.jpg)
Crime Connoisseurs
Crime Connoisseurs
The Great Brinks Robbery: Inside Boston's Criminal Underworld Part 2
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
Hey, hey, crime connoisseurs, and welcome back to our final part of the Great Brinks Robbery. If you still need to listen to Part 1, stop and go give it a listen. Last week we discussed the details of the heist, the main members of the crew and the investigative efforts of the FBI and Boston Police Department. The FBI and Boston Police Department. To recap on January 17, 1950, a group of five to seven individuals entered the Brinks' offices disguised with masks, navy peacoats, chauffeur's hats and gloves. They efficiently overpowered five Brinks employees and made off with $2.7 million in cash, coins, checks and money orders, which would be worth around $30 million today. Following the heist, law enforcement agencies launched a thorough investigation seeking to identify the culprits from the limited evidence available. Numerous tips poured in from across the country and Brinks offered a $100,000 reward for information leading to the capture and prosecution of the thieves. Over the years, the FBI identified several suspects but faced challenges in obtaining conclusive evidence for their indictment. Among the main suspects were Joseph James O'Keefe and Stanley Albert Guschiora, who were apprehended in Pennsylvania for other criminal activities. O'keefe faced multiple legal issues in different locations and was targeted in three separate assassination attempts. Ultimately, o'keefe was arrested in Leicester, massachusetts, on August 1, 1954 and transferred into Boston police custody. Due to safety concerns, he was placed in a county jail in Springfield, massachusetts, instead of the Suffolk County Jail in Boston. The FBI attempted to leverage O'Keefe's situation to gain information about his accomplices. This brings us to January 1956. This is the final part of the Great Brinks Robbery. At 4.20 pm on January 6, 1956, joseph O'Keefe made his final decision. He was done with Pino, baker, mcginnis, maffie and the other Brinks conspirators who had betrayed him. He told two FBI agents quote all right, what do you want to know? End quote agents. Quote all right, what do you want to know? End quote. O'keefe told the complete story of the Brinks robbery in a series of interviews over the following days. After each interview, fbi agents worked tirelessly into the night verifying all aspects of his story. Many of the details had already been uncovered during the extensive six-year investigation and additional information from O'Keefe helped to fill in the remaining gaps.
Speaker 1:Although Pino was the main orchestrator, the Brinks robbery was a result of the collective ideas and criminal experience of individuals who had been acquainted for many years. The idea to rob Brinks first surfaced in 1947, when Brinks was located on Federal Street in Boston. During that time Pino approached O'Keefe and invited him to participate in the heist. His close associate Stanley Guschiara had already been recruited and O'Keefe agreed to take part as well. The crew at the time included everyone involved in the January 17, 1950 robbery, except for Henry Baker. 17th 1950 robbery except for Henry Baker. They planned to break into the Brinks building and steal a truck containing payrolls. However, numerous complications and risks were associated with such a robbery and the plans never materialized.
Speaker 1:In December 1948, brinks relocated from Federal Street to 165 Prince Street in Boston. Shortly after the move, the crew started making new plans. Soon the rooftops of buildings on Prince and Snow Hill Streets were buzzing with inconspicuous activity. As the crew searched for the best vantage points to observe what was happening inside Brink's offices, binoculars were used during this phase of the casing operation. Before the robbery took place, all of the participants were familiar with the Brink's premises. Each of them had secretly entered the premise multiple times after the employees had left for the day.
Speaker 1:During their activities inside the building, some crew members removed lock cylinders from five doors, one of which opened onto Prince Street. Other members stayed inside the building to prevent anyone from noticing the operation, while the remaining members quickly acquired keys to match the locks. Then they replaced the lock cylinders. Investigations to confirm this information led to the discovery of the owner of a key shop who remembered making keys for Pino on at least four or five evenings in the fall of 1949. Pino had previously arranged for the shop to remain open beyond regular closing hours. On nights when he needed it he would bring locks to the shop and keys would be made for them. The shop owner later identified locks from the doors that the Brinks crew had entered, similar to those Pino had brought to him. However, the owner claimed not to know about Pino's involvement in the Brinks robbery. The crew took each of the five lock cylinders separately. Removing the lock from the outside door was the riskiest as someone passing by could notice it missing, so they replaced it with another lock until the original was returned.
