Beyond The Horizon

The El Chapo Files: The DOJ Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Pre Trial Detention (Part 4) (7/14/24)

The United States government's memorandum supporting the pre-trial detention of Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán focused on several key points highlighting the necessity of keeping him in custody without bail.Key Points from the Memorandum:

Drug Trafficking: El Chapo led the Sinaloa Cartel, a major criminal organization responsible for transporting tens of thousands of kilograms of narcotics into the United States. The cartel used sophisticated methods, including submarines, airplanes, trains with secret compartments, and underground tunnels to smuggle drugs such as cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana. Evidence presented included recordings of Guzmán discussing drug trafficking and seizures of substantial quantities of drugs linked to the cartel .
Violence: The cartel maintained its power through extreme violence. Guzmán was directly involved in acts of violence, including ordering and participating in kidnappings, torture, and murders. Testimonies included accounts of brutal killings and torture carried out on Guzmán's orders, demonstrating the cartel's reliance on violence to control its territory and eliminate rivals
Sophisticated Communications: Guzmán employed an encrypted communication network to avoid detection by law enforcement. This network was set up by an IT engineer who was paid a million dollars to ensure secure communications with associates in various countries, allowing the cartel to operate efficiently and securely
Corruption: The cartel's operations were facilitated by a vast network of corrupt officials, including law enforcement, military, and politicians. These officials were bribed to protect the cartel's activities, warn about law enforcement operations, and turn a blind eye to drug trafficking and other illegal activities .
Money Laundering: Guzmán's drug trafficking operations generated billions in illicit proceeds. The memorandum detailed how the cartel laundered money through various means, including bulk cash smuggling and the use of shell companies. These activities underscored the extensive and organized nature of Guzmán's criminal enterprise .
Weapons: The cartel had access to a significant arsenal, including AK-47s, grenades, and a rocket-propelled grenade launcher. Guzmán himself possessed a personalized collection of weapons, highlighting the militaristic aspect of the cartel's operations .

The memorandum argued that Guzmán posed an exceptional flight risk and a danger to the community, justifying the need for his pre-trial detention without bail. His history of violence, the extensive resources at his disposal, and his ability to evade capture for years supported the government's stance that no conditions of release could reasonably assure his appearance in court or the safety of the community.

(commercial at 8:18)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

source:

Detention Memo (justice.gov)

Duration:: 16m
Broadcast on:: 14 Jul 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

