The RICO (Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act of 1970 had a conspiracy provision which allowed for law enforcers to tie together seemingly unrelated acts — as long as it builds a consistent “pattern of racketeering.”
An analogy could be a painting, where each brush stroke was “legal” (or at least not a gross violation of law), but not the resulting painting itself. When you step back from the painting, you realize that the picture is a picture of racketeering, so that everyone who contributed as much as a single brush stroke to that painting can be jailed.
The danger of RICO would be to commit the fallacy of Guilt-by-Association, where just having transient social exposure to mobsters ends up with you getting prison time. By increasing the sensitivty of law enforcers to detect crime, it reduces the specificity, and there is more chance to put an “innocent” person into prison.
FBI analysis of five crime families revealed 6 levels or ranks of organized crime:
The levels were Boss (or Don), Consigliere, Underboss, Capo, Soldier, and Associate.
With the COVID fiasco, an unmistakable pattern of racketeering has developed, akin to the infiltration of labor unions by the Mob. People acted in lock-step, similar to union members all saying that they want the same thing, and using extra-legal “tactics” to undermine anyone who disagrees with the narrative.
A problem with law enforcement catching and then indicting low-level persons is that, not only would they not necessarily give up the details of the inner workings of the Mob, but it was more than likely that they personally did not know those inner workings, due to a compartmentalization similar to what’s seen in the military.
Catching these low-level guys actually provided cover for the top-dogs. When it comes time for “COVID crimes” to be paid for, let’s keep in mind the 800-year old advice of Jewish philosopher, Maimonides:
“It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death.”
To be clear, when looking worldwide, there are definitely more than a thousand guilty persons involved with the COVID fiasco. Even within single nations, you might find a thousand guilty persons — though they may be found to be ranked on approximately six different levels of guilt, like the Mafia families of New York were.
Prosecuting all of them (~200,000 guilty persons; using a crude estimate of ~200 nations, each with a thousand guilty persons) should not be the main goal, because it is most likely to ensnare people with “relative innocence.”
In defence of the British soldiers charged with murder in the Boston Massacre, John Adams demonstrated the value of having a system of justice that errs on the side of protection of the innocent — rather than erring on the side of punishing crime, even if it meant putting innocent persons in prison for life, or even putting them to death:
“The reason is, because it’s of more importance to community, that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in the world, that all of them cannot be punished; and many times they happen in such a manner, that it is not of much consequence to the public, whether they are punished or not. But when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, it is immaterial to me, whether I behave well or ill; for virtue itself, is no security. And if such a sentiment as this, should take place in the mind of the subject, there would be an end to all security what so ever.”
This view is specifically Western. Advocates of Eastern Philosophy — valuing advantage more than truth; the exact opposite of Western Philosophy — do not ascribe to this line of reasoning. Advocates of Eastern Philosophy, using unprincipled opportunism, may even advocate hanging an entire town to punish one guilty man.
They would justify their behavior by calling it “utilitarianism” but that is a philosophy which is more or less a euphemism for unprincipled opportunism (“the ends justify the means”). As justice is served, let’s do it the Western way, where timeless truth is more important than short-term expediency.
Here is a crude depiction of a legal framework meant to punish half of the bad guys (“sensitivity”), in a 1/000 ratio to accidentally punishing good guys (the innocent):
The background crime rate depicted here is 2% — i.e., 2% of society is guilty of criminal behavior (98% of society consists of innocent people). You can tweak it so that 2 of every 3 criminals gets punished while still preserving the “thousand-to-one” ratio that errs on the side of protecting the innocent.
You can even get it up to a 75% punishment rate for criminals, while protecting the innocent. But as you approach a 100% punishment rate for criminals, the legal system no longer protects the innocent, and the societal incentive to follow the law erodes, as John Adams in 1770 demonstrated that it would.
Reference
[1970 RICO Act] — RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) Statute - Implications for Organized Labor. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/rico-racketeer-influenced-and-corrupt-organizations-act-statute
[the 6 ranks in organized crime families] — FBI. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/mafia-family-tree.pdf/view
[Maimonides (general background)] — Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/maimonides/
[a proper legal system protects the innocent from unjust punishment; preserving the incentive for the people of society to continue to follow the law] — John Adams. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/05-03-02-0001-0004-0016
[the primary difference between Eastern and Western philosophy is that Eastern philosophy focuses on expediency, opportunity, and advantage; while Western philosophy values truth more than those things] — Peter J. King. https://archive.org/details/100philosophersg0000king