Pegasus Jackson
Trump's Amerikkka
Has anybody even seen this goddamn movie?!!?
JoJo Capone exposes MC Eiht as a snitch
- Thread starter FreshAIG
- Start date
bourgeoisie tall freak
Superstar
i think i read that it got seized or something like that. there is no movie bro
MC Eiht Reveals Origins Of Shelved Movie Opposite Bernie Mac & Lisa Raye
Then I shot a movie in Chicago that was called Reasons but it was government, political drug shyt so they seized the movie and it never came out. We shot this movie maybe 15 years ago. Bernie Mac was in it. Lisa Raye was in it. It was a drug movie. A dude called Nathaniel Hill; he was a pretty big drug dealer and he basically made a movie about it. They seized the movie because he basically told the story of how he came up. He was on a worldwide run, they extradited him from Africa. We shot it in Chicago. It took us maybe four months to shoot it. Real big movie. Spike Lee’s producer [Monty Ross] directed it. It was gon’ be a big, large movie. I played the lead role. It was a real neighborhood pic but it was governments and indictments and courts and all that; followings and grand jury’s so they basically seized the movie.”
Then I shot a movie in Chicago that was called Reasons but it was government, political drug shyt so they seized the movie and it never came out. We shot this movie maybe 15 years ago. Bernie Mac was in it. Lisa Raye was in it. It was a drug movie. A dude called Nathaniel Hill; he was a pretty big drug dealer and he basically made a movie about it. They seized the movie because he basically told the story of how he came up. He was on a worldwide run, they extradited him from Africa. We shot it in Chicago. It took us maybe four months to shoot it. Real big movie. Spike Lee’s producer [Monty Ross] directed it. It was gon’ be a big, large movie. I played the lead role. It was a real neighborhood pic but it was governments and indictments and courts and all that; followings and grand jury’s so they basically seized the movie.”
get these nets
Veteran
Wait, so saying that you got paid for an acting job is snitching?
not if dude himself said he invested the money for the film...
c'mon son. you just made up a whole scenario like the truth isn't documented in here
prince_peoples
Superstar
calling him a snitch for saying he was payed for a job is crazy.
FeloniousMonk
Dont mind me..Im a azzhole
Keep thinking money launderers "invest" their monies,brehs.not if dude himself said he invested the money for the film...
c'mon son. you just made up a whole scenario like the truth isn't documented in here
Have your "investment" seized cuz you launder money, brehs.
That film was part of a money wash.
from reading that he had already invested the money and started the process years prior to filming andFROM READING THAT
IT APPEARS HE WAS FORCED
TO ADMIT TO FUNDING THE MOVIE
AFTER EIHT SAID HE PAID HIM 100K...
WHILE CLAIMING HE DID IT
WITH NON DRUG MONEY.
that's not what I think and he obviously didn't wash shyt well
dude told on himself I mean the goddamn movie is about him and his life of drug dealing that's why it was seized. you sound goofy
this ain't no different than the dudes on insta n youtube advertising their crimes except he invested in a platform to do so
YOU NEVER HEARD OF PLEADING THE 5TH?
HE LEGALLY DIDNT HAVE TO SAY shyt.
HE KNEW HE WAS PAID WITH DRUG MONEY.
WHAT DID LISA RAYE DO?
HE LEGALLY DIDNT HAVE TO SAY shyt.
HE KNEW HE WAS PAID WITH DRUG MONEY.
WHAT DID LISA RAYE DO?
Sounds like Jojo hot cuz he didn't get a permanent spot on Gangster Chronicles and is trying to get Eiht's spot. I don't know what the truth is, but it sounds like the following is the issue. The book states Eiht pointed the finger at Rodney Ellis who was Hill's right hand man. Eiht admitting payment from Ellis assists the prosecutors with establishing a general idea of the amount of money Hill was having laundered.
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Robert Daniel Ward and Rodney Ellis, Defendants-appellants, 211 F.3d 356 (7th Cir. 2000)
Drug trafficking provided Hill with sizable profits which he used to purchase homes, cars, boats, and, eventually, a four-engine JetStar aircraft. Hill also sought legitimate business opportunities through which he could launder his drug proceeds. One of these businesses was Pocketown Records, a record producing and manufacturing business formed in 1993 by Nate Hill and Michael Jefferson. At Hill's direction, Rodney Ellis, a cousin to Hill, participated in the operation of Pocketown Records. Ellis managed Pocketown's daily operations and financial activities. Pocketown's expenses were paid primarily in cash. For example, no salary checks were issued; instead Hill handed out cash payments to Pocketown workers. On several occasions, Ellis transported large amounts of cash from Chicago to Pocketown, which was located in New York, and at other times, Ellis received deliveries of cash from other Hill employees. Ellis prepared false records for Pocketown in an attempt to justify the influx of cash to the business. Ellis also provided inaccurate information to the accountant who was preparing Pocketown's 1993 tax returns. Ellis then signed the falsified return and filed it with the IRS. Ellis later became involved in another of Hill's business ventures, the production of a motion picture entitled "Reasons" which was based on Hill's life story. Ellis played a limited role in the "Reasons" production, unsuccessfully attempting to persuade a recording company to produce the soundtrack for the film.
