Judge Chastises 'El Chapo' Lawyer for Hinting at Selective Prosecution in Opening Statement
On Tuesday afternoon, during the first half of his opening statements to the jury in the drug conspiracy trial against Guzmán, defense attorney Jeffrey Lichtman said the government is selectively prosecuting his client.
November 14, 2018 at 02:42 PM
5 minute read
An attorney for Joaquin Guzmán Loera, the alleged Mexican drug kingpin known as “El Chapo,” went too far in his opening statements by suggesting that the case against his client is driven in part by crooked government officials in the United States and Latin America, a judge said on Wednesday.
On Tuesday afternoon, during the first half of his opening statements to the jury in the drug conspiracy trial against Guzmán, defense attorney Jeffrey Lichtman said the government is selectively prosecuting his client, who is more of a household name than other suspected leaders of the Sinaloa Cartel, over Ismael Zambada García, who is now the cartel's suspected leader and remains at large.
Lichtman went further to tell jurors that the case will reveal an “uglier side” to the story, including that Zambada and the U.S. government “work together when it suits them” and that law enforcement and government officials in the U.S. and Mexico—including Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto; he was preceded by Felipe Calderón.
“This is a case which will require you to open your minds to the possibility that government officials at the very highest level can be bribed, can conspire to commit horrible crimes; that American law enforcement agents can also be crooked,” Lichtman said on Tuesday.
Before Lichtman began the second half of his opening statements on Wednesday morning, prosecutors filed a motion to strike the arguments that Lichtman had presented on Tuesday for improperly arguing that Guzmán was the subject of selective prosecution, making arguments not based on evidence and for relying on inadmissible hearsay.
Prosecutors noted that U.S. District Court Judge Brian Cogan of the Eastern District of New York, who presides over what is expected to be a 16-week trial, granted motions in limine to preclude the defense from pursuing a selective prosecution strategy.
“Nonetheless, despite the court's clear ruling in place to avoid this exact situation, Mr. Lichtman chose to present this argument in opening statements in an attempt to improperly sway the jury,” the government said in a letter to Cogan
Cogan did not grant the government's motion, but warned Lichtman about going too far afield from the evidence in the case when completing his opening statements.
“Your opening statements handed out a lot of promissory notes that your case is not going to cash,” Cogan told the veteran defense attorney.
Guzmán faces 17 counts in the conspiracy case, in which he is accused along side Zambada of running a murderous, multi-billion dollar drug smuggling operation from 1989 to 2014. Guzmán faces a maximum penalty of life in prison and the government is seeking $14 billion in forfeiture.
Guzmán's defense team's primary strategy thus far has been to undermine the government's case by directing jurors' attention to the checkered pasts of their cooperating witnesses, a rogue's gallery that includes César Gastelum Serrano, a prolific drug smuggler who allegedly had a hand in the killing of a prosecutor in Honduras; and Miguel Angel Martinez, who Lichtman said maintained a four-gram-per-day cocaine habit for 15 years.
“This is the kind of scum I told you about yesterday,” Lichtman said. “This is what you're dealing with.”
Lichtman has also argued that “El Chapo” is more legend than man, and that the mythical branding belies that the alleged drug kingpin was obsessed with notoriety—thus the interview with actor Sean Penn that Rolling Stone published in 2016—and often hard up for money.
In addition to Lichtman, Guzmán's defense team includes Eduardo Balarezo, who represented convicted drug lord Alfredo Beltrán Leyva; Michael Lambert and Mariel Colon Miro of the Law Offices of Michael Lambert; and William Purpura of the Law Offices of Purpura & Purpura.
Leading the prosecution in the case are Andrea Goldbarg, Hiral Mehta, Patricia Notopoulos, Gina Parlovecchio and Michael Robotti from the Eastern District of New York; and Adam Fels and Lynn Kirkpatrick of the Southern District of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
3 minute readUS Courts Announce Closures in Observance of Jimmy Carter National Mourning Day
2 minute readNew York State's 37th Veterans Treatment Court Opens With New Program in Cattaraugus County
Trending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250