Racketeer Influence And Corrupt Organizations Act Of 1970

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (RICO) was originally put in place to combat the mafia but has become increasingly used to combat corporate schemes as well. The first thing to know is what a racketeer is. A racketeer is defined as a person who obtains money illegally, as by bootlegging, fraud, or extortion. There are lists in other cases used to describe a racketeer using words from arson all the way to witness tampering . The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act was imposed mainly to be able to prosecute bosses who may order a killing or some other type of illegal activity but have no physical connection with the crime per say .
RICO was aimed at trying to stop the infiltration of organized crime into the business community. It does this by being able to prosecute only by being able to show a pattern of activity and it created powerful criminal and civil penalties. Those treble damages aforementioned were designed to be able to destroy the economic base of organized crime. RICO defines what racketeering activities are and lists a large number of crimes in which members of organized crime commonly engage. It also lists several crimes that aren’t associated with organized crime in the attempt to blanket whatever organized crime may attempt to do, but has resulted in not limiting the RICO application by courts to just organized crime. RICO defines an enterprise as an individual, partnership, corporation, associate, or other legal entity, and union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity. There has been a lot of dissention in the courts over this definition as to whether or not an enterprise may be illegitimate. RICO defines a pattern of racketeering activity as requiring at least two acts of racketeering activity. Only requiring two acts to show a pattern has caused trouble in the courts, because of how much it leaves open to interpretation and it’s a very broad definition
He was acquitted on charges of bribery and extortion. He is 61 years old and sentenced to 28 years in prison. More than one thousand former defendants in Luzerne County Juvenile Court who claim their rights were violated in the kids-for-cash case and 548 of their parents would split about $12.2 million from a proposed settlement of $17.75 million with the developer Robert K Mericle. Mericle admitted to paying $2.1 million to the two judges