Howard Vickery

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
giving a prison sentence as a punishment, in most cases is just delaying another inevitable problem. best hope is as you say they take it to end the problem themselves but many dont see themselves as the problem.
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
I don’t care to know anything more about the man. The link in this thread is all I’ll ever need to know. Don’t care about his stroke, cueball control, life story, tournament finishes, gambling achievements, nothing. He never existed in pool as far as I’m concerned.
You know many people are not who you may think they are.

 

Logandgriff

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
You know many people are not who you may think they are.

The rest of the story:

DILIBERTO CLEARED BY JURY IN DRUG-TRAFFICKING CASE​

  • From the Buffalo News
  • By CAROLYN RAEKE AND TOM ERNST, CARL ALLEN AND TOM ERNST, ANTHONY CARDINALE AND TOM ERNST, DALE ANDERSON AND TOM ERNST, BY TOM ERNST, AGNES PALAZZETTI AND TOM ERNST, CHARLES ANZALONE AND TOM ERNST, BARBARA O'BRIEN AND TOM ERNST, CHARITY VOGEL AND TOM ERNST, DARRYL CAMPAGNA AND TOM ERNST
  • Aug 3, 2001 Updated Jul 23, 2020
Danny DiLiberto, a 70-year-old former West Side pool hustler, has been cleared of all four charges that he trafficked in cocaine.
A federal jury found him innocent after about two hours of deliberations Wednesday at the conclusion of an eight-day trial.

Several former associates in the world of professional pool -- some of whom also face sentencing or have been sentenced in connection with cocaine trafficking -- testified against him.

"They lied to the FBI, they lied to each other," DiLiberto's attorney, John J. Carney III, said Thursday. "There was no physical evidence linking my client."

No one from the U.S. attorney's office in Buffalo could be reached to comment Thursday.

DiLiberto, now living in Florida, was indicted in December 1999 on charges that he and another man transported more than five kilograms of cocaine to a longtime fellow pool player, Gregory Hatch, in the Town of Tonawanda.

Hatch, 60, also an expert pool player, was sentenced to 20 years in prison in a related case last year and was among those testifying against DiLiberto.

DiLiberto had a colorful history as a pool hustler and claimed never to have held a steady job.
In a 1983 interview with The Buffalo News, he said that steady work gave him rashes and that he was advised by a doctor to quit.

0 comments
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
I believe Danny fought that charge and proved his innocence.
He wasn't convicted not the same as innocent. They just didn't prove the charges. Heck Greg hatch Dennis's father I think testified against him. But the jury for one reason or another didn't buy it I guess.

It's not that easy to convict somebody and that's as it should be you're innocent till proven guilty. The prosecutor doesn't have the goods you can walk.
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member

middleofnowhere

Registered
I’m not not sure why you chose to bring that up in a conversation about a pedophile.
People are murdered everyday because a desperate person on drugs will do anything to get the drugs. The drug supplier has nothing on a pedophile, one is as bad as the other.

Just because someone has a talent or for some reason cons people into looking up to them, they don't get a pass.
 

DieselPete

Active member
People are murdered everyday because a desperate person on drugs will do anything to get the drugs. The drug supplier has nothing on a pedophile, one is as bad as the other.

Just because someone has a talent or for some reason cons people into looking up to them, they don't get a pass.

Bringing up a case in which someone was found not guilty* in a thread about someone being found guilty of a horrific crime and sentenced to six years feels an awful lot like an unfair smear to me. A jury heard the evidence and came to a conclusion quite quickly. I don't know that that means that jury was "conned."

*You can't hold a person responsible for not being found "innocent." Our system doesn't declare innocence as an outcome of a trial.
 

middleofnowhere

Registered
Bringing up a case in which someone was found not guilty* in a thread about someone being found guilty of a horrific crime and sentenced to six years feels an awful lot like an unfair smear to me. A jury heard the evidence and came to a conclusion quite quickly. I don't know that that means that jury was "conned."

*You can't hold a person responsible for not being found "innocent." Our system doesn't declare innocence as an outcome of a trial.
I don't think the jury was conned. I was referring to people who can be conned because of hero worship.
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Children's lives are destroyed by drugs. They are both bad. A case could be made that someone selling drugs to kids is worse. And a line is drawn straight to the supplier. It's not a debate.
You’re trying to say Dennis Hatch and Danny DiLiberto are scumbags equal to Howard Vickery?

