New Jersey MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR “The outstanding investigative work by this Office’s prosecutors and our law enforcement partners uncovered a litany of crimes allegedly committed by members and associates of the Gambino organized crime family, who still don’t get it – handcuffs and a jail cell are waiting for criminals who threaten violence and commit fraud, money laundering and bribery in furtherance of their enterprise.” - United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Richard P. Donoghue, December 5, 2019 I am pleased to present to you the 2019-2020 Annual Report of the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor. To say that this was a tumultuous year is an understatement. We are still reeling from the ongoing onslaught of the COVID-19 Pandemic, which has ravaged our nation and the world, and changed life as we know it. We mourn the tragic loss of lives, and remember with sadness the passing of our friend and colleague, Linda Smith, who was a dedicated member of this agency for over 23 years. This year, we also witnessed one of the largest movements in this country’s history, with millions of people participating in mass demonstrations to protest systemic racism. While diversity and inclusion has long been an integral part of the Commission’s culture, we reaffirm our commitment to fairness and equality for all, regardless of race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or religion. -
Download Pernamanzo.Indictment
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Hon. V. Crim. No. 20- JOHN PERNA and 18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(3), (a)(6) THOMAS MANZO 18 u.s.c. § 1349 18 u.s.c. § 1519 18 u.s.c. § 2 INDICTMENT The Grand Jury in and for the District of New Jersey, sitting at Newark, charges: COUNT ONE (Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering Activity Assault with a Dangerous Weapon) The Racketeering Enterprise At all times relevant to this Indictment: 1. Defendant JOHN PERNA was a member of a criminal organization referred to as the Lucchese Crime Family that operated in New Jersey, New York, and elsewhere. Accomplice- I was an associate of the Lucchese Crime Family. Defendant THOMAS MANZO was an associate of defendant JOHN PERNA. 2. The Lucchese Crime Family was part of a nationwide criminal organization known by various names, such as "the Mafia," "La Cosa Nostra," and "the MOB," which operated through entities known as "families." The Lucchese Crime Family, including its leadership, members, and associates, constituted an "enterprise," as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1959(b)(2), that is, a group of individuals associated in fact that engaged in, and the activities of which affected interstate and foreign commerce. The Lucchese Crime Family (the "Enterprise") constituted an ongoing organization whose members functioned as a continuing unit for a common purpose of achieving the objectives of the Enterprise. 3. The Lucchese Crime Family operated through groups of individuals, headed by persons called "captains" or "capos," who control "crews" that consist of "made" members who, in tum, control subordinates, who are known as "associates" of the Enterprise. -
Is the Mafia Taking Over Cybercrime?*
Is the Mafia Taking Over Cybercrime?* Jonathan Lusthaus Director of the Human Cybercriminal Project Department of Sociology University of Oxford * This paper is adapted from Jonathan Lusthaus, Industry of Anonymity: Inside the Business of Cybercrime (Cambridge, Mass. & London: Harvard University Press, 2018). 1. Introduction Claims abound that the Mafia is not only getting involved in cybercrime, but taking a leading role in the enterprise. One can find such arguments regularly in media articles and on blogs, with a number of broad quotes on this subject, including that: the “Mafia, which has been using the internet as a communication vehicle for some time, is using it increasingly as a resource for carrying out mass identity theft and financial fraud”.1 Others prescribe a central role to the Russian mafia in particular: “The Russian Mafia are the most prolific cybercriminals in the world”.2 Discussions and interviews with members of the information security industry suggest such views are commonly held. But strong empirical evidence is rarely provided on these points. Unfortunately, the issue is not dealt with in a much better fashion by the academic literature with a distinct lack of data.3 In some sense, the view that mafias and organised crime groups (OCGs) play an important role in cybercrime has become a relatively mainstream position. But what evidence actually exists to support such claims? Drawing on a broader 7-year study into the organisation of cybercrime, this paper evaluates whether the Mafia is in fact taking over cybercrime, or whether the structure of the cybercriminal underground is something new. It brings serious empirical rigor to a question where such evidence is often lacking. -
