,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
It's fairly rare for prosecutors to limit what the defense can do in summations but they did that in the Chapo trial. The govt filed a letter asking Judge Cogan not to let the defense argue that Chapo was the victim of a conspiracy b/t his partner and corrupt Mexican officials.
Chapo's lawyers started the trial that way and it didn't go well. They were cut off in the middle of their opening statement.
In the letter the govt said there was no evidence that the partner, Mayo Zambada, conspired w/Mexican officials to target Chapo.
In the letter the govt said there was no evidence that the partner, Mayo Zambada, conspired w/Mexican officials to target Chapo.
Prosecutors also asked the judge to stop the defense from arguing that US officials conspired w/Mexico to cover up corruption there. (The defense hinted at that when testimony came out about the alleged $100 million bribe to EPN.)
The letter:
"Defense counsel’s claim that there is a conspiracy between the United States
and Mexican governments to cover up Mexican government corruption is not only patently false and without any basis—it is also utterly irrelevant to the defendant’s guilt."
"Defense counsel’s claim that there is a conspiracy between the United States
and Mexican governments to cover up Mexican government corruption is not only patently false and without any basis—it is also utterly irrelevant to the defendant’s guilt."
