RICO the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations

RICO

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a federal law that was passed in 1970. This law permits the trial and prosecution for actions that are performed as part of an ongoing criminal enterprise. Actions that include such criminal behavior has illegal gambling, bribery, murder and money laundering are all typical of RICO violations.

The RICO act was intended to bring down crime families and mafia organizations or other organized crime. Within these criminal families are systems that protect the long standing hierarchies that control and deliver the criminal behavior within these families. As a result, old laws could not reach these criminals and new prosecutorial powers were needed to ensure that justice was taking place.

The RICO Act originally was legislated to prosecute the Mafia and others involved in organized crime, but over time, the definition of what constitutes racketeering activity has expanded. Consequently, the application of RICO law has broadened to include a variety of individuals, organizations and activities. Among other enterprises, RICO law has been applied to drug cartels, street gangs, corrupt police departments, political parties, protest groups, terrorist organizations, corporations, managed care companies, bankers and insurance and securities firms.

RICO laws give official power to chase and prosecute members of crime families who may never have actually committed those crimes. Instead the criminal enterprise is taken down and anyone associated with the unlawful activities that accompany such organizations. The statute was also designed for civil cases, with the intent to repay the victims of racketeering. The law suggests that individuals who have sustained injury to property or business due to racketeering activity may sue and are entitled to three times the amount of their losses. The extent to which the act can be interpreted by plaintiffs in civil RICO claims has led to some amount of fear and controversy, with critics leveling accusations that the law's wording is too broad, particularly in the areas of mail and wire fraud, and can be used to unfairly seek damages from non-criminal enterprises.