John and Tahir Ramin were indicted on charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud

Question

John and Tahir Ramin were indicted on charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and conspiracy to commit bribery, among other charges. They were alleged to have bribed Army Major Christopher West to secure a bunkers and barriers contract, which would enable them to provide bunkers and barriers to the air field that West was responsible for. The defendants were then alleged to have inflated the number of bunkers and barriers that they actually provided to the air field. In response to the charges, the defendants provided a defense to the bribery charge based on economic duress. The government fi led a motion to exclude the evidence related to economic duress, arguing that economic duress was not a valid defense for bribery. Do you think the district court granted the government's motion to exclude evidence? Why or why not?[ United States v. West et al., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33294 (N.D. III. 2010).]

Explanation / Answer

Econimic duress is an act of getting a contract in unlawful manner which they would not have got under normal conditions. The district court will not grant the government's motion to exclude evidence because this evidence might bring out many more culprits from the government itself who might have helped the accused . Hence the district court might not have granted their notion.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse J
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.