July 10, 2024 • 43 mins
Send us a text and let us know what you think about the episode!
What happens when a meticulously planned heist unravels due to fractured trust and relentless investigation? Uncover the thrilling final chapter of the Great Brinks Robbery, where elaborate schemes and duplicity ultimately led to one of the most dramatic turns in criminal history. We'll walk you through how Joseph O'Keefe, cornered by legal troubles and assassination attempts, flipped on his accomplices, exposing the intricate details that sealed their fate. Prepare to be captivated by the precision in planning—from casing the Brinks building to duplicating keys—and how these masterful plans fell apart.
Join us as we follow the FBI's relentless pursuit of justice, which culminated in a surprising twist in 1956 involving a small-time crook and a hidden stash of bills. Discover how a figure known as "Fat John" became a pivotal clue, leading to critical breakthroughs and further implicating the conspirators. This episode promises to tie together the thrilling investigation, the betrayal within the criminal ranks, and the ultimate resolution of one of America's most notorious robberies. Don't miss this gripping conclusion to an unforgettable saga.
Source Material: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GXtsG66sFXign9XE5_ynezkBoHEDLQtGyXF1Yt3P7mM/edit?usp=sharing
Thanks for being a loyal Crime Connoisseur! Enjoy your free 30-Day Audible Trial Membership
Discover your dog's DNA with a simple cheek swab for their genetic testing.
BoxDog and BoxCat are premium customizable subscription boxes for dogs and cats.
Your cat deserves better. Have fresh, human-grade meals for your cat straight to your door each month.
Free 30-Day Audible Trial MembershipThanks for being a loyal Crime Connoisseur! Enjoy your free 30-Day Audible Trial Membership
Smalls
Your cat deserve better. Have fresh, human-grade meals for your cat straight to your door each month
Wisdom Panel
Discover your dog's DNA with a simple cheek swab for their genetic testing.
BoxDog
BoxDog and BoxCat are premium customizable subscription box for dogs and cats.
Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/crimeconnoisseurs
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, hey, crime connoisseurs, and welcome back
to our final part of the GreatBrinks Robbery.
If you still need to listen toPart 1, stop and go give it a
listen.
Last week we discussed thedetails of the heist, the main
members of the crew and theinvestigative efforts of the FBI
and Boston Police Department.
(00:22):
The FBI and Boston PoliceDepartment.
To recap on January 17, 1950, agroup of five to seven
individuals entered the Brinks'offices disguised with masks,
navy peacoats, chauffeur's hatsand gloves.
They efficiently overpoweredfive Brinks employees and made
(00:43):
off with $2.7 million in cash,coins, checks and money orders,
which would be worth around $30million today.
Following the heist, lawenforcement agencies launched a
thorough investigation seekingto identify the culprits from
(01:03):
the limited evidence available.
Numerous tips poured in fromacross the country and Brinks
offered a $100,000 reward forinformation leading to the
capture and prosecution of thethieves.
Over the years, the FBIidentified several suspects but
faced challenges in obtainingconclusive evidence for their
(01:27):
indictment.
Among the main suspects wereJoseph James O'Keefe and Stanley
Albert Guschiora, who wereapprehended in Pennsylvania for
other criminal activities.
O'keefe faced multiple legalissues in different locations
and was targeted in threeseparate assassination attempts.
(01:48):
Ultimately, o'keefe wasarrested in Leicester,
massachusetts, on August 1, 1954and transferred into Boston
police custody.
Due to safety concerns, he wasplaced in a county jail in
Springfield, massachusetts,instead of the Suffolk County
Jail in Boston.
(02:09):
The FBI attempted to leverageO'Keefe's situation to gain
information about hisaccomplices.
This brings us to January 1956.
This is the final part of theGreat Brinks Robbery.
At 4.20 pm on January 6, 1956,joseph O'Keefe made his final
(03:08):
decision.
He was done with Pino, baker,mcginnis, maffie and the other
Brinks conspirators who hadbetrayed him.
He told two FBI agents quoteall right, what do you want to
know?
End quote agents.
(03:28):
Quote all right, what do youwant to know?
End quote.
O'keefe told the complete storyof the Brinks robbery in a
series of interviews over thefollowing days.
After each interview, fbiagents worked tirelessly into
the night verifying all aspectsof his story.
Many of the details had alreadybeen uncovered during the
extensive six-year investigationand additional information from
(03:51):
O'Keefe helped to fill in theremaining gaps.
Although Pino was the mainorchestrator, the Brinks robbery
was a result of the collectiveideas and criminal experience of
individuals who had beenacquainted for many years.
The idea to rob Brinks firstsurfaced in 1947, when Brinks
(04:15):
was located on Federal Street inBoston.
During that time Pinoapproached O'Keefe and invited
him to participate in the heist.
His close associate StanleyGuschiara had already been
recruited and O'Keefe agreed totake part as well.
The crew at the time includedeveryone involved in the January
(04:39):
17, 1950 robbery, except forHenry Baker.
17th 1950 robbery except forHenry Baker.
They planned to break into theBrinks building and steal a
truck containing payrolls.
However, numerous complicationsand risks were associated with
such a robbery and the plansnever materialized.
(05:00):
In December 1948, brinksrelocated from Federal Street to
165 Prince Street in Boston.
Shortly after the move, thecrew started making new plans.
Soon the rooftops of buildingson Prince and Snow Hill Streets
were buzzing with inconspicuousactivity.
(05:22):
As the crew searched for thebest vantage points to observe
what was happening insideBrink's offices, binoculars were
used during this phase of thecasing operation.
Before the robbery took place,all of the participants were
familiar with the Brink'spremises.
(05:42):
Each of them had secretlyentered the premise multiple
times after the employees hadleft for the day.
During their activities insidethe building, some crew members
removed lock cylinders from fivedoors, one of which opened onto
Prince Street.
Other members stayed inside thebuilding to prevent anyone from
(06:05):
noticing the operation, whilethe remaining members quickly
acquired keys to match the locks.
Then they replaced the lockcylinders.
Investigations to confirm thisinformation led to the discovery
of the owner of a key shop whoremembered making keys for Pino
on at least four or fiveevenings in the fall of 1949.
(06:29):
Pino had previously arrangedfor the shop to remain open
beyond regular closing hours.
On nights when he needed it hewould bring locks to the shop
and keys would be made for them.
The shop owner later identifiedlocks from the doors that the
Brinks crew had entered, similarto those Pino had brought to
(06:52):
him.
However, the owner claimed notto know about Pino's involvement
in the Brinks robbery.
The crew took each of the fivelock cylinders separately.
Removing the lock from theoutside door was the riskiest as
someone passing by could noticeit missing, so they replaced it
(07:12):
with another lock until theoriginal was returned.
Inside the building the crewcarefully studied Brink's
schedules and shipments.
They did such a thorough casingthat they could tell what was
happening in the Brink's officesby observing the lights inside
the building.