Alternatively, Ellis contends that the district court's finding under sec. 2S1.1(b) (2) that the value of funds laundered exceeded $2 million was unsupported by the evidence.4 The district court arrived at this value by holding Ellis responsible for (1) $750,000 to $1 million laundered through Pocketown in 1993; (2) $1.5 million laundered into the JetStar aircraft, a seventy-two foot yacht, and a speed boat which accompanied the yacht; and (3) $1,107,000 laundered through "Reasons." At sentencing, Ellis challenged the inclusion of the amounts relating to the plane, the yacht and speed boat, and "Reasons." On appeal, Ellis challenges only the district court's valuation of Hill's investment in Pocketown and the inclusion of amounts relating to the yacht and accompanying speed boat.
Eiht states he was paid in cash, probably by Ellis. Feds ask whether Eiht received $100,000 from Ellis, he replies yes. Prosecution includes that money as part of the total sum being laundered. I can see why someone would label that as telling, but I can see Eiht's side too as just simply admiting to having accepted payment for services rendered. Here's the thing, you admittedly finance a movie with a significant budget and with a popular rap star as the lead. I even remember promo ads for the film in The Source. Now you want people in the movie to deny payment? If the feds asked Eiht whether he acted in the movie, would you expect him to say no? Or plead the fifth?
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Robert Daniel Ward and Rodney Ellis, Defendants-appellants, 211 F.3d 356 (7th Cir. 2000)
Drug trafficking provided Hill with sizable profits which he used to purchase homes, cars, boats, and, eventually, a four-engine JetStar aircraft. Hill also sought legitimate business opportunities through which he could launder his drug proceeds. One of these businesses was Pocketown Records, a record producing and manufacturing business formed in 1993 by Nate Hill and Michael Jefferson. At Hill's direction, Rodney Ellis, a cousin to Hill, participated in the operation of Pocketown Records. Ellis managed Pocketown's daily operations and financial activities. Pocketown's expenses were paid primarily in cash. For example, no salary checks were issued; instead Hill handed out cash payments to Pocketown workers. On several occasions, Ellis transported large amounts of cash from Chicago to Pocketown, which was located in New York, and at other times, Ellis received deliveries of cash from other Hill employees. Ellis prepared false records for Pocketown in an attempt to justify the influx of cash to the business. Ellis also provided inaccurate information to the accountant who was preparing Pocketown's 1993 tax returns. Ellis then signed the falsified return and filed it with the IRS. Ellis later became involved in another of Hill's business ventures, the production of a motion picture entitled "Reasons" which was based on Hill's life story. Ellis played a limited role in the "Reasons" production, unsuccessfully attempting to persuade a recording company to produce the soundtrack for the film.
Alternatively, Ellis contends that the district court's finding under sec. 2S1.1(b) (2) that the value of funds laundered exceeded $2 million was unsupported by the evidence.4 The district court arrived at this value by holding Ellis responsible for (1) $750,000 to $1 million laundered through Pocketown in 1993; (2) $1.5 million laundered into the JetStar aircraft, a seventy-two foot yacht, and a speed boat which accompanied the yacht; and (3) $1,107,000 laundered through "Reasons." At sentencing, Ellis challenged the inclusion of the amounts relating to the plane, the yacht and speed boat, and "Reasons." On appeal, Ellis challenges only the district court's valuation of Hill's investment in Pocketown and the inclusion of amounts relating to the yacht and accompanying speed boat.
Eiht states he was paid in cash, probably by Ellis. Feds ask whether Eiht received $100,000 from Ellis, he replies yes. Prosecution includes that money as part of the total sum being laundered. I can see why someone would label that as telling, but I can see Eiht's side too as just simply admiting to having accepted payment for services rendered. Here's the thing, you admittedly finance a movie with a significant budget and with a popular rap star as the lead. I even remember promo ads for the film in The Source. Now you want people in the movie to deny payment? If the feds asked Eiht whether he acted in the movie, would you expect him to say no? Or plead the fifth?
@Southside Swangin
Same dude Cyco who was mad at Eiht, is in the video at the 1:15 mark. Funny how that go. Mad at you one minute, then in your video later on.