In other words, what does the prosecutor have to to prove in order to win a conspiracy case.. For example, on a case were the charge is conspiracy of money laundry. And what is the deference of a charge of "conspiracy of money laundry" and a charge of just simple "money laundry"?
2007-05-15 05:37:35 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The crime of "conspiracy" is actually a separate offense. It is used far more at the federal level. In a conspiracy charge, the government must show that you did some "overt act" to further the conspiracy. In federal drug cases, the government only needs to show that you were a member of a conspiracy, and you had the intent to advance and maintain the conspiracy (no "overt act" is required). Either way, it is not necessary that the conspirators had any express or formal agreement, or that they had a meeting, or even that they all knew each other. If you are found to be a member of a conspiracy to commit a crime, and that crime was committed by any member of that conspiracy, then you, and all other members of the conspiracy, are guilty of that crime.
2007-05-15 05:45:21 · answer #1 · answered by jurydoc 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Conspiracy means you conspired, you might not have been the actual person to do the deed but you were in on it with others. Money laundering would be that you are charged with being the one to actually be doing the laundering.
2007-05-15 12:49:58 · answer #2 · answered by Lori B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