Griselda Blanco's arrest in Irvine, several years after she had eluded the police, came as a relief to the United States government, contributing to their fight against drug distribution, use, and related crimes. Blanco's arrest on February 17, 1985, followed a lengthy investigation into a well-connected drug manufacturing and distribution syndicate operating between Colombia and the United States (Tikkanen, 2020). During her arrest, Blanco owned false identification papers, which she used to identify herself. Several witnesses were called to stand during Blanco's trial, the key witness, Carmen giving sufficient evidence to link her to several drug conspiracies. Blanco denied all the charges brought against her, but the jury found her guilty on one count of conspiracy to manufacture, import, and distribute cocaine in the United States. Blanco was then sentenced to serve a prison term of 15 years and fined $25,000.
Possible Crimes Committed
Drug Paraphernalia, Drug Manufacturing, Drug Possession, Drug Trafficking, and Drug Distribution. Blanco was arrested about drug charges after being suspected of having aided the transportation of cocaine from Colombia to some parts of the United States, including California, where she was arrested.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Forgery and Impersonation- During her arrest, Blanco had forged documents and even gave a false name to the arresting officers ( U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit - 861 F.2d 773, (2d Cir. 1988 ).
Murder- Blanco's involvement in numerous drug trafficking offenses resulted in the loss of lives, where she was involved directly or indirectly. Allegedly, Blanco killed nearly 2,000 people to facilitate her business.
Abduction- Blanco was earlier accused of kidnapping a two-year-old boy with the intention to collect ransom from his wealthy parents.
Pickpocketing- Blanco's crime tendencies began when she was younger as she started pickpocketing when she was only 13.
Possible Defenses
Blanco, through her lawyers, denied all the charges leveled against her, citing ill-will by the prosecution in trying to link her with drug offenders. However, Blanco had alternatives, including:
Pleading guilty- to attract leniency and avoid lengthy imprisonment. Possibly, she could have gotten ten instead of 15 years.
Duress- though she claims to have killed some of her clients for failing to make payments for catering to her transportation costs, she could also emphasize that she was also under pressure by some of her suppliers, hence acted in self-preservation, not to be killed herself.
Prejudice- No mention is made of drugs during Blanco's arrest. She was only found with fake documents and tried to conceal her identity by giving out a wrong name to the police. She could, therefore, argue that claims against her were. Still, products of imagination, meant to disadvantage her and insult her reputation by painting her as a wrong person, noting that Blanco denied being a fugitive.
Elements of Crime Committed
Elements of crime, otherwise referred to as crime elements, describe subsets that the prosecutor must address to secure a conviction against a felon ( Soler, 2019 ). It is common knowledge that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed by the alleged offender, by affirming both the intent and the real act, rather the concurrence of the two ( Nance, 2016 ). The burden of proof, therefore, lies with the prosecutor given the legal mantra, "he who alleges must prove." Notably, an act may constitute a commission or omission. Also, other crimes may require an affirmation of the attendant circumstances, including details such as methodology, setting or location, and unique characteristics of the victims involved.
The Basic Components of Offense
Whereas each element of crime fits into a different category(s) of crime, common law dictates that the defendant ought to possess some level of intention for their conduct to be considered criminal ( Soler, 2019, p. 92 ). The intention could mean recklessness, purpose, or knowledge from whence an offense was established either through works of commission or omission, where there exist factual circumstances that crime is considered to have occurred.
Mens rea
Men's rea is an element that tests the defendant's mental involvement to show intent for any crimes committed ( Levin, 2019, p. 499 ). Therefore, Mens rea is a necessary element/component for the prosecutor ought to establish that the offender was in the right state of mind and that they acted willfully or out of recklessness in commissioning a crime. This is to imply that the defendant needs to have shown a guilty mind for their actions to be qualified as a crime. Accordingly, most legal jurisdictions recognize the importance of Mens rea, though the concept varies depending on the context and the benchmarked Penal Code.
Actus reus
Actus reus refers to the actual act or unlawful omission thereof. Therefore, an actual crime must occur for one to be charged, as one cannot be punished merely for thinking criminal thought(s) ( Abrams, 2018, p. 199 ). However, there is a difference in how the element is gauged, as the problem of standards of proof varies from time to time, depending on the nature of the case. As such, the qualifiers of Actus reus differentiate criminal thoughts from idle thoughts, making it possible to charge those who act upon criminal thoughts uncoerced. Supposedly, words can be construed as acts in criminal law and could, therefore, result in a conviction if found guilty of crimes such as perjury, threats, solicitation, and conspiracy.