Get out of here. Pedophile are worse. You’re going on my ignore list.
 

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
You’re trying to say Dennis Hatch and Danny DiLiberto are scumbags equal to Howard Vickery?

Get out of here. Pedophile are worse. You’re going on my ignore list.

That first post just showing he was indicted when the outcome is already known surely seems like major game playing at the least. Did he not know that we would find what happened in short order?

When the other people indicted testify against someone it almost always means they have cut a deal, less time or no time in trade for testimony. Danny was the one with the most status and they could tie him to a very famous boxing trainer. That is news for the little more than pulp rags and the cops will try to go after what they see as the "big fish", not necessarily the one that is guilty of the most but the one that gives the most prestige to convict.

I have no use for drug dealers and if they sell to children they are major on my list. However, pedophiles are always molesters of children. You don't wreck the innocence of a child and cause them life long issues to pleasure yourself. They generally mention if it is a child over 12 or 14 so we have to assume this is a very young child in howard's case. There is also the implication that he preyed on a child that had reason to trust him. I hope he and all like him have a special extra nasty corner of hell reserved for them, and the sooner they get there the better!

Hu
 

DieselPete

Active member
Children's lives are destroyed by drugs. They are both bad. A case could be made that someone selling drugs to kids is worse. And a line is drawn straight to the supplier. It's not a debate.
Well, in that case it's a darn good thing that Danny was found NOT GUILTY of being a drug dealer/supplier.
 

Straightpool_99

I see dead balls
Silver Member
Wow, never knew about the DiLiberto case. His friends testified against him, huh? I mean he may be innocent, and one should presume he is since he wasn't convicted, but it's kind of sad to see how the people turn against eachother like wolves when the heat is on. There really is no honour among thieves. I learned my lesson long ago, stay away from scetchy people, you never know what they have done and therefore may implicate you in. I'll play anyone a game of pool, but that's it, no socializing with creeps and lowlives. Never got burned myself, as I've always been law abiding, but someone I know almost got framed for murder. Bunch of lying cowards, criminals. Recently a kid in the poolhall went down on drug charges and what you'd call racketeering in the US, probably. Lots of talent, but was into drugs. No more pool for a few years....He had it coming too, you better believe it. In the US he would have never gotten out of prison. I bet his friends sung like canaries. The judge got sick of seeing his face in court and threw the book at him, something which rarely happen to young people in my country, they give them lots of chances. Now he has no future, his familys good name is ruined, and God only knows how many people he hurt along the way with violence and drugs. Most child molestors would probably have to add an extra zero to their victims number to be halfway competitive with a drug dealer of this sort.

Anyway, Vickery got what he deserved. An old man in prison 6 years for child molestation charges. The way it's portrayed in the media, one is almost surprised he came out alive. But I think the criminals are full of bs in this department too. Everyone squeals on eachother, and nobody tries anything if the target can put up even a little bit of a fight. Criminals prey on the weak and helpless. That's why they are criminals. If the guy is a little bit big and maybe looks like he can throw a punch, they leave him well alone. I hate child molesters more than any other sort of criminals and everyone else do too, it seems. So his main punishment will be to be forever ostracized from his community. Who'd want to be seen even talking to a guy like that? You'd better believe that is worse than even a pretty brutal beating. At least you can recover from a beating.
 
Last edited:

middleofnowhere

Registered
Well, in that case it's a darn good thing that Danny was found NOT GUILTY of being a drug dealer/supplier.
14 were arrested 12 plead guilty. I think Diliberto was the only one who went to trial. He didn't care at his age and health, jail was a death sentence anyway. He took a shot and inexplicably they let him walk.
 
Last edited:

Nick B

This is gonna hurt
Silver Member
14 were arrested 12 plead guilty. I think Diliberto was the only one who went to trial. He didn't care at his age and health, jail was a death sentence anyway. He took a shot and inexplicably they let him walk.
OK enough of this silliness. The man was found not guilty. Period. Full stop. Nothing to see hear. The results are binary. No shades of grey. This being brought up is tasteless (especially in parallel with pedophilia). Why don't we bring up all the other pros who have gone to the big house who paid their time and that's done with? No lets not.
 
Top