+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    su Guest
    My fiance, a 55 year old, very good and honest man, has been charged with conspiracy to sell drugs because the chemical company he worked for sold certain items that can sometimes be used for dilution of drugs, apparently. (Quinine, inositol, mannitol) He was unaware of that, but apparently one of his customers was taking advantage of that option and it ended up that his company became mired in a larger case involving people who perhaps really were selling some of these items for that purpose. In any case, my fiance is innocent and is going to trial in April. Some of the fellows whose case was tied to his indirectly have already been found guilty, without more than circumstantial proof of intention to sell drugs. Now his lawyer is recommending a plea bargain. Why should an innocent man go for a plea bargain? He has no one to rat on, because everyone he worked with is equally innocent. We are interested in getting another opinion from a good criminal lawywr who really knows the drug prosecution business and can give suggestions as to how to avoid spending 10 years in jail for being innocent. How does one get justice in a case like this? Thanks to all.

  2. #2
    Not Guilty Guest
    Conspiracy = two or more get together and intend to commit a crime plus an overt act in furtherence thereof. The difficult part of proving conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt is the government proving the defendant's mental state, i.e. that your husband was in agreement with others. Typically the rules of evidence allow the statements of other co-conspirators to come into evidence without the other co-conspirators being present (hearsay exception) and without violating the confrontation clause. The government has to tender to the defense prior to trial the statements of the co-conspirators the government is going to use against defendant at trial. The theory is that since the accused is part of the conspiracy these are the accused own statements and can be used against the accused without being considered hearsay. The second major issue in conspiracy is the corpus delecti rule, this rule says that a person can not be found guilty merely on his own admissions. For example the case agent testifies as to what a co-conspirator who already pled out said (not a Bruton, issue). While not hearsay, these statements should not be admissible according to the corpus delecti rule, unless there is independent evidence of the conspiracy other then the statements themselves. This is just information that you should not rely on, if you want advise contact a local attorney experienced in criminal law.

    [Edited by Not Guilty on 02-13-2001 at 06:50 PM]

  3. #3
    su Guest

    clarification please?

    Thanks for the reply. I cannot say I understood a lot of it though. What is the confrontation clause you referred to? And what is the Bruton issue?
    I have heard that the government is not even obliged to prove that a defendant knew about any illegal acitivity in order to be considered part of the conspiracy. For example, if someone gave someone else a ride and that person was carrying hidden drugs, the driver could still be considered a member of the conspiracy. Is this true?
    Also,I wonder how the government can charge someone who is selling a totally legal product, when it was not the intention of the seller that it be used for any illegal reason,with conspiracy to distribute drugs or aiding and abetting that distribution? Is there any law that gives the government the right to do this? Surely they must begin with the guys who actually use the product wrongly? I cannot understand the logic behind this.

  4. #4
    Not Guilty Guest
    Constitution and Bruton rule says you have right to face accuser at trial. Except does not apply to statements of co-conspirator. Government has to prove that defendant knew that defendant's conduct legal or illegal took place to help another commit a previously agreed upon joint criminal goal. Your example about giving a ride is not conspiracy. Driver only guilty of conspiracy if the government can prove driver previously and knowingly agreed to help another in a joint criminal goal. One can be guilty of conspiracy for selling a legal product if he or she sold the legal product for the purpose of a previously agreed upon joint criminal goal. A and B agree to manufacture methamphetamine. A owns a hardware store and sells acetone to B. A and B are both guilty of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. If the government can not prove that A's purpose in selling acetone to B was for a joint criminal goal, A is not guilty of conspiracy. If A is found not guilty B is still guilty if B believed that A was selling B acetone for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine. This is just a suggestion not advise if you want advise you can rely upon contact a local criminal defense practitioner experienced in multi-defendant drug cases.

    [Edited by Not Guilty on 02-15-2001 at 07:39 PM]

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Conspiracy charges
    By soflawrongplace in forum Drug Charges
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-08-2008, 06:58 PM
  2. Drug Conspiracy charges
    By soflawrongplace in forum Drug Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-28-2008, 09:35 PM
  3. Conspiracy charges
    By ejc in forum Drug Charges
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-26-2007, 04:01 AM
  4. Conspiracy Charges
    By injustice27 in forum Drug Charges
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-13-2006, 08:52 PM
  5. conspiracy charges
    By cruncher in forum Other Crimes – Federal and State
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-26-2000, 05:51 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

© Since 1995 Advice Company, All Rights Reserved

FreeAdvice® has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding advice, free, since 1995. While not a substitute for personal advice from a licensed professional, it is available AS IS, subject to our Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions Of Use.