U.S. prosecutors said Wednesday they are discussing a possible plea deal with Mexican drug trafficker Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, who was arrested last summer and whose son could testify against him if he goes to trial.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Francisco Navarro reported that talks with Zambada, leader of the powerful Mexican Sinaloa cartel, have so far been fruitless, but that prosecutors want to keep trying. The judge has set a hearing for April 22.
Zambada’s lead attorney, Frank Perez, declined to comment on the conversations.
It’s common for prosecutors and defense attorneys to explore whether they can reach a deal, and the talks don’t necessarily go anywhere.
Zambada was an attentive and active participant during Wednesday’s hearing, which focused on whether he wanted Perez to continue representing him, even as he also represented a potential government witness in the case: Zambada’s son, Vicente Zambada.
The father said through a court interpreter that he did not want another lawyer. “I love him, although this could be a conflict if he represents me and my son.”
The younger Zambada was also charged and reached a plea deal in the long-running U.S. indictments against figures in the Sinaloa cartel. He testified for the government in the trial of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, the infamous and now imprisoned co-founder of the cartel.
Working alongside Guzmán, Ismael Zambada kept a lower profile and was considered more focused on the smuggling business than on the extremes of brutality, acting as a strategist and negotiator who handled daily operations, authorities say.
At Guzmán’s trial, Vicente Zambada recounted how his father and Guzmán ran the cartel together. At one point, he described corrupt Mexican politicians asking if the organization could help them transport 100 tons of cocaine on a tanker.
Zambada Jr. told a jury in the same Brooklyn federal court where his father is being prosecuted that they wanted to know if his dad and El Chapo could provide that amount of coke. At another time, Vicente Zambada recalled hearing a leader of a rival drug trafficking group say that he wanted to kill Ismael Zambada and Guzmán to avenge a failed attack.
Prosecutors said in a court filing last month that the son could be called to testify against his father, which could represent a conflict of interest for Perez. For example, he could not question the son because of the loyalty he owes to both clients.
Defense attorneys sometimes have potential conflicts of interest regarding a client, and federal courts have outlined the steps judges should take to address such situations. These include having independent counsel advise defendants as they consider what to do about the potential conflict. Zambada had one at Wednesday’s hearing.
Zambada said he realized there could be problems if Perez represents him and his son: “for example, that he will have to hide information from me that he obtained from Vicente.”
U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan ultimately agreed that Perez could continue in the case, noting that Ismael Zambada also has other attorneys who could handle any part of the process involving his son.
Authorities searched for the elder Zambada for years before his surprising arrest in July at an airport near El PasoTexas, after arriving on a private plane with one of Guzmán’s sons, Joaquín Guzmán López. He was also wanted by the US authorities.
Zambada has said he was kidnapped in Mexico and taken to the United States by Guzmán López, whose lawyer denies those claims. Joaquín Guzmán López and his brother Ovidio are in plea negotiations with the U.S. government, their lawyers said this month in a Chicago court.
Following the July arrests and allegations of Zambada’s kidnapping, bloody fighting broke out in Mexico between a faction of the cartel loyal to him and another linked to the “Chapitos,” Guzmán’s sons. The chain of events also strained relations between Mexico and the United States.
First, Mexico’s president at the time, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, and current President Claudia Sheinbaum, placed some of the blame for the violence on Washington, saying the arrests in the United States sparked problems.
The outgoing US ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, responded that it was “incomprehensible” to suggest that the cartel wars were Washington’s fault. He later claimed that the Mexican government had stopped cooperating with Washington in the fight against cartels and was turning a blind eye to police violence and corruption.
Mexico’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted by expressing “surprise” in a formal note to the United States embassy about the envoy’s statement.
Connect with the Voice of America! Subscribe to our channels YouTube, WhatsApp and to newsletter. Turn on notifications and follow us on Facebook, x and instagram.
Add Comment