Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
George/Digger
- Thread starter Dunk
- Start date
- Status
StickFigure
New member
I agree with swole. Or call him on the toll free help line, I talked to BRR personally and he hooked me up right there on the phone. BRR is the answer.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
lol, I blame Lestat for all of this
StickFigure
New member
BrothaBill said:
Jorge Schpwellwinger put him up to it.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
StickFigure said:Jorge Schpwellwinger put him up to it.
Its funny though, how could a gift go any worse than it actually taking money out of someone's bank account without permission lololol. Its just priceless hahaha
StickFigure
New member
BrothaBill said:
LOL! No shit! I wonder how many people got the shaft and didn't even notice??
Dunk
New member
StickFigure said:
i havee called 5 times over the past 3 days. No answer every time.
what i dont get is they stress us to use the support link (which we are) and theres no one on the other end to help.
WTF. I really cant stand the way things are ran around here and would love my life time plat refunded as well. You could pro rate me for the month of which i used and i wouldnt give a fuck about leaving.
Seriously.
StickFigure
New member
Dunk said:
I have never had any luck with the support link either. Only had to call once though and BRR answered right away. Sorry you ain't gettin no help bro.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
gjohnson5 said:
I already cancelled my creditcard that I used to buy things on this site earlier on this week just to be on the safe side, scary stuff.
exotic_island_girl
New member
I got charged and I didn't even buy any Karma...
For a fact I gave my 20 dollar cerficate to wootom
Scandalous!!!!!!!!!!!!
For a fact I gave my 20 dollar cerficate to wootom
Scandalous!!!!!!!!!!!!
B
BrothaBill
Guest
ceasar989 said:
Yeah, just drained everyone's bank account and left with a bag of cash to Brazil lolol.
Sorta reminds me of the Office Space movie where they meant to imbezzle pennies over time and the program screwed up
B
BrothaBill
Guest
Dunk said:
lmao, and how much did you pay for lifetime plat??? hahahaha
B
BrothaBill
Guest
Dunk said:
In all seriousness, this doesnt sound like a wise business decision on George's part. There has to be someone illegally draining customer bank accounts and legal stuff involved or else he would have explained what the hell is going on.
Not like him to just drain people's bank accounts and charge not once but twice someone. I just wonder how long they thought they could keep the lid on this. I told Lestat the very first day about this yet he still defends this "stealing" of people's money
Dunk
New member
no way should he keep our information on file. You should have to fill out biling information every time a transaction is processed. EF shouldnt take the liberty of just "swiping" fuck that.
How do we clear our billing information on here?
and you know i wouldnt have to make a thread about this but apparently this seems to be the ONLY form of communication with the site.
How do we clear our billing information on here?
and you know i wouldnt have to make a thread about this but apparently this seems to be the ONLY form of communication with the site.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
gjohnson5 said:
I need to get in the habit of going over whose charging my account what and what for. This is couldve easily slipped by someone like me who doesnt keep track of things especially since they keep deleting threads and posts that tell of people having their accounts stolen from.
I noticed it straight off, dude the first day said, "Hey, you overcharged my account"
I think they deleted that and subsequent posts about it and then continued to overcharge people.
Lestat can be my witness to this b/c I told him right away about that happening. Yet, it continued and now a whole helluva lot of people are pissed off, doenst make any sense.
Im not giving my credit card out no more
B
BrothaBill
Guest
Dunk said:
dude, you should go file a police report on this, its a clear cut case of online theft of your credit card
B
BrothaBill
Guest
75th said:
bannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnedddddd, Im taking you down with me lololol
Dunk, you should cutnpaste this into a word document before it gets deleted like the other threads on such matters as evidence. Then contact your credit card company. Dispute the charges, file a police report, contact your congressman in NY state. Write a letter to Hillary Clinton your senator. Contact the DEA, FBI and secret service. Tell them that EF is just a front for getting steroid sources cleared by mods who get kickbacks under the guise of sourcechecking lolololol
Write John McCain and let his office know whats going on here
B
BrothaBill
Guest
nycgirl said:Goodbye BB
My email address is in my profile. Please keep in touch.
lolol, getting weaker, c-a-n-t s-e-e the sc-r-e-e-n, g-o-od-byyyyyyyyyyyeeeeee
redshirt27se
New member
alright...take care BB, i always enjoyed reading your posts.BrothaBill said:bannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnedddddd, Im taking you down with me lololol
Dunk, you should cutnpaste this into a word document before it gets deleted like the other threads on such matters as evidence. Then contact your credit card company. Dispute the charges, file a police report, contact your congressman in NY state. Write a letter to Hillary Clinton your senator. Contact the DEA, FBI and secret service. Tell them that EF is just a front for getting steroid sources cleared by mods who get kickbacks under the guise of sourcechecking lolololol
Write John McCain and let his office know whats going on here
B
BrothaBill
Guest
redshirt27se said:
109 RICO charges
It is unlawful for anyone employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) (West 1984). The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) was passed by Congress with the declared purpose of seeking to eradicate organized crime in the United States. Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16, 26-27, 104 S. Ct. 296, 302-303, 78 L. Ed. 2d 17 (1983); United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 589, 101 S. Ct. 2524, 2532, 69 L. Ed. 2d 246 (1981). A violation of Section 1962(c), requires (1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479, 496, 105 S. Ct. 3275, 3285, 87 L. Ed. 2d 346 (1985).