Speaker 1:Inside the building the crew carefully studied Brink's schedules and shipments. They did such a thorough casing that they could tell what was happening in the Brink's offices by observing the lights inside the building. They also knew how many staff were on duty at different times of the day. A few months before the robbery, o'keefe and Guschiara secretly entered the premises of a security alarm company in Boston, they obtained a copy of the security plans for the Brinks building. After reviewing these plans and finding them unhelpful, o'keefe and Guschiara returned them the same way they obtained them.
Speaker 1:Mcginnis had previously discussed sending a man to the United States Patent Office in Washington DC to inspect the patents on the security alarms used in the Brinks building. A lot of consideration was put into every detail. When the robbers decided they needed a truck, they agreed it had to be a new one because a used truck might have identifying marks and might not be in perfect condition. Shortly after, in the first week of November, a 1949 Green Ford stakebody truck was reported missing by a car dealer in Boston. In November and December 1949, the crew extensively practiced their approach to the Brinks building and the getaway route, aiming for perfection, in the month leading up to January 17,. For perfection, in the month leading up to January 17, 1950, they attempted around six approaches to Brinks, but none of these plans materialized as the crew did not find the conditions favorable. Costa, equipped with a flashlight to signal the other men, was stationed on the roof of a tenement building on Prince Street, overlooking Brinks during these approaches. From this lookout post, costa was in a better position than the men below to determine whether conditions inside the building were favorable for the robbers. The last test approach occurred on January 16, 1950, the night before the robbery.
Speaker 1:At around 7 pm on January 17, 1950, a group of crew members gathered in the Roxbury section of Boston and got into the back of a Ford stake body truck. Banfield was the getterway driver driver and he was alone in the front. In the back of the truck there were Pino O'Keefe, baker Faraday, maffie Guschiora, michael Vincent Geegan and Thomas Francis Richardson. Geegan and Richardson, known associates of other crew members. Geegan and Richardson, known associates of other crew members, were among the initial suspects.
Speaker 1:At the time of the Brinks robbery. Geegan was on parole. He had been released from prison in July 1943 after serving eight years for armed robbery and assault. Richardson had been involved in an armed robbery with Faraday in February 1934., after being sentenced to serve five to seven years for the offenses, he was released from prison in September 1941. When asked about his activities on the night of January 17th, richardson said that after unsuccessfully looking for work, he had several drinks and then returned home. Geegan claimed that he had spent the evening at home and didn't find out about the Brinks robbery until the next day. An investigation revealed that Geegan, a laborer, did not go to work on January 17th or 18th 1950.
Speaker 1:On the way from Roxbury, pino gave the other seven men in the back of the truck Navy-style peacoats and chauffeur's caps. Each man also received a pistol and a Halloween-type mask, and they all carried a pair of gloves. O'keefe wore crepe-soled shoes to muffle his footsteps, while the others wore rubbers. As the truck passed by the Brinks' offices, the robbers noticed that the lights were out on the Prince Street side of the building, which was in their favor. They continued up the street to the end of the playground that adjoined the Brinks building. Where the truck had stopped. Everyone except Pino and Banfield got out and proceeded into the playground to wait for Costa's signal. Costa had previously arrived in a Ford sedan that the crew had stolen from behind the Boston Symphony Hall two days earlier.
