Indiana Outlaws RICO Case

July 11, 2012

All Posts, News

The Southern District of Indiana unsealed a 70 page, 37-count indictment this morning that charges 42 members and associates of the American Outlaws Association with federal offenses including “racketeering, mail fraud, money laundering, extortion, drug charges, wire fraud, witness tampering and operating an illegal gambling operation.”

More than 300 local, state and federal police including 11 Swat Teams served the arrest warrants and 17 search warrants. Among the locations searched were the Outlaws club houses in Indianapolis and Fort Wayne. Count One of the indictment calls the “Outlaws Motorcycle Club” an “international criminal organization.”

In a press release issued after the early morning raids Joseph H. Hogsett, the United States Attorney for the Southern District, thundered “If you are operating an organized criminal gang in this city, the clock is ticking. It might be tomorrow, it might be weeks from now, but it is only a matter of time before you wake up to the sound of law enforcement at your door.”

“For more than three years, a volatile mixture of guns, drugs, and motorcycles allegedly fueled a dangerous criminal organization in Indianapolis as sophisticated as any business in this city,” Hogsett added. “This morning, we closed down that business. For good.”

In the same release, FBI Special Agent-in-Charge Robert Allan Jones was quoted as saying, “This enterprise-based investigation and today’s takedown focused on disrupting and dismantling what the indictment alleges to be a violent, criminal outlaw motorcycle gang by targeting its senior leaders and key members.” Jones’ comment refers to the “enterprise theory of investigation” which underlies most biker RICO cases. He continued, “The U.S. Attorney’s Office, FBI Safe Streets Task Force, and our partner agencies are committed to making the streets of Indiana safer by the disruption and dismantlement of gangs like the Outlaws Motorcycle Club.”

The Accused

The indictment was returned July 3 and unsealed this morning. It has not yet been filed on the Public Access to Court Electronic Records website. The Aging Rebel has legally obtained a copy of the indictment. The case is officially titled United States of America v. Joshua N. Bowser et al.

The investigation underlying the indictment began in May, 2009. This page has been unable to substantiate a connection between this case and the sprawling investigation of the Mongols Motorcycle Club titled Operation Black Rain. Three undercover ATF agents named Jeff Grabman, Rick Hankins and Mark Kelly were patched into the Mongols by two Mongols officers named Coconut Dan Horrigan and Lars Wilson. After the Black Rain indictment was unsealed in October 2008, those three agents joined the Outlaws and that investigation led to a federal indictment against AOA members in Virginia. Horrigan was a paid Confidential Informant. He died last year. It is a matter of public record that Wilson was cooperating with federal prosecutors in Indiana in the summer of 2009.

The press release simply states that the “arrests are the culmination of a lengthy investigation as part of the U.S. Attorney’s Violent Crime Initiative involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, FBI Safe Streets Task Force, the Indiana State Police, the Marion County Sheriff’s Department, as well as the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department.”

The defendants arrested this morning are Joshua N. Bowser, Michael A. Knoll, Kent D. Whitinger, Michael E. Hamilton, James W. Bain, Edward J. Bolen, Dominic R. Mangine, Michael Medlin, Michael A. Schlicher, Jamie A. Bolinger, Stephen M. Whitinger, Vance Canner, Lawrence Gregory, Bryan E. Glaze, Stephen D. Duff, Richard C. DeMarco, Jr., Steve A. Reynolds, Mark A. Bisel, Joseph Alarcon, Charles N. Ernstes, II, David L. Whitinger, Joseph Maio, Ronald P. Taylor, Jr., Pamela K. Cummins, Jose Diaz, Rigo Rocha-Lopez, Justo Rojas, Carlos Mena, Hector Nava-Arrendondo, Jorge Daniel Ledezma-Cruz, Jorge Sedeno-Callejas, Cesar Granados, James Stonebraker, Brian T. Peacock, Norvel Terry, Russell Pryor, Thomas Swan, Steven Lecclier, Anthony Leach, William Anderson, Terrell Adams and Scharme L. Bolinger.

