Border patrol agents' sentences commuted, but struggle not yet over (TX) congressman vows

Beaumont Enterprise ^ | January, 20, 2009 | Colin Guy

[flattorney]

Two Texas border guards sentenced each to about a dozen years in prison have had their sentences commuted by former President George W. Bush in one of last official acts. But the campaign on their behalf is not yet over. In 2005 Border Patrol agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos shot drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Davila in the buttocks as he fled across the Rio Grande, away from an abandoned van load of marijuana, according to Associated Press reports. The two men, who did not report the shooting and tampered with evidence by picking up spent shell casings, were convicted of charges that include assault with a dangerous weapon and violation of civil rights.

Since their sentencing U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble(1), has strongly supported clemency for the two men. Poe said the sentence they received was inappropriate. Although he does not condone their attempt to cover up the shooting, he believes they should have been suspended or fired. Bush chose to commute their sentences, which will now end within two months, but did not grant a pardon, which would eliminate the convictions. "Of course I felt they were unjustly prosecuted initially for a lot of reasons," Poe told The Enterprise by phone from Washington, D.C., adding that many, including 30 of 32 Texas members of Congress, consider the sentence excessive. Lydia Kurtz, 65, of Groves, was one of many people throughout the country who share Poe's sentiment. "It was too severe. They were protecting us," said Kurtz, who wrote a letter to The Enterprise's editorial board last year expressing support for the border agents.

Part of the problem, Poe noted, was that a law that enhances sentences for federal offenses that involve the use of a firearm was applied to the border patrol agents, adding an additional 10 years to what would otherwise be a one- to two-year sentence for the men. Poe said he does not believe this enhancement should apply to law enforcement officers and said he plans to intro-duce legislation this session to amend and clarify the federal law.

Poe said he also has problems with how the case, which he said may still be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, was handled. Davila was granted immunity on drug charges in exchange for his testimony against the border agents, Poe said. He continued to smuggle drugs before the trial, Poe said. That information was not permitted into evidence, he said, but should have been because it calls Davila's credibility into question.

Poe said he also wants to know what motivated the U.S. Attorney's Office of the Western District of Texas to pursue criminal charges against Compean and Ramos. "Was it the Mexican government pushing to prosecute these two people?" he asked. The Enterprise was unable to reach Johnny Sutton, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, but in a prepared statement released Monday he said he respects the president's decision and is pleased the convictions will stand. In a separate statement released in 2007, Sutton said Compean began firing at Davila while he was fleeing, unarmed, and indicated that prosecutors cannot look the other way when law enforcement officers fire at a suspect who is not presenting a danger to them.

Poe said he will continue to push for answers and will appeal to President Obama to consider pardoning Compean and Ramos.

[flattorney]

(1) Before being elected a U.S. House Rep., Ted Poe was a Harris County(Houston) chief felony prosecutor and then a felony court judge. Everyone inside the Houston GOP and legal circles knows Ted. He is tough on Mexican border security, illegals, greatly dislikes U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton’s abuse of power, and will continue to be a go-to guy in this Ramos and Compean matter. Many hope Ted will run for Texas Governor in 2010. Here’s the website. – FlA

01.19.09 FR: Bush Commutes Sentences of Two Border Agents Convicted of Shooting Drug Dealer
- - Despite the great news today, this matter is not over. First, it will be two months before Ramos and Compean are released from prison for time served. Second, many “GOP Interests” still support attempting to overturn these two border agents convictions before the SCOTUS. Third, there is good support from the majority of U.S. Congress Republicans and a number of Democrats to change the federal firearms discharge law to protect border patrol agents doing their job in the line of duty. – FlA, SFARI

01.19.09 Dallas Morning News: Immigrant advocates warned that leniency would encourage aggressive tactics by U.S. border authorities. Mexican officials were dismayed by President Bush’s sentence commutation arguing that U.S. border agents must obey the law regardless of how suspects behave. "This sends a very bad and difficult to understand message," Carlos Rico, the assistant foreign minister for North American affairs, told reporters in Mexico City.”
- - FlAttorney Says: Ramos and Compean should have been given a pay raise and accommodation for shooting the fleeing career drug smuggler (currently serving 9 years in prison) who ignored their orders to stop so he could be questioned and subsequently arrested for trying to smuggle over 700 pounds of marijuana into Texas. If drug smugglers and illegals don’t fear our border patrol agents we will never get our extremely serious Mexican border problems under control. The problem is so serious and out of control the U.S. government should have/should legally declare the entire Mexican border as an official war zone. But no, the H.W. Bush Cartel and “W” were too busy all these years kissing Mexican government officials butts, while they tied our courageous border patrol agents hands. This is one of the reasons “W” will be remembered as the worst GOP President in my lifetime – some GOP political experts say in U.S. history.
      I/we like this GOP statement - "Today marks the end of an injustice," said U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas. "Especially as drug trafficking and violence continue to assault our border, our Border Patrol agents should know that their government will support and defend them as they risk their lives for the security of our nation." - - I am glad Pete is the new NRCC Chairman. He has an excellent conservative track record and is an asset in the “New GOP”. - FlA

All The Way!

