The federal government has 250 S-visas (sometimes called “snitch” visas) at its disposal to award to immigrants who provide information about crimes. See 18 U.S.C. s. 1101(a)(15). There has been increasing attention paid to abuses of immigrants under this program: visas promised but never awarded, immigrants who provide significant information but are deported anyway, sometimes at risk to their lives. For more information see the following sources: Andrew Becker, Retired Drug Informant Says he Was Burned, NPR (Feb. 13, 2010); Helen O’Neill, Informants for Feds Face Deportation, Associated Press (2/13/2010) ; Prerna Lal, Reforming a Visa to Snitch, Social Science Research Network (SSRN), (May 1, 2013).
Incentives & Payments
San Francisco police use violent career criminal as informant
The San Francisco Weekly and the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute just released this indepth story about the SFPD’s use of a high-level gang leader as an informant over several years: Cover of Darkness: S.F. Police turned a blind eye to some of the city’s most dangerous criminals–who were also some of their most trusted soures. The story documents the clash between the S.F. police who protected their violent source in violation of their own policies, and the federal agents who ultimately arrested him. The debacle elicited scathing criticism from former law enforcement. From the story:
Thirty-year law enforcement veteran Chuck Drago and former police commissioner Peter Keane both believe that the existence of rogue informants for SFPD’s specialized Gang Task Force and Narcotics Bureau indicates serious flaws in the department’s internal checks and balances. (The SFPD’s Narcotics Bureau, Gang Task Force, and Media Relations Office wouldn’t comment on the department’s handling of violent informants for this story.) “Somebody is dropping the ball in management,” says Drago. “SFPD have let loose an unguided missile on the public” by allowing dangerous men like Sandoval (and, as we’ll see, at least one other) to stay at large in spite of their offenses, says Keane. “No modern police force with any professionalism engages in that sort of practice anymore.”
BBC World Service radio program on snitching in the U.S.
Here’s an excellent new radio program on snitching by the British BBC, Snitching in the U.S.A. It includes stories of individual informants, interviews with law enforcement, attorneys, and families. A written magazine version is here. The report centers around the story of John Horner, a first-time offender currently serving a 25-year drug sentence in Florida. Mr. Horner became dependent on pain killers due to an eye injury, and was set up by an experienced informant. Horner tried to work the sentence off as an informant himself, but couldn’t make enough arrests. He talks in detail about his experiences as an informant and how the system treated him.
Jailhouse snitches pay $1000s for information
USA Today ran this indepth story about a pay-for-information scheme in the Atlanta jail, in which federal inmates looking for cooperation credit bought information to pass on to their handlers, passing it off as their own knowledge. Story here: Federal prisoners use snitching for personal gain. The story offers an unusually detailed and extensive look at the ways that inmates and informants can game the system, buying and selling information that prosecutors and investigators then reward them for and rely on. In this black market free-for-all, inmates paid tens of thousands of dollars ($250,000 in one case) for information to lower their sentences, while FBI agents relied on snitches who were passing on second-hand uncorroborated information from the street. It is the fourth such scheme uncovered in Atlanta alone in the last 20 years.
A similar pay-for-information scheme was discovered in a federal prison in Louisiana, after Ann Colomb and her three sons were wrongfully convicted based on the testimony of dozens of snitch inmates. See this post: Professional Prison Snitch Ring.
Federal judge questions fairness of “substantial assistance” rules
The New York Times ran this story about the infamous case of Stephanie George: For Lesser Crimes, Rethinking Life Behind Bars. Ms. George became a poster child in 1997 for the unfairness of federal mandatory minimum sentencing when she received a lifetime sentence for a half kilo of cocaine that her former boyfriend had hidden in her attic.
Ms. George also became a prime example of how informing, or in federal parlance, providing “substantial assistance” to the government, can turn the justice system upside down. Ms. George’s boyfriend–a cocaine dealer and ringleader–and other members of the drug ring received lower sentences than she did because they became informants. Because Ms. George had no information, she couldn’t snitch and therefore U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson had no discretion to lower her sentence, a sentence that the judge himself considered draconian and unfair. From the story:
“Stephanie George was not a major participant by any means, but the problem in these cases is that the people who can offer the most help to the government are the most culpable,” Judge Vinson said recently. “So they get reduced sentences while the small fry, the little workers who don’t have that information, get the mandatory sentences.”
Judge Vinson’s comment reflects an intentional design feature of federal drug law. Because becoming an informant is the only way a defendant can avoid harsh mandatory minimums, snitching has become pervasive in the federal criminal system.