The Accusations

The indictment alleges the accused “engaged in criminal activity including the use and distribution of controlled substances, the use and threatened use of violence, extortion, firearms violations, obstruction of justice, illegal gambling and insurance fraud.” As is common in biker RICO cases the indictment charges defendants with “being persons employed by and associated with the OMC (Outlaws Motorcycle Club), an enterprise engaged in and the activities of which affected interstate commerce” and that they “did knowingly and unlawfully conduct and participate, directly and indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of the OMC enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity within the meaning of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961 (1) and (5).

The allegations include using the US Mail in a scheme to make false or contrived insurance claims; laundering the money obtained from the false insurance claims by buying a motorcycle and a Van; extorting the repayment of a loan; extorting a bar owner, distributing cocaine, morphine, methadone and Vicodin; discussing club business on the phone ( the charge is Unlawful Use of a Communications Facility); threatening an unnamed person who may have been a confidential informant; and running an illegal lottery.

As of 3 p.m. Pacific Time, no public documents had been filed in this case.


, , , , ,

40 Responses to “Indiana Outlaws RICO Case”

  1. Caretaker Says:

    Same shit,different club. This shit needs to stop.

    F.T.F, F.T.P,

  2. Phuquehed Says:

    If it weren’t for the RICO bullshit act, the fuckin’ faggot pigs would have nothing to do. They’re too pussy to go after real ‘gangs’ that cause real trouble, like MS13 and such scum, instead they have to go after everyone on a bike wearing a patch and since most pigs are illiterate they have to go by the pictures on the patches to know who to grab and who not.

  3. (btb) back to basics Says:

    “This enterprise-based investigation and today’s takedown focused on disrupting and dismantling what the indictment alleges to be a violent, criminal outlaw motorcycle gang by targeting its senior leaders and key members.” …. comment refers to the “enterprise theory of investigation” which underlies most biker RICO cases.”

    They always use these same words in every case. Can’t they come up with something more original.

  4. (btb) back to basics Says:

    “discussing club business on the phone ( the charge is Unlawful Use of a Communications Facility)”

    Fuck… that’s a new one I hadn’t heard about before.

  5. things that make you go hmm Says:


  6. OneEye Says:

    “More than 300 local, state and federal police including 11 Swat Teams…”

    To serve 42 warrants? By my calculations that’s approximately a 7:1 ratio. Couldn’t do the job with a 4:1 ratio? That kind of hyperbole is ridiculous. Eleven SWAT teams for 42 warrants. Well taxpayers of Indiana, alarm bells should be ringing. What would the Texas Rangers think?

  7. DocB Says:

    @ (btb) back to basics

    “discussing club business on the phone ( the charge is Unlawful Use of a Communications Facility)”

    Wonder why no conspiracy charges listed this time?


  8. Snow Says:

    Fucking snitches, just a bunch of bottom feeders. Best wishes for the AOA, stand strong.

  9. Seriously Says:

    Why dont clubs communicate and pass photos and info? Clubs need to band together and keep the cops in the dark.

  10. (btb) back to basics Says:

    to DocB …

    “discussing club business on the phone” ….. That seems to leave the door wide open. There must be limits to what that means.

  11. JIM666 Says:

    (btb) I was thinking the same, I would think freedom of speech would cover this charge, but im probably wrong again,
    Goood luck to the AOA on this bullshit,
    this shit really needs to end once and forall

  12. RVN69 Says:

    I’m not sure RICO ever had a legitimate purpose, but the bastardized concoction the Feds have changed it into certainly doesn’t. Cutting and pasting a bunch of unrealated acts some of which are not even illegal into a “criminal enterprise” is a travesty. The fact that this “law” hasn’t been declared unconstitutional speaks volumes of our system of jurisprudence.

    Best of luck to the AOA in your struggle for justice.

    FTF, FTP

    “Sometimes the majority just means all the fools are on the same side”

  13. jonny i Says:

    what puzzles me is… how the hell do these SAME ATF (FBI, LE in general) undercovers/CIs/Rats keep getting patched in or allowed to hang around in multiple MCs… perhaps we should take the time to pass info to each other… yes… there are MCs with “history”… but it might be time to put aside certain differences in the interest of INTEL… after 20 years in the military I might be able to make some suggestions to turn their own methods on them…


  14. Wolfheart Says:

    I would had thought that after the crud that happened a few years ago to the Outlaws and Bowman, that they would had learned and been smarter about club business and who they deal with.