They also knew how many staffwere on duty at different times
(07:36):
of the day.
A few months before the robbery, o'keefe and Guschiara secretly
entered the premises of asecurity alarm company in Boston
, they obtained a copy of thesecurity plans for the Brinks
building.
After reviewing these plans andfinding them unhelpful, o'keefe
(07:57):
and Guschiara returned them thesame way they obtained them.
Mcginnis had previouslydiscussed sending a man to the
United States Patent Office inWashington DC to inspect the
patents on the security alarmsused in the Brinks building.
A lot of consideration was putinto every detail.
(08:18):
When the robbers decided theyneeded a truck, they agreed it
had to be a new one because aused truck might have
identifying marks and might notbe in perfect condition.
Shortly after, in the firstweek of November, a 1949 Green
(08:39):
Ford stakebody truck wasreported missing by a car dealer
in Boston.
In November and December 1949,the crew extensively practiced
their approach to the Brinksbuilding and the getaway route,
aiming for perfection, in themonth leading up to January 17,.
(09:00):
For perfection, in the monthleading up to January 17, 1950,
they attempted around sixapproaches to Brinks, but none
of these plans materialized asthe crew did not find the
conditions favorable.
Costa, equipped with aflashlight to signal the other
men, was stationed on the roofof a tenement building on Prince
Street, overlooking Brinksduring these approaches.
(09:23):
From this lookout post, costawas in a better position than
the men below to determinewhether conditions inside the
building were favorable for therobbers.
The last test approach occurredon January 16, 1950, the night
before the robbery.
(09:44):
At around 7 pm on January 17,1950, a group of crew members
gathered in the Roxbury sectionof Boston and got into the back
of a Ford stake body truck.
Banfield was the getterwaydriver driver and he was alone
in the front.
In the back of the truck therewere Pino O'Keefe, baker Faraday
(10:08):
, maffie Guschiora, michaelVincent Geegan and Thomas
Francis Richardson.
Geegan and Richardson, knownassociates of other crew members
.
Geegan and Richardson, knownassociates of other crew members
, were among the initialsuspects.
(10:30):
At the time of the Brinksrobbery.
Geegan was on parole.
He had been released fromprison in July 1943 after
serving eight years for armedrobbery and assault.
Richardson had been involved inan armed robbery with Faraday
in February 1934.
, after being sentenced to servefive to seven years for the
offenses, he was released fromprison in September 1941.
(10:52):
When asked about his activitieson the night of January 17th,
richardson said that afterunsuccessfully looking for work,
he had several drinks and thenreturned home.
Geegan claimed that he hadspent the evening at home and
didn't find out about the Brinksrobbery until the next day.
An investigation revealed thatGeegan, a laborer, did not go to
(11:17):
work on January 17th or 18th1950.
On the way from Roxbury, pinogave the other seven men in the
back of the truck Navy-stylepeacoats and chauffeur's caps.
Each man also received a pistoland a Halloween-type mask, and
(11:37):
they all carried a pair ofgloves.
O'keefe wore crepe-soled shoesto muffle his footsteps, while
the others wore rubbers.
As the truck passed by theBrinks' offices, the robbers
noticed that the lights were outon the Prince Street side of
the building, which was in theirfavor.
They continued up the street tothe end of the playground that
(12:02):
adjoined the Brinks building.
Where the truck had stopped.
Everyone except Pino andBanfield got out and proceeded
into the playground to wait forCosta's signal.
Costa had previously arrived ina Ford sedan that the crew had
stolen from behind the BostonSymphony Hall two days earlier.
(12:26):
After getting the go-aheadsignal from Costa, the seven
armed men went to the PrinceStreet entrance of Brinks.
They used an outside door keythat they had obtained earlier
to enter and then put on theirmasks obtained earlier.
To enter and then put on theirmasks With the other keys they
had, they went to the secondfloor and surprised the five
(12:50):
Brinks employees.
Once the employees weresecurely bound and gagged, the
robbers started stealing fromthe building.
In the process, a pair ofglasses belonging to one of the
employees was accidentallypicked up along with other items
and put into a bag of stolengoods.
When the bag was emptied laterthat evening, the robbers found
and destroyed the glasses.
(13:12):
The crew's carefully plannedroutine inside Brinks was
interrupted only when theattendant in the adjoining
Brinks garage sounded the buzzer.
Before the crew could take himprisoner, the garage attendant
walked away.
Although the attendant did notsuspect that the robbery was
occurring, this incident causedthe criminals to move more
(13:36):
swiftly.
Before escaping with the stolenbags, the seven armed men tried
to open a metal box containingGeneral Electric Company's
payroll.
They had no tools and wereunsuccessful.
Upon leaving, the crewimmediately loaded the stolen
(13:56):
items into the truck parked onPrince Street near the door.
Costa departed in the stolenFord sedan.
As the truck sped away withnine crew members, the Brinks
employees managed to freethemselves and reported the
crime.
Banfield drove the truck toMatthew's parents' house in
Roxbury, where the stolen itemswere quickly unloaded.
(14:19):
Afterward Banfield took off tohide the truck.
Geegan, who was on parole atthe time, left the truck before
it arrived at Matthew's parents'house, as he was concerned
about being considered a strongsuspect and wanted to establish
an alibi immediately.
Meanwhile, the others stayed atthe house to quickly count the
(14:42):
stolen items and Pino andFaraday departed.
Approximately one and a halfhours later Banfield came back
with McGinnis.
Before that McGinnis had beenat his liquor store and wasn't
with the gang during the robbery.
The crew members who stayed atMatthew's parents' house quickly
(15:04):
left to create alibis forthemselves.
But before they left, baker putaround $380,000 in a coal
hamper for safekeeping.
Pino, richardson and Costa eachtook $20,000, which was
recorded on a score sheet.
Before taking the rest of thestolen goods from the house.
(15:26):
On January 18, 1950, the crewmembers tried to find any
incriminating items.
Extensive efforts were made todetect pencil markings and other
notations on the currency thatthe criminals believed might be
traceable to Brinks.
They were even concerned thatthe new bills might be connected
(15:49):
to the crime.
To address this, mcginnisproposed a method to rapidly age
the new money the new money.
On the night of January 18,1950, o'keefe and Gus Giora each
received $100,000 from thestolen loot.
(16:09):
They placed the entire $200,000in the trunk of O'Keefe's car.
O'keefe then left his car alongwith the $200,000, in a garage
on Blue Hill Avenue in Boston.
Following the Brinks' robbery,o'keefe and Guschiara faced a
lot of scrutiny.
Consequently, when stateauthorities detained them in
(16:32):
late January, o'keefe managed toinform McGinnis to retrieve his
car and the $200,000 itcontained.
A few weeks later, o'keefereceived his share of the stolen
money.
He was given $98,000 in asuitcase, but realized that
$2,000 was missing.
