With the prosecutions of the former president, rapper Young Thug and Cop City protesters, Atlanta has become ground zero for the use/abuse of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO law. Of the plethora of crimes in the prosecutor’s arsenal, RICO has become the most effective and least restrictive option available to secure convictions.
Most notably, former President Donald Trump and his co-conspirators were indicted by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis based on actions taken by the defendants in an attempt to interfere with and overthrow the 2020 election. After successfully securing probation pleas against four of former President Trump’s co-defendants, the case came to a grinding halt based on a motion alleging misconduct by the DA and special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
Credit: Courtesy
Credit: Courtesy
Among the issues raised was that the DA had personally benefitted financially from the hiring of her romantic partner as a special prosecutor. These benefits include vacations and cruises. The overarching allegation is that by hiring her then-boyfriend, the DA has siphoned off nearly a million dollars and counting of taxpayer money that continues to be paid to him.
After several hearings investigating the background and facts of the misconduct motion, the truth about what actually transpired between DA Willis and special prosecutor Wade is becoming clear. While there have been objections, attempts to enforce legal privilege, contradicting testimony, the exchange of cash between Willis and Wade, texts messages sent by Wade’s law partner (who appeared to have come down with sudden onset amnesia while on the stand) and cell phone data used to place Wade at DA Willis’ residence in advance of the election investigation, we can better infer the intent and motive behind the DA hiring her boyfriend and fighting tooth and nail from trying to bring the extent of their relationship to light.
While pondering the evidence and filings made in pursuit of the claims of impropriety, a familiar pattern seemed to appear. In RICO cases the actions of any defendant are impugned to every other defendant. In fact, a person can find themselves entangled in a RICO prosecution for actions that would otherwise be wholly legal if not made in furtherance of the alleged RICO conspiracy.
This thought led to one question: by hiring a paramour without authorization and paying him with public monies, would our DA seek a RICO indictment for an alleged romantic partnership that used subterfuge to enrich her partner?
Under Georgia law, a person can be convicted under the RICO statute by “engaging in at least two acts of racketeering activity in furtherance of one or more incidents, schemes, or transactions…” Racketeering activity includes over 43 state crimes that could be the basis for a RICO prosecution. While contemplating the aforementioned thought, three criminal/predicate acts jump off the page in support of a RICO prosecution. This list includes, “records and reports of currency transactions,” “impersonating a public officer or employee” and “influencing witnesses.”
These three enumerations came to mind because they so closely mirror the facts in the misconduct alleged. Taking each in turn, violation of records and reports of currency transactions is done by committing a pattern of illegal activity involving transactions exceeding $100,000 in any 12-month period. Here, Wade has far surpassed that amount.
Additionally, from information gained from the hearings, the DA never got approval to hire Wade from the Fulton County Commission. Therefore, any payments made to the DA’s boyfriend would be in violation of county rules and regulations.
Next, impersonating a public officer or employee is completed when “a person falsely holds himself out as a peace officer, officer of the court, or other public officer or employee with intent to mislead another into believing that he or she is actually such officer.” Here, Wade was never approved by the county commission and he did not file the required oath of office to serve as a special prosecutor.
As such, Wade’s involvement in the case was illegal. Despite that, Wade led the investigation before the special purpose grand jury that was empaneled to conduct the investigation on whether or not charges should be brought. Although Wade was never technically authorized to be cloaked with the title of special assistant district attorney, Wade was and continues to be paid handsomely for his involvement with the case.
Finally, we turn to “influencing witnesses.” During testimony at the hearing to disqualify the DA, Terrence Bradley, who was the law partner of Wade, admitted that another attorney had called him regarding his testimony in the case and attempted to dissuade him from testifying. This attorney is connected to the DA as he was part of the DA’s transition team. If a defense attorney called a government witness and tried to talk them out of testifying, we can be assured that the DA would seek charges.
As outlined above, the actions of Willis and Wade meet the black letter law of a RICO prosecution. Here, we have at least two racketeering activities that all work toward the same scheme or goal, to enrich Wade, and as such, benefit Willis financially through her romantic relationship with him.
Given these facts and the Fulton County District Attorney’s willingness to use RICO to routinely prosecute cases, it only seems reasonable that DA Fani Willis would, in fact, indict this version of Fani Willis.
Robert Wilson is an associate at Arora Law Firm, a boutique Atlanta law firm that specializes in criminal defense and represented attorney Kenneth Chesebro, a defendant in the election interference case against former President Donald Trump. Chesebro pleaded guilty to a probation sentence last year.
About the Author