Authorized Federal Capital Prosecutions Which Resulted in a Guilty Plea - 6/24/2016
Authorized Federal Capital Prosecutions Which Resulted in a Guilty Plea - 6/24/2016 Zambrano, Jesus E.D. TX CR No. 9:91-CR4 Guilty plea Name of AG Barr Race & gender of def H M Victim R WM Date of DP notice 4/23/1991 a cross-racial law enforcement officer victim. Two Hispanic men in Texas were sentenced to life imprisonment and 40 years, respectively, for the marijuana-related murder of a white law enforcement officer after a joint trial. The sentencing jury found no aggravating factors. 963 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 353 (1992). A third Hispanic defendant, Jesus Zambrano, was also initially approved for capital prosecution but received a sentence of 30 years after he testified for the government against the Villarreal brothers. Culbert, Stacy E.D. MI CR No. 92-81127 Guilty plea at trial Name of AG Barr Race & gender of def B M Victim R BM Date of DP notice 7/22/1994 involves eight gun murders by a drug gang member. A prosecutor claimed that the gang was involved in up to 50 murders. Johnson, Darryl W.D. NY CR No. 92-159-C Guilty plea Name of AG Reno Race & gender of def B M Victim R BM Date of DP notice 7/29/1993 an African-American from the West Coast charged with two cocaine-related killings by a California and Tennessee connected, Buffalo, New York group, suspected in as many as five other murders. Murder for hire is alleged as an aggravating circumstance. A guilty plea was entered in 1995 on the morning of trial. -
DECISION of the TRADE WASTE COMMISSION DENYING the APPLICATIONS of SUBURBAN CARTING CÔNP. and Code
THE CITY OF NEW YORK TRADE WASTE COMMISSION 253 BROADWAY, lOTH FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK IOOOT DECISION OF THE TRADE WASTE COMMISSION DENYING THE APPLICATIONS OF SUBURBAN CARTING CÔNP. AND PRIME CARTING, INC. FOR LICENSES TO OPERATE AS TRADE WASTE BUSINESSES By applications submitted August 30, 1996, Suburban Carting'Cotp. and Prime Carting, Inc. ("Suburban" and "Prime," respectively, or the "applicants," collectively) applied to the New York City Trade Waste Commission for licenses to operate as trade waste businesses pursuant to Local Law 42 of 1996. See Title 16-A of the New York City Administrative Code ("Admin. Code") S 16-508. Local Law 42, which created the Commission to license and regulate the trade waste industry in New York City, was enacted to address pervasive organized crime and other comrption in the commercial carting industry, to protect businesses using private carting services, and to increase competition in the industry and thereby reduce prices. Local Law 42 authorizes the Commission to deny a license to any applicant who it determines, in the exercise of its discretion, ¡lacks good character, honesty, and integrity. See Admin. Code $ 16-509(a)' The statute identifies u ,rurnb.r of facìo., u-ong those which the Commission may , consider in making its determination. See id. $ 16-509(aXi)-(x). fhesg illustrative factors include the failure to provide truthfu| information.to the Commission, certain criminal convictions or pending criminal' charges, certain civil ôr administrative findings of liabitity, and certain associations with organized crime figures. In'addition, the Cámmission is authorìZgd to L deny a license to any applicant who knowingly fails to provide information See id. -
Table 2–1 Demographic Trends in New York City, 1890–1940, ~ Total Numbers and Percentages of New York City Population59