(16:52):
O'keefe didn't have a secureplace to keep such a large
amount of money, so he trustedMaffie and gave him the money
for safekeeping, saving only$5,000 for himself.
However, o'keefe was resentfulbecause he never saw his share
of the money again.
Maffie claimed that some of themoney was stolen and the rest
(17:16):
was used for O'Keefe's legaldefenses in Pennsylvania.
Other crew members accusedMaffie of wasting the money
O'Keefe had entrusted to him.
O'keefe was also bitter aboutthe involvement of certain crew
members who were not presentduring the robbery and at the
disposal of the stolen truckparts near his home.
(17:37):
Overall, he regretted beingassociated with some crew
members Before the heist.
The men all agreed that theywould be dealt with if anyone
made a mistake.
O'keefe believed that most ofthe members had messed up and
talking to the FBI was his wayof taking care of them all.
(17:59):
Talking to the FBI was his wayof taking care of them all.
On January 11, 1956, the UnitedStates attorney in Boston
authorized special agents of theFBI to file complaints charging
11 criminals with the followingoffenses Conspiracy to commit
theft of government property.
Robbery of government propertyand bank robbery by force,
(18:23):
violence and intimidation.
Committing bank robbery onJanuary 17, 1950, and assaulting
Brinks employees during thetheft.
Conspiracy to receive andconceal money in violation of
the bank robbery and theft ofgovernment property statutes.
Additionally, mcginnis wasnamed in two other complaints
(18:49):
involving the receiving andconcealing of the stolen money.
Six members Baker Costa, geeganMaffie, mcginnis and Pino were
arrested by FBI agents onJanuary 12, 1956, just shy of
the six-year anniversary of theheist.
(19:09):
They were held in lieu of bail,which amounted to more than
$100,000 for each man.
Three of the five remainingcrew members were previously
accounted for.
O'keefe and Guschiara were inprison on other charges and
Banfield was deceased.
(19:33):
Faraday and Richardson had fledto avoid apprehension and were
subsequently placed on the FBI's10 most Wanted Fugitives list.
Their success in invadingarrest came to an abrupt end on
May 16, 1956, when FBI agentsraided the apartment in which
they were hiding in inDorchester, massachusetts.
(19:54):
At the time of their arrest,faraday and Richardson were
reaching for three loadedrevolvers that they had left on
a chair in the apartment.
The hideout was found tocontain over $5,000 in coins.
Faraday and Richardson's arrestalso led to the indictment of
(20:15):
another Boston criminal as anaccessory.
After the fact.
Boston criminal as an accessory.
After the fact.
The FBI shared the informationthey gathered in the Brinks
investigation with the DistrictAttorney of Sulphur County,
massachusetts.
On January 13, 1956, theSulphur County Grand Jury
indicted 11 members of theBrinks crew.
(20:36):
O'keefe was the main witnesswho appeared before the state
grand jury.
Despite the arrests andindictments in January 1956,
more than $2,775,000, including$1,218,211.29 in cash, was still
(21:01):
missing.
O'keefe did not know where thecrew members had hidden their
shares of the loot or where theyhad disposed of the money.
If, in fact, they had disposedof their shares, the other crew
members would not talk.
However, in early June 1956,there was an unexpected break in
(21:24):
the case.
Unexpected break in the case Atapproximately 7.30 pm on June 3
, 1956, an officer of theBaltimore Police Department was
approached by the operator of anamusement arcade saying, quote
I think a fellow just passed acounterfeit $10 bill on me.
End quote.
While examining the bill, theofficer noticed that it was in a
(21:49):
musty condition.
The arcade operator told theofficer that he had followed the
man who used the $10 bill to anearby tavern.
The man, who was lateridentified as a small-time
Boston underworld figure, waslocated and questioned.
Boston underworld figure waslocated and questioned when the
(22:11):
officer and the arcade operatorwere talking to him.
The man reached into his pocket, quickly withdrew his hand and
covered it with a raincoat thathe was carrying.
Two other Baltimore policeofficers who were walking nearby
saw this action.
One of the officers quicklygrabbed the man's hand and a
large roll of money fell from it.
The criminal was taken topolice headquarters where a
(22:35):
search revealed that he wascarrying more than a thousand
dollars, including 860 in oldworn bills.
Baltimore officers called aSecret Service agent, who
arrived while the criminal wasbeing questioned at the police
station.
After examining the money foundin the criminal's possession,
(22:57):
the agent confirmed that it wasnot counterfeit.
This individual from theunderworld informed authorities
that he had discovered the money.
He stated that there was asubstantial amount of cash in
his hotel room, which he alsoclaimed to have found.
The criminal explained that hewas involved in the contracting
(23:19):
business in Boston and that inlate March or early April 1956,
he came across a plastic bagcontaining the money while
working on the foundation of ahouse.
The police found $3,780 in thecriminal's room at a Baltimore
hotel where he had registeredunder a fake name.
(23:42):
The money, which appeared tohave been stored for a long time
, was confiscated and taken tothe police station.
Later that evening at around9.50 pm, the Baltimore field
office of the FBI was informedabout the incident.
The serial numbers of some ofthe bills found were shared with
(24:04):
the FBI.
Of some of the bills found wereshared with the FBI and it was
then discovered that the Bostoncriminal had some of the money
that was stolen during theBrinks robbery by seven masked
gunmen on January 17, 1950.
Fbi agents found $4,822 in thesmall-time criminal's possession
(24:26):
, $1,822 in the small-timecriminal's possession.
They identified $4,635 of themoney as being taken by the
Brinks robbers.
During interviews on June 3rdand 4th 1956, it was revealed
that the 31-year-old criminalhad a history of arrests and
convictions dating back to histeens.
(24:48):
He had been conditionallyreleased from a federal prison
camp less than a year beforeafter serving slightly more than
two years of a three-yearsentence for transporting a
falsely made security interstate.
Additionally, at the time ofhis arrest, he was also facing
(25:09):
an outstanding charge of armedrobbery in Massachusetts.
During an interrogation by theFBI, the man claimed that he was
in a partnership with anotherman as a Mason contractor on
Tremont Street in Boston.
He mentioned that they sharedoffice space with someone known
(25:29):
only as Fat John.
According to the Boston Criminal, on the night of June 1, 1956,
fat John asked him to remove apanel from a wall in the office.
Once the panel was removed, fatJohn reached into the opening
and uncovered a metal container.
(25:49):
Inside the container werepackages of bills wrapped in
plastic and newspapers, with FatJohn alleging that each package
contained $5,000.
The man said.
Fat John told him quote, thisis good money, but you can't
pass it around here in Boston.
End quote.
(26:11):
According to the criminal whowas arrested in Baltimore, fat
John told him that the money waspart of the Brinks loot and
offered him $5,000 to pass.
$30,000 of the bills.
$30,000 of the bills.
The Boston criminal informedFBI agents in Baltimore that he
(26:33):
received six packages of moneyfrom Fat John.