Concurrence
Ideally, men's rea and actus reus occur at the same time, though mens rea must precede or coexist with actus reus ( Serrano-Maíllo, 2018, p. 98 ) . However, the necessary criminal intent must not continue to be present, for what matters is that an act was committed aforethought.
Causation
In most legal jurisdictions, depending on the case, the jury could also ask for proof of causation. For instance, most homicides require an actual killing, and the prosecutor is expected, therefore, to confirm causation in the form of severe bodily harm and injuries, strangling, asphyxiation, or other grievous act that qualify crime. Unfortunately, causation is quite complex to prove as intervening events may have occurred in between thoughts, acts, and result. Therefore, the jury always settles for the cause of action that is proximate to the alleged.
Confirmation of Blanco's Alleged Crimes
Blanco was charged on numerous accounts, though only one was confirmed. This section endeavors to evaluate the listed crimes Blanco may have committed by reviewing the elements prescribed for each crime.
Drug-related Charges
Of all the charges brought against Blanco, the prosecutor was only able to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the defendant conspired with others to manufacture, import into, and distribute cocaine in the United States.
The prosecution's case was that on several unknown dates, Blanco in the company of others operated between Colombia and the United States manufacturing, transporting, and distributing cocaine. Earlier arrest requests had been lodged by the police against Blanco, though she managed to sneak out of the country unnoticed. However, this did not stop the court from issuing a warrant of arrest. Caban corroborated the prosecution's story confirming the existence of a drug importing conspiracy. Additionally, the prosecution presented supporting evidence showing arrests of drug couriers, seizure of contrabands alleged to belong to Blanco and her associates, together with recorded conversations between several drug dealer suspects tying her to the cartel.
A Verdict on the Qualification of the Elements of Drug-related Charges
An examination into the evidence that the court relied on affirms that all the elements of drug-related crime charges were sufficiently accounted for. In summary, Blanco was liable for the alleged completed offense ascribed to her for the reason that a criminal intention had been confirmed, and the presentation of supporting evidence affirmed that the actual crime ensued ( Na'im, 2018 ). Caban's testimony directly linking Blanco affirmed of the causation, whereas her ability to possess forged documentation and travel disguised proves of concurrence.
An Evaluation of Blanco's Defense
Defense strategy solely centered on discrediting the witness to dissociate Blanco from the alleged crimes. Firstly, the defense began its argument by digging into Caban's alleged involvement with a ring of drug lords and the extent of their operation within the United States. The counsel then questioned Caban's credibility as a state witness, further inquiring about the grant of immunity for all of the alleged crimes she purported to have commissioned with the help of others. Finally, the defense produced evidence revealing that Caban was a liar with a long reputation for fraud.
The strategy would have worked only if the identity of Blanco till the day of her arrest was anonymous and if the Judge presiding over the case; Judge Cannella could insist on the affirmation of conscience guilt. Unfortunately for Blanco, her past tainted history destroyed any chances for her to deny such allegations. Also, the fact that there was an indictment case against her, for which she was aware but willingly chose to be a fugitive removed any doubt whatsoever of her involvement in the alleged offense ( Carrington, 2018 ). Therefore, the prosecutor only needed to establish causation, and a former colleague turned witness was the best strategy ever.
An Evaluation into Second Trial's Verdict
Having found guilty, the court sentenced Blanco to 15 years and fined her $25,000, deservedly- given that the penal code prescribes for a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 20 years. However, Blanco filed an appeal arguing that the state violated her fundamental rights to a speedy trial as prescribed for under the sixth amendment, under Fed. R. Crim. P. 48(b). her central argument was that the government disregarded the fact that an earlier indictment against her had taken many years before her arrest and more questioned Judge Cannella's ruling, thereby sort the appellate court intervention, to quash the earlier ruling and to announce a new trial, where are rights will be respected.
The sixth amendment indeed postulates for a speedy trial for all criminal defendants. This acclamation was confirmed by the Supreme court in 1972 while presiding over a case Barker and Wingo ( Osnowitz, 2016 ). The case Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972) outlined a scenario that allowed the Supreme Court to identify factors that ought to be considered when determining adherence to the sixth amendment of the Constitution for a speedy trial to include: (1) the actual length of the alleged delay between the date of indictment and trial, (2) reasons for the supposed delay, (3) the time when the defendant claimed their right, (4) any prejudice that the defendant may have suffered because of the delay.
