Uploaded May 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 hours ago
Here's another federal RICO lawsuit filed in the Northern District against four persons. There is an error in the video where I typed that personal jurisdiction is set by the nature of the claim. Actually, that's subject matter jurisdiction, as federal courts are of limited jurisdiction and can't hear all types of cases. I tried to blur out the error, and I screwed it up. This video is just looking at the narrow question of pleading a RICO case. I am not commenting on what transpired to avoid making the video much longer. Allegations can include all kinds of things that have not been proven. Treat all allegations of wrongdoing as mere allegations. Nothing has been proven, and they are all entitled to a presumption of innocence. Any charges against them can be dropped. Never treat a pleading as "true" because it is just that - a pleading. These auditors were up in NorCal, and they deny any wrongdoing. This is now the second RICO case that has been brought. RICO is not easy to prove. I am interested in if the lawyer is claiming that the "property" affected the RICO extortionate act for interstate commerce is satisfied through existing case law. I don't handle RICO cases, and I am not going to do the research. I'll address this when and if there are pleading challenges. I don't get paid for that work, so I will leave it up to them to figure it out.
None of this is legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed. I reserve all rights, including California's anti-SLAPP statute, and other privileges accorded to me over a public issue, all of which are reserved. Always consult a licensed professional in your state before taking any action that could impact your legal rights. Any errors you find in this video can be reported to me, and I will provide your response in the description of this video.
@Direct_D
@frauditortroll
@TrollMediaGroup
@BlackHartKnight
@FrauditorRoundup
@UncleanHands1
@TeamSkeptic
@drdavedebunker
@dickbagpatrol
Here's another federal RICO lawsuit filed in the Northern District against four persons. There is an error in the video where I typed that personal jurisdiction is set by the nature of the claim. Actually, that's subject matter jurisdiction, as federal courts are of limited jurisdiction and can't hear all types of cases. I tried to blur out the error, and I screwed it up. This video is just looking at the narrow question of pleading a RICO case. I am not commenting on what transpired to avoid making the video much longer. Allegations can include all kinds of things that have not been proven. Treat all allegations of wrongdoing as mere allegations. Nothing has been proven, and they are all entitled to a presumption of innocence. Any charges against them can be dropped. Never treat a pleading as "true" because it is just that - a pleading. These auditors were up in NorCal, and they deny any wrongdoing. This is now the second RICO case that has been brought. RICO is not easy to prove. I am interested in if the lawyer is claiming that the "property" affected the RICO extortionate act for interstate commerce is satisfied through existing case law. I don't handle RICO cases, and I am not going to do the research. I'll address this when and if there are pleading challenges. I don't get paid for that work, so I will leave it up to them to figure it out.
None of this is legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed. I reserve all rights, including California's anti-SLAPP statute, and other privileges accorded to me over a public issue, all of which are reserved. Always consult a licensed professional in your state before taking any action that could impact your legal rights. Any errors you find in this video can be reported to me, and I will provide your response in the description of this video.
@Direct_D
@frauditortroll
@TrollMediaGroup
@BlackHartKnight
@FrauditorRoundup
@UncleanHands1
@TeamSkeptic
@drdavedebunker
@dickbagpatrol
