More In This Category
View Transcript
So RICO is what’s known as RICO, it’s short for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization. Any organization that has illegal activities, from a regular corporation, a Wall Street corporation to gangs, can be prosecuted under the RICO Act. In order to be prosecuted under the RICO Act, the prosecutors have to – there’s different levels and different elements that the government has to prove when it comes to prosecutions of RICO. However, generally the prosecutor has to prove at least two or three separate acts that the corporation is committing that are illegal.
So for example, when you are prosecuting a street gang with RICO, prosecutors usually would show that that gang is dealing with drugs and committing murders. That would be enough to prove a RICO. It depends on, again, what statute section under the RICO act you are being prosecuted under. Sometimes the prosecutor has to prove specifically those acts, and sometimes they can just generally prove certain acts. And when the jury deliberates, they don’t really have to specifically tell or vote on a certain act, they can just in general say yes, we find that the prosecutor proved that at least two acts are illegal.
Chicago, IL criminal defense attorney Gal Pissetzky talks about what RICO is and the activities that fall under it. In discussing RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization), the attorney explains that any organization engaging in illegal activities, ranging from regular corporations, Wall Street entities to gangs, can face prosecution under the RICO Act. The prosecution must satisfy various levels and elements to establish a case under RICO, generally requiring proof of at least two or three separate illegal acts committed by the organization.
For instance, when prosecuting a street gang under RICO, prosecutors typically demonstrate the gang’s involvement in drug dealing and murders. The specific statute section under the RICO Act determines the elements that need to be proven. Sometimes, prosecutors must specifically prove certain acts, while in other cases, a more general proof of acts may suffice. During jury deliberations, jurors are not necessarily required to vote on specific acts but can instead conclude that the prosecution has proven the commission of at least two illegal acts in a general sense.