'No practice is more ingrained in our criminal justice system" than that of the government calling a cooperating witness who participated in the crime charged to testify against others based on the expectation of a reduction in the cooperator's own sentence.1 But some recent complex white-collar cases that have fallen apart after cooperators pleaded guilty—the Collins & Aikman fraud prosecution, the "African Sting" Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases, and the "Squawk Box" securities fraud prosecution—suggest that the cooperation system needs reexamination, and that at a minimum, courts should consider adjustments to the typical jury instructions regarding cooperator testimony.
In many white-collar investigations, the issue is not really who did what, but instead whether the conduct amounts to a crime at all, and whether the defendant has the requisite intent. Nevertheless, the government, aided by potentially draconian sentences, has considerable leverage to scare people into pleading guilty and cooperating against others for the prospect of probation or reduced prison time, even when the theory of criminality is tenuous and the case ultimately results in an acquittal or dismissal.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