    I was in Cincy quite a few years ago, was walking through King’s Island and saw some club members walking around in pairs, a few carrying guns under their vests. I was a teenager at the time, everybody was afraid of them since they were wearing their colors and carrying guns at a family 6 Flags park. Their patch indicated “Sin City” as their home turf in Indiana. I had only heard of Vegas as “Sin City”, so I walked up to 2 members and asked where “Sin City” was in Indiana, they said “Terre Haute”. I got a big laugh out of that, I was used to Los Angeles, and frankly when I went through Terre Haute I was not impressed, I mean how bad could a tiny burg like that be? The population were mostly local yokals with a distinctive red hue on the back of their necks, right under the John Deere hat, what got me was the members were black. No wonder they were carrying guns.

    Indiana has a rich criminal history, but it is mostly the ones in government doing to illegal activity in that state’s history. Guess the Outlaws were not paying enough into the slush fund.

  15. Chesty Says:


    I saw a short blurb on our local (Milwaukee) paper’s website that said 25 people were arrested by locals and feds for drug and conspiracy charges. No names or other details tho except that the feds will hold a parade for the press sometime later. Makes me wonder if there’s any connection especially after what’s happened with Jack and the local AOA chapter here over the last couple years. Plus I know how the pigs like the shock and awe tactic of multiple attacks across multiple parts of the country all at about the same time. Any insite?

  16. DocB Says:

    I agree! I read in one article they confiscated 35 guns, no mention weather legal guns or not, and $14,000 dollars. That’s about $300 each devided between 42 guys. Stole the Clubs sign off the house in Indy. The real purpose behind this shit is always pre trial punishment, and that’s the only pourpose!

  17. sherides Says:


    What part of this allows for the bikes to be confiscated? Is it a part of RICO?|topnews|text|

  18. jonny i Says:

    RICO allows for many things… “used in conjunction with/for/etc…”

  19. Rebel Says:

    Dear Chesty,

    I don’t really have any insight. It looks a fairly typical federal operation. There appears to have been some entrapment in Indianapolis. I am waiting for more shoes to drop.


  20. Rebel Says:

    Dear Wolfheart,

    Terre Haute got the name “Sin City” back in the 1950s. It was an open town with whore houses and casinos near the intersection of US 40 and US 41. For about a minute, it was a nationally notorius place. I haven’t been there in decades. I almost rode there in 2005 but the weather was bad that summer and I turned back toward the dry southwest in Missouri.


  21. Rebel Says:

    Dear Sherides,

    The bikes (and the pool table and whatever else, cash, liquor, photos) can legally be held as “evidence” for 90 days. After 90 days the government can and will sue the bikes (right, they sue THE BIKES) under civil forfeiture law. The owners of the bikes must then prove that the motorcycles were not used in any criminal context. The case will drag on for years and the feds will have unlimited legal resources. It really all depends on the judge. Some of the bikes seized in the Sons of Silence case in Colorado Springs back in the late 90s were returned within weeks. At least one of them came back with ATF scratched in the gas tank. The feds frequently vandalize seize seized vehicles. That’s the best case scenario. The worst case is something like what happened to the Mongols bikes after Black Rain. Some number of those bikes, and other seized property, are still in federal custody after four years.

    The short answer is the feds can do it so they will just to fuck with people. It is a form of extra-judicial punishment. Like punishment by Swat raid.


  22. sherides Says:

    Thanks for explaining Rebel.

    What a bunch of bullshit.

    Good Luck to those involved.

  23. YYZ Skinhead Says:

    Question for feds:

    This club has never done anything to me, and in fact I had never heard of the people listed prior to this morning, so I am paying for this “bust” why?

    YYZ Skinhead

  24. Goldsboro Williams Says:

    I have to go back to the same old question: Why does the DOJ/ATF keep doing this nonsense, instead of going after the inner-city street gangs that terrorize neighborhoods and kill people daily?

    Maybe those gang members are just too scary for the lawyers that run the federal agencies.It must be a lot easier to just convince a guy on a motorcycle to hold a raffle, and then to bust him for it after he talks about it on the phone.


  25. Wolfheart Says:

    Thanks for the facts, Rebel.

