Epstein Secrets

28 349 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES Plaintiffs have failed to state a RICO claim against the moving Defendants. See id.; Beata' Leasing, Inc. v. Bellezza, 95 Civ. 5191(JFK), 1997 WL 603496, at *5 (S.D.N.Y.1997) ("A defendant does not 'di- rect' an enterprise's affairs under § 1962(c) merely by e

he relocated to Sudan in 1991. Ash- ton. Complaint 1 548; Burnett Complaint 1 317. For example, SBG, through two subsidiaries allegedly supported Osama bin Laden's participation in the construc- tion of the Tahaddi road and Port Sudan Airport. Ashton Complaint 111550; 552, 553; Burnett Complaint 111319-322.

haracterized [him] as having ‘directed organizations that have provided financial and logistical support to al-Qa-ida, [he] is the logistics chief of bin Laden’s organization and fought on bin Laden’s side in WESTLAW Afghanistan.’ ” (Ashton Compl. J¥ 304, 312, 523-24; Burnett Compl. J 236, 255, 271; Federal

the enterprise itself,’ which requires that these Defendants must have had some part in directing the enterprise’s affairs.” Redtail Leasing, Inc. v. Bellezza, No. 95 Civ. 51910FK), 1997 WL 603496, at *5 (S.D.N-Y. Sept.30, 1997). 25] 26] The TVPA provides a cause of action against individuals who under act

amdi participated in the operation or management of any enterprise. The RICO claims against Mr. Hamdi must be dismissed. See Redtail Leasing, Inc. v. Bellezza, 1997 WL 603496 at *5. Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Hamdi knew about bin Laden’s terrorist activities at the time he procured a phone for him because t

e met with members of the Taliban and representa- tives of bin Laden and agreed to not extra- dite bin Laden or close terrorist camps in exchange for bin Laden’s protection of the II, 292 F.Supp.2d at 16. This Court has re- viewed these affidavits and agrees with Judge Robertson’s assessment. For example, one

RSIGHT_017892 --- PAGE BREAK --- 828 Plaintiffs have failed to state a RICO claim against the moving Defendants. See id.; Redtail Leasing, Inc. v. Bellezza, 95 Civ. 5191JFK), 1997 WL 603496, at *5 (S.D.N.Y.1997) (“A defendant does not ‘di- rect? an enterprise’s affairs under § 1962(c) merely by engaging