A more expansive view holds that in order to be found guilty of violating the RICO statute, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that an enterprise existed; (2) that the enterprise affected interstate commerce; (3) that the defendant was associated with or employed by the enterprise; (4) that the defendant engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity; and (5) that the defendant conducted or participated in the conduct of the enterprise through that pattern of racketeering activity through the commission of at least two acts of racketeering activity as set forth in the indictment. United States v. Phillips, 664 F. 2d 971, 1011 (5th Cir. Unit B Dec. 1981), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1136, 102 S. Ct. 1265, 73 L. Ed. 2d 1354 (1982).
An "enterprise" is defined as including any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1961(4) (West 1984). Many courts have noted that Congress mandated a liberal construction of the RICO statute in order to effectuate its remedial purposes by holding that the term "enterprise" has an expansive statutory definition. United States v. Delano, 825 F. Supp. 534, 538-39 (W.D.N.Y. 1993), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 55 F. 3d 720 (2d Cir. 1995), cases cited therein.
"Pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering activity committed within ten years of each other. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1961(5) (West 1984). Congress intended a fairly flexible concept of a pattern in mind. H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Tel. Co., 492 U.S. 229, 239, 109 S. Ct. 2893, 2900, 106 L. Ed. 2d 195 (1989). The government must show that the racketeering predicates are related, and that they amount to or pose a threat of continued criminal activity. Id. Racketeering predicates are related if they have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events. Id. at 240, 109 S. Ct. at 2901; Ticor Title Ins. Co. v. Florida, 937 F. 2d 447, 450 (9th Cir. 1991). Furthermore, the degree in which these factors establish a pattern may depend on the degree of proximity, or any similarities in goals or methodology, or the number of repetitions. United States v. Indelicato, 865 F. 2d 1370, 1382 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 811, 110 S. Ct. 56, 107 L. Ed. 2d 24 (1989).
Continuity refers either to a closed period of repeated conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition. H.J., Inc., 492 U.S. at 241-42, 109 S. Ct. at 2902. A party alleging a RICO violation may demonstrate continuity over a closed period by proving a series of related predicates extending over a substantial period of time. Id. Predicate acts extending over a few weeks or months and threatening no future criminal conduct do not satisfy this requirement as Congress was concerned with RICO in long-term criminal conduct. Id.
As to the continuity requirement, the government may show that the racketeering acts found to have been committed pose a threat of continued racketeering activity by proving: (1) that the acts are part of a long-term association that exists for criminal purposes, or (2) that they are a regular way of conducting the defendant's ongoing legitimate business, or (3) that they are a regular way of conducting or participating in an ongoing and legitimate enterprise. Id.
When a RICO action is brought before continuity can be established, then liability depends on whether the threat of continuity is demonstrated. Id. However, Judge Scalia wrote in his concurring opinion that it would be absurd to say that "at least a few months of racketeering activity. . .is generally for free, as far as RICO is concerned." Id. at 254, 109 S. Ct. at 2908. Therefore, if the predicate acts involve a distinct threat of long-term racketeering activity, either implicit or explicit, a RICO pattern is established. Id. at 242, 109 S. Ct. at 2902.
The RICO statute expressly states that it is unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the subsections of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962. The government need not prove that the defendant agreed with every other conspirator, knew all of the other conspirators, or had full knowledge of all the details of the conspiracy. Delano, 825 F. Supp. at 542. All that must be shown is: (1) that the defendant agreed to commit the substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to participate in two racketeering acts; (2) that he knew the general status of the conspiracy; and (3) that he knew the conspiracy extended beyond his individual role. United States v. Rastelli, 870 F. 2d 822, 828 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 982, 110 S. Ct. 515, 107 L. Ed. 2d 516 (1989).
B
BrothaBill
Guest
nycgirl said:
Why not, Im the lead investigator from the FBI on this matter (female body inspectors). My final report delivered to Congress soon. lololol
Might I add, banning me for bringing up the subject is also against the law according to the Rico law
(1) “racketeering activity” means
(A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, banning from a chatboard, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year;
(B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581–1591 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons).,[1] section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic),
(C) any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds), (D) any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States,
(E) any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act,
(F) any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or
(G) any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B);
(2) “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, any political subdivision, or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof;
(3) “person” includes any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) “enterprise” includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity;
(5) “pattern of racketeering activity” requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity;
(6) “unlawful debt” means a debt
(A) incurred or contracted in gambling activity which was in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or which is unenforceable under State or Federal law in whole or in part as to principal or interest because of the laws relating to usury, and
(B) which was incurred in connection with the business of gambling in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or the business of lending money or a thing of value at a rate usurious under State or Federal law, where the usurious rate is at least twice the enforceable rate;
(7) “racketeering investigator” means any attorney or investigator so designated by the Attorney General and charged with the duty of enforcing or carrying into effect this chapter;
(8) “racketeering investigation” means any inquiry conducted by any racketeering investigator for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has been involved in any violation of this chapter or of any final order, judgment, or decree of any court of the United States, duly entered in any case or proceeding arising under this chapter;
(9) “documentary material” includes any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material; and
(10) “Attorney General” includes the Attorney General of the United States, the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, the Associate Attorney General of the United States, any Assistant Attorney General of the United States, or any employee of the Department of Justice or any employee of any department or agency of the United States so designated by the Attorney General to carry out the powers conferred on the Attorney General by this chapter. Any department or agency so designated may use in investigations authorized by this chapter either the investigative provisions of this chapter or the investigative power of such department or agency otherwise conferre
Last edited:
B
BrothaBill
Guest
Dunk said:
He'll be the first one indicted, like Johnnie black in Donnie Brasco, the stooge will get it first
coldblue1955
New member
A little advise to you buddy. Never talk that way to George Spellwin or Digger or you might get banned. Say what you have to say but be polite about it!Dunk said:
- Status
Similar threads
