Second: That the acts of racketeering activity were related to each meaning that there was a relationship between or among the acts of racketeering activity [referred to as the requirement]; “relatedness” Third: That the acts of racketeering activity amounted to or posed a threat of continued criminal activity and [referred to as the requirement]; “continuity” Fourth: That conducted or participated, directly or indirectly, in the (name) conduct of the enterprise’s affairs the pattern of racketeering “through” activity. With respect to the second requirement, acts of racketeering activity are if the acts had the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims “related” or methods of commission, or were otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics. Acts of racketeering activity are not related if they are disconnected, sporadic, or widely separated and isolated acts. As to the third requirement, the government must prove that the racketeering acts themselves amounted to continuing racketeering activity or that the acts otherwise posed a threat of continuing racketeering activity. Continuing racketeering activity may be proved by evidence showing a closed period of repeated racketeering activity; that is, by evidence of a series of related racketeering acts committed over a substantial period of time. [Acts of racketeering activity committed over only a few weeks or months and which do not threaten future criminal Continuing racketeering activity or a threat conduct do not satisfy this requirement.]
Second: That the acts of racketeering activity were related to each meaning that there was a relationship between or among the acts of racketeering activity [referred to as the “relatedness” requirement]; Third: That the acts of racketeering activity amounted to or posed a threat of continued criminal activity [referred to as the “continuity” requirement]; and Fourth: That (name) conducted or participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the enterprise’s affairs “through” the pattern of racketeering activity. With respect to the second requirement, acts of racketeering activity are “related” if the acts had the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims or methods of commission, or were otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics. Acts of racketeering activity are not related if they are disconnected, sporadic, or widely separated and isolated acts. As to the third requirement, the government must prove that the racketeering acts themselves amounted to continuing racketeering activity or that the acts otherwise posed a threat of continuing racketeering activity. Continuing racketeering activity may be proved by evidence showing a closed period of repeated racketeering activity; that is, by evidence of a series of related racketeering acts committed over a substantial period of time. [Acts of racketeering activity committed over only a few weeks or months and which do not threaten future criminal conduct do not satisfy this requirement.] Continuing racketeering activity or a threat
Chap%206%20RICO%20May%202013Rev.docx