  26. Ol'LadyRider Says:

    “I have to go back to the same old question: Why does the DOJ/ATF keep doing this nonsense, instead of going after the inner-city street gangs that terrorize neighborhoods and kill people daily?”

    I’m no expert, but I know that here in CA the local jurisdictions apply for and receive a buttload of grant money for “gang suppression.”. Street gangs very often use wanna-be juveniles to do the stuff that adults go away to prison for, including shootings and muling and other adventures. Kids who walk across the border with pounds of meth strapped to them get 2 weeks in Juvie and a year of probation, and they generally don’t know who was paying them or where the money came from. Street-gang related crime is harder to prove, and RICO generally wouldn’t apply because there is nothing to tie them all together except the color of their shirts and shoestrings. The fact is, as far as local jurisdictions go, they have to put out statistics to keep getting the gang grants funded, and MCs are easy picking. Pull over any group of bikers and there will be SOMETHING to jump all over their shiz about… Loud pipes, questionable helmets, license plates mounted incorrectly, erratic riding, etc. Glory be, are they are all wearing the SAME patch on the backs??? They must be a gang! So now LE can up their stats with field interviews, photos, and miscellaneous citations to show how all over the gang issue they are. And since all those dirty biker scumbags are over the age of 18, everything sticks, or at least is enough of a hassle to further disenfranchise those hard working taxpayers who wear their colors publicly and proudly and don’t scuttle away into the night when the cops are around. Instead of working the infinitely more difficult cases of street terrorist drug sales, turf wars, prostitution rings, and exploitation of minors, LE agencies will throw that task force money at the sitting ducks: the MCs.

    Just IMHO.

  27. Erudite Hillbilly Says:

    Rebel used the term “extra-judicial punishment” and a light-bulb lit up over my head. I think I’ll have to add that to my everyday vocabulary as it puts into words what I’ve had a hard time quantifying in a simple phrase. All that action that occurs as solely harassment for the sake of additional pain and discomfort that they think you “deserve” because they can and do get away with it. Excellent example in this video: A raid for a civil compliance issue, along with a strategically placed step & knee, and a general trashing of the place to (fail at an attempt to) destroy the evidence of some of the dealing of “extra-judicial punishment” in the form unwarranted brutality that could raise a few eyebrows.

    Additional note: This video also confirms why you want to stream your security camera footage off-site as the cops attempted to locate and destroy the cameras and DVR when a camera was pointed out after the little incident of brutality.

  28. pizzo Says:

    sounds like the feds are using the same rats to just make there way around different clubs an see if they can patch in
    i prospected for a club in ca (thats at the top of the food chain right now) an didnt make it because i followed my sargent at arms lead ( who also got booted out) by the way i was told by senior members more than once that i was a dam good prospect an that they were sure i was gonna make it
    but because of club members slipping up letting cops in there club i can honestly say im truely glad i didnt make it into that club

  29. stroker Says:

    To: Ol’Lady Rider:
    Well said.
    That’s exactly what’s going on.

  30. sherides Says:

    A copy of the indictment related to today’s indictments of the DDMC.

    Are the people referred to as Person A, Person B, etc. more than likely cooperating in this investigation?

  31. sherides Says:

    For a country that claims to be fed up with bullying, it sure seems to be ok when the cops do it.

    I’m still stewing over the fact that they can take your bike, hold it for 90 days, then charge the bike, and make the bike(owner) prove it wasn’t used for Criminal Intent. Seems to me this is backwards and the burden of proof should be on the prosecution.

  32. Junior Says:

    You are absolutely right when you said “it depends on the judge”. If were a defendant, I would first make sure the guy in the black robe is a “judge” because most guys in black robes are not judges because they havent satisfied the state Constitutions requirements to subscribe and file their oath of office. Read your states Constitution again and you will find something to the effect of “all officers of the state must take and subscribe the following oath…” the language of that oath always says the will “uphold the Constitution of this state and of the United States”. …there you have it in black & white, a promise to abide by the Constitution. Submit a attested true copy of that subscribed and signed oath as evidence in the case and hold his feet to the fire. If a black robed individual hasnt subscribed & signed his oath the he is simply impersonating a judge, any lawyer worth two/squirts of piss can disqualify him for cause, have him prosecuted for impersonating a judge and reserve the accuseds right to have a judge hear the case.
    Judges must abide by the Constitution, administrators do not. There are a few judges left in this country and you have the right to have a judge if you demand that right beligerently.

