Custom Search

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

RICO LAWS / government can be held accountable for it's employees. Guilt by association.

Folks please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.

14 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

*
**
Hi All,

There is interesting case law that could have an effect on the RICO cases against the City of Saint Paul.

Essentially what the case's I have linked below state is a city can be innocent of RICO charges and still be held accountable for the illegal actions taken by a small number of it's employees.

signed,

Bob

2:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please click above

3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please click above

3:11 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

RICO; State agencies
United States Court of Appeals Affirmed

A state can be a RICO enterprise. "We endorse the Sixth Circuit's call for caution. We also agree with the Sixth Circuit's ultimate conclusion that the prosecution's approach to this issue in cases such as Thompson and the case at hand may often not be absolutely necessary under RICO, but it is not forbidden. Some cases, however, are exceptional, and ours is one of them. In such a case, the prosecution may have no real alternative to naming the state as the RICO enterprise. (This of course does not mean that the state itself has violated any federal law; it may instead be a victim of the overall scheme, as are many RICO enterprises.) In such a case, the use of the state as the RICO enterprise in the indictment is analogous to the courts' treatment of the state as a market participant in a dormant commerce clause case. If the CEO of a major corporation, who ascended to that position from other senior executive positions, engaged in comparable activities, we would not only accept but expect a RICO conspiracy indictment with the corporation itself named as the RICO enterprise, even knowing that the overwhelming majority of employees, shareholders, and consumers of the corporation were innocent of wrongdoing. The situation here is the same. "In this case, the prosecution thought that it had identified an ongoing scheme to defraud the State of Illinois through the illegal use of two of the most significant executive branch offices of the state and of the state's electoral processes during Ryan's campaign for Governor in 1998. The scheme revolved around an elected official throughout his tenure in these two offices - Secretary of State and Governor - and during the time he was a candidate for the latter office. No legal rule prohibited the prosecution from concluding that there was no single entity or office that it could have identified, short of the state as a whole, that would have encompassed the enterprise that was used by the defendants. In these unusual circumstances, comity interests do not override the broad language of RICO, as interpreted in Turkette. The district court did not err by allowing the state to be the RICO enterprise in this RICO conspiracy prosecution." Affirmed.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Pallmeyer, J., Wood, J.

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?caseno=06-3517&submit=showdkt&yr=06&num=3517

9:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, maybe I am missing something, but when was the State of Illinios ever held responsible for the actions of Governor Ryan?

What you copied here appears to be Ryan's losing appeal. He and his good buddy, Warner, were convicted on the RICO charges because they were involved in a conspiracy to award contracts to Warner and other friends of Ryan that directly benefitted each other.

In the Ryan case there was a clear conspiracy over a long time between two close associates to benefit each other at the expense of others who might have been awarded contracts. Even with this close of an association and as high in the government as Ryan was, I don't think even then that the State was held responsible for Ryan's criminal actions.

So, if a crook like Ryan can be involved in an long term and multi level conspiracy like that and not get the State on the hook, how is it that the City of Saint Paul is going to be convicted...?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We appear to be typing at the same time...

In your post it is clear that the linkage to the State was to show that the business Ryan was operating was the State of Illinois and that the State itself was a victim of his actions. Otherwise there wouldn't be the ability to have someone benefit and lose. The benefit was the awarding of a state contract and the loss was not getting the state contract. So, the prosecution had to link Ryan to the State.

Again, I have never seen anywhere where the State was held responsible for Ryan's actions, which is what the landlords are suggesting in their suit. If the State was held responsible then there should have been some compensation to those who were not awarded contracts from the State. That would then make the two relevant Bob.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,I don't believe the state of Illinois was sued for damages. This was a criminal case in Illinois. We have a lawsuit seeking damages here. It should be a criminal case and it isn't.

I assume since the city hasn't taken any actions against Magner (not even an investigation into the allegations) this will add to the damages of the award handed down to the plaintiffs. It is as if the city is complicit with Magners actions.

Oh and Chuck, the discovery process is on going. The plaintiffs have Magner by the balls and all that is left is to squeeze.

10:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Magner is obviously one of the key creeps. The city won't let him go, because the entire creepy power structure might sustain damage. There are others.

10:44 AM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Listen people, if there was any truth to ANY of this it would be national news. This stuff doesn't even make the local news.

This blog is fun, but don't expect the information here to be anything of real importance.

Good thing I am better educated than to fall for this stuff.

Bob, Nancy L. and Mr. Anonymous put on a good show.

7:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Enquirer provides a thorough education.

8:22 PM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When you people are done cleaning up corruption in Saint Paul and Maplewood we could sure use some help over here in Minneapolis with this bunch.

8:05 AM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1:28 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home