The Clown will take the stand

Hmmm. I think most jurors would see this move as a sign of concern.

I think we've all been schooled by t.v and news etc. that if they haven't proven their case, no need to defend yourself.

I am not convinced the case is proven at all- in fact besides the tapes and the testimony of Mrs. Seifert what links him to any of the murders?

Is the best they have a partial print?

If he's willing to admit involvement on any level,even as a gopher then he's agreeing to being part of the "raqueteering ( sp?) " indictment.( look at doyle).

If this is a ploy to distance himself from the other defendants they may not appreciate it and I doubt it will work.

I think he would be wise to leave well wnough alone.

I'm sure he's very funny but the jury may not be amused...that humor gets old...especially after looking at pictures of dead bodies.

I'm sure he's a very wise man but someone better help him think this one through.

Questions:

Have they already announced it to the jury and when is this supposed to happen?

i'm also wondering about how this happens. when the jury goes in to deliberate are they to keep the defendants separate in dicussion and determinations of innocence or guilt?

Also what witnesses are each of the defense lawyers planning on bringing in?

How much longer is the trial expected to continue once the prosecution rests?

Seems like quite a lot to process,I'm sure the jury is very smart but its hard enough to find one man guilty when it will determine where they spend the rest of their years, i cant imagine the pressure of having so many men's fates in my hand. God help them.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: Lots of questions. I love it! Keep them coming.

If individuals jurors are violating the judge's order and checking out media accounts of the trial, they already know Lombardo is going to testify. (I have no reason to believe any juror is actually doing this, but trial attorneys always assume that jurors are reading media accounts of the trial.)

Otherwise, jurors will likely hear that Lombardo is going to testify when Lombardo's attorney, Rick Halprin, gives his opening statement on Monday. Halprin will tell them they are going to hear from Lombardo.

When they start deliberations, the jury is definitely supposed to keep each individual defendant separate and judge each man's respective guilt or innocence.

The jury does have a tough job. On the blog and in the newspaper, you've only gotten the highlights of the evidence they've seen.

There is no way, with time and space constraints, that I could present all the evidence the jury has heard. But there is a ton of evidence in a very fact-intensive case.

What's tough for the jury too is that they have to keep 18 murders straight, and all the corresponding details, and the evidence that goes to support the government's account. Then they have to compare it to the defense's various theories.

Whew!

As for the witnesses each defendant expects to present, keep checking the blog or the Sun-Times. I usually have an entry that tells you who is coming up on the witness stand the next day.

I expect the trial could goabout two more weeks before the jury gets the case.

Lombardo being indicted is a joke.

What evidence have they presented on him?

The fact that he had heart to hearts with dr. RAT spilotro?

Where is the Seifert evidence?

And why didnt halprin sever lombardos trial. whatever he is, and whatever he has done, they convicted him in strawman, he did his fricken stretch like a man. paid his debt to society. did they bring him in on any real charges, or any activity post 1992? nope.

if he dont walk here, the system is a total joke. If you re asking me who is more moral, honorable, honest, and decent, joe lombardo or your bushes, cheneys, rumsfelds, etc, its an easy answer.

Burden of proof is on the prosecution. If Lombardo claims to have quit the mob after 1992, then it's up to the prosecution.

Look at it this way:

They are linking him to the Seifert hit based on hearsay testimony.

From one person who said some guy told him Lombardo was there (hearsay?), or speculation in one lady said he "kinda looked like him".

Or because he said he wouldnt be testifying against anyone?

Well no s---, its not like Lombardo had inside information, it was all over the papers.

He's probably not the only one who said the same thing.

Let's not forget the partial fingerprint. Oh and Lombardo's alibi. The Seifert case is shaky at best, I'd be amazed to see him convicted on this one.

Then you bring in the dentist brother of a mobster who has been dead for 20 years.

This guy was an FBI informant?

In what capacity is this guy qualified to be an FBI informant?

Better yet, in what capacity is he qualified to take the stand and testify in a federal racketeering trial?

He's a dentist for crying out loud. He saw these people maybe a few times a year for tooth cleanings.

I bet he had a reeeeeeeeal insight to the inner workings of the mob.

Goes to show you how weak the prosecutions case is, in my opinion, to even call this guy to the stand.

Trying to get a conviction anyway they can, it's sad, but it might work.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: A quick answer to one question you asked.

Pat Spilotro testified that he grew up with mobsters and essentially hung out with them or people associated with them for years and reported what he heard to the FBI.