Speaker 1:After getting the go-ahead signal from Costa, the seven armed men went to the Prince Street entrance of Brinks. They used an outside door key that they had obtained earlier to enter and then put on their masks obtained earlier. To enter and then put on their masks With the other keys they had, they went to the second floor and surprised the five Brinks employees. Once the employees were securely bound and gagged, the robbers started stealing from the building. In the process, a pair of glasses belonging to one of the employees was accidentally picked up along with other items and put into a bag of stolen goods. When the bag was emptied later that evening, the robbers found and destroyed the glasses.
Speaker 1:The crew's carefully planned routine inside Brinks was interrupted only when the attendant in the adjoining Brinks garage sounded the buzzer. Before the crew could take him prisoner, the garage attendant walked away. Although the attendant did not suspect that the robbery was occurring, this incident caused the criminals to move more swiftly. Before escaping with the stolen bags, the seven armed men tried to open a metal box containing General Electric Company's payroll. They had no tools and were unsuccessful. Upon leaving, the crew immediately loaded the stolen items into the truck parked on Prince Street near the door. Costa departed in the stolen Ford sedan. As the truck sped away with nine crew members, the Brinks employees managed to free themselves and reported the crime.
Speaker 1:Banfield drove the truck to Matthew's parents' house in Roxbury, where the stolen items were quickly unloaded. Afterward Banfield took off to hide the truck. Geegan, who was on parole at the time, left the truck before it arrived at Matthew's parents' house, as he was concerned about being considered a strong suspect and wanted to establish an alibi immediately. Meanwhile, the others stayed at the house to quickly count the stolen items and Pino and Faraday departed. Approximately one and a half hours later Banfield came back with McGinnis. Before that McGinnis had been at his liquor store and wasn't with the gang during the robbery. The crew members who stayed at Matthew's parents' house quickly left to create alibis for themselves. But before they left, baker put around $380,000 in a coal hamper for safekeeping. Pino, richardson and Costa each took $20,000, which was recorded on a score sheet. Before taking the rest of the stolen goods from the house.
Speaker 1:On January 18, 1950, the crew members tried to find any incriminating items. Extensive efforts were made to detect pencil markings and other notations on the currency that the criminals believed might be traceable to Brinks. They were even concerned that the new bills might be connected to the crime. To address this, mcginnis proposed 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 the stolen loot. They placed the entire $200,000 in the trunk of O'Keefe's car. O'keefe then left his car along with the $200,000, in a garage on Blue Hill Avenue in Boston.
Speaker 1:Following the Brinks' robbery, o'keefe and Guschiara faced a lot of scrutiny. Consequently, when state authorities detained them in late January, o'keefe managed to inform McGinnis to retrieve his car and the $200,000 it contained. A few weeks later, o'keefe received his share of the stolen money. He was given $98,000 in a suitcase, but realized that $2,000 was missing. O'keefe didn't have a secure place to keep such a large amount of money, so he trusted Maffie and gave him the money for safekeeping, saving only $5,000 for himself. However, o'keefe was resentful because he never saw his share of the money again. Maffie claimed that some of the money was stolen and the rest was used for O'Keefe's legal defenses in Pennsylvania. Other crew members accused Maffie of wasting the money O'Keefe had entrusted to him. O'keefe was also bitter about the involvement of certain crew members who were not present during the robbery and at the disposal of the stolen truck parts near his home. Overall, he regretted being associated with some crew members Before the heist. The men all agreed that they would be dealt with if anyone made a mistake. O'keefe believed that most of the members had messed up and talking to the FBI was his way of taking care of them all. Talking to the FBI was his way of taking care of them all.
Speaker 1:On January 11, 1956, the United States attorney in Boston authorized special agents of the FBI to file complaints charging 11 criminals with the following offenses Conspiracy to commit theft of government property. Robbery of government property and bank robbery by force, violence and intimidation. Committing bank robbery on January 17, 1950, and assaulting Brinks employees during the theft. Conspiracy to receive and conceal money in violation of the bank robbery and theft of government property statutes. Additionally, mcginnis was named in two other complaints involving the receiving and concealing of the stolen money. Six members Baker Costa, geegan Maffie, mcginnis and Pino were arrested by FBI agents on January 12, 1956, just shy of the six-year anniversary of the heist. They were held in lieu of bail, which amounted to more than $100,000 for each man. Three of the five remaining crew members were previously accounted for. O'keefe and Guschiara were in prison on other charges and Banfield was deceased.
