Muscle Insider
New member
Q: Why do peeps who get busted for selling gear snitch on their bros?
A: That’s a great question. Although the majority of criminal defendants don’t “snitch,” confessing to the crime and then cooperating with the prosecution against the others involved can occur whenever two or more people commit a crime together. If they get arrested, the suspects will face a variation on what’s called the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” – a game theory situation that’s been the focus of intense experimental study by psychologists and social scientists.1
The theoretical Prisoner’s Dilemma model works like this. You and your partner have perpetrated a crime. You are both arrested and interrogated in separate rooms. Without one or the other talking, the police lack enough evidence to sustain serious charges. If you both refuse to talk, you both get minor charges and lenient sentences. However, if only one snitches on the other, that person goes free while the other gets serious charges and a long prison sentence. But if both snitch on the other, you both get slammed with serious charges. Endless variables have been manipulated to examine what factors make the prisoners snitch versus keep silent.
Is the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma reflective of real-world cases involving the unlawful sale of anabolic steroids or SARMs? Not necessarily. First, the hypothetical is predicated on the supposition that the police lack sufficient evidence. But in today’s digital world, everything may be documented through texts, emails, messaging apps, payment processors and bank records; the police may not need a confession to sustain serious charges. So, both you and your partner can typically get slammed even when staying silent.
Second, although one may win the other doesn’t necessarily lose. Even where the police already have the necessary proof, both of you could get lower sentences by talking. In the federal criminal justice system, providing “substantial assistance” by cooperating with the government is a basis for a judge to punish an offender more leniently than the applicable federal sentencing guidelines would advise. Further, quickly “accepting responsibility” for a crime by admitting wrongdoing is another basis for reduced punishment.
Third, there may be yet other peeps to snitch on, such as unidentified co-conspirators or third parties involved in similar conspiracies. Providing information gets rewarded. So, in the real world, both you and your partner may be incentivized to snitch. If that’s the direction you choose to take, timing can matter. The longer you wait, the less value your snitching may have. If your partner talks first, he may get the bigger benefit.
Whichever way you decide to handle the Prisoner’s Dilemma, sound legal advice will make a huge difference on the ultimate outcome in court. If grounds don’t exist to get the case tossed or if a dismissal motion is denied, then the standard options are to either negotiate a resolution (with or without snitching) or to fight the case at a jury trial. Going before a jury can beat the case completely! But there’s a reason why up to 98 percent of federal criminal cases are settled without a trial. Negotiating a settlement agreement to reduced charges often yields a much lower punishment at sentence than by getting the “trial penalty” after a guilty verdict or by sheepishly “folding your cards” on the eve of trial. Does a well-timed, carefully bargained-for guilty plea mean “throwing in the towel” or giving up the fight? Not by a long shot – often a defense lawyer’s hardest work lies in negotiating the plea deal details and then devising strategies to convince the judge to impose a reduced sentence. I’ve tried many criminal cases and I’ve negotiated many pleas. Sometimes the most heated courtroom battles occurred after a guilty plea, in fighting to keep a client out of jail at sentencing. Some sentencing hearings became mini-trials, with witnesses called and subjected to my aggressive cross-examination!
Always remember, if you find yourself arrested and faced with the Prisoner’s Dilemma, you have the right to speak with a criminal defense lawyer before you answer police questions or waive valuable constitutional protections. A lawyer can help you assess the known evidence against you and to decide whether staying silent is your best option. And if you choose to talk to the prosecution, your lawyer can ensure that what you say is protected by a written “proffer agreement” limiting its use to incriminate you. Good lawyering is essential!
Rick Collins, Esq., CSCS [https://rickcollins.com/] is the lawyer who members of the bodybuilding community and dietary supplement industry turn to when they need legal help or representation. [© Rick Collins, 2022. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal or medical advice.]
Reference:
1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/
Q: Why do peeps who get busted for selling gear snitch on their bros?
A: That’s a great question. Although the majority of criminal defendants don’t “snitch,” confessing to the crime and then cooperating with the prosecution against the others involved can occur whenever two or more people commit a crime together. If they get arrested, the suspects will face a variation on what’s called the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” – a game theory situation that’s been the focus of intense experimental study by psychologists and social scientists.1
The theoretical Prisoner’s Dilemma model works like this. You and your partner have perpetrated a crime. You are both arrested and interrogated in separate rooms. Without one or the other talking, the police lack enough evidence to sustain serious charges. If you both refuse to talk, you both get minor charges and lenient sentences. However, if only one snitches on the other, that person goes free while the other gets serious charges and a long prison sentence. But if both snitch on the other, you both get slammed with serious charges. Endless variables have been manipulated to examine what factors make the prisoners snitch versus keep silent.
Is the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma reflective of real-world cases involving the unlawful sale of anabolic steroids or SARMs? Not necessarily. First, the hypothetical is predicated on the supposition that the police lack sufficient evidence. But in today’s digital world, everything may be documented through texts, emails, messaging apps, payment processors and bank records; the police may not need a confession to sustain serious charges. So, both you and your partner can typically get slammed even when staying silent.
