In the preparation process for the trial of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, all aspects are covered. Every detail is anticipated, and one of them—fundamental, as it constitutes the end goal of justice—is the jury verdict.
In this installment of the series, we will discuss the verdict document that the court will provide to the jury members at the end of the trial, so they can record their decision.
The document establishes the legal framework and specific questions that the jury must answer to determine the guilt or innocence of Hugo Armando Carvajal Barrios concerning the charges brought against him by the United States government. Their resolution will determine the outcome of the trial.
The Role of the Jury
The jury is essential, as it is responsible for ensuring that trials are fair and impartial.
In the United States judicial system, the jury plays a crucial role, as it is tasked with ensuring that trials are fair and impartial. The jury consists of ordinary citizens, who bear the responsibility of evaluating evidence and deciding on guilt or innocence in criminal cases and determining damages in civil cases.
In criminal trials—like that of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios—the jury reviews the evidence presented by both sides—prosecution and defense—and, based on a set of instructions provided by the judge regarding applicable law, deliberates to reach a verdict of either “guilty” or “not guilty.”
In civil trials, the jury also assesses the evidence and decides on liability and, in some cases, determines the monetary compensation to be paid by the defendant.
The jury trial system is a fundamental pillar of the American legal system, as it ensures that justice is administered by ordinary people and not just legal professionals.
The Charges Against Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios
The Southern District Attorney’s Office of New York must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios, is guilty of the four charges against him related to drug trafficking, narco-terrorism, and possession of weapons.
The charges are as follows:
Charge One: Conspiracy to engage in narco-terrorism, which refers to drug trafficking crimes committed with the intention of providing monetary or economic value to a terrorist organization or one engaged in terrorist activities.
Charge Two: Conspiracy to import at least five kilograms of cocaine into the United States.
Charge Three: Use or possession of machine guns or destructive devices in relation to, or in support of, the drug trafficking offenses referred to in Charges One and Two.
Charge Four: Conspiracy to use or possess machine guns or destructive devices in relation to, or in support of, the drug trafficking offenses referred to in Charges One and Two.
The Verdict in the Trial of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios
In the case of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal Barrios’ trial, the jury must deliver a verdict concerning the four charges against the former head of intelligence of the Chavista regime.
At the end of the trial, after reviewing the evidence presented by the Southern District Attorney’s Office of New York, as well as any evidence the defendant’s defense may choose to present—though they are not obligated to do so—the jury must submit their decision to the presiding judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein.
The jury must issue a unanimous verdict of “guilty” or “not guilty” for each charge, as well as respond to additional questions in case they find the defendant guilty; that is, the verdict must be adequately substantiated.
The Jury’s Decision
Regarding Charge One, conspiracy of narco-terrorism, the jury must determine whether the defendant is guilty of this conspiracy and, if found guilty, they must ascertain whether the government proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offense involved “mixtures or substances containing a detectable amount of cocaine”.
Additionally, if found guilty, the jury must determine if the government proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offense involved “five or more kilograms of mixtures or substances containing cocaine”.
In relation to Charge Two, conspiracy to import narcotics, the jury must establish whether the defendant is guilty of this conspiracy and, as with Charge One, if found guilty, will have to determine if the government proved the presence of “mixtures or substances containing a detectable amount of cocaine”.
If found guilty, the jury must determine if the government proved the involvement of “five or more kilograms of mixtures or substances containing cocaine”.
Referring to Charge Three, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, the jury must determine if the defendant is guilty of this possession charge, and, if found guilty, must ascertain whether the government proved the involvement of a “machine gun” beyond a reasonable doubt.
Similarly, if found guilty, they must ascertain whether the government proved the involvement of a “destructive device”.
For Charge Four, conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices, the jury must determine if the defendant is guilty of this conspiracy and, if found guilty, must determine if the government proved the involvement of a “machine gun” beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, if found guilty, they must determine if the government proved the involvement of a “destructive device”.