Talk:Dutch Schultz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
Contents |
[edit] Cleanup
Noting the obvious that this article needs a cleanup for style, organisation and content. Eusebeus 11:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dead link
The link to Schultz's last words is dead. Kakashi64 16:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Some guy wanted to note this
I did a google search and came accross very dirty article. I noted that the wiki article has left his use of germs to make a poor man blind. It may be controversal to introduce that fact though.
The guy's name was Joe Rock, another gangster. Schultz didn't use germs, he had Joe Rock strung up by his thumbs, and then he (Schultz) smeared a piece of gauze with discharge from a gonhorrea infection that he had and taped the gauze over Rock's eyes. Rock wasn't found for over a day and by the time they got him to a hospital he'd gone blind. Schultz later said that he didn't expect it'd take his men that long to come for him. The germs case you're thinking about occurred at a meeting when someone made a snide remark about not wanting to be around Schultz (who had the flu at the time), so Schultz went over to the guy, grabbed him by the shirt collar, and coughed into his face. A few days later the guy was diagnosed with the flu. 70.243.32.96 00:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- The guy in question in that story would be Joe Adonis and it actually never happened. It was an event in "the Last Testament of Lucky Luciano" which has been proven to be a falsified autobiography. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.215.252.167 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Famous last words
I'd come across the famous a boy has never wept...nor dashed a thousand kin--though not from Burroughs, whom I don't take seriously. I felt they were worth adding, but also a sample of the other rubbish he talked. --GwydionM 18:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- The link to the last words is broken. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.234.243.2 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Identity of "Piggy" and his Role in Schultz's Murder
The section of this article under the heading, "Death," describes the third participant in Schultz's murder as " . . . a third, unidentified man known only by his alias "Piggy. . . It is unknown whether "Piggy" was armed, if he fired any bullets, or if he was simply the getaway driver."
In his excellent book, Bummy Davis vs. Murder, Inc.: The Rise and Fall of the Jewish Mafia and an Ill-Fated Prizefighter (New York: St. Martin's, 2003), author Ron Ross answers these questions. His story is that Murder, Inc. needed an experienced driver who knew his way around Newark, to drive the getaway car for the assigned hitmen, Charlie "The Bug" Workman and Emmanuel "Mendy" Weiss. A small-time, Brooklyn mob-affiliated hoodlum named Willie "Big Gangy" Davidoff (incidentally, the older brother of Al Davis, the protagonist of the book), recommended they hire a self-employed truck driver named Seymour "Piggy" Schecter for this job. Davidoff was acquainted with Schecter because he (Schechter) took and delivered produce orders for the neighborhood pushcart operators and greengrocers under Davidoff's "protection" rackets. Apparently Schechter had earned the nickname Piggy because he spent most of his day driving his truck from farms directly to the markets in different neighborhoods all around New York and New Jersey (i.e., "this little piggy went to market . . . "). Schechter was not affiliated with the mob but was fascinated with the gangster life and jumped at the opportunity to rub elbows with real hit-men and take part in the murder of so infamous a mob figure as Schultz, without getting himself directly in danger.
The job turned out to be fatal for Piggy anyway, because immediately after the shooting Weiss jumped into the car and ordered Piggy to drive off without Workman. The next day, after Workman had made his own way back to Brooklyn, he complained to the "board" of Murder, Inc. that he had been abandoned by Weiss and Piggy at the crime scene, an offense punishable by death. Despite Piggy's protestations that he was only following Weiss's orders, the board decided he was more expendable than Weiss. Therefore, Weiss was "acquitted" and Piggy instead ended up being tortured to death by Murder, Inc., as punishment for this "crime." Dave in Milwaukee 01:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Internal links
The link to "Julie Martin" in this article is not to the gangster who is referred to in the article but to a character from the Australian soap "Neighbours".
That to "Charles Workman" seems equally bogus, connecting as it does to a British theatrical personality who died in 1923, twelve years before the events described in the "Dutch Schultz" article.
Also, the link to "Schultz's last words" is broken.
Jason Finch 20:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Death scene very off..
People who update these pages should do their own research rather than quoting error filled accounts by others. Experienced crime experts know that Schultz was in fact shot mistakenly by his own men. That explained why his men had a different caliber of bullet than Schultz himself, who had the type of bullets his men would have been using in him. The laytout of the restaurant supports this since the shooter likely would have been standing between the abthroom door and the tabel where Schultz's men were sitting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.215.252.167 (talk • contribs).
- No, you can't. WP:NOR. --Mantanmoreland 14:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
10/12/2006 - I changed the wording of the argument that Schultz was killed by his own men to a more professional, encyclopedic style. "This is all wrong" should be a comment in the discussion page, not in the body of the article itself. If you have a differing opinion than the one that has been previously entered in the article it should be presented in a courteous, non-derogatory manner. Additionally, any counter-claim should be supported by evidence in the form of citations and, whenever possible, the inclusion of non-copyrighted material (see article Wikipedia:Citation templates). rallymonkee 12:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
ALSO the murder of the 5 year old boy actually had nothing at all to do with Vince Coll or Dutch Schultz. If you read the newspaper articles and trial documents (you can search the NY times database), you find that the confusion began when a burgler decided to tell the police he knew who did the crime to escape conviction. He said it was members of the Vince Coll gang, but identified Mike Coppola (a Luciano man). Schultz's name became involved because they say in the initial article that the men were looking for Joey Rao whow as falsely assumed to be a Schultz man(he also worked for Luciano).
Admittedly Copolla had shot Rao a year earlier during the masseria-maranzano mafia war when they were on opposite sides. But anyway the man shot at was one Anthony Trobino an alleged narcotics dealer, which just adds to the notion it was a Luciano affair. Joey Rao wasn't even present. In an ironic twist Joey Rao and Mike Coppola would go on to become great friends and co-defendants in a murder case years later.
- I took out the unsourced paragraph about Schultz being shot by his own men, as it was never sourced. The only authoritative source, Sann's bio, makes no reference to it. If it can be sourced, it can go back in, but it can't be original research.--Mantanmoreland 14:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Paul Sann is no authority... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.86.116.65 (talk • contribs).
It would be good if someone could dig out the Police report from the time, or perhaps a Newspaper report. There are no other "authoritative sources" because gangsters are self serving liars who's versions of events cannot be relied upon. We are therefore left to deduce what we can from the physical evedence. Leaving aside the shotgun, as all the dozen or so bullets found in Shultz men were .38 calibre it would seem reasonable to say that their assailants were armed only with .38's. Schultz was the only person hit by a .45. Schultz men were armed with .45's, therefore it is not unreasonable to suggest that Schultz was shot accidentaly by one of his men as they tried to drive off their assailants. Severely wounded, they were only functioning on blind rage and instinct, coming out of the back room firing at anything that moved. If Schultz happened to appear at the door of the urinal at the same time, it could have happened that way. It would be strange and ironic, but reality is often stranger than fiction. It is also easy to pick holes in Weiss' version of events, as passed down to us. He apparently claims Workman shot the man at the urinal before attacking the men in the back room, which would have removed any element of surprise, yet they were shot in the back. Also He claims Workman went back to frisk Schultz body for money and yet Schultz still had a significant amount of money on his person when he reached the hospital. So really we are left to form a consensus of what seems most likely to have happened and I find the "accidentaly shot by his own men" best fits the facts as far as I have seen them—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seveb (talk • contribs) 22:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