The next day, june 2nd, he leftMassachusetts with $4,750 of
those bills and started usingthem.
He arrived in Baltimore on themorning of June 3rd and was
taken into custody by theBaltimore Police Department that
evening.
The FBI office in Boston wasimmediately informed about a
(26:56):
significant development.
Fat John and the businessassociate of the man arrested in
Baltimore were found andinterviewed on the morning of
June 4, 1956.
They both denied knowledge ofthe recovered loot.
Later that afternoon, though,fat John admitted that he had
the money, describing it asproceeds from the Brinks robbery
(27:21):
.
A search warrant was executedin Boston covering the Tremont
Street offices occupied by thethree men.
In Fat John's office, the wallpartition described by the
Boston criminal was found.
When the partition was removed,a picnic-type cooler containing
more than $57,700 wasdiscovered, of which $51,906 was
(27:53):
identifiable as part of theBrinks loop.
The money discovered in theTremont Street offices led to
the arrests of Fat John and thebusiness associate of the
criminal, already in custody inBaltimore.
Both men remained silent.
After their arrests On June 5thand 7th 1956, the Sulphur
County Grand Jury indicted thethree men for multiple state
(28:15):
offenses related to theirpossession of the money obtained
in the Brinks robbery.
Following the guilty pleas, inNovember of 1956, fat John was
sentenced to two years in prison, while the other two men
received one-year sentences.
After serving his sentence, fatJohn returned to a life of
(28:36):
crime.
On June 19, 1958, while out onappeal for a five-year narcotic
sentence, he was found shot todeath in a car that had crashed
into a truck in Boston.
The money found in the cooler,which had been hidden in the
wall of the Tremont Streetoffice was wrapped in plastic
(28:59):
and newspaper.
Three of the newspapers used towrap the bills were identified
as publications from Bostondated between December 4, 1955
and February 21, 1956.
The FBI also located thecarpenter who had remodeled the
offices where the money washidden.
(29:20):
His records indicated that hehad worked on the offices in
early April of 1956 under theinstructions of Fat John.
This meant that the money couldnot have been hidden behind the
wall panel before that time.
Because the money in the coolerwas in various stages of
(29:42):
decomposition, it was verydifficult to make an accurate
count.
Some of the bills were inpieces, while others fell apart
when handled.
Examination by the FBIlaboratory later revealed that
the decomposition, discolorationand clumping together of the
(30:02):
bills were due, at least in part, to the fact that all the bills
had been wet.
It was determined that thepackages of currency had been
damaged before being wrapped inpieces of newspaper and there
were indications that the billshad previously been in a canvas
container buried in groundconsisting of sand and ashes.
(30:26):
In addition to mold, insectremains were also found on the
money.
Even with the recovery of thismoney in Baltimore and Boston,
more than $1,150,000 of currencytaken in the Brinks robbery
remained unaccounted for in theBrinks robbery remained
(30:50):
unaccounted for.
The recovery of part of thestolen goods was a significant
setback for the crew membersawaiting trial in Boston.
Were there any traces ofevidence in the stolen items
that could directly link them tothe crime?
This question weighed heavilyon their minds.
In July 1956, a significantdevelopment occurred when
(31:11):
Stanley Guschiora, who had beentransferred from Pennsylvania to
Massachusetts for trial, wastaken into medical care due to
weakness, dizziness and vomiting.
On July 9th, while visited by aclergyman, guschiora got out of
bed and, in front of theclergyman, fell and hit his head
(31:32):
.
Two hours later, guschiarapassed away.
An examination revealed that hehad a brain tumor and acute
cerebral edema.
O'keefe and Guschiara had beenclose friends for many years.
When O'Keefe confessed to hisinvolvement in the Brinks
robbery to the FBI agents inJanuary of 1956, he mentioned
(31:57):
his deep respect for Guschiara.
As a government witness hewould have reluctantly testified
against him.
Yet since Guschiara was nowbeyond the reach of any human
authority, o'keefe was even moredetermined to ensure that
justice would be served.
Following the death ofGuschiara, only eight members of
(32:21):
the Brinks crew remained tostand trial.
On January 18, 1956, o'keefepleaded guilty to the armed
robbery of Brinks.
The trial of the remaining eightmen commenced on the morning of
August 6, before Judge FilesForte in the Suffolk County
(32:41):
Courthouse in Boston.
The defense immediately filedmotions to delay or prevent the
trial, but all were denied andthe jury selection process began
on August 7th.
Over the next two weeks, nearly1,200 potential jurors were
dismissed as the defense counselexercised their 262 peremptory
(33:06):
challenges.
Another week passed withapproximately 500 more citizens
considered before the 14-memberjury was finally assembled.
Over 100 individuals testifiedas witnesses for both the
prosecution and the defense.
In September 1956.
The key witness, spex O'Keefe,provided a detailed account of
(33:32):
the crime, clearly outlining theinvolvement of each of the
eight defendants.
At 10.25 am on October 5, 1956,the jury began deliberating on
the evidence.
1956.
The jury began deliberating onthe evidence.
Three and a half hours laterthey reached a verdict.
(33:59):
All the defendants were foundguilty.
Judge Forte sentenced the eightmen on October 9th 1956.
Pino Costa, maffie, geegan,faraday, richardson and Baker
received life sentences for therobbery, two-year sentences for
conspiracy to steal andsentences of eight to ten years
for breaking and entering atnight.
(34:20):
Mcginnis, who had not been atthe scene on the night of the
robbery, received a lifesentence on each of the eight
indictments that charged himwith being an accessory before
the fact in connection with theBrinks robbery.
In addition, mcginnis alsoreceived other sentences of two
(34:40):
years, two and a half to threeyears and eight to ten years.
While action was being taken toappeal the convictions on their
behalf, the eight men weretransferred to the state prison
at Wallop, massachusetts.
From their prison cells theycarefully followed the legal
maneuvers aimed at securingtheir freedom.
(35:02):
The state trial recordconsisted of over 5,300 pages.
The defense counsel utilized itto prepare a 294-page brief for
the Massachusetts State SupremeCourt.
After considering the argumentsfrom the attorneys representing
the eight convicted individualsconvicted individuals the state
(35:30):
Supreme Court rejected theappeals on July 1, 1959, in a
35-page decision written by theChief Justice.
On November 16, 1959, theUnited States Supreme Court
denied the defense counsel'srequest for a writ of certiorari
.
A writ of certiorari is a legalorder that a higher court
(35:52):
issues to a lower court toreview its record and a decision
in a case.
Now I have looked up how to saythat word correctly, and even
Supreme Court justices disagreewith how it's correctly said.
I read an article in the ABAJournal from June 2014, where
(36:12):
Regent University Law Professor,james Duane asked how it was
properly pronounced and, much tohis surprise, he received six
different pronunciations fromthe justices.
So I did my best on this one.
If you're an attorney, I wouldlove to hear from you as to how
you pronounce this, please.