The Mob and the City: The Hidden History of the How Mafia Captured New York Chapter Two: Prohibition and the Rise of the Sicilians enclaves. In 1910, 41% of its residents had been born outside America. While Germans and Irish were the largest immigrant groups in the 1800s, Jews and Italians were the largest groups by the early 1900s. “Within the brief span of less than a generation the ethnic composition of the metropolis altered radically,” explains demographer Ira Rosenwaike. “[P]ersons of Jewish and Italian background had become numerically superior to those of Irish and German descent.”58 Table 2–1 Demographic Trends in New York City, 1890–1940, ~ Total Numbers and Percentages of New York City Population59 Census Irish Jewish Italian Black NYC Total Year Population 1890 624,000 (26%) 175,000 (7%) 67,000 (2%) 35,000 (<2%) 2,321,000 1900 710,000 (20%) 510,000 (14%) 216,000 (6%) 60,000 (<2%) 3,437,000 1910 676,000 (14%) 1,050,000 (22%) 544,000 (11%) 91,000 (<2%) 4,766,000 1920 616,000 (10%) 1,600,000 (28%) 802,000 (14%) 152,000 (2%) 5,620,000 1930 613,000 (8%) 1,800,000 (25%) 1,070,000 (15%) 327,000 (4%) 6,930,000 1940 518,000 (6%) 1,785,000 (23%) 1,785,000 (23%) 458,000 (6%) 7,454,000 In Chapter Three: The Racketeer Cometh, we will see how these demographic trends bolstered the Mafia’s labor racketeering. Now, let us look at their social effects on the underworld. -
United States V. Carson
PARTIAL OPINION (EDITTED BY RICOACT.COM LLC) Page 1 52 F.3d 1173, 149 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2001, 130 Lab.Cas. P 11,313 (Cite as: 52 F.3d 1173) eteering acts on behalf of organized crime while Car- son was Secretary-Treasurer of Local 1588 of the International Longshoremen's Association United States Court of Appeals, (“ILA”).FN1 Following a bench trial in which the dis- Second Circuit. trict court heard ten weeks of evidence and argument UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, distributed over an eleven month period, the United v. District Court for the Southern District of New York Donald CARSON, Defendant-Appellant, LOCAL 1804-1, ILA; John Barbato; George Barone; (Sand, J.) entered a final judgment in favor of the John Bowers; George Bradley; Thomas Buzzanca; government, (1) granting injunctive relief, (2) order- Sato Calabrese; Ronald Capri; Harry Cashin; James ing Carson to disgorge ill-gotten gains, and (3) im- J. Cashin; Anthony Ciccone; Joseph Colozza; Vin- posing approximately $46,000 of costs. Carson ap- cent Colucci; James Coonan; Michael Coppola; Har- peals on numerous grounds. In addition, appeal is old Daggett; Doreen Supply Company, Inc.; Tino taken from the district court's dismissal of a com- Fiumara; Anthony Gallagher; Robert Gleason; John plaint filed by Carson and his wife, Peggy Carson, Gotti; Leroy Gwynn; ILA Local 1588; ILA Local against Local 1588 under the Employee Retirement 1588, Executive Board; ILA Local 1809; ILA Local Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et 1809, Executive Board; ILA Local 1814; ILA Local seq. -
State Statutory Responses to Criminal Street Gangs
Washington University Law Review Volume 73 Issue 2 Limited Liability Companies January 1995 The Jets and Sharks Are Dead: State Statutory Responses to Criminal Street Gangs David R. Truman Washington University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Recommended Citation David R. Truman, The Jets and Sharks Are Dead: State Statutory Responses to Criminal Street Gangs, 73 WASH. U. L. Q. 683 (1995). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol73/iss2/11 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE JETS AND SHARKS ARE DEAD: STATE STATUTORY RESPONSES TO CRIMINAL STREET GANGS I. INTRODUCTION Organized crime in America has progressed through a variety of incarnations, from the outlaw gangs of the Wild West to the glorified gangsters of the early half of this century (Al Capone, John Dillinger) to the Mafia ("La Cosa Nostra"), personified in the 1980s and 1990s by the Gambino crime family and its "Dapper Don," John Gotti. But today, organized crime in America is increasingly controlled by criminal street gangs, a new level of organized crime1 that consistently outpaces the efforts of law enforcement to control it. A far cry from the dancing, singing Jets and Sharks of West Side Story,2 these gangs are sophisticated, well- organized criminal enterprises. Los Angeles County, California, alone has an estimated 130,000 gang members who accounted for a record 430 of Los Angeles' 1,100 murders in 1992.4 Although Los Angeles' gang 1. -
La Cosa Nostra in the US
NIJ - International Center - U.N Activities - La Cosa Nostra in the US Participating in the U.N.'s crime prevention program. LA COSA NOSTRA IN THE UNITED STATES by James O. Finckenauer, Ph.D. International Center National Institute of Justice Organizational Structure La Cosa Nostra or LCN -- also known as the Mafia, the mob, the outfit, the office -- is a collection of Italian- American organized crime “families” that has been operating in the United States since the 1920s. For nearly three quarters of a century, beginning during the time of Prohibition and extending into the 1990s, the LCN was clearly the most prominent criminal organization in the U.S. Indeed, it was synonymous with organized