The Gambino Crime Family: Drug Operations and Law Enforcement

Introduction

This paper examines research on the Gambino crime family, whose drug business was centered in New York City. The paper analyzes the Gambino family's national and international organizational structure and operating techniques related to drug trafficking. Additionally, this paper compares the Gambino family's operations from their past to present, focusing on their involvement in drug prohibition, the drug trade nexus, political corruption, and other criminal activities. Over time, the Gambino family developed diverse business interests that increased their prominence within the Italian Mafia. The paper will also assess various law enforcement tools that can be employed against organized crime families of this nature.

National and International Drug Business Structure

The Gambino family's drug business structure and operating approaches originated from strong links with the Sicilian drug trade (Critchley, 2008). Until 1914, there were no effective laws or regulations governing the drug market in the United States (Critchley, 2008). The Boylan anti-drug Law, enacted by the New York state legislature on March 28, 1914, was the first regulatory constraint placed on drugs. This law was not rigorously enforced until the 1920s, when legitimate pharmacies continued dispensing medications to drug users. The law was created in response to the growing number of individuals addicted to drugs, according to Charles B. Towns, the lawyer who authored the legislation (Shaffer, 2012). The most significant provision of this new law was the Harrison Tax Act of 1914, which, among other measures, restricted the sale of heroin and cocaine (Head, 2012).

Until drug production and use became illegal, organized crime had little incentive to become involved in the drug trade. However, after the Harrison Tax Act of 1914 and the Boylan anti-drug Law, the drug market became a prime target for organized crime. In 1920, when Carlo Gambino was just eighteen years old, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that non-medical drug use was unlawful, creating an opportunity for organized crime groups to become the primary source of narcotics (Head, 2012).

In the mid-to-late 1920s, Charles Luciano served as the Cosa Nostra's representative in Italy, while Carlo Gambino served as the organization's point person and supervisor of drug operations in the United States (Critchley, 2008). The Gambino family's Sicilian connections to the Cosa Nostra's Italian drug business were transplanted to the United States through Carlo Gambino's leadership.

Diversified Business Interests of the Gambino Family

The Gambino family maintained stakes in numerous companies over many years, ranging from legal to illegal enterprises. In 1957, Carlo Gambino became known as one of the most effective mobsters in history. The family had involvement in Consolidated Carriers Corporation, which dealt with labor union issues. Later, in the 1990s, Carlo's son Thomas Gambino directed the Gambino Medical and Science Foundation. Through this foundation, the Gambino family funded a two million dollar pediatric bone marrow transplant program at a Medical Center in Long Island, which enhanced the family's wealth to approximately seventy-five million dollars.

In 1991, charges were filed against Carlo Gambino and others that included racketeering, extortion, loan sharking, unlawful gambling, and eleven counts of murder. A government witness soon came forward and agreed to testify against Carlo Gambino and his associates. In 1993, Carlo Gambino was convicted of two counts of racketeering and racketeering conspiracy. The prosecution sought to prove that Carlo Gambino was responsible for overseeing unlawful gambling and loan sharking operations that occurred in Connecticut from 1985 to 1996. Carlo Gambino was sentenced to five years in prison, which he began serving immediately.

While serving his sentence, it emerged that Gambino's stockbroker, Mohammad Ali Khan, had been defrauding him of money for an extended period. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) estimated the fraudulent amount to be approximately two million dollars, and Carlo Gambino successfully sued and recovered the money. In 2000, Carlo Gambino was released from prison and subsequently relocated to Florida. It has been documented that the Gambino family engaged in numerous illegal activities, making it difficult to find individuals willing to testify against them. Greed and a hunger for power are cited as factors that ultimately led to the family's decline.

Law Enforcement Tools Against Organized Crime

Within the United States, serious efforts to regulate organized crime began to emerge in the 1960s (Finkle, 2010). Commissions were established to research organized crime and develop strategies to curtail criminal enterprises effectively. These investigations reflected growing national concern about organized crime and its motivations. Organized crime can include individuals coming together to conduct illegal business such as drug trafficking or to obtain access to legitimate companies (LeFrancois, 2011). Legislators began passing regulations to reduce organized crime and minimize the threat to American society.

The Organized Crime Control Act was enacted by President Nixon in 1970. This legislation was designed to assist law enforcement agencies in combating organized crime in America and initiated a comprehensive war on organized crime. The act established new investigative methods for examining organized crime activities and created new criminal penalties for such offenses. According to Lyman and Potter (2007), the act "gave higher powers to juries, allowed the detention of difficult-to-manage witnesses, and gave authority to the Attorney General to safeguard cooperative federal and state witnesses as well as their families." LeFrancois (2011) describes the act's function as being "to seek the removal of organized crime in the United States by reinforcing the legal devices in the evidence-gathering process, by developing new panel prohibitions, and by offering superior penalties and new methods to manage the illegal activities of those involved in organized crime." The Organized Crime Control Act is divided into thirteen distinct titles, each with unique requirements for prosecuting organized crime activities.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act represents a significant development in organized crime legislation. According to U.S. Legal (2011), the function of this law is "to suppress the threat of organized crime and to prevent it from infiltrating legitimate business operations affecting interstate commerce." Find Law (2011) explains that the RICO Act "makes it unlawful for criminal organizations to exploit any legitimate business operations. Many of these laws permit the seizure and confiscation of criminal firms' legitimate business assets, and are normally used against well-known organized crime groups. The objective is to paralyze the operation economically and cut off sources of funding that support recurring criminal activities." Notably, mafia heads who did not personally participate in illegal activities could still be held accountable for the organization's crimes. RICO gave the government authority to charge an entire organization, and if a member was guilty of participating in racketeering or other criminal activity, they could be prosecuted under the RICO Act.

The challenge in combating organized crime in modern society stems from increasing innovation and creativity that makes it easier for criminal organizations to operate across the country and internationally. Police may encounter difficulties investigating such firms due to legal constraints and limited ability to monitor their activities. Organized crime occurs worldwide, and therefore pressure is felt globally (Buscaglia, 2003). Organized crime organizations pose a substantial problem for institutions attempting to minimize such activities. These criminal enterprises increasingly intermingle with legitimate businesses and terrorist groups.

The threat posed by this dangerous subculture cannot be reduced unless American society acknowledges the presence of organized crime and demands safety and protection against criminal organizations. Americans must collaborate with local law enforcement to develop solutions that minimize organized crime within society. Individuals must report suspicious activities to police so they can take appropriate action.

Conclusion

Organized crime no longer consists solely of group members managing specific territories and businesses within a defined area. Many modern criminal organizations operate covertly and employ both legal and illegal methods. Contemporary organized crime groups leverage innovation and legal loopholes to successfully operate their ventures, exploiting the fact that law enforcement faces significant challenges in monitoring their activities and operations. There is a critical need for new legislation to assist police in restricting the activities of organized crime families and for better processes and procedures within law enforcement. Only through comprehensive legal reform, enhanced investigative capabilities, and coordinated community engagement can society hope to effectively counter the persistent threat of organized crime.