Plea Bargaining Tactics in Drug Kingpin Prosecutions

Introduction

One of the most common tools used by prosecutors is the plea bargain. This is when a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser crime in exchange for immunity or reduced charges. In nearly all court cases, prosecutors are willing to make some kind of plea deal. The rationale is that doing so saves time, reduces costs, and serves justice. However, as with any kind of deal, the prosecution's focus is concentrated on a single person or group of individuals, since the information obtained will most likely be used to solidify the government's case against the primary defendant ("Bargaining Justice," 2012).

The situation involving a known drug kingpin and his girlfriend is particularly problematic. The kingpin has a history of successfully avoiding prosecution, largely because the government has not been able to gather sufficient evidence to pursue charges against him.

Recently, this individual was arrested with one kilogram of cocaine at his girlfriend's house. Law enforcement has attempted to convince the girlfriend to testify against her boyfriend in exchange for immunity, but she has refused to cooperate, believing that he will protect her at all costs. However, in recent days the drug kingpin's attorney approached prosecutors about a possible plea deal. Under this proposed agreement, the kingpin would testify that the cocaine belonged to his girlfriend. The central challenge is whether this agreement should proceed, even though it would allow the kingpin to escape prosecution. Fully understanding this situation requires carefully examining the case and identifying what tactics prosecutors can use to encourage the woman to change her mind — and ultimately to turn her against her boyfriend.

The Plea Bargaining Case

This case rests on the fact that a known drug kingpin was caught with one kilogram of cocaine. His lawyers are now approaching the prosecution about a plea deal, which signals that the defense regards the evidence as highly damaging to their client. To protect him, they are taking a preemptive step by testing whether the state will accept some form of agreement granting the kingpin immunity (Rhodes, 1979, pp. 360–375).

Complicating matters further, the girlfriend does not appear to know that her boyfriend's legal team has approached the prosecution with this kind of offer. As a result, the state has two options: accept the plea agreement from the kingpin and charge his girlfriend with all related offenses, or persuade the girlfriend to begin cooperating and share what she knows about his activities. The real challenge lies in convincing her to testify against him. To accomplish this, prosecutors must employ specific tools and tactics that increase the likelihood of her turning against him (Rhodes, 1979, pp. 360–375).

Conclusion

The situation involving the drug kingpin requires prosecutors to apply increasing pressure on the woman. This can be accomplished by arresting and charging her with cocaine possession. Once she is in police custody, she should be given multiple opportunities to cooperate with investigators. During this process, she must be made fully aware that her boyfriend intends to testify against her — a revelation that will likely reduce any remaining resistance to cooperation. If she continues to refuse, she will be prosecuted and sentenced for cocaine possession, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of significant length under federal drug statutes.