Facing a Federal Investigation? Trial vs. Plea Deal: Insights from Ron Chapman
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2024
- I connected with Ron Chapman through LinkedIn, where we often commented on each other's posts about mitigation. A few weeks ago, after I posted a video describing why some white-collar defense attorneys were averse to working with consultants, Ron commented.
"Justin, the issue is that in your industry there are a lot of vultures. Big promises of RDAP admission, programs, mitigation success. Most are working off of false or outdated knowledge of BOP policy. In addition, any field that intersects law will be highly skeptical to lawyers who've worked for decades perfecting their craft.
You seem to be different, and I see value in what you offer. My only remaining concern is that others will continue to mimic you with a cheaper and a less honest service.
We need to be on guard for these types because they cause real damage to vulnerable people during vulnerable times.
It's all about helping people facing Government scrutiny, and as long as we're rowing in that direction, I'm happy."
Based on that comment, I asked Ron if he would join me for an interview. He said yes!
As Ron expressed in our video, his career as a criminal defense started in the Marine Corps, where he initially served as a prosecutor. He found more satisfaction in "ripping the wires out" of the government's case than in building it, which led him to switch to defense work. Now, he primarily represents physicians and healthcare entities facing federal investigations related to healthcare fraud and opiate prescribing cases.
One of the main topics we discussed was defendants' vulnerability. As we often do, Ron highlighted the dangers of misleading marketing and unethical practitioners who prey on the desperate. He stressed the importance of choosing lawyers carefully and being wary of those who promise unrealistic outcomes. What do I say in every video? WE CANNOT CHANGE THE PAST OR GUARANTEE AN OUTCOME.
Contrary to some defense attorneys who suggest waiting, Ron advocates for immediate action when a target letter is received, or any indication of an investigation arises. This involves engaging compliance professionals, conducting self-audits, and preparing for a thorough defense. The Department of Justice is always working, and so should the defendant.
Ron noted that a successful defense requires an understanding of the client's personality and actions. This knowledge is crucial, especially in trial settings where the attorney must effectively convey the defendant's story to the jury.
Our conversation then moved to the difficult decisions defendants face, particularly between going to trial and accepting a plea deal. Ron shared a story about a physician, Dr. Thomas Sachy (link below), who initially pleaded guilty under pressure but successfully withdrew his plea and won his case at trial. This story illustrates the importance of fully understanding the implications of a plea agreement.
We also discussed the issue of overcharging. Ron expressed concerns about prosecutors who stack multiple charges to compel defendants to plead guilty, often involving family members to increase pressure. This practice can lead to unjust outcomes, and Ron stressed the need for a more balanced approach to charging decisions.
Despite being based in Michigan, Ron's focus on healthcare law allows him to represent clients across the country. His national practice underscores the importance of specialized knowledge in navigating complex regulatory environments like healthcare.
Finally, we touched on the sentencing process. Ron emphasized the importance of defendants understanding the sentencing guidelines and the potential consequences of plea agreements. He encouraged defendants to become vested in their cases and actively engage with their attorneys to ensure they understand each step in the process.
Ron's insights into prosecutors' mindsets were insightful. He described how motivations can vary widely among prosecutors, from those driven by a sense of justice to others possibly influenced by career ambitions or bureaucratic inertia. Understanding these motivations can help defendants and their lawyers better anticipate prosecutorial strategies and prepare accordingly.
I am grateful Ron took the time to join us and offer his insights. If you seek guidance in a healthcare case, Ron is someone you should consider calling.
Thank you,
Justin Paperny
P.S. To learn more about Ron, his book and some of his outcomes, click the links below:
Book: ronaldwchapman...
Company Website: www.ccghealthc...
News Media Appearances: / @ronaldchapmanii
Dr. Sachy Case: wgxa.tv/news/l...
jp@whitecollaradvice.com - 818-424-2220
Visit www.whitecolla... to access our federal prison blogs
/ federalprisonadvice
/ justinpaperny
RON CHAPMAN FOR THE WIN!!!! What a fantastic interview where an attorney takes a truly objective view about who can & can’t truly help. Could not be more impressed by an attorney. Great interview!!!!
This dude is a 3rd rate huckster. He will lie stretch and bend the truth any opportunity he gets. His clients are in trouble 🤓👏🏾😩😝🤭
Ron's advice is fantastic. I love how he actually GOES TO TRIAL, when so many attorneys push people into quick pleas.
Terrific interview, guys. I look forward to referring Ron to our clients in need.
Great interview and insights regarding the beauracy of the US prosecutors.
This was gold. Great job Justin with the questions.
Thank you for watching.
It takes a tremendous amount of money to defend a federal case for a defendant and it takes great courage to throw it all to the wind and fight on. It's very very difficult but you got to weigh what is important to you and consider your chances in winning. This experience is not for the faint hearted.
This was a surprising interview. I've always read that the vast majority of federal cases involve plea deals, and insisting on a trial would result in additional charges and greater penalties if the defendant loses. He said healthcare cases are different and that going to trial can work.
Attorney's oaths is to the courts not you!!!
Wait til the Chevron deference gets overturned when the department of injustice interpret the laws get thrown out.
Hey Man, your 2 tiered system of justice video. The cases really weren’t Apples to Apples.
Once indicted, you have a 2% chance of avoiding conviction. Facts.
Slave traders for lenient sentences 😂😂😂. Those courts are tribunal and are not article 3 courts. The statute applies to public officials or government contractors not private citizens.
Great interview and insights regarding the beauracy of the US prosecutors.