What if you could have a career where the opportunities are as fast as our nation where it's not about mission statements but a shared mission? At US Customs and Border Protection, we go beyond to protect more than borders from ship to shore, air to ground, cities to local communities. CBP agents and officers are keeping people safe. Join US Customs and Border Protection and go beyond for something far greater than yourself. Learn more at cbp.gov/careers. At the UPS store, we want to make this summer the summer shipping, summer ship elusive so you can start crossing items off your must-ship list. Like the vintage film camera your college kid needs for class or the vase you told your mom you would send her ages ago. And with our pack and ship guaranteed, your items arrive safe or we reimburse you. So stop by your local store today for everything you need to be unstoppable. Visit the UPS store.com/guaranteed for full details. Available at participating locations. Most locations are independently owned. Product services pricing and hours of operation may vary. See center for details. The UPS store. Be unstoppable. What's up everyone and welcome back to the program. In this episode we're gonna write back to those L. Chappell files and we're gonna continue taking a look at the United States government's motion for pretrial detention. Three. The history and characteristics of the defendant. Guzman started as a teenager cultivating marijuana and growing poppies for heroin production which he sold for a living. Over the next 40 years Guzman devoted his efforts to growing his organization and increasing and enhancing the power of the Sinaloa cartel. Often through torture and murder. As the leader of the Sinaloa cartel, Guzman operated with impunity at the highest level of the Mexican drug trafficking world while being assured of his continued success and safety from arrest through his payment of bribes to government officials and law enforcement officers. Guzman has known no other life than a life of crime and violence. Driven by an insatiable power and greed Guzman's personal history and characteristics demand attention to prevent him from being a danger to the community. Four. The nature and seriousness of the danger posed by release. Guzman's violent international and multi-billion dollar drug trafficking empire continues to pump thousands of kilos of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana into the United States for distribution in our communities. Without question Guzman will continue to be a danger to the community should he be released from jail. The complexity and breadth of Guzman's criminal organization requires his unique ability to orchestrate and carry out its goals which will compel Guzman to reassume his leadership throne if released from custody. Even during prior incarcerations the defendant continued to manage his drug trafficking operations and successfully plot escapes from jail. Once free Guzman was undeterred and continued to oversee the activities of his drug trafficking empire. Given Guzman's prior history unless Guzman is incarcerated under the strictest security arrangements the risk of his continued criminal activity is certain. As detailed above Guzman is extremely violent and maintains caches of weapons to be used for protection and to punish those who would act against Guzman's interests. Moreover Guzman has a history of murdering individuals whom he perceives as having provided information to law enforcement therefore witnesses for the government many of whom still reside in Mexico without protection would be engraved danger of physical harm or even death as a reprisal for their cooperation with the government should Guzman be at liberty. Keeping Guzman in custody pending the disposition of his case will dramatically reduce the risk that he can orchestrate reprisals against government witnesses and their families. In some releasing Guzman would guarantee only one outcome an extraordinary danger to the community no conditions or combination of conditions can assure it safety be release of Guzman poses a guarantee of flight similarly Guzman cannot overcome the presumption that he's a flight risk first the fact that Guzman twice escaped from maximum security prisons in Mexico speaks volumes about his readiness and ability to avoid prosecution at all costs. Should Guzman be released from custody he would draw on his nearly boundless undisclosed wealth to orchestrate his flight from the jurisdiction and sustain himself in hiding as he's done twice before moreover his drug trafficking empire would provide him with a continued revenue stream should that need arise. Finally Guzman's massive wealth provides him with the ability to tempt all but the strongest of individuals with large cash bribes to assist him in his flight. Second if convicted of operating a continuing criminal enterprise Guzman faces mandatory life imprisonment each substantive drug trafficking crime charged in the indictment carries a 10 year mandatory minimum sentence of incarceration and if convicted of the use of a firearm charge an additional mandatory minimum 10 year consecutive sentence will be imposed in any event a guideline sentence alone for the substantive drug trafficking crimes will dictate a life sentence of imprisonment thus Guzman has every incentive to flee from prosecution and having twice escaped from maximum security prisons in Mexico when facing incarceration he has a proven track record of choosing flight rather than facing prosecution. Third even if Guzman were to prevail in the instant case he faces charges in many other jurisdictions of the United States including the western district of Texas the southern district of California the northern district of Illinois the southern district of New York and the district of New Hampshire these cases provide Guzman with an even greater incentive to flee the fact that Guzman recently fought each and every single proceeding in Mexico for his extra addition to the United States illustrates his desire to avoid prosecution. Gerard versus Farandina 536 F.2 D 478 483 second circuit 1976 finding that defendant intended to avoid prosecution when refusing to return to native country to face charges. Fourth as previously mentioned Guzman uses large scale corruption to control key government officials to protect his criminal activity and that of the Sinaloa cartel. This behavior depicts an individual who has no respect for public authority and the rule of law thus there is no reason to believe that Guzman would obey the court's orders or conditions of release if Bell were granted. Fifth as detailed above Guzman maintains substantial drug distribution networks in the United States including in the New York area. Thus although a citizen of Mexico Guzman has members of his organization nearby ready to assist him to flee the court's jurisdiction. Sixth Guzman has admitted to the United States solely for the purpose of facing prosecution thus he has no legal status in the country. Moreover it's not known to have any substantial connection to the United States aside from his drug trafficking activity. In some it's difficult to imagine another person with a greater risk of fleeing prosecution than Joaquin Archivaldo Guzman-Lareya. For the foregoing reasons the government respectfully submits that Guzman cannot rebut the government's proof that supports the presumption that he had no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure his appearance as required and the safety of the community. U.S. Code 18, Section 3142E. Accordingly Guzman must be detained pending a trial. This document was signed January 20th 2017 and it was signed by Robert L. Capers. Alright so that's going to conclude the pre-trial detention motion but to finish this episode off we have the letter from the judge to the New York Times and vice regarding the information that they were looking for that we talked about while we were going through these documents so let's just add this bad boy right to the end of this and keep it moving. Order 09CR-0466. United States of America versus Joaquin Archivaldo Guzman-Lareya. Cogan District Judge. By letters dated December 21st 2018 and January 3rd 2019 the New York Times company and vice media respectively make three requests of the