3 ms·
Well, he didn't actually say "[drug trafficking]", and since we don't have the context, we have to take the undercover agent's word for it. He could have been r
by josu 9y ago
Well, he didn't actually say "[drug trafficking]", and since we don't have the context, we have to take the undercover agent's word for it. He could have been referring to something else with "this", or at least, he could claim that.
- millzlane 9y agoUndercover: "Mr ramos, we're drug dealers and we need to send secrets messages. Can these devices do that?" Mr. Ramos: "Yes, they can. They were designed specifically to do that" Undercover: "Take em away boys."
- KMag 9y agoIn this dialogue, "to do that" might mean "to send secret messages" or "to send secret messages for drug trafficking". I presume there's a bit of similar ambiguity in the actual conversation. It's also possible that as a sales pitch, the defendant may have intentionally meant the former while subtly implying the latter, where the former is almost certainly true and the defendant might know the latter to not be true. Though, I imagine for a variety of reasons it's unwise to play phrasing ambiguity sales games with drug cartels. His first mistake was of course getting into a situation where it was possible to play these games with presumed cartel members.
- emiliobumachar 9y agoIs this dialog from the indictment, or did you just made it up? What was the actual context? That's pretty important.
- josu 9y agoNope, page 15 of 24. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4406486/Vincent-Ramos-Complaint.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4406486/Vincent-R...
- thaumasiotes 9y agoThe context is redacted from the quote on page 15 under the note [conversation continues].
- archgoon 9y agoPharmaceutical exporters who are bad at paperwork.