So..."Pounding the table" does work? For those who may not get the allusion...
When the law is on your side, argue the law.
When the facts are on your side, argue the facts.
When neither are on your side, pound the table.
The conspiracy statute can be the only crime. As long as there is evidence of intent and conspiracy to commit one of numerous offenses. The intent element is necessary, and association, without more, does not establish intent.
The intent element is fairly lengthy in its own right, but reads to me like an intention to "share or personally profit" via commission of one of the enumerated crimes (gambling, prostitution, gun sales, murder, and probably 100 other offenses), with the intent also necessarily being part of a group effort. If a person conspires for himself, the conspiracy doesn't meet the intent element in this statute.
For what it's worth, judges almost always uphold unsupported allegations. "The law in principle" bears only resemblance in form, to the way substantive law is practiced by the government capos and goons. Thousands of cases and decisions bear this out in black and white.
Thank you again for joining the discussion. Your contribution resonates with some actual knowledge, which has been rare in these threads.
So..."Pounding the table" does work? For those who may not get the allusion...
When the law is on your side, argue the law.
When the facts are on your side, argue the facts.
When neither are on your side, pound the table.