court relating to sealed and redacted filings and transcripts. The government has filed a letter in response explaining the reasons why some sealed documents identified by the NYT and vice should remain sealed. This order addresses each request in turn. One unsealing the docket. The NYT invites requests at the court direct the parties to unseal any filings on the docket that are fully or partially sealed or alternatively to provide specific findings as to the reasons for the complete or partial sealing. First the court will remind the parties to be diligent in their redactions and cover only those portions of filings that are necessary to achieve the purpose they seek by sealing. The filings must also set forth specific reasons why they contend sealing is appropriate. The court will also remind the parties of their obligations with respect to the pending orders to show cause. Why filings are partially sealed cannot be unsealed at certain future dates once the need for sealing no longer exists. Second the court agrees with the NYT and vice that parties should review the remainder of the docket for filings which are sealed or partially sealed which are not already subject orders to show cause. The parties are therefore directed to review their respective sealed filings and any orders which relate to those filings and inform the court whether the filings can now be unsealed. If the parties contend that the filings cannot be unsealed they are to provide the reason why not if the court disagrees it will unseal the filing. But if the court agrees it will issue a sealing order with specific on the record findings supporting that sealing. In addition moving forward the court will issue sealing orders with specific on the record findings for each sealed or partially sealed filing. This review of the docket cannot happen all at once nor can it happen immediately because the parties and the court are in the middle of a very large and complex criminal trial diverting the court and the party's resources and attention from the ongoing trial proceedings to review and unseal documents risks jeopardizing defendants right to a fair trial. This is especially true with respect to older filings which were sealed years ago. As a result the party should inspect the docket confer and inform the court within five days of the date of this order of their proposed timeline for this review and the format in which they propose providing their positions to the court to summarizing sealed orders. We all have somewhere we're trying to get to. As the largest energy producer in Colorado Chevron is helping meet rising demand and we're working to do it responsibly. Our next-gen tankless facilities reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of our operations by more than 90% compared to our older designs working to provide Colorado with energy that's affordable reliable and ever cleaner. So everyone can get to where they want to be. You've arrived. That's Energy in Progress. Visit chevron.com/tankless. What if you could have a career where the opportunities are as fast as our nation where it's not about mission statements but a shared mission. At US Customs and Border Protection we go beyond to protect more than borders from ship to shore, air to ground, cities to local communities. CBP agents and officers are keeping people safe. Join US Customs and Border Protection and go beyond for something far greater than yourself. Learn more at cbp.gov/careers. The NYT and Vice requests that when public posting of an order is delayed while the parties propose redactions to the order for the court's review the court provide brief descriptions on the docket at the same time the orders are initially issued. The court will ask the parties to title any forthcoming sealed motions with as much detail as possible so that the public can understand the nature of the documents being filed. To the extent the court can provide greater clarity through a description of the orders ruling on those motions or filings it will but the court cannot provide detailed summaries of its orders. When the court issues an order that rules on sealed filings the parties must inform the court which information contained in the order must be redacted. That is because the parties and not the court have the most accurate knowledge of what information can and cannot be made public. This is especially true with respect to witness security which remains one of the court's primary concerns supporting sealing and redacting filings in this case. Although the court has an obligation to review the parties proposed redactions and ensure that there are stated justifications for ceilings are valid and that the redactions are narrowly tailored to achieve that purpose the court cannot do that in the first instance otherwise it would risk disclosing sensitive information which cannot be made public. For those same reasons the court would have to show any detailed summary of those orders to the parties before posting them on the docket. Three sidebar transcripts. The NYT and vice requests the transcripts of sidebar conversations be made public to the extent the sealing of such conversations does not meet the stringent standards of the first amendment and the common law. Sidebar conversations which are not sealed are already available to the public and the NYT and vice are free to order those transcripts. The court has made specific on the record findings providing reasons for complete or partial ceilings with respect to a majority of the sealed or redacted sidebars and the court has already unsealed portions of sidebar transcripts when it found that there was no justification for sealing. Out of an abundance of caution however the court orders that the transcript of sidebar proceedings at the following lines should be unsealed to the extent they are not already public. These portions of the transcript contain either the court's findings in support of sealing or sidebar conversations that the court previously found or now finds that sealing is not warranted. The party who applied for sealing is responsible for ensuring that these portions of the trial transcript are unsealed to the public. In addition the court makes the following findings in support of sealing for sidebars. 1360, 4-1361-10, 1398, 4-1399.5 complete sealing of these two sidebars is necessary to protect public dissemination of personal information about the jury. 170, 616, 17001, 68, partial ceiling of this sidebar is necessary to protect the cooperating witness who was referenced in the sealed portion. If the redacted information is made public it would put the cooperating witness and the cooperating witness's family and their safety at risk. The court will continue to scrutinize the party's sealing applications to the extent any are made and the court will deny them if it finds there is no justification for sealing. If the court finds that there is justification to seal a sidebar transcript the court will continue to make specific on the record findings and its reasons for full or partial ceilings. Alright so that's going to do it for the order dealing with unsealing different portions of this trial for the media to get their hands on. And still to this day all these years later some of this stuff is still under seal and considering the sensitive nature as the judge just said and the type of people we're dealing with that information is never going to see the light of day. However some of this other stuff that doesn't have to do with you know witnesses and stuff like that eventually we'll probably get a look at it when I don't know. But the second it becomes available you better believe we're going to get our hands on it and get it added to the catalog. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box. Hey there it is Ryan Seacrest with you. You want to make this summer unforgettable? Join me at Chumba Casino. It's this summer's hottest online destination. They are rolling out the red carpet with an amazing welcome offer just for you. So don't wait. Dive in now and play hundreds of social casino games for free. Your chance to redeem real prizes is just a spin away. Care to join me? Sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary. VGW Group. Forward where prohibited by law. 18 plus terms and