(36:34):
In the end, the perfect crimeended almost perfectly.
The thieves were incarceratedand missing out on the money,
and their heist became one ofthe most expensive robberies in
history.
Not to mention that less than$60,000 was recovered, leaving
(36:58):
$2.2 million out of the $2.7million that had disappeared
without a trace, never to beseen again.
Disappeared without a trace,never to be seen again, and
that's the case of the GreatBrinks robbery.
I hope you guys enjoyed this tadbit different of a case as much
as I did.
Let me know what you think andif you'd like more cases like
(37:19):
this covered.
There's a link in the shownotes at the very top that'll
allow you to send a text messageto me and let me know your
thoughts.
You can find Crime Connoisseurswherever you listen to your
podcasts.
Please follow, subscribe andleave a review, and be sure to
follow us on social media atCrime Connoisseurs for updates
(37:41):
and bonus content, as always.
Thank you all so much forlistening.
In the meantime, keep it classyconnoisseurs, and I'll catch
you on the next case.
Thank you.
Hey, hey, crime connoisseurs, and welcome back
to our final part of the GreatBrinks Robbery.
If you still need to listen toPart 1, stop and go give it a
listen.
Last week we discussed thedetails of the heist, the main
members of the crew and theinvestigative efforts of the FBI
and Boston Police Department.
(00:22):
The FBI and Boston PoliceDepartment.
To recap on January 17, 1950, agroup of five to seven
individuals entered the Brinks'offices disguised with masks,
navy peacoats, chauffeur's hatsand gloves.
They efficiently overpoweredfive Brinks employees and made
(00:43):
off with $2.7 million in cash,coins, checks and money orders,
which would be worth around $30million today.
Following the heist, lawenforcement agencies launched a
thorough investigation seekingto identify the culprits from
(01:03):
the limited evidence available.
Numerous tips poured in fromacross the country and Brinks
offered a $100,000 reward forinformation leading to the
capture and prosecution of thethieves.
Over the years, the FBIidentified several suspects but
faced challenges in obtainingconclusive evidence for their
(01:27):
indictment.
Among the main suspects wereJoseph James O'Keefe and Stanley
Albert Guschiora, who wereapprehended in Pennsylvania for
other criminal activities.
O'keefe faced multiple legalissues in different locations
and was targeted in threeseparate assassination attempts.
(01:48):
Ultimately, o'keefe wasarrested in Leicester,
massachusetts, on August 1, 1954and transferred into Boston
police custody.
Due to safety concerns, he wasplaced in a county jail in
Springfield, massachusetts,instead of the Suffolk County
Jail in Boston.
(02:09):
The FBI attempted to leverageO'Keefe's situation to gain
information about hisaccomplices.
This brings us to January 1956.
This is the final part of theGreat Brinks Robbery.
At 4.20 pm on January 6, 1956,joseph O'Keefe made his final
(03:08):
decision.
He was done with Pino, baker,mcginnis, maffie and the other
Brinks conspirators who hadbetrayed him.
He told two FBI agents quoteall right, what do you want to
know?
End quote agents.
(03:28):
Quote all right, what do youwant to know?
End quote.
O'keefe told the complete storyof the Brinks robbery in a
series of interviews over thefollowing days.
After each interview, fbiagents worked tirelessly into
the night verifying all aspectsof his story.
Many of the details had alreadybeen uncovered during the
extensive six-year investigationand additional information from
(03:51):
O'Keefe helped to fill in theremaining gaps.
Although Pino was the mainorchestrator, the Brinks robbery
was a result of the collectiveideas and criminal experience of
individuals who had beenacquainted for many years.
The idea to rob Brinks firstsurfaced in 1947, when Brinks
(04:15):
was located on Federal Street inBoston.
During that time Pinoapproached O'Keefe and invited
him to participate in the heist.
His close associate StanleyGuschiara had already been
recruited and O'Keefe agreed totake part as well.
The crew at the time includedeveryone involved in the January
(04:39):
17, 1950 robbery, except forHenry Baker.
17th 1950 robbery except forHenry Baker.
They planned to break into theBrinks building and steal a
truck containing payrolls.
However, numerous complicationsand risks were associated with
such a robbery and the plansnever materialized.
(05:00):
In December 1948, brinksrelocated from Federal Street to
165 Prince Street in Boston.
Shortly after the move, thecrew started making new plans.
Soon the rooftops of buildingson Prince and Snow Hill Streets
were buzzing with inconspicuousactivity.
(05:22):
As the crew searched for thebest vantage points to observe
what was happening insideBrink's offices, binoculars were
used during this phase of thecasing operation.
Before the robbery took place,all of the participants were
familiar with the Brink'spremises.
(05:42):
Each of them had secretlyentered the premise multiple
times after the employees hadleft for the day.
During their activities insidethe building, some crew members
removed lock cylinders from fivedoors, one of which opened onto
Prince Street.
Other members stayed inside thebuilding to prevent anyone from
(06:05):
noticing the operation, whilethe remaining members quickly
acquired keys to match the locks.
Then they replaced the lockcylinders.
Investigations to confirm thisinformation led to the discovery
of the owner of a key shop whoremembered making keys for Pino
on at least four or fiveevenings in the fall of 1949.
(06:29):
Pino had previously arrangedfor the shop to remain open
beyond regular closing hours.
On nights when he needed it hewould bring locks to the shop
and keys would be made for them.
The shop owner later identifiedlocks from the doors that the
Brinks crew had entered, similarto those Pino had brought to
(06:52):
him.
However, the owner claimed notto know about Pino's involvement
in the Brinks robbery.
The crew took each of the fivelock cylinders separately.
Removing the lock from theoutside door was the riskiest as
someone passing by could noticeit missing, so they replaced it
(07:12):
with another lock until theoriginal was returned.
Inside the building the crewcarefully studied Brink's
schedules and shipments.
They did such a thorough casingthat they could tell what was
happening in the Brink's officesby observing the lights inside
the building.
They also knew how many staffwere on duty at different times
(07:36):
of the day.
A few months before the robbery, o'keefe and Guschiara secretly
entered the premises of asecurity alarm company in Boston
, they obtained a copy of thesecurity plans for the Brinks
building.
After reviewing these plans andfinding them unhelpful, o'keefe
(07:57):
and Guschiara returned them thesame way they obtained them.
Mcginnis had previouslydiscussed sending a man to the
United States Patent Office inWashington DC to inspect the
patents on the security alarmsused in the Brinks building.
A lot of consideration was putinto every detail.
(08:18):
When the robbers decided theyneeded a truck, they agreed it
had to be a new one because aused truck might have
identifying marks and might notbe in perfect condition.
Shortly after, in the firstweek of November, a 1949 Green
(08:39):
Ford stakebody truck wasreported missing by a car dealer
in Boston.
In November and December 1949,the crew extensively practiced
their approach to the Brinksbuilding and the getaway route,
aiming for perfection, in themonth leading up to January 17,.