That was why he was a confidential informant.

To the person who wrote "The fact that he had heart to hearts with dr. RAT spilotro"

I would like to see how you would act if half your family was murdered. Fellow, you have no compassion.

A person is a "rat" when he wants to find out who killed his 2 brothers? I don't understand you at all.

Hey steve I know you are not a lawyer but does the case against Lombardo seem soft to you ?

Regardless if he did these crimes or not he is almost 80 years old and in bad health.

If your going to bring a case against a man in his condition it should atleast be concrete.

I say we let god sort this mess out.

Clearly it took the justice system over 30 years to bring him to trial, and Nick Calabrese hasnt really brought any harm to Lombardo.

So why do you think they the government has waited so long to bring Charges on the Seifert trial, nothing has really changed since 74 ?

And this stolen wallet alibi, it seems like this has been swept under the rug. The man had a solid alibi !!!

The man did ten years for bribing a Senator. The Senator did no time none what so ever and was never brought up on charges!

I mean this clearly illustrates how corrupt and selective our justice system is !

Furthermore, the man has made every attempt to seperate himself from this lifestyle ? OK so he didn't move to Palm Springs, I guess that just wasn't his style !

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: Clearly, the government's case against Lombardo isn't as strong as their case against Frank Calabrese Sr.

Calabrese Sr., of course, is caught on tape apparently describing mob killings he took part in.

His brother confirmed portions of those accounts in his testimony.

And Calabrese Sr.'s son, testified against him too.

The government's case against Lombardo is circumstantial, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's weak.

If Lombardo and his lawyers had assessed the proof as extremely weak, I don't think you'd see him taking the stand in his own defense.

To sum up, here's what the government has:

1. A fingerprint on the title application for a car used in the Seifert murder.

2. Witness testimony that Lombardo bought a police scanner found in the car.

3. Testimony that Lombardo said the day after Seifert's murder words to the effect that the S.O.B. won't be testifying against anyone now.

4. Testimony that Seifert was the main witness against Lombardo in a 1974 Teamster pension fund case, and with Seifert's death, the case against Lombardo evaporated.

5. Testimony from Seifert's widow, Emma, that one of the masked gunmen who attacked her husband had the build, size and lightness of foot of Lombardo. She told her brother-in-law of her suspicion that day, a fact he confirmed in his testimony.

6. Testimony from Nick Calabrese that another mob killer John Fecarotta told him who was involved in the Seifert murder. Those people included Fecarotta himself and Lombardo.

Those are the highlights.

Now, Lombardo's defense team, led by attorney Rick Halprin, has challenged much of that evidence.

For instance, Halprin has raised the question of why Fecarotta would ever tell Nick Calabrese about the Seifert murder.

Fecarotta was a made man at the time he allegedly told the story. Calabrese was not.

If the story got out, all it could do was cause problems for Fecarotta.

As Halprin is fond of pointing out, no one can ask Fecarotta about the story because Nick Calabrese killed him

Lombardo will offer an alibi of his own — that he was reporting his wallet stolen to police at the time of the Seifert murder.

We'll see how good that alibi is once it's introduced at trial, and prosecutors get a chance to rip it apart.

If it's a solid alibi, it will stand up.

Also, remember that Lombardo doesn't even have to be convicted in connection with the Seifert murder to go to prison on the racketeering conspiracy charge.

He only has to be convicted on two of the underlying charges in the indictment, which is broad in scope.

I think for a lot of people, how they see the charges against Lombardo is reflected through the prism of how they see the man.

there is nothing on Mr. Lombardo he is not a made man. they should leave him alone. they have been tring for years to get him and he as done nothing wrong but tried to live a quite life. the rats who said things against him should look in the mirror and not hide in protective custody.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: Just for the record, the feds were after him for years, and they succeeded in the 1980s, when they put him in prison for conspiring to bribe a U.S. senator and skimming millions from a Las Vegas casino for the mob.

Is there any speculation as to whether Lombardo's use of a wheelchair is a prop to get jury sympathy? When he got up during trial yesterday to go to the men's room, he looked like he was barely able to move on his own. He used a cane just to get to the wheel chair.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: I don't have a solid answer for you. I know he underwent some medical procedure before trial, creating the apparent need for the wheelchair.

He is a 78-year-old man.

Then again, often times, a criminal defendant's ailments do tend to become more pronounced at trial and sentencing.

If Lombardo is not in the top echelon of the Outfit, then how was he was in a position to bribe a U.S. Senator?