Second, although one may win the other doesn’t necessarily lose. Even where the police already have the necessary proof, both of you could get lower sentences by talking. In the federal criminal justice system, providing “substantial assistance” by cooperating with the government is a basis for a judge to punish an offender more leniently than the applicable federal sentencing guidelines would advise. Further, quickly “accepting responsibility” for a crime by admitting wrongdoing is another basis for reduced punishment.
Third, there may be yet other peeps to snitch on, such as unidentified co-conspirators or third parties involved in similar conspiracies. Providing information gets rewarded. So, in the real world, both you and your partner may be incentivized to snitch. If that’s the direction you choose to take, timing can matter. The longer you wait, the less value your snitching may have. If your partner talks first, he may get the bigger benefit.
Whichever way you decide to handle the Prisoner’s Dilemma, sound legal advice will make a huge difference on the ultimate outcome in court. If grounds don’t exist to get the case tossed or if a dismissal motion is denied, then the standard options are to either negotiate a resolution (with or without snitching) or to fight the case at a jury trial. Going before a jury can beat the case completely! But there’s a reason why up to 98 percent of federal criminal cases are settled without a trial. Negotiating a settlement agreement to reduced charges often yields a much lower punishment at sentence than by getting the “trial penalty” after a guilty verdict or by sheepishly “folding your cards” on the eve of trial. Does a well-timed, carefully bargained-for guilty plea mean “throwing in the towel” or giving up the fight? Not by a long shot – often a defense lawyer’s hardest work lies in negotiating the plea deal details and then devising strategies to convince the judge to impose a reduced sentence. I’ve tried many criminal cases and I’ve negotiated many pleas. Sometimes the most heated courtroom battles occurred after a guilty plea, in fighting to keep a client out of jail at sentencing. Some sentencing hearings became mini-trials, with witnesses called and subjected to my aggressive cross-examination!
Always remember, if you find yourself arrested and faced with the Prisoner’s Dilemma, you have the right to speak with a criminal defense lawyer before you answer police questions or waive valuable constitutional protections. A lawyer can help you assess the known evidence against you and to decide whether staying silent is your best option. And if you choose to talk to the prosecution, your lawyer can ensure that what you say is protected by a written “proffer agreement” limiting its use to incriminate you. Good lawyering is essential!
Rick Collins, Esq., CSCS [https://rickcollins.com/] is the lawyer who members of the bodybuilding community and dietary supplement industry turn to when they need legal help or representation. [© Rick Collins, 2022. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal or medical advice.]
Reference:
1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/
Click here to view the article.
A: That’s a great question. Although the majority of criminal defendants don’t “snitch,” confessing to the crime and then cooperating with the prosecution against the others involved can occur whenever two or more people commit a crime together. If they get arrested, the suspects will face a variation on what’s called the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” – a game theory situation that’s been the focus of intense experimental study by psychologists and social scientists.1
The theoretical Prisoner’s Dilemma model works like this. You and your partner have perpetrated a crime. You are both arrested and interrogated in separate rooms. Without one or the other talking, the police lack enough evidence to sustain serious charges. If you both refuse to talk, you both get minor charges and lenient sentences. However, if only one snitches on the other, that person goes free while the other gets serious charges and a long prison sentence. But if both snitch on the other, you both get slammed with serious charges. Endless variables have been manipulated to examine what factors make the prisoners snitch versus keep silent.
Is the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma reflective of real-world cases involving the unlawful sale of anabolic steroids or SARMs? Not necessarily. First, the hypothetical is predicated on the supposition that the police lack sufficient evidence. But in today’s digital world, everything may be documented through texts, emails, messaging apps, payment processors and bank records; the police may not need a confession to sustain serious charges. So, both you and your partner can typically get slammed even when staying silent.
Second, although one may win the other doesn’t necessarily lose. Even where the police already have the necessary proof, both of you could get lower sentences by talking. In the federal criminal justice system, providing “substantial assistance” by cooperating with the government is a basis for a judge to punish an offender more leniently than the applicable federal sentencing guidelines would advise. Further, quickly “accepting responsibility” for a crime by admitting wrongdoing is another basis for reduced punishment.
Third, there may be yet other peeps to snitch on, such as unidentified co-conspirators or third parties involved in similar conspiracies. Providing information gets rewarded. So, in the real world, both you and your partner may be incentivized to snitch. If that’s the direction you choose to take, timing can matter. The longer you wait, the less value your snitching may have. If your partner talks first, he may get the bigger benefit.
