Dear Igo

April 26, 2018

All Posts, Editorials, News

Dear Igo

On April 26, 2018 Igo wrote:

Let me see if I’m getting this. SO, IF we use the example of “Red Sox Nation” in place of “Mongol Nation”, then that would include (by the courts finding of one in the same) ANY PERSON that had the least hint of ANY trace to the name (a grandmother wearing a pink Red Sox hat for example) could be charged with criminal conspiracy for being part “of the nation” It would in effect make a conspiracy crime out of mere possession of support gear. Never mind wearing it. Am I seeing this correctly? If so, this is a VERY dangerous precedent to set, and really effectively outlaw (or give a legal precedent to) ANYBODY having ANY trace to a group they target. Never mind having a REAL connection to, not to even go as far as to being a member.

Dar Igo,

I know I have left a lot of people confused. The legal issue in the Mongols Nation case is “the distinctiveness requirement” in RICO. I’ll try again. The original intent of RICO was to prevent “criminals” from seizing control of “enterprises” like bowling allies and dairies.

Under the case law, which is an ass and goes back to the Turkette decision, prosecutors need a named DEFENDANT and a criminal ENTERPRISE. For example, US v. Cavazos, Barbeito, Pike and Portillo, and so on. The criminal enterprises in these cases, respectively, were or are the Mongols, Pagans and Bandidos.

What the government, at the suggestion of Judge Wright, did in this case was differentiate between the Mongols Nation which includes prospects, old ladies, friends of the club, retired members and so on and the Mongols Motorcycle Club, which is comprised solely of full patch members. The government assumes and will try to prove that the Mongols MC is a criminal enterprise that is tied SYMBOLLICALLY — by patch and name — to various criminal acts.

Red Sox Nation

Prosecutors can charge anybody or any group under RICO. It is possible to indict Red Sox Nation but that does not necessarily mean every woman wearing a pink Red Sox hat could be arrested. It does mean that any cop could rip the pink Sox hat off the head of any old lady and charge her with disorderly conduct if she objected. The only thing that has kept the government from going after, say, Penn State Nation, is politics. Anybody Uncle Sugar wants to get can be got.

I can’t wait to see what a jury makes of all this. I am not comforted by the idea that this jury will be entirely comprised of people who couldn’t get out of jury duty.

The case is not about criminal defendants. The case is about symbolic expression – which technically is protected by the First Amendment. Here is the deal. It isn’t about prison. It isn’t about a criminal defendant. It is about the pink hat.


RICO cases usually end with plea bargains because they can actually lock a real person up. Mongols Nation can’t plea bargain because there is nobody to lock up. This is not about locking people up. This is about creating a legal rationale for defacto criminalizing membership in a club.

This case, for 13 years, has been all about finding a way to outlaw motorcycle clubs by depriving them of their names and symbols. One reason the government has been so stubborn is because they were almost there before. If they can just twist case law enough, to make membership in a motorcycle club the legal equivalent of selling lawn mowers that the seller knows will explode, then they can outlaw all things Mongol.

In late 2008 and through the first half of 2009 ATF agents were breaking into cars and seizing stickers that said “MFFM.” They were raiding parties and seizing shirts that said “Support The Mongols.” They were breaking into homes and seizing Mongols calendars. That’s the point here now.

Out Bad

A couple of years ago, Judge Carter asked the prosecution a very good question: “Who goes to jail?” Nobody goes to jail. That’s not the point.

The point, as I wrote in the book Out Bad, is: “to put every outlaw in America out bad – to seize his cut, his motorcycle and his memorabilia, to rough him up, wreck his home, scare him and tell him “don’t come around this club no more.” It was, simultaneously emotionally, financially and legally devastating for the men involved. The point of the “enforcement effort” described in this book was never to punish “criminals.” The point was to crush a set of seductive, romantic, dangerous, and maybe obsolete, ideas.”


, ,

10 Responses to “Dear Igo”

  1. Kenny Says:

    40 years aho my brothers told me that the biggest fear is rico. Not the law but when enough clubs get convicted of them, the feds will say we are at war inside the country. That would justify them shutting down all clubs. Turn in your shit or go to jsil. Tats would have to be covered. I did not lol. I listenened. For these men had saw what our gov can and will do. Toghether we are strong is not some fuckin ape movie idea. Its a fact. Thats why it is are most powerful weapon. If union members would honor all union members. Why we the working people would control wages. Substitute weclubs stand toghether.. I dint say kiss and hug!! But used our knowlege and prior lawyers that won. We would hold a boting block that would rival the NRA.

  2. Gypsy Girl Says:

    Everybody should be concerned with this case and the dangerous precedent it will set if the government wins. Unfortunately, there are a lot of nearsighted folks in this world who don’t pay attention until the consequences are on their doorsteps. This is such an overreach of power and I hope the jury sees it for what it is and what doors it will ultimately unlock!

    “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-Because I was not a socialist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.”

    —Martin Niemoller

  3. david Says:

    A former National Socialist state continued its attack on the lives, liberty and property of real human beings to the point of selling the gold teeth, hair and other body parts while at the same time making lamp shades out of human skin.

    This state needs the excuse of a court ruling/decision to be able to cut the skin off the back of someone it doesn’t like?

  4. Aanon Says:

    Might be a decent time to tell everyone to gladly serve the summons just in case. Got set up with a wicked carnita/ tripa plate a few years back. No way could who gave me that be bad. Plain just too good of food to be monsters.

  5. RLG Says:

    I hope the feds knock themselves out trying to kill ideas.

  6. jrino Says:

    unbelievable! and the government has OUR unlimited funds to wage a endless legal boondoggle! The supreme court would overturn that wouldn’t they?

  7. Lurch Says:

    @Paladin +!

    GOOD QUESTION!!! What will happen to those members?

  8. Paladin Says:

    If this case succeeds, will they seize the skin from a shirtless member sporting a tattooed back patch?


  9. Trebor Says:

    Really hope the Lawyers can do half as good a job of spelling that out as well as you did to the jury when they do their final summation.The Prosecution is about smoke and mirrors and cloudy water.

  10. Freebird Says:

    The point was to crush a set of seductive, romantic, dangerous, and maybe obsolete, ideas.”

    And I hope it blows up in their face and they get just the opposite reaction!

Leave a Reply