Also, bet your last dollar that one or two jurors are fully aware that Lombardo was on the lam for a long period and will hold that against him.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: Lombardo is charged with going on the lam, so all the jurors have learned of it.

Pat Spilotro "Grew up with Mobsters" ? Did he think that his brothers were choir boys? Did he not know that they in fact were ruthless murderers? Extortionists? Arsonists? Torturers?.

Did he not in fact benefit from his association with the outfit?

Financially they directed a great deal of business to his practice.

I believe the guy is a RAT. You play with fire and you get burned. You break the rules in that life and you get killed. Pat knew enough to know this. I think he is a total hypocrite.

I'm inclined to agre with "anonymous".

I dont mean to sound insensitive but does Dr. spilotro have any qualms about the people his brothers supposedly killed and tortured...I think it goes without saying if you play with fire you get burned.

I'm sure it hurt to lose your brothers but what gives you the right to get up on the stand and scream you want justice?

You know as well as I do that this was the life his brother chose--maybe he should be angry with him ...thats a much more reasonable approach.

And another point , if these men were so bad why did he treat them?

Steve: Any indication as to what day Lombardo will take the stand?

Really, what does he have to lose by testifying at this point in his life?

I would imagine that Halprin has told him that the G has presented enough evidence to effectively put him away for life.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: I would look for Lombardo to hit the stand as early as Tuesday.

I don't understand how people on this blog are defending the mob.

They kill innocent people(remember the Polish guy).

They use extortion to steal money from hard working Americans. They steal millions from Union members. Seems like to me the people defending the mob might be members of the mob themselves...

Depending on how broad Lombardo's direct examination is and the extent of his denials about connections to the outfit, the government may be able to cross him on a broad range of outfit related questions about his contacts with many of the players in Chicago and elsewhere

His attorney is experienced but if the prosecution has surveillance pictures, tapes and physical observations of agents of him with other connected people it could backfire on him.

In general these guys rarely testify in their own cases and his lawyer will have to bring out his previous conviction or the G will in their cross.

They could really try to 'Mine" him for information and my guess is that those not on trial might not like the idea of any testimony from him at all.

While the concept of "Omerta" has been watered down and conveniently forgotten by many "modern" wise guys (particularlt those who flip) it could backfire in more ways than just a jury conviction.

If he somehow walks from the case he better get a high speed motor for that chair and get out of Dodge!!

I think its presumptious and borderline repulsive that DR. RAT SPILOLTRO walks around trying to avenge the deaths of his siblings as if they were a bunch of pipe-fitters walking to work with their lunch pails, and got gunned down by gang-bangers.

Anthony John Spilotro was one of the most notoroius, violent, and feared crime bosses of the twentieth century.

He was a suspect in over 2 dozen murders, destroyed lives, sold drugs, did drugs, stole, adultered, etc, etc. He wasnt BISHOP SHEEN doc.

They guy was in the NEVADA black book for cryin out loud. You live by the sword, you die by it. Its the life they chose, much to your chagrin.

Let them rest in peace. You should have kept your nose out of it.

Furthermore, when reports surfaced in early 1980 that spilotro was sleeping with rosenthals wife, aiuppa and the bosses wanted to take action against tony, It was his capo, Joe Lombardo, who protected him. What a way to pay him back Dr. RAT.

No one is defending these people. What we dont like is when criminals get caught in the act, and the government gives them an escape hatch by allowing these guys to get on the stand and bury other people regardless of the truth.

Lombardo will sit one day in front of higher judge. The bottom line here, is that politics, not truth or justice was the motivation behing LUMBY's indictment.

The FEDS know that since his 92 release, he s clean. ITs a b.s indictment.

They just figured, lets indict em and hope he gets flushed down the toilet with the rest of these guys on trial. collateral damage effect.

Did the DOJ discontinue posting exhibits on its website, or are just behind in doing so? They have not added anything since July 31.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: They're just behind.

I'm glad Jeff said that: These people should be treated like any other murderer. They are a threat to society as terrorists are. Though terrorists have reckless abandon, mobsters seem to slip in the cracks and take advantage of the weak in this country.

Just look at their impact in professional sports. They are murderers and I'm sure if any one of you dealt with them directly, your opinions would change. This isn't the "Godfather" people.

Steve, I find it very odd that one of the biggest unsolved murders in Chicago outfit history hasent been metioned at all.

Sam Giancana, why do you think that is??

I mean all the street crews are in some way connected to this trial, (26th, Elmwood Park, Grand Ave,etc) As well as the murder of Chuckie English.

