XPost: alt.sodomites.barack-obama, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism
XPost: talk.politics.guns

The types of offenses that may most often be adapted to RICO use are
bribery, extortion, theft from interstate shipment, embezzlement, and interstate transportation of stolen property.

Fani Willis and her lover have committed blatant RICO crimes,
embezzlement, extortion, theft, defrauding federal and state
governments.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-109-rico-cha
rges

CRIMINAL RESOURCE MANUAL
CRM 1-499
109. RICO Charges
It is unlawful for anyone employed by or associated with any enterprise
engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign
commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the
conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering
activity or collection of unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) (West
1984). The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) was
passed by Congress with the declared purpose of seeking to eradicate
organized crime in the United States. Russello v. United States, 464
U.S. 16, 26-27, 104 S. Ct. 296, 302-303, 78 L. Ed. 2d 17 (1983); United
States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 589, 101 S. Ct. 2524, 2532, 69 L. Ed.
2d 246 (1981). A violation of Section 1962(c), requires (1) conduct (2)
of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.
Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479, 496, 105 S. Ct. 3275, 3285,
87 L. Ed. 2d 346 (1985).

A more expansive view holds that in order to be found guilty of
violating the RICO statute, the government must prove beyond a
reasonable doubt: (1) that an enterprise existed; (2) that the
enterprise affected interstate commerce; (3) that the defendant was
associated with or employed by the enterprise; (4) that the defendant
engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity; and (5) that the
defendant conducted or participated in the conduct of the enterprise
through that pattern of racketeering activity through the commission of
at least two acts of racketeering activity as set forth in the
indictment. United States v. Phillips, 664 F. 2d 971, 1011 (5th Cir.
Unit B Dec. 1981), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1136, 102 S. Ct. 1265, 73 L.
Ed. 2d 1354 (1982).

An "enterprise" is defined as including any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group
of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity. 18
U.S.C.A. § 1961(4) (West 1984). Many courts have noted that Congress
mandated a liberal construction of the RICO statute in order to
effectuate its remedial purposes by holding that the term "enterprise"
has an expansive statutory definition. United States v. Delano, 825 F.
Supp. 534, 538-39 (W.D.N.Y. 1993), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 55 F.
3d 720 (2d Cir. 1995), cases cited therein.

"Pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of
racketeering activity committed within ten years of each other. 18
U.S.C.A. § 1961(5) (West 1984). Congress intended a fairly flexible
concept of a pattern in mind. H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Tel. Co.,
492 U.S. 229, 239, 109 S. Ct. 2893, 2900, 106 L. Ed. 2d 195 (1989). The government must show that the racketeering predicates are related, and
that they amount to or pose a threat of continued criminal activity. Id. Racketeering predicates are related if they have the same or similar
purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events. Id. at 240, 109 S. Ct. at 2901; Ticor Title Ins. Co. v. Florida, 937 F. 2d 447, 450 (9th Cir. 1991). Furthermore, the degree in
which these factors establish a pattern may depend on the degree of
proximity, or any similarities in goals or methodology, or the number of repetitions. United States v. Indelicato, 865 F. 2d 1370, 1382 (2d
Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 811, 110 S. Ct. 56, 107 L. Ed. 2d 24
(1989).

Continuity refers either to a closed period of repeated conduct, or to
past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat
of repetition. H.J., Inc., 492 U.S. at 241-42, 109 S. Ct. at 2902. A
party alleging a RICO violation may demonstrate continuity over a closed
period by proving a series of related predicates extending over a
substantial period of time. Id. Predicate acts extending over a few
weeks or months and threatening no future criminal conduct do not
satisfy this requirement as Congress was concerned with RICO in
long-term criminal conduct. Id.

As to the continuity requirement, the government may show that the
racketeering acts found to have been committed pose a threat of
continued racketeering activity by proving: (1) that the acts are part
of a long-term association that exists for criminal purposes, or (2)
that they are a regular way of conducting the defendant's ongoing
legitimate business, or (3) that they are a regular way of conducting or participating in an ongoing and legitimate enterprise. Id.

When a RICO action is brought before continuity can be established, then liability depends on whether the threat of continuity is demonstrated.
Id. However, Judge Scalia wrote in his concurring opinion that it would
be absurd to say that "at least a few months of racketeering activity. .
.is generally for free, as far as RICO is concerned." Id. at 254, 109 S.
Ct. at 2908. Therefore, if the predicate acts involve a distinct threat
of long-term racketeering activity, either implicit or explicit, a RICO
pattern is established. Id. at 242, 109 S. Ct. at 2902.

The RICO statute expressly states that it is unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the subsections of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962. The government need not prove that the defendant agreed with every other conspirator, knew all of the other conspirators, or had full knowledge
of all the details of the conspiracy. Delano, 825 F. Supp. at 542. All
that must be shown is: (1) that the defendant agreed to commit the
substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to participate in two racketeering acts; (2) that he knew the general status of the
conspiracy; and (3) that he knew the conspiracy extended beyond his
individual role. United States v. Rastelli, 870 F. 2d 822, 828 (2d
Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 982, 110 S. Ct. 515, 107 L. Ed. 2d 516
(1989).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)