TAB

[flattorney]

Thanks. Can’t wait until they are both free.

Yes, March 20th will not come soon enough ~ TAB

[Duck Fan]

My question is why the Hell weren’t they out yesterday?

[flattorney]

Because it’s a time served pardon and Bush is spineless. ~ TAB

[MileHi]

Poe said he does not believe this enhancement should apply to law enforcement officers and said he plans to intro-duce legislation this session to amend and clarify the federal law.

Don't get me wrong, these guys were railroaded, but if that stupid law applies to me then it needs to apply to cops as well. The Kings men are NOT a special class of citizens. Despite NRAs support, Project Exile is a federal encroachment on local jurisdiction.

[rednesss]

"Poe said he does not believe this enhancement should apply to law enforcement officers and said he plans to introduce legislation this session to amend and clarify the federal law."

So if you are Joe Criminal Sixpack you get ten years, if you're Joe Criminal Law Enforcement officer you get a pass. One set of laws for cops, one set of laws for peons. Sounds sweet to me if I'm a scumbag criminal with a badge. Does the word impunity mean anything???

Here in the U.S. we have this pesky little thing called the 14th amendment, that guarantees among other things, Equal Protection of the laws.

"no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".[1] The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal"[2] by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.

[muawiyah]

Here's the deal, the law should to apply to you when you bring the gun with you of your own volition. If you want it to apply to cops they should be told beforehand that it's "their choice" whether or not to bring their guns to work.

The legal analyst who came up with the logic that gave Sutton the OK to allow him to push this case forward for DOJ funding for prosecution seems to have not been able to think that far.

I do hope she's fired.

[MileHi]

Yes, it's a great law. Like the Colorado woman with a past drug conviction who got ten years because she posed for pictures scantily clad with an AR in her hands.

The sentence should stand on its own merit. There is a reason why locals won't buy of on that sort of draconian stuff. That is why they kick local crimes to federal jurisdiction, to sidestep the will of the people.

Cheer it if you want, I won't.

[rednesss]

"Here's the deal, the law should to apply to you when you bring the gun with you of your own volition. If you want it to apply to cops they should be told beforehand that it's "their choice" whether or not to bring their guns to work."

I'm not sure you're on legal footing. Take for example a person who is arrested, and happens to have drugs on them. Now we all know that there's this thing called the 5th amendment that guarantees that we don't have to incriminate ourselves except if you're stopped for a DUI but that's another matter. Now if the guy says nothing about the drugs, not wanting to incriminate himself, and is transported to the county jail. He will be charged with introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility. Now he didn't voluntarily go to the jail, but he'll be charged nonetheless. Even though he's shackled and strip searched. The law doesn't always require intent.

[muawiyah]

Alas, when you are talking about a 10 year minimum penalty I think it's only fair that a cop be given a warning that it will be applied should he arrive at work and find a need to fire in self-defense.

Remember, the ONLY person who claimed he got shot was Avila. The border patrolmen fired at him, but Avila got away over the Mexico/USA border. The law prevents them from crossing the border and tracking down people like Avila ~ even to help them.

Once Avila was over the border, that was the end of that story. If he comes back later and says he was shot, that doesn't mean a thing. Lots of Mexicans get shot near the border every day by other narcotrafficantes.

If you are going to allow narcotrafficantes to testify against border patrolmen regarding conditions beyond their legal ability to determine (was the guy in Mexico really shot, e.g.), then you really have to allow them to decide if they want to take their guns to work.

Remember, absurdity breeds absurdity, and as long as our guys can't go chasing after these people into Mexico, we shouldn't be using narcotrafficantes as witnesses.

[muawiyah]

We originated these laws in Virginia. It cut the murder rate in the black dominated city of Richmond VA IN HALF.

There are thousands of people now alive who would have otherwise been killed in Richmond.

The federal law really doesn't need to be used here.

In the case of the two borderpatrolmen their use of a firearm was presumably in the course of performing their FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JOBS. So state law would have not applied anyway.

At the same time the law was incorrectly applied by people who are probably certifiably insane.