Speaker 1:Faraday and Richardson had fled to avoid apprehension and were subsequently placed on the FBI's 10 most Wanted Fugitives list. Their success in invading arrest came to an abrupt end on May 16, 1956, when FBI agents raided the apartment in which they were hiding in in Dorchester, massachusetts. At the time of their arrest, faraday and Richardson were reaching for three loaded revolvers that they had left on a chair in the apartment. The hideout was found to contain over $5,000 in coins. Faraday and Richardson's arrest also led to the indictment of another Boston criminal as an accessory. After the fact. Boston criminal as an accessory. After the fact.
Speaker 1:The FBI shared the information they gathered in the Brinks investigation with the District Attorney of Sulphur County, massachusetts. On January 13, 1956, the Sulphur County Grand Jury indicted 11 members of the Brinks crew. O'keefe was the main witness who appeared before the state grand jury. Despite the arrests and indictments in January 1956, more than $2,775,000, including $1,218,211.29 in cash, was still missing. O'keefe did not know where the crew members had hidden their shares of the loot or where they had disposed of the money. If, in fact, they had disposed of their shares, the other crew members would not talk. However, in early June 1956, there was an unexpected break in the case. Unexpected break in the case At approximately 7.30 pm on June 3, 1956, an officer of the Baltimore Police Department was approached by the operator of an amusement arcade saying, quote I think a fellow just passed a counterfeit $10 bill on me.
Speaker 1:End quote. While examining the bill, the officer noticed that it was in a musty condition. The arcade operator told the officer that he had followed the man who used the $10 bill to a nearby tavern. The man, who was later identified as a small-time Boston underworld figure, was located and questioned. Boston underworld figure was located and questioned when the officer and the arcade operator were talking to him. The man reached into his pocket, quickly withdrew his hand and covered it with a raincoat that he was carrying. Two other Baltimore police officers who were walking nearby saw this action. One of the officers quickly grabbed the man's hand and a large roll of money fell from it. The criminal was taken to police headquarters where a search revealed that he was carrying more than a thousand dollars, including 860 in old worn bills.
Speaker 1:Baltimore officers called a Secret Service agent, who arrived while the criminal was being questioned at the police station. After examining the money found in the criminal's possession, the agent confirmed that it was not counterfeit. This individual from the underworld informed authorities that he had discovered the money. He stated that there was a substantial amount of cash in his hotel room, which he also claimed to have found. The criminal explained that he was involved in the contracting business in Boston and that in late March or early April 1956, he came across a plastic bag containing the money while working on the foundation of a house. The police found $3,780 in the criminal's room at a Baltimore hotel where he had registered under a fake name. The money, which appeared to have been stored for a long time, was confiscated and taken to the police station.
Speaker 1:Later that evening at around 9.50 pm, the Baltimore field office of the FBI was informed about the incident. The serial numbers of some of the bills found were shared with the FBI. Of some of the bills found were shared with the FBI and it was then discovered that the Boston criminal had some of the money that was stolen during the Brinks robbery by seven masked gunmen on January 17, 1950. Fbi agents found $4,822 in the small-time criminal's possession, $1,822 in the small-time criminal's possession. They identified $4,635 of the money as being taken by the Brinks robbers.
Speaker 1:During interviews on June 3rd and 4th 1956, it was revealed that the 31-year-old criminal had a history of arrests and convictions dating back to his teens. He had been conditionally released from a federal prison camp less than a year before after serving slightly more than two years of a three-year sentence for transporting a falsely made security interstate. Additionally, at the time of his arrest, he was also facing an outstanding charge of armed robbery in Massachusetts. During an interrogation by the FBI, the man claimed that he was in a partnership with another man as a Mason contractor on Tremont Street in Boston. He mentioned that they shared office space with someone known only as Fat John.