(09:00):
For perfection, in the monthleading up to January 17, 1950,
they attempted around sixapproaches to Brinks, but none
of these plans materialized asthe crew did not find the
conditions favorable.
Costa, equipped with aflashlight to signal the other
men, was stationed on the roofof a tenement building on Prince
Street, overlooking Brinksduring these approaches.
(09:23):
From this lookout post, costawas in a better position than
the men below to determinewhether conditions inside the
building were favorable for therobbers.
The last test approach occurredon January 16, 1950, the night
before the robbery.
(09:44):
At around 7 pm on January 17,1950, a group of crew members
gathered in the Roxbury sectionof Boston and got into the back
of a Ford stake body truck.
Banfield was the getterwaydriver driver and he was alone
in the front.
In the back of the truck therewere Pino O'Keefe, baker Faraday
(10:08):
, maffie Guschiora, michaelVincent Geegan and Thomas
Francis Richardson.
Geegan and Richardson, knownassociates of other crew members
.
Geegan and Richardson, knownassociates of other crew members
, were among the initialsuspects.
(10:30):
At the time of the Brinksrobbery.
Geegan was on parole.
He had been released fromprison in July 1943 after
serving eight years for armedrobbery and assault.
Richardson had been involved inan armed robbery with Faraday
in February 1934.
, after being sentenced to servefive to seven years for the
offenses, he was released fromprison in September 1941.
(10:52):
When asked about his activitieson the night of January 17th,
richardson said that afterunsuccessfully looking for work,
he had several drinks and thenreturned home.
Geegan claimed that he hadspent the evening at home and
didn't find out about the Brinksrobbery until the next day.
An investigation revealed thatGeegan, a laborer, did not go to
(11:17):
work on January 17th or 18th1950.
On the way from Roxbury, pinogave the other seven men in the
back of the truck Navy-stylepeacoats and chauffeur's caps.
Each man also received a pistoland a Halloween-type mask, and
(11:37):
they all carried a pair ofgloves.
O'keefe wore crepe-soled shoesto muffle his footsteps, while
the others wore rubbers.
As the truck passed by theBrinks' offices, the robbers
noticed that the lights were outon the Prince Street side of
the building, which was in theirfavor.
They continued up the street tothe end of the playground that
(12:02):
adjoined the Brinks building.
Where the truck had stopped.
Everyone except Pino andBanfield got out and proceeded
into the playground to wait forCosta's signal.
Costa had previously arrived ina Ford sedan that the crew had
stolen from behind the BostonSymphony Hall two days earlier.
(12:26):
After getting the go-aheadsignal from Costa, the seven
armed men went to the PrinceStreet entrance of Brinks.
They used an outside door keythat they had obtained earlier
to enter and then put on theirmasks obtained earlier.
To enter and then put on theirmasks With the other keys they
had, they went to the secondfloor and surprised the five
(12:50):
Brinks employees.
Once the employees weresecurely bound and gagged, the
robbers started stealing fromthe building.
In the process, a pair ofglasses belonging to one of the
employees was accidentallypicked up along with other items
and put into a bag of stolengoods.
When the bag was emptied laterthat evening, the robbers found
and destroyed the glasses.
(13:12):
The crew's carefully plannedroutine inside Brinks was
interrupted only when theattendant in the adjoining
Brinks garage sounded the buzzer.
Before the crew could take himprisoner, the garage attendant
walked away.
Although the attendant did notsuspect that the robbery was
occurring, this incident causedthe criminals to move more
(13:36):
swiftly.
Before escaping with the stolenbags, the seven armed men tried
to open a metal box containingGeneral Electric Company's
payroll.
They had no tools and wereunsuccessful.
Upon leaving, the crewimmediately loaded the stolen
(13:56):
items into the truck parked onPrince Street near the door.
Costa departed in the stolenFord sedan.
As the truck sped away withnine crew members, the Brinks
employees managed to freethemselves and reported the
crime.
Banfield drove the truck toMatthew's parents' house in
Roxbury, where the stolen itemswere quickly unloaded.
(14:19):
Afterward Banfield took off tohide the truck.
Geegan, who was on parole atthe time, left the truck before
it arrived at Matthew's parents'house, as he was concerned
about being considered a strongsuspect and wanted to establish
an alibi immediately.
Meanwhile, the others stayed atthe house to quickly count the
(14:42):
stolen items and Pino andFaraday departed.
Approximately one and a halfhours later Banfield came back
with McGinnis.
Before that McGinnis had beenat his liquor store and wasn't
with the gang during the robbery.
The crew members who stayed atMatthew's parents' house quickly
(15:04):
left to create alibis forthemselves.
But before they left, baker putaround $380,000 in a coal
hamper for safekeeping.
Pino, richardson and Costa eachtook $20,000, which was
recorded on a score sheet.
Before taking the rest of thestolen goods from the house.
(15:26):
On January 18, 1950, the crewmembers tried to find any
incriminating items.
Extensive efforts were made todetect pencil markings and other
notations on the currency thatthe criminals believed might be
traceable to Brinks.
They were even concerned thatthe new bills might be connected
(15:49):
to the crime.
To address this, mcginnisproposed a method to rapidly age
the new money the new money.
On the night of January 18,1950, o'keefe and Gus Giora each
received $100,000 from thestolen loot.
(16:09):
They placed the entire $200,000in the trunk of O'Keefe's car.
O'keefe then left his car alongwith the $200,000, in a garage
on Blue Hill Avenue in Boston.
Following the Brinks' robbery,o'keefe and Guschiara faced a
lot of scrutiny.
Consequently, when stateauthorities detained them in
(16:32):
late January, o'keefe managed toinform McGinnis to retrieve his
car and the $200,000 itcontained.
A few weeks later, o'keefereceived his share of the stolen
money.
He was given $98,000 in asuitcase, but realized that
$2,000 was missing.
(16:52):
O'keefe didn't have a secureplace to keep such a large
amount of money, so he trustedMaffie and gave him the money
for safekeeping, saving only$5,000 for himself.
However, o'keefe was resentfulbecause he never saw his share
of the money again.
Maffie claimed that some of themoney was stolen and the rest
(17:16):
was used for O'Keefe's legaldefenses in Pennsylvania.
Other crew members accusedMaffie of wasting the money
O'Keefe had entrusted to him.
O'keefe was also bitter aboutthe involvement of certain crew
members who were not presentduring the robbery and at the
disposal of the stolen truckparts near his home.
(17:37):
Overall, he regretted beingassociated with some crew
members Before the heist.
The men all agreed that theywould be dealt with if anyone
made a mistake.
O'keefe believed that most ofthe members had messed up and
talking to the FBI was his wayof taking care of them all.
(17:59):
Talking to the FBI was his wayof taking care of them all.
On January 11, 1956, the UnitedStates attorney in Boston
authorized special agents of theFBI to file complaints charging
11 criminals with the followingoffenses Conspiracy to commit
theft of government property.
