Opinion & Decision at 5.) Malangone also attended Froncillo's father's wake in July 1992. Id. Moreover, Froncillo admits that after he became an IBT member, he saw Malangone between ten and twenty times at Pastel's Disco ("Pastel's"), which Malangone managed. Id.; (Proposed Charges at 11.) Several of these visits occurred in private, during non-business hours, when Pastel's was closed to the public. (IRB Opinion & Decision at 6.) In addition, on April 16, 1989, law enforcement officials surveilling Pastel's during the reception following Frank Malangone's induction into the Genovese LCN Family observed a white 1981 Cadillac in Pastel's parking lot that was registered to Froncillo's wife. Id.
Froncillo was also observed in the company of Malangone and his associates on December 17, 1990. Id. On this date, the New York City Police Department's Organized Crime Intelligence Division ("OCI") conducted a surveillance of Malangone. Id. During this surveillance, OCI observed Froncillo speaking to Malangone, Elio "Chinatown" Albanese, Longo, and John Giangrande, all of whom the FBI considers to be Genovese LCN Family members, at the corner of Mulberry and Grand Streets in Manhattan. Id. The OCI observed all four men enter Ruggero's Restaurant ("Ruggero's") on Grand Street, and remain there for over one hour. Id. After leaving Ruggero's, the OCI witnessed Froncillo, Malangone, and Giangrande walk to 171 Mulberry Street, which the FBI believes to be a "known Genovese LCN Family social club." Id. at 6-7.
Finally, Froncillo testified that he has had several contacts with Malangone at Dino's Hair Salon ("Dino's") in Brooklyn since becoming an IBT member. Id at 8. According to the FBI, members of the Luchese, Gambino, and Genovese LCN Families have frequented Dino's for the past fifteen years. Id. In his deposition, Froncillo stated that he went to Dino's "once every two months." Id. Froncillo admitted seeing and greeting Malangone at Dino's two or three times in the twelve months prior to his deposition. Id.
Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the IRB found that "the evidence established that Dominic Froncillo brought reproach upon the IBT and violated the IBT Constitution by knowingly associating with members of organized crime." Id. at 19. First, the IRB "determined that Malangone's membership in the Genovese LCN Family was clearly established." Id. at 10. The IRB found the hearsay evidence presented to it at the hearing to be reliable. Id. It further noted that, in an earlier decision, the IRB found Malangone to be a Genovese LCN Family member. Id. at 10 n.7. The IRB stated that "in Investigations Officer v. Lauro, the [IRB], in permanently barring Lauro from the IBT based upon his 'knowing association' with Malangone and Longo, concluded that Malangone was a Genovese LCN Family member." Id. (citing Decision of the Independent Review Board, slip op. at 2-3, 7 (Nov. 14, 1995), aff'd, United States v. IBT, 910 F. Supp. 139 (S.D.N.Y 1995)).
Next, the IRB found that, in light of the evidence presented to it, "Froncillo's knowledge of Malangone's ties to organized crime was established." Id. at 12. The IRB noted that Malangone's LCN membership was reported by the United States Senate and by local newspapers. Id. Moreover, the IRB found that "given their longstanding friendship, Froncillo's knowledge of Malangone's ties to organized crime may be inferred from the length and nature of his relationship with Malangone, which included Froncillo and Malangone meeting in the company of other LCN members." Id. (citation omitted).
Having held that the charges against Froncillo had been proved, and having considered the gravity of the charges, the IRB permanently barred Froncillo from holding membership in or any position with the IBT, or any IBT-affiliated entity, in the future. Id. at 19. The IRB further ruled that Froncillo may not hereafter obtain employment, consulting or other work with the IBT or any IBT-affiliated entity. Id.
This Court received IRB Application XXXIII, consisting of the IRB's Opinion and Decision concerning Froncillo together with supporting exhibits, on July 3, 1996. By letter dated July 12, 1996, Chambers notified Froncillo that if he wished to object to the IRB's findings and rulings, he could submit any objections to IRB Application XXXIII to this Court no later than ten days from the date of the letter. (Letter from Jennifer A. Meyer, Law Clerk to the Honorable David N. Edelstein, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, to Dominic Froncillo (July 12, 1996) (on file with Clerk of the Southern District of New York).) This Court received no response from Froncillo.
Having carefully reviewed the IRB's Opinion and Decision, as well as the exhibits attached thereto, this Court finds that the IRB's decision is not arbitrary and capricious. See IRB Rules, P O ("in reviewing actions of the IRB, this Court shall apply the same standard of review applicable to review of final federal agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act"); see also May 6, 1994 Opinion & Order, slip op. at 4 (S.D.N.Y 1994). This Court finds that the IRB received adequate proof that Malangone was a member of organized crime. In addition, this Court finds that the IRB sufficiently established that Froncillo knew that Malangone was an organized crime member. This Court further finds that the Chief Investigator presented the IRB with proof that Froncillo knowingly associated with Malangone. Accordingly, the decision of the IRB is affirmed in its entirety.
DATED: New York, New York
December 9, 1996
David N. Edelstein