Speaker 1:According to the Boston Criminal, on the night of June 1, 1956, fat John asked him to remove a panel from a wall in the office. Once the panel was removed, fat John reached into the opening and uncovered a metal container. Inside the container were packages of bills wrapped in plastic and newspapers, with Fat John alleging that each package contained $5,000. The man said. Fat John told him quote, this is good money, but you can't pass it around here in Boston. End quote.
Speaker 1:According to the criminal who was arrested in Baltimore, fat John told him that the money was part of the Brinks loot and offered him $5,000 to pass. $30,000 of the bills. $30,000 of the bills. The Boston criminal informed FBI agents in Baltimore that he received six packages of money from Fat John. The next day, june 2nd, he left Massachusetts with $4,750 of those bills and started using them. He arrived in Baltimore on the morning of June 3rd and was taken into custody by the Baltimore Police Department that evening.
Speaker 1:The FBI office in Boston was immediately informed about a significant development. Fat John and the business associate of the man arrested in Baltimore were found and interviewed on the morning of June 4, 1956. They both denied knowledge of the recovered loot. Later that afternoon, though, fat John admitted that he had the money, describing it as proceeds from the Brinks robbery. A search warrant was executed in Boston covering the Tremont Street offices occupied by the three men. In Fat John's office, the wall partition described by the Boston criminal was found. When the partition was removed, a picnic-type cooler containing more than $57,700 was discovered, of which $51,906 was identifiable as part of the Brinks loop.
Speaker 1:The money discovered in the Tremont Street offices led to the arrests of Fat John and the business associate of the criminal, already in custody in Baltimore. Both men remained silent. After their arrests On June 5th and 7th 1956, the Sulphur County Grand Jury indicted the three men for multiple state offenses related to their possession of the money obtained in the Brinks robbery. Following the guilty pleas, in November of 1956, fat John was sentenced to two years in prison, while the other two men received one-year sentences. After serving his sentence, fat John returned to a life of crime. On June 19, 1958, while out on appeal for a five-year narcotic sentence, he was found shot to death in a car that had crashed into a truck in Boston.
Speaker 1:The money found in the cooler, which had been hidden in the wall of the Tremont Street office was wrapped in plastic and newspaper. Three of the newspapers used to wrap the bills were identified as publications from Boston dated between December 4, 1955 and February 21, 1956. The FBI also located the carpenter who had remodeled the offices where the money was hidden. His records indicated that he had worked on the offices in early April of 1956 under the instructions of Fat John. This meant that the money could not have been hidden behind the wall panel before that time.
Speaker 1:Because the money in the cooler was in various stages of decomposition, it was very difficult to make an accurate count. Some of the bills were in pieces, while others fell apart when handled. Examination by the FBI laboratory later revealed that the decomposition, discoloration and clumping together of the bills were due, at least in part, to the fact that all the bills had been wet. It was determined that the packages of currency had been damaged before being wrapped in pieces of newspaper and there were indications that the bills had previously been in a canvas container buried in ground consisting of sand and ashes. In addition to mold, insect remains were also found on the money.
Speaker 1:Even with the recovery of this money in Baltimore and Boston, more than $1,150,000 of currency taken in the Brinks robbery remained unaccounted for in the Brinks robbery remained unaccounted for. The recovery of part of the stolen goods was a significant setback for the crew members awaiting trial in Boston. Were there any traces of evidence in the stolen items that could directly link them to the crime? This question weighed heavily on their minds. In July 1956, a significant development occurred when Stanley Guschiora, who had been transferred from Pennsylvania to Massachusetts for trial, was taken into medical care due to weakness, dizziness and vomiting. On July 9th, while visited by a clergyman, guschiora got out of bed and, in front of the clergyman, fell and hit his head. Two hours later, guschiara passed away. An examination revealed that he had a brain tumor and acute cerebral edema.