Robbery of government propertyand bank robbery by force,
(18:23):
violence and intimidation.
Committing bank robbery onJanuary 17, 1950, and assaulting
Brinks employees during thetheft.
Conspiracy to receive andconceal money in violation of
the bank robbery and theft ofgovernment property statutes.
Additionally, mcginnis wasnamed in two other complaints
(18:49):
involving the receiving andconcealing of the stolen money.
Six members Baker Costa, geeganMaffie, mcginnis and Pino were
arrested by FBI agents onJanuary 12, 1956, just shy of
the six-year anniversary of theheist.
(19:09):
They were held in lieu of bail,which amounted to more than
$100,000 for each man.
Three of the five remainingcrew members were previously
accounted for.
O'keefe and Guschiara were inprison on other charges and
Banfield was deceased.
(19:33):
Faraday and Richardson had fledto avoid apprehension and were
subsequently placed on the FBI's10 most Wanted Fugitives list.
Their success in invadingarrest came to an abrupt end on
May 16, 1956, when FBI agentsraided the apartment in which
they were hiding in inDorchester, massachusetts.
(19:54):
At the time of their arrest,faraday and Richardson were
reaching for three loadedrevolvers that they had left on
a chair in the apartment.
The hideout was found tocontain over $5,000 in coins.
Faraday and Richardson's arrestalso led to the indictment of
(20:15):
another Boston criminal as anaccessory.
After the fact.
Boston criminal as an accessory.
After the fact.
The FBI shared the informationthey gathered in the Brinks
investigation with the DistrictAttorney of Sulphur County,
massachusetts.
On January 13, 1956, theSulphur County Grand Jury
indicted 11 members of theBrinks crew.
(20:36):
O'keefe was the main witnesswho appeared before the state
grand jury.
Despite the arrests andindictments in January 1956,
more than $2,775,000, including$1,218,211.29 in cash, was still
(21:01):
missing.
O'keefe did not know where thecrew members had hidden their
shares of the loot or where theyhad disposed of the money.
If, in fact, they had disposedof their shares, the other crew
members would not talk.
However, in early June 1956,there was an unexpected break in
(21:24):
the case.
Unexpected break in the case Atapproximately 7.30 pm on June 3
, 1956, an officer of theBaltimore Police Department was
approached by the operator of anamusement arcade saying, quote
I think a fellow just passed acounterfeit $10 bill on me.
End quote.
While examining the bill, theofficer noticed that it was in a
(21:49):
musty condition.
The arcade operator told theofficer that he had followed the
man who used the $10 bill to anearby tavern.
The man, who was lateridentified as a small-time
Boston underworld figure, waslocated and questioned.
Boston underworld figure waslocated and questioned when the
(22:11):
officer and the arcade operatorwere talking to him.
The man reached into his pocket, quickly withdrew his hand and
covered it with a raincoat thathe was carrying.
Two other Baltimore policeofficers who were walking nearby
saw this action.
One of the officers quicklygrabbed the man's hand and a
large roll of money fell from it.
The criminal was taken topolice headquarters where a
(22:35):
search revealed that he wascarrying more than a thousand
dollars, including 860 in oldworn bills.
Baltimore officers called aSecret Service agent, who
arrived while the criminal wasbeing questioned at the police
station.
After examining the money foundin the criminal's possession,
(22:57):
the agent confirmed that it wasnot counterfeit.
This individual from theunderworld informed authorities
that he had discovered the money.
He stated that there was asubstantial amount of cash in
his hotel room, which he alsoclaimed to have found.
The criminal explained that hewas involved in the contracting
(23:19):
business in Boston and that inlate March or early April 1956,
he came across a plastic bagcontaining the money while
working on the foundation of ahouse.
The police found $3,780 in thecriminal's room at a Baltimore
hotel where he had registeredunder a fake name.
(23:42):
The money, which appeared tohave been stored for a long time
, was confiscated and taken tothe police station.
Later that evening at around9.50 pm, the Baltimore field
office of the FBI was informedabout the incident.
The serial numbers of some ofthe bills found were shared with
(24:04):
the FBI.
Of some of the bills found wereshared with the FBI and it was
then discovered that the Bostoncriminal had some of the money
that was stolen during theBrinks robbery by seven masked
gunmen on January 17, 1950.
Fbi agents found $4,822 in thesmall-time criminal's possession
(24:26):
, $1,822 in the small-timecriminal's possession.
They identified $4,635 of themoney as being taken by the
Brinks robbers.
During interviews on June 3rdand 4th 1956, it was revealed
that the 31-year-old criminalhad a history of arrests and
convictions dating back to histeens.
(24:48):
He had been conditionallyreleased from a federal prison
camp less than a year beforeafter serving slightly more than
two years of a three-yearsentence for transporting a
falsely made security interstate.
Additionally, at the time ofhis arrest, he was also facing
(25:09):
an outstanding charge of armedrobbery in Massachusetts.
During an interrogation by theFBI, the man claimed that he was
in a partnership with anotherman as a Mason contractor on
Tremont Street in Boston.
He mentioned that they sharedoffice space with someone known
(25:29):
only as Fat John.
According to the Boston Criminal, on the night of June 1, 1956,
fat John asked him to remove apanel from a wall in the office.
Once the panel was removed, fatJohn reached into the opening
and uncovered a metal container.
(25:49):
Inside the container werepackages of bills wrapped in
plastic and newspapers, with FatJohn alleging that each package
contained $5,000.
The man said.
Fat John told him quote, thisis good money, but you can't
pass it around here in Boston.
End quote.
(26:11):
According to the criminal whowas arrested in Baltimore, fat
John told him that the money waspart of the Brinks loot and
offered him $5,000 to pass.
$30,000 of the bills.
$30,000 of the bills.
The Boston criminal informedFBI agents in Baltimore that he
(26:33):
received six packages of moneyfrom Fat John.
The next day, june 2nd, he leftMassachusetts with $4,750 of
those bills and started usingthem.
He arrived in Baltimore on themorning of June 3rd and was
taken into custody by theBaltimore Police Department that
evening.
The FBI office in Boston wasimmediately informed about a
(26:56):
significant development.
Fat John and the businessassociate of the man arrested in
Baltimore were found andinterviewed on the morning of
June 4, 1956.
They both denied knowledge ofthe recovered loot.
Later that afternoon, though,fat John admitted that he had
the money, describing it asproceeds from the Brinks robbery
(27:21):
.
A search warrant was executedin Boston covering the Tremont
Street offices occupied by thethree men.
In Fat John's office, the wallpartition described by the
Boston criminal was found.
When the partition was removed,a picnic-type cooler containing
more than $57,700 wasdiscovered, of which $51,906 was
(27:53):
identifiable as part of theBrinks loop.
The money discovered in theTremont Street offices led to
the arrests of Fat John and thebusiness associate of the
criminal, already in custody inBaltimore.