It is irrefutable that the length of delay between Blanco's date of indictment and trial allows for prejudice at the cost of the defendant. Therefore, in such a scenario, the reason for the delay and possible prejudice that the defendant could have suffered because of the delay were key to Blanco's case. Unfortunately for Blanco, her right to a speedy trial was undermined by her decision to try and evade justice ( Ryder & Pasculli, 2020 ). It was only fair that given her own volition not to present herself before the authority that she suffered the liability. Given her blatant refusal to cooperate with the government, the court of appeal sustained the earlier ruling dismissing appeal altogether.
Analysis of the Alternative Defense
Blanco's conviction was unavoidable, as there was overwhelming evidence linking her to numerous conspiracies. Alternatively, Blanco could have sought a plea bargain to have her sentence reduced to the minimum. In her plea agreement, she could offer to reveal more about drug trafficking in the country and identify critical suspects that, if arrested, would have helped the police curb the menace ( Ouziel, 2017 ). This was the only viable strategy Blanco could have used. Case in point is her former colleague Caban. Also, several case studies confirm that a crime suspect can enjoy mitigated leniency should they choose to cooperate with the authority. For instance, in the case Doggett v. the United States, the Judge ruled in favor of the defendant has established that the defendant's right to a speedy trial was breached ( DeWolfe, Hutchins, & Georgian, 2016 ). The court had no other alternative but to accept the defendant's plea bargain and was freed unconditionally. However, when entering into a plea bargain, Blanco should have ensured that her plea was binding so that the court could verify the facts first to determine whether to accept or reject, from which her defense could have taken the most appropriate strategy to resolve the matter.
References
Case Studies
Barker v. Wingo test. Case W. Res. L. Rev. , 67 , 273.
Appellee, v. Griselda Blanco, Defendant-appellant, 861 F.2d 773 (2d Cir. 1988).
Doggett v. the United States
Journals
Abrams, N. (2018). A Constitutional Minimum Threshold for the Actus Reus of Crime: MPC Attempts and Material Support Offenses. Quinnipiac L. Rev. , 37 , 199. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/qlr37&div=9&id=&page= .
Carrington, A. M. (2018). Equality, Prejudice, and the Rule of Law: Alabama Supreme Court Justice Thomas M. Peters' Protection of African American Rights during Reconstruction. J.S. Legal Hist. , 25 , 205.
DeWolfe, P., Hutchins, R. M., & Georgian, S. (2016). Brief of Appellant, John Hill v. the State of Maryland, No. 2740. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://scholar.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1010&context=ct_briefs .
Levin, B. (2019). Mens Rea Reform and Its Discontents. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-) , 109 (3), 491-558. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/48572938?seq=1 .
Na'im, K. (2018, October). Judicial Review on The Application of Criminal Offense of Evil Conspiracy to Narcotic Drug Courier Based on Act Number 35 the Year 2009 about Narcotics (Verdict of District Court of Medan Number 1537/Pid. Sus/2015/PN. MDN). In International Conference of ASEAN Perspective and Policy (ICAP) (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 360-364). Retrieved from http://jurnal.pancabudi.ac.id/index.php/ICAP/article/view/313 .
Nance, D. A. (2016). The Burdens of Proof . Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Q2aSCwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=burden+of+proof+criminal+cases&ots=tekT8y5rfQ&sig=GJj8vOu7XiuL7fSMgkaFqaUn7cg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=burden%20of%20proof%20criminal%20cases&f=false .
Osnowitz, S. (2016). Demanding a speedy trial: re-evaluating the assertion factor in the Barker v. Wingo test. Case W. Res. L. Rev. , 67 , 273.
Ouziel, L. M. (2017). Ambition and fruition in federal criminal law: A case study. Virginia Law Review , 1077-1140.
Rosen, J. & Kassab, H. (2019). History of Crime and Violence. In Drugs, Gangs, and Violence, (pp. 15-35). Palgrave Mcmillan, Cham.
Ryder, N., & Pasculli, L. (Eds.). (2020). Corruption, Integrity, and the Law: Global Regulatory Challenges . Routledge.
Serrano-Maíllo, A. (2018). Crime contemplation and self-control: A test of Situational Action Theory's hypothesis about their interaction in crime causation. European Journal of Criminology , 15 (1), 93-110. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1477370817732193 .
Soler, C. (2019). The Overarching Contextual (Juridical) Elements. In The Global Prosecution of Core Crimes under International Law (pp. 89-109). TMC Asser Press, The Hague. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6265-335-1_6 .
Tikkanen, A. (2020). Colombian Cocaine Trafficker. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Griselda-Blanco.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit - 861 F.2d 773 (2d Cir. 1988). United States of America, Appellee, v. Griselda Blanco, Defendant-appellant, 861 F.2d 773 (2d Cir. 1988). Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/861/773/138342/ .
