COMPLETE STATIC READING EDITION

The middlemen

Errichetti, Criden and the men who sold the sheikh names.

← Interactive guide and chronology · The ABSCAM File hub: the history, the full timeline and every file · What people say ↓

Who were the go-betweens?

A mayor, a lawyer, a councilman and a few businessmen, all claiming to know who in Washington was for sale.

Angelo Errichetti was the hub. He was mayor of Camden and a New Jersey state senator, and he brought the operatives Myers and Lederer. Howard Criden, a Philadelphia lawyer, and his law partner Louis Johanson, a Philadelphia city councilman, brought Thompson, who in turn brought Murphy and Murtha, and named the Philadelphia council members. Joseph Silvestri, a New Jersey businessman, raised Senator Pressler’s name. Eugene Ciuzio and Stanley Weisz brought Kelly. John Stowe brought Jenrette. Alexander Feinberg, a lawyer, was Senator Williams’s partner in the titanium venture. [1][2][3]

They were paid. The Senate report records Criden receiving $5,000 on 10 January 1980 for delivering Murtha to a meeting three days earlier, and middlemen keeping shares of the cash the members took. [2]

Their claims were often false. Of 24 officials the FBI authorized for bribe meetings, every one except Representative William Hughes of New Jersey had first been named by a middleman who said the person was corrupt. Several never showed up, and some who came, like Pressler, refused. [2]

Errichetti, Criden and Johanson were convicted with Myers in August 1980. Errichetti died in 2013. [3]

What we can’t tell you. Middlemen’s claims about others are evidence only of what the middlemen said.

The sources

  1. Senate Report 97-682, Summary of findings and conclusions (printed pp. 11–25) ↗

    Primary committee report, December 15, 1982. Bipartisan select committee (4 R, 4 D). Findings on informant control, authorization, recording failures, leaks and harm to innocent people.

  2. Senate Report 97-682, Part on selection of subjects and the “Republicans” requests (printed pp. 60–80) ↗

    Primary. Records the September 18 and October 9, 1979 recorded requests for Republican and non-Atlantic targets and the committee’s conclusion that no predicate existed for them.

  3. Senate Report 97-682, Appendix G: House Judiciary subcommittee summaries of the ABSCAM trials ↗

    Primary appendix compiling indictment, trial, verdict and sentencing dates for Jenrette, Myers, Kelly, Thompson–Murphy, Lederer and Williams. Some sentencing details postdate it and are taken from later sources.

  4. DOJ Public Integrity Section, Significant Cases (ABSCAM entries and Operation Lost Trust) ↗

    Prosecutor’s institutional summary. Contains at least one date typo (Lederer resignation printed as 1991; correct year 1981). Cross-checked against court and House records.

Did being named by a middleman mean anything?

No. It got you a meeting. What you did there was the evidence.

The committee’s harshest finding about targeting was that the FBI let corrupt people choose its subjects. “At least one (and apparently more) clearly innocent public official was brought before the hidden cameras,” it wrote, because the operation relied on middlemen who had every reason to promise more than they could deliver. [1][2]

The government’s reply was that the meeting itself was the test. An honest official would turn the money down, and some did: the trial judge in the Myers case pointed to Pressler, Patten and Murtha as proof that the offer did not overwhelm anyone who heard it. [3]

Both points are true at once. The meeting did separate refusals from acceptances. It also put honest people’s names into FBI files and, once the leaks began, into the newspapers.

What we can’t tell you. The committee did not name every official it considered innocent.

The sources

  1. Senate Report 97-682, Part on selection of subjects and the “Republicans” requests (printed pp. 60–80) ↗

    Primary. Records the September 18 and October 9, 1979 recorded requests for Republican and non-Atlantic targets and the committee’s conclusion that no predicate existed for them.

  2. Senate Report 97-682, The Pressler meeting and harm to innocent persons ↗

    Primary. Approval within an hour on November 7, 1979; the committee calls Pressler clearly innocent and injured by leaks.

  3. United States v. Myers, 527 F. Supp. 1206 (E.D.N.Y. 1981) — published district-court opinion ↗

    Contemporaneous trial-court opinion on constitutional challenges, published on Justia. Its description of refusals is not a finding that every aspect of every meeting was beyond ethical criticism.

WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THIS FILE

The claims, rated.

3 claims people make about this file, each rated documented, partly true, disputed, unproven or false. Think a rating is wrong? Use Dispute or Support, or join the Discussion.

All 97 rated claims ↗

← The ABSCAM File hub: the history, the full timeline and every file

Discussion

Comment, dispute or support a claim, submit a source or rate this page through a short Google Form. It asks you to sign in with Google so we know you are a real person; your email is never shown. Nothing appears here until it has been reviewed. Conversation on X tagged #AIFiles #Abscam shows up below after the daily refresh.

CommentSubmit a sourceRate this pageStart a discussion on XFull forum topicSee all disputesFollow updates (Google Group)

Reader comments

Approved reader comments and ratings are shown on the interactive edition. This plain reading edition does not load them.

On X

This plain reading edition does not load posts. You can read this subject’s threads on the forum: Forum: #Abscam.

Reader comments are shown only after review, and rows removed from the form’s sheet disappear at the next refresh. X posts are a read-only daily snapshot; posts deleted or made private there are removed at the next refresh. Inclusion is not endorsement. A submitted source stays pending review until a page update says otherwise.