    Most ATTORNeys dont have the balls to even go after a low life impersonating administrator, which is why we have to learn to author and file paper ourselves.
    The subscribed oath must be on file with the Court where the black robed individual works, start with the clerk. No subscribed oath, no judge. If the clerk says theres no oath on file, have the clerk sign a statement (that you have already prepared) and show up at arraignment and submit a copy of the clerks statement and a copy of the “oath” section of the states Constitution immediately and demand a judge. I havent done this yet, but an aqaintance in CA has and he didnt get a judge (someone sworn to uphold the Constitution) until disqualifying 3 administrators (who were not sworn to uphold the Constitution). Who do YOU want presiding over your next case? -Junior

  33. Rebel Says:

    Dear sherides,

    I presume you have seen this indictment.

    Making sense of this thing is enormously difficult. For one thing it is in some kind of off brand, non-standard photo file so it is difficult for me to OCR. I basically have to print out the entire indictment, then scan it in and OCR that in order to get something like a text or Word file that I can run recurring word searches on and all that. I believe that is deliberate, so right out of the gate they are trying to discourage coverage and hide the case. I think that at least hints that this is a weak case. There is much detail but the details could all be lies.

    Secondly, I am having trouble trying to figure out which of the “overt acts” (there are almost 200 of them in Count One alone) are something new that is being charged for the first time or just everything the DOJ has on the DDMC thrown into one big indictment.

    Third, I am trying to figure out where Billy Wadd fits into this. So far, I can’t find Mr. Wadd anywhere.

    Finally, as far as Person A through Person X goes, some of them must be snitches. But then the indictment quotes Grand Jury testimony by someone who is named. Very confusing indictment. I won’t be able to find out anything about it until Monday. I am told that 35 people were arrested including, I think, four in Alabama. They should all see a judge Monday and some information may start to come out then. It will be interesting to see how the federal defenders handle the discovery issues in this monstrosity.


  34. sherides Says:

    There is a link to the DDMC indictment on the web site above. You can print a .pdf file of it.

    I did read it.

    I think I understand the alphabet person concept now.

  35. BigV Says:

    Rebel: At least 4 in Alabama who were members or associates, including Tatu who ran the Birmingham DDMC’s webpage.

  36. Junior Says:

    Rebel said:
    “They should all see a judge Monday and some information may start to come out then”

    Rebel: Unfortunately they will probably see an administrator monday who is not sworn to uphold the Constitution. -Junior

  37. Junior Says:

    Here is the oath from the Calif. Constitution, without it, you are dealing with an “inferior officer or employee as may be by law exempted”. Note the “take and subscribe” language that I have been so adamantly yellin & screamin about!

    All have a right to have a Judge that is sworn to uphold the Constitution but so few exercise that right. If you keep permitting “inferior officers” to determine your fate then you will continue to get fucked. When you do permit an “inferior officer” to preside and determine your fate don’t come back here whining about the fucking outcome! Exercise your right to have a Judge that is sworn to uphold the Constitution or allow an inferior officer to determine your fate if you like:


    SEC. 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
    employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
    officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
    enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
    subscribe the following oath or affirmation:

    “I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
    and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Consti-
    tution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign
    and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
    Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
    State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without

    any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will
    well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about
    to enter.
    “And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate,
    am I a member of any party or organization, political or other-
    wise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the
    United States or of the State of California by force or violence

    or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately
    preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not
    been a member of any party or organization, political or other-
    wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the
    United States or of the State of California by force or violence

    or other unlawful means except as follows:

    (If no affiliations, write in the words “No Exceptions”)
    and that during such time as I hold the office of ______________

    ________________________________ I will not advocate nor become
    (name of office)
    a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise,
    that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United
    States or of the State of California by force or violence or
    other unlawful means.”

    And no other oath, declaration, or test, shall be required as a
    qualification for any public office or employment.
    “Public officer and employee” includes every officer and employee
    of the State, including the University of California, every county,
    city, city and county, district, and authority, including any
    department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or
    instrumentality of any of the foregoing.

  38. Junior Says:

  39. Junior Says:

Leave a Reply