Both thses murders took part in the time frame of this trial.

I really do believe this may have to do with the fack I believe the Govt has played a role in these deaths, maybe due to the fact of the Kennedy assasination.

I'd like to hear your thoughts as well as the other bloggers on this!

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: There are quite a few prominent mob hits not featured in the trial.

I don't think it has anything to do with the government being involved in those men's deaths.

I would speculate federal prosecutors don't feel they have enough to make their case.

Steve: What time does the trial begin? And what courtroom will it be in?

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: The trial starts at 9:30 a.m. most mornings and ends around 5:30 p.m. It runs Monday through Thursday.

It's in Courtroom 2525 at the Dirksen Federal Building, 219 S. Dearborn.

I have made an attempt to contact you through email and have been unsuccessful. I am hoping that by posting my concerns here I may receive a response.

I am amazed at the fact that there has been no mention of Seiferts brother Nicholas. Do you have any idea why he has not been asked to tesitfy?

I had heard this story as a child numerous times...more than 20 years ago. Obviously none of this meant much as a child it even seemed crazy really. I can't help but be surprised by how accurate the information truely was.

I had even heard Lombardo's name myself and I do not even know the man.

I keep thinking that something or someone is missing from this trial that may actually provide valuble information.

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: Nicholas Seifert has attended several days of trial, especially when they involved his father's murder.

Prosecutors don't say why they do or don't call someone.

Nicholas Seifert wasn't there the day his father was killed.

Thanks again for the great coverage. I look forward to your indepth coverage in the upcoming weeks,in particular Lombardo's testimony.
I've reviewed the articles and have a few questions, forgive me if they're repeats.
Taking each defendant one at a time.

Doyle: I don't recall seeing testimony anywhere that is more than hearsay . Is there testimony from "reliable" witnesses that incriminates him , and if so what kind of time is he looking at ?

Schiro: Again , very little mention of him besides the Calabrese's, how can a jury put a man away for the rest of his life based on criminal's testimony. Is there any hard evidence against him ? I assume he is looking at life if convicted, where would he do the time ? Sounds as if he was up for release on the jewelry charge....Again, the case looks incredibly weak from a readers standpoint.

Lombardo: Is it possible his attorney may have said he was going to testify, under the assumption the jury would get wind, but then say they decided he didn't need to as the prosecution has not proven their case? I know its a stretch but I can't imagine why he would testify when it appears the prosecution has not proven their case. Does the prosecution have a free hand to question him on anything or just the items brought up by his attorney in the direct? Even if its the latter it seems to be an open invitation that shouldn't be extended.

Marcello: Evidence against him seems stronger than the others but still appears to be soft. There are hoodlums,his "common law wife" which for the life of me I can't understand (were they still together at the time of hi arrest? Does there appear to be a reason she was so deceptive with Marcello? It just seems odd that she is so intennt on doing so much damage) The tapes don't impress me that much- i mean we all know they talk in circles but who "assigned" all these code names? Obviously theres an implied correlation but is there anyone who can without a doubt validate that these codes applied to Marcello's discussion or is it what the feds have decided ?

I'm not naive-- but what is concrete about any of this ?

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS:

1. Doyle - He's caught on tape visiting Frank Calabrese Sr. in prison and discussing various matters with him. The prosecution is arguing Doyle was passing back messages from Frank Calabrese Sr. Prosecutors have called other witnesses to try to establish that. His defense will argue Doyle is a loyal friend who was just visiting his pal.

2. Schiro - Prosecutors have Nick Calabrese saying he was involved in the Vaci murder, and several other witnesses testifying he was part of the Chicago mob activity in Phoenix.

3. Lombardo - Lawyers typically don't say their clients are going to testify then not have them do it. In effect, they're promising the jury something and then not delivering it. Also, defendants don't testify when they believe the prosecution has a weak case against them.

4. Marcello - The feds don't need validation of the code names in the tapes. For instance, in one of the tapes, the Marcellos talk about a Carol Marin article and what mobsters are mentioned in them. The Marcellos came up with the code names, and it's obvious from Marin's story who they are referring to by their various code names they've come up with.

They use those nicknames in other conversations.

You can also figure out the nicknames from other contexts.

The codes the Marcellos used weren't that hard to figure out, in most cases.

If by concrete, you mean, first-hand eyewitnesses to murders or DNA evidence, it isn't there, with the exception of Nick Calabrese and Frank Calabrese Sr. talking about murders he allegedly committed on tape. Some pepple would find that concrete.

