In drafting New York's 'little RICO' law, prosecutors wanted the powerful tools available in other jurisdictions to effectively protect New Yorkers against the physical, financial, and criminal harm inflicted by criminals. The Assembly leadership, allied with civil libertarians, wanted to limit the potential for prosecutorial abuse and protect the State's tradition of fair trial. This analysis of compromises that resulted in the law's enactment focuses on a key issue, appropriate joinder of defendants. A review of traditional joinder limitations concludes that pre-RICO joinder law did not work well in protecting society from organized crime. The significance of the 1970 RICO Act is discussed, as well as its shortcomings. The article describes negotiations between prosecutors and the Assembly to resolve the prosecutorial efficiency versus fair trial conflict. The New York law in its final version has much more specific requirements than RICO, including knowing participation in a criminal enterprise and three acts of 'enterprise corruption,' two of which must be felonies. 1 chart and 66 footnotes.