1) Papadopoulos did not provide "substantial assistance" according to prosecutors. Whether a cooperating witness "cooperated" is in the discretion of prosecutors. Sometimes they have reason to believe the CW hasn't been forthcoming enough.
2) If prosecutors don't think the CW was honest, they might not file the 5K1.1 ("substantial assistance") motion. This can be really bad for a defendant, because the level reduction from a 5K1 can make a decade's worth of difference in prison.
3) In Papadopoulos's case, however, that 5K1 motion for a sentence reduction wouldn't have made much of a difference, because he was already in the lowest sentencing guidelines range: 0-6 months, which was established in his plea agreement.
4) In fact, even Papadopoulos's "acceptance of responsibility" (plea) reduction of two levels from 6 to 4 didn't make much difference. Why?
5) The key is in the sentencing guidelines table: ussc.gov/sites/default/…. First, his Criminal History Category is I--which means a defendant has no prior record, or it's very minor. That puts him in the lowest column. From there...
6) Look to offense level (OL). At OL 6, which is the starting point for Section 1001 (False Statements), his guidelines range is: 0-6 mos. With the two point level reduction for "acceptance of responsibility" (guilty plea), his OL is 4, and range is...0-6 mos.
7) So, even though Papadopoulos did a bad job of providing information, in the government's estimation, he still has a shot at a probation-only sentence. He likely won't get it, though.
8) Alex Van der Zwaan had the same range and got a month. Van der Zwaan was more cooperative than Papadopoulos, in the government's opinion.
9) Generally, though, once a witness has pleaded & agreed to cooperate, full & voluntary disclosure is a good idea whenever talking to gov't investigators or AUSAs. If there's any real exposure, a cooperator needs that "substantial assistance" reduction.