Both men remained silent.
After their arrests On June 5thand 7th 1956, the Sulphur
County Grand Jury indicted thethree men for multiple state
(28:15):
offenses related to theirpossession of the money obtained
in the Brinks robbery.
Following the guilty pleas, inNovember of 1956, fat John was
sentenced to two years in prison, while the other two men
received one-year sentences.
After serving his sentence, fatJohn returned to a life of
(28:36):
crime.
On June 19, 1958, while out onappeal for a five-year narcotic
sentence, he was found shot todeath in a car that had crashed
into a truck in Boston.
The money found in the cooler,which had been hidden in the
wall of the Tremont Streetoffice was wrapped in plastic
(28:59):
and newspaper.
Three of the newspapers used towrap the bills were identified
as publications from Bostondated between December 4, 1955
and February 21, 1956.
The FBI also located thecarpenter who had remodeled the
offices where the money washidden.
(29:20):
His records indicated that hehad worked on the offices in
early April of 1956 under theinstructions of Fat John.
This meant that the money couldnot have been hidden behind the
wall panel before that time.
Because the money in the coolerwas in various stages of
(29:42):
decomposition, it was verydifficult to make an accurate
count.
Some of the bills were inpieces, while others fell apart
when handled.
Examination by the FBIlaboratory later revealed that
the decomposition, discolorationand clumping together of the
(30:02):
bills were due, at least in part, to the fact that all the bills
had been wet.
It was determined that thepackages of currency had been
damaged before being wrapped inpieces of newspaper and there
were indications that the billshad previously been in a canvas
container buried in groundconsisting of sand and ashes.
(30:26):
In addition to mold, insectremains were also found on the
money.
Even with the recovery of thismoney in Baltimore and Boston,
more than $1,150,000 of currencytaken in the Brinks robbery
remained unaccounted for in theBrinks robbery remained
(30:50):
unaccounted for.
The recovery of part of thestolen goods was a significant
setback for the crew membersawaiting trial in Boston.
Were there any traces ofevidence in the stolen items
that could directly link them tothe crime?
This question weighed heavilyon their minds.
In July 1956, a significantdevelopment occurred when
(31:11):
Stanley Guschiora, who had beentransferred from Pennsylvania to
Massachusetts for trial, wastaken into medical care due to
weakness, dizziness and vomiting.
On July 9th, while visited by aclergyman, guschiora got out of
bed and, in front of theclergyman, fell and hit his head
(31:32):
.
Two hours later, guschiarapassed away.
An examination revealed that hehad a brain tumor and acute
cerebral edema.
O'keefe and Guschiara had beenclose friends for many years.
When O'Keefe confessed to hisinvolvement in the Brinks
robbery to the FBI agents inJanuary of 1956, he mentioned
(31:57):
his deep respect for Guschiara.
As a government witness hewould have reluctantly testified
against him.
Yet since Guschiara was nowbeyond the reach of any human
authority, o'keefe was even moredetermined to ensure that
justice would be served.
Following the death ofGuschiara, only eight members of
(32:21):
the Brinks crew remained tostand trial.
On January 18, 1956, o'keefepleaded guilty to the armed
robbery of Brinks.
The trial of the remaining eightmen commenced on the morning of
August 6, before Judge FilesForte in the Suffolk County
(32:41):
Courthouse in Boston.
The defense immediately filedmotions to delay or prevent the
trial, but all were denied andthe jury selection process began
on August 7th.
Over the next two weeks, nearly1,200 potential jurors were
dismissed as the defense counselexercised their 262 peremptory
(33:06):
challenges.
Another week passed withapproximately 500 more citizens
considered before the 14-memberjury was finally assembled.
Over 100 individuals testifiedas witnesses for both the
prosecution and the defense.
In September 1956.
The key witness, spex O'Keefe,provided a detailed account of
(33:32):
the crime, clearly outlining theinvolvement of each of the
eight defendants.
At 10.25 am on October 5, 1956,the jury began deliberating on
the evidence.
1956.
The jury began deliberating onthe evidence.
Three and a half hours laterthey reached a verdict.
(33:59):
All the defendants were foundguilty.
Judge Forte sentenced the eightmen on October 9th 1956.
Pino Costa, maffie, geegan,faraday, richardson and Baker
received life sentences for therobbery, two-year sentences for
conspiracy to steal andsentences of eight to ten years
for breaking and entering atnight.
(34:20):
Mcginnis, who had not been atthe scene on the night of the
robbery, received a lifesentence on each of the eight
indictments that charged himwith being an accessory before
the fact in connection with theBrinks robbery.
In addition, mcginnis alsoreceived other sentences of two
(34:40):
years, two and a half to threeyears and eight to ten years.
While action was being taken toappeal the convictions on their
behalf, the eight men weretransferred to the state prison
at Wallop, massachusetts.
From their prison cells theycarefully followed the legal
maneuvers aimed at securingtheir freedom.
(35:02):
The state trial recordconsisted of over 5,300 pages.
The defense counsel utilized itto prepare a 294-page brief for
the Massachusetts State SupremeCourt.
After considering the argumentsfrom the attorneys representing
the eight convicted individualsconvicted individuals the state
(35:30):
Supreme Court rejected theappeals on July 1, 1959, in a
35-page decision written by theChief Justice.
On November 16, 1959, theUnited States Supreme Court
denied the defense counsel'srequest for a writ of certiorari
.
A writ of certiorari is a legalorder that a higher court
(35:52):
issues to a lower court toreview its record and a decision
in a case.
Now I have looked up how to saythat word correctly, and even
Supreme Court justices disagreewith how it's correctly said.
I read an article in the ABAJournal from June 2014, where
(36:12):
Regent University Law Professor,james Duane asked how it was
properly pronounced and, much tohis surprise, he received six
different pronunciations fromthe justices.
So I did my best on this one.
If you're an attorney, I wouldlove to hear from you as to how
you pronounce this, please.
(36:34):
In the end, the perfect crimeended almost perfectly.
The thieves were incarceratedand missing out on the money,
and their heist became one ofthe most expensive robberies in
history.
Not to mention that less than$60,000 was recovered, leaving
(36:58):
$2.2 million out of the $2.7million that had disappeared
without a trace, never to beseen again.
Disappeared without a trace,never to be seen again, and
that's the case of the GreatBrinks robbery.
I hope you guys enjoyed this tadbit different of a case as much
as I did.
Let me know what you think andif you'd like more cases like
(37:19):
this covered.
There's a link in the shownotes at the very top that'll
allow you to send a text messageto me and let me know your
thoughts.
You can find Crime Connoisseurswherever you listen to your
podcasts.
Please follow, subscribe andleave a review, and be sure to
follow us on social media atCrime Connoisseurs for updates
(37:41):
and bonus content, as always.
Thank you all so much forlistening.
In the meantime, keep it classyconnoisseurs, and I'll catch
you on the next case.
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.