Prosecutors can prove murders and other crimes circumstantially.

Whether Lombardo is convicted or acquited here, they ll make sure he stays and rots in prison until he dies.

When the government is involved, the concept of justice seizes to exsist.

Infact, the concept of justice manifests itself in the guiding principles of the OUTFIT far more than the machinations of any government body for that matter.

The organizations. bodies, and indivuals who prosecute and persecute the men standing trial here are often and likely more corrupt, immoral, and evil.

Dick Cheney has done humans and society far more damage than any joe lombardo or sam carlisi.

But Cheney is treated like royalty, not only above the law, but responsible for it. I wont even mention the Daleys.

FORMER TEXAS NARCOTIC KINGPIN JAMIEL "JIMMY" CHAGRA TO FEDERAL JUDGE (and future FBI director) WILLIAM SESSIONS AT THE SENTENCING PORTION OF HIS 1981 KINGPIN/RICO TRIAL: " You dont care at all about honesty or the truth. One day, you and I will both sit in front of a higher judge. If you can live with the sentence yuou give me, well so can I. "

I appologize for not making my question clear. I was refering to Daniel Seifert's older brother Nicholas, not his eldest son.

I was wondering if you had heard anything about him testifying.

My understanding is that he was a friend of Lombardos at the time of Daniels murder and quite close to his younger brother as well. I just find it strange that he hasn't been mentioned.

Also, are you aware of whether or not he has been attending the trial?

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: With the prosecution case wrapping up on Monday, I don't expect he'll testify.

While there are many witnesses who could be fascinating, the prosecution is trying to streamline its case as much as possible.

Nicholas can not testify for the reason he was not at the murder nor did he get information til much later in life and that was not first hand it was from people who know people !! Not much help and know way to verify the information had ! You can pick up a book and know almost as much !

And for the people that say this was such a nice man and he could never have done these things I think they forget of the convictions and jail time he has already spent................didnt they Manson and Bundy were such nice guys to ? Stop protecting and glorifing the mob you BOZOS !!

In regards to the Giancana murder. It's been known for quite some time that Anthony Spilotro was the man who killed Giancana.

The order was given by Accardo and Aiuppa back in 1975. The only reason we're not hearing it is because the little guy is long gone.

I believe Daniel's older brother Nicholas knew months ahead of the murder that it would take place and in fact tried to warn Daniel against testifying. I believe he knew as much as Ronald knew. Not just "fascinating", Steve, it's a FACT.

What is Joey Lombardo's build? How tall is he and what was hs stature like in his younger days?

STEVE WARMBIR RESPONDS: I've got to be honest with you, I have no specifics. At trial, he's usually in a wheelchair or sitting behind one of the desks in the defense area.

Back in his younger days, he looked like a strapping fellow.

Lombardo's build back in the day was no different then the build of most of the little gangbangers you see on street corners these days.

Everyone is a bad a** when you got a gun or as Mr. Lombardo put it, when you have an army behind you.

My intrest is who is anonymous that makes these statements, you seem to have information that could only come from very few people.

I was a teenager though this time and I know first hand information.

I knew these people and knew what they were capable of there are only 2 people in the world that know were my uncle is and what he knew back then and one of them is me. because of the names you used for my uncles tells me your a cop or a fed.

Not a cop, Nicky, nor a fed. Anonymous is "family". Don't know how to get in touch with you......... tried through Mr. Warmbir
but got no response.

I can assure you that I am not either of the two. I am a relative of Dannys

I would be happy to talk with you if you can provide me with a way of contacting you.

I am not comfortable posting any of my personal information online.

If you would be interested maybe Mr. Warmbir can send me some form of contact information for you. I have always wished that I could speak with you or your brother but have been unable to reach you.

Please understand that I do not believe that I have any information that would be beneficial to you only interesting at best.

Anyone who "really" understands the capital opportunity and power at "the top" historically in this country knows the real situation here.

After all Joseph Kennedy manipulated the stock market with no impunity and much more (elections). Bill & Hillary Clinton crawled to the white house over money and sex scandals as well as bodies.

How is this any different and they have no intentions of withdrawing.

What is the real truth and why are some, guilty or not, held accountable and others not.

Perception is everything and sometimes what we perceive as evil is not.

Every big company in this country has stepped over someone and worse.

Who is burying their head in the sand over this one, or do I need to bring Joe McCarthy and J. Edger Hoover up?

Reader