Speaker 1:O'keefe and Guschiara had been close friends for many years. When O'Keefe confessed to his involvement in the Brinks robbery to the FBI agents in January of 1956, he mentioned his deep respect for Guschiara. As a government witness he would have reluctantly testified against him. Yet since Guschiara was now beyond the reach of any human authority, o'keefe was even more determined to ensure that justice would be served. Following the death of Guschiara, only eight members of the Brinks crew remained to stand trial. On January 18, 1956, o'keefe pleaded guilty to the armed robbery of Brinks.
Speaker 1:The trial of the remaining eight men commenced on the morning of August 6, before Judge Files Forte in the Suffolk County Courthouse in Boston. The defense immediately filed motions to delay or prevent the trial, but all were denied and the jury selection process began on August 7th. Over the next two weeks, nearly 1,200 potential jurors were dismissed as the defense counsel exercised their 262 peremptory challenges. Another week passed with approximately 500 more citizens considered before the 14-member jury was finally assembled. Over 100 individuals testified as witnesses for both the prosecution and the defense.
Speaker 1:In September 1956. The key witness, spex O'Keefe, provided a detailed account of the crime, clearly outlining the involvement 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 on the evidence. Three and a half hours later they reached a verdict. All the defendants were found guilty. Judge Forte sentenced the eight men on October 9th 1956. Pino Costa, maffie, geegan, faraday, richardson and Baker received life sentences for the robbery, two-year sentences for conspiracy to steal and sentences of eight to ten years for breaking and entering at night. Mcginnis, who had not been at the scene on the night of the robbery, received a life sentence on each of the eight indictments that charged him with being an accessory before the fact in connection with the Brinks robbery. In addition, mcginnis also received other sentences of two years, two and a half to three years and eight to ten years.
Speaker 1:While action was being taken to appeal the convictions on their behalf, the eight men were transferred to the state prison at Wallop, massachusetts. From their prison cells they carefully followed the legal maneuvers aimed at securing their freedom. The state trial record consisted of over 5,300 pages. The defense counsel utilized it to prepare a 294-page brief for the Massachusetts State Supreme Court. After considering the arguments from the attorneys representing the eight convicted individuals convicted individuals the state Supreme Court rejected the appeals on July 1, 1959, in a 35-page decision written by the Chief Justice. On November 16, 1959, the United States Supreme Court denied the defense counsel's request for a writ of certiorari. A writ of certiorari is a legal order that a higher court issues to a lower court to review its record and a decision in a case.
Speaker 1:Now I have looked up how to say that word correctly, and even Supreme Court justices disagree with how it's correctly said. I read an article in the ABA Journal from June 2014, where Regent University Law Professor, james Duane asked how it was properly pronounced and, much to his surprise, he received six different pronunciations from the justices. So I did my best on this one. If you're an attorney, I would love to hear from you as to how you pronounce this, please. In the end, the perfect crime ended almost perfectly. The thieves were incarcerated and missing out on the money, and their heist became one of the most expensive robberies in history. Not to mention that less than $60,000 was recovered, leaving $2.2 million out of the $2.7 million that had disappeared without a trace, never to be seen again. Disappeared without a trace, never to be seen again, and that's the case of the Great Brinks robbery.
Speaker 1:I hope you guys enjoyed this tad bit different of a case as much as I did. Let me know what you think and if you'd like more cases like this covered. There's a link in the show notes at the very top that'll allow you to send a text message to me and let me know your thoughts. You can find Crime Connoisseurs wherever you listen to your podcasts. Please follow, subscribe and leave a review, and be sure to follow us on social media at Crime Connoisseurs for updates and bonus content, as always. Thank you all so much for listening. In the meantime, keep it classy connoisseurs, and I'll catch you on the next case. Thank you.