crime. In recent years, the LCN has been severely crippled by law enforcement, and over the past decade has been challenged in a number of its criminal markets by other organized crime groups. Nevertheless, with respect to those criteria that best define the harm capacity of criminal organizations, it is still pre-eminent. The LCN has greater capacity to gain monopoly control over criminal markets, to use or threaten violence to maintain that control, and to corrupt law enforcement and the political system than does any of its competitors. As one eminent scholar has also pointed out, “no other criminal organization [in the United States] has controlled labor unions, organized employer cartels, operated as a rationalizing force in major industries, and functioned as a bridge between the upperworld and the underworld” (Jacobs, 1999:128). It is this capacity that distinguishes the LCN from all other criminal organizations in the U.S. -
1 United States District Court Eastern District of New
Case 1:03-cr-00929-NGG Document 660 Filed 12/21/06 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: <pageID> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MEMORANDUM & ORDER v. 03-CR-929 (NGG) VINCENT BASCIANO, and PATRICK DEFILIPPO, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------X GARAUFIS, United States District Judge. Defendants Vincent Basciano (“Basciano”) and Patrick DeFilippo (“DeFilippo”) (collectively “Defendants”) have moved this court to grant either an acquittal pursuant to Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or a new trial under Rule 33. Defendants make their challenges on four grounds. First, Defendants contest the jury’s findings with respect to count one of the indictment, which charged a RICO conspiracy. Defendants claim that there was insufficient proof of three of the eight racketeering acts – racketeering acts three, seven, and eleven. (See Memorandum of Law in Support of Vincent Basciano’s Post-Trial Motions (“Basciano Mem.”) at 15-26 (challenging racketeering acts three, seven, and eleven); Post-Trial Memorandum of Law in Support of DeFilippo’s Motions (“DeFilippo Mem.”) at 4-6 (challenging racketeering act three).) Second, Basciano claims that the court’s charge to the jury on the concept of relatedness pertaining to Racketeering Conspiracy was improper. (Basciano Mem. at 35-37.) Third, Basciano contends that venue was not established by a preponderance of the evidence with respect to count two, which charged ownership and supervision of a gambling 1 Case 1:03-cr-00929-NGG Document 660 Filed 12/21/06 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: <pageID> business involving joker-poker machines. (Basciano Mem. -
U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 August 24, 2020 MR. JOHN GREENEWALD JR. SUITE
U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 August 24, 2020 MR. JOHN GREENEWALD JR. SUITE 1203 27305 WEST LIVE OAK ROAD CASTAIC, CA 91384-4520 FOIPA Request No.: 1374338-000 Subject: List of FBI Pre-Processed Files/Database Dear Mr. Greenewald: This is in response to your Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request. The FBI has completed its search for records responsive to your request. Please see the paragraphs below for relevant information specific to your request as well as the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for standard responses applicable to all requests. Material consisting of 192 pages has been reviewed pursuant to Title 5, U.S. Code § 552/552a, and this material is being released to you in its entirety with no excisions of information. Please refer to the enclosed FBI FOIPA Addendum for additional standard responses applicable to your request. “Part 1” of the Addendum includes standard responses that apply to all requests. “Part 2” includes additional standard responses that apply to all requests for records about yourself or any third party individuals. “Part 3” includes general information about FBI records that you may find useful. Also enclosed is our Explanation of Exemptions. For questions regarding our determinations, visit the www.fbi.gov/foia website under “Contact Us.” The FOIPA Request number listed above has been assigned to your request. Please use this number in all correspondence concerning your request. If you are not satisfied with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s determination in response to this request, you may administratively appeal by writing to the Director, Office of Information Policy (OIP), United States Department of Justice, 441 G Street, NW, 6th Floor, Washington, D.C.