Whichever way you decide to handle the Prisoner’s Dilemma, sound legal advice will make a huge difference on the ultimate outcome in court. If grounds don’t exist to get the case tossed or if a dismissal motion is denied, then the standard options are to either negotiate a resolution (with or without snitching) or to fight the case at a jury trial. Going before a jury can beat the case completely! But there’s a reason why up to 98 percent of federal criminal cases are settled without a trial. Negotiating a settlement agreement to reduced charges often yields a much lower punishment at sentence than by getting the “trial penalty” after a guilty verdict or by sheepishly “folding your cards” on the eve of trial. Does a well-timed, carefully bargained-for guilty plea mean “throwing in the towel” or giving up the fight? Not by a long shot – often a defense lawyer’s hardest work lies in negotiating the plea deal details and then devising strategies to convince the judge to impose a reduced sentence. I’ve tried many criminal cases and I’ve negotiated many pleas. Sometimes the most heated courtroom battles occurred after a guilty plea, in fighting to keep a client out of jail at sentencing. Some sentencing hearings became mini-trials, with witnesses called and subjected to my aggressive cross-examination!
Always remember, if you find yourself arrested and faced with the Prisoner’s Dilemma, you have the right to speak with a criminal defense lawyer before you answer police questions or waive valuable constitutional protections. A lawyer can help you assess the known evidence against you and to decide whether staying silent is your best option. And if you choose to talk to the prosecution, your lawyer can ensure that what you say is protected by a written “proffer agreement” limiting its use to incriminate you. Good lawyering is essential!
Rick Collins, Esq., CSCS [https://rickcollins.com/] is the lawyer who members of the bodybuilding community and dietary supplement industry turn to when they need legal help or representation. [© Rick Collins, 2022. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal or medical advice.]
Reference:
1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/
Q: Why do peeps who get busted for selling gear snitch on their bros?
A: That’s a great question. Although the majority of criminal defendants don’t “snitch,” confessing to the crime and then cooperating with the prosecution against the others involved can occur whenever two or more people commit a crime together. If they get arrested, the suspects will face a variation on what’s called the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” – a game theory situation that’s been the focus of intense experimental study by psychologists and social scientists.1
The theoretical Prisoner’s Dilemma model works like this. You and your partner have perpetrated a crime. You are both arrested and interrogated in separate rooms. Without one or the other talking, the police lack enough evidence to sustain serious charges. If you both refuse to talk, you both get minor charges and lenient sentences. However, if only one snitches on the other, that person goes free while the other gets serious charges and a long prison sentence. But if both snitch on the other, you both get slammed with serious charges. Endless variables have been manipulated to examine what factors make the prisoners snitch versus keep silent.
Is the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma reflective of real-world cases involving the unlawful sale of anabolic steroids or SARMs? Not necessarily. First, the hypothetical is predicated on the supposition that the police lack sufficient evidence. But in today’s digital world, everything may be documented through texts, emails, messaging apps, payment processors and bank records; the police may not need a confession to sustain serious charges. So, both you and your partner can typically get slammed even when staying silent.
Second, although one may win the other doesn’t necessarily lose. Even where the police already have the necessary proof, both of you could get lower sentences by talking. In the federal criminal justice system, providing “substantial assistance” by cooperating with the government is a basis for a judge to punish an offender more leniently than the applicable federal sentencing guidelines would advise. Further, quickly “accepting responsibility” for a crime by admitting wrongdoing is another basis for reduced punishment.
Third, there may be yet other peeps to snitch on, such as unidentified co-conspirators or third parties involved in similar conspiracies. Providing information gets rewarded. So, in the real world, both you and your partner may be incentivized to snitch. If that’s the direction you choose to take, timing can matter. The longer you wait, the less value your snitching may have. If your partner talks first, he may get the bigger benefit.
Whichever way you decide to handle the Prisoner’s Dilemma, sound legal advice will make a huge difference on the ultimate outcome in court. If grounds don’t exist to get the case tossed or if a dismissal motion is denied, then the standard options are to either negotiate a resolution (with or without snitching) or to fight the case at a jury trial. Going before a jury can beat the case completely! But there’s a reason why up to 98 percent of federal criminal cases are settled without a trial. Negotiating a settlement agreement to reduced charges often yields a much lower punishment at sentence than by getting the “trial penalty” after a guilty verdict or by sheepishly “folding your cards” on the eve of trial. Does a well-timed, carefully bargained-for guilty plea mean “throwing in the towel” or giving up the fight? Not by a long shot – often a defense lawyer’s hardest work lies in negotiating the plea deal details and then devising strategies to convince the judge to impose a reduced sentence. I’ve tried many criminal cases and I’ve negotiated many pleas. Sometimes the most heated courtroom battles occurred after a guilty plea, in fighting to keep a client out of jail at sentencing. Some sentencing hearings became mini-trials, with witnesses called and subjected to my aggressive cross-examination!
Always remember, if you find yourself arrested and faced with the Prisoner’s Dilemma, you have the right to speak with a criminal defense lawyer before you answer police questions or waive valuable constitutional protections. A lawyer can help you assess the known evidence against you and to decide whether staying silent is your best option. And if you choose to talk to the prosecution, your lawyer can ensure that what you say is protected by a written “proffer agreement” limiting its use to incriminate you. Good lawyering is essential!
Rick Collins, Esq., CSCS [https://rickcollins.com/] is the lawyer who members of the bodybuilding community and dietary supplement industry turn to when they need legal help or representation. [© Rick Collins, 2022. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal or medical advice.]
Reference:
1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/
Click here to view the article.