[rednesss]

Alas, they are Law Enforcement Officers and therefore are instructed about the law as part of their training. Therefore they should, if anything, be held to a higher standard as they have received extensive instruction beforehand, and should they choose to disregard the law, I believe that the penalty should be greater than a non-trained Joe Sixpack.

This issue goes far beyond Ramos and Compean so I could care less about narcotrafficantes or even James Traficant for that matter. Isn't he due out of federal prison soon???

[freeplancer]

Are they not out yet? I wonder why

[muawiyah]

14th Amendment does not require higher punishment for some and lower punishment for others for the same crime.

Still, if you order a cop to take a gun to work, and then you create a "crime", and then punish him for having the gun, you are engaged in a practice prohibited in Hammurabi's code.

The legal principles are really ancient. Makes me wonder what Sutton was doing accepting the word of a narcotrafficante. He certainly received a briefing upon appointment concerning the issue.

[MileHi]

At the same time the law was incorrectly applied by people who are probably certifiably insane.

Wee agree about that.

We originated these laws in Virginia. It cut the murder rate in the black dominated city of Richmond VA IN HALF.

That is fine. So why don't Virginians increase state penalties for violent crime committed in Virginia? Why should the feds even be involved? Is there a federal solution for every local problem?

Then some folks wonder why the feds are in your face in every facet of life. BTW, you might love the conceded law enforcement powers under the new administration. But no fair whining, you have already consented.

[Duck Fan]

“Because it’s a time served pardon and Bush is spineless.”

Does that mean that they have to serve a specific amount of minimum time?

[SmallGovRepub]

“Don't get me wrong, these guys were railroaded, but if that stupid law applies to me then it needs to apply to cops as well. The Kings men are NOT a special class of citizens. Despite NRAs support, Project Exile is a federal encroachment on local jurisdiction.”

I wouldn't have a problem with having the law not apply to law enforcement acting in the line of duty. They carry guns on the job and sometimes have to use them. In the heat of the moment they can screw up and there is a fine line between when what they do is appropriate and when it is illegal. The whole idea of these laws is to discourage people from using guns in criminal acts. If they're going to commit a criminal act we'd rather they leave their gun at home. Cops and border patrol need to have their guns with them all the time. I think it is reasonable not to have this mandatory minimum sentence apply in that type of situation. The mandatory minimum sentence is the only reason these two got so much time. If not for the mandatory minimum, they'd already be home. One thing I'd like to see us take from this is that we need to really think twice about having all these mandatory minimum sentences because they're always getting applied in situations not contemplated by Congress and the consequences can really be outrageously unfair.

[MileHi]

The whole idea of these laws is to discourage people from using guns in criminal acts. If they're going to commit a criminal act we'd rather they leave their gun at home.

No, in practice it is often used to turn misdemeanors into 10 year sentences when the firearm had nothing to do with the crime charged but was rather just incidentally possessed.If the actual crime does not warrant harsh sentencing, then there is no call to dump this load on. It is the equivalent of "hate crime" laws.

Cheer this law if you must, but I won't.

[SmallGovRepub]

I'm not cheering the law. I think we have too many laws and we've gone a little crazy with the gun laws. I've been over at the jail this morning talking to some poor 18 year old kid with federal charges for possessing a firearm when he wasn't a citizen or a permanent legal resident. Did you know that any noncitizen not here on an actual immigrant visa is committing a felony if he is in possession of a firearm? This kid has never been in trouble in his life but just for shooting guns out in the boonies with a couple of other kids on New Year's Eve he's sitting in jail facing up to 10 years in the federal pen plus three years probation and up to a $250k fine, not to mention that he'll be deported and barred from the U.S. forever even though all his family are citizens or permanent residents and he has a baby on the way here. I had one a while back where a guy had been to the gunsmith to get an estimate for work on an inoperable M1 Garand and his aunt called and asked if he would stop by the school and pick up his cousin and while he was waiting someone noticed the rifle in the back seat and he was arrested and charged with a felony even though he had no ammo or clips and the gun didn't even work. He'd forgotten all about it being in his backseat still. Lucky for him the state prosecutors were understanding enough not to stick him with a felony. Federal prosecutors are often a lot harder to work with.

[MileHi]

Did you know that any noncitizen not here on an actual immigrant visa is committing a felony if he is in possession of a firearm?

Good. You didn't really want me to feel bad about illegals here getting sideways with the law, did you? We were discussing Exile and how that affects American citizens. You wring your hands about the plight of sneak-thieves if you want, but you seem a little naive to me. Maybe you need to read a little more here.