Posted on 02/07/2007 2:07:58 AM PST by Man50D
Then I started reading the DOJ information(http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/).
So it's either there was a GIANT conspiracy involving Federal Prosecutors, other Border Patrol agents, a Federal Judge, and 12 Jurors... or they might have done something they shouldn't have.
No matter what any conspiracy theorist here on FR says; in my opinion, it was their own words (and actions) that convicted these two. The jury found them guilty of shooting at a fleeing un-armed man... one they knew was unarmed (according to their own words). The jury found them guilty, not the President.
I respect the loyaly and passion of FReepers, but please don't be blinded. Study whats known and make your own informed decision.
Let's see, now where did I put my flame retardant suit?
Russell indicates that management at Fabens themselves chose not to make a report about Compean's injury. Here is his testimony:
"Even management at the station in Fabens was fully aware of what had transpired and for whatever reason nothing was ever generated … and once all this comes forward, I mean, it's my belief even his attorneys' belief that even once that does come forward and all that information is presented that the charges will possibly be dropped … or dismissed … or he will be found not guilty … based on that … what did transpire."
Directly contradicting prosecutor Sutton's assertion that agents Ramos and Compean filed false reports, the April 2005 administrative hearing reveals Compean was forthcoming concerning the events of the incident.
In the second cassette, Russell makes clear that the reluctance to do more formal reporting after the incident came from supervisor Richards.
"But the fact of the matter is an assault did take place. Umm … Mr. Richards did know about it. Umm … whether Mr. Compean … Mr. Compean said yes sir to this or whether he was assaulted or not … doesn't negate Mr. Richards responsibility to take some action from the facts that were presented to him as to what happened out there."
He was on the scene. He was told by another agent exactly what had happened and it pretty much apparently stopped at that point.
Johnny Sutton needs to be indicted for Witness Tampering and Obstruction of Justice and his friend Alberto Gonzalez needs to resign pronto.
BUMP!
I'm reasonably sure that there will be no pardons at this time.
The thing that everyone is missing here is a request for executive clemency. President Bush could commute their sentences. That would get them out of prison quickly - then they could apply for pardons in a few years.
Where are those words? Show me the transcripts.
and where is Jorge Bush's pardon?
He has no problem pardoning DRUG RUNNERS but when it comes to Federal Agents doing their jobs...oh nooooooooo cannot pardon those men!!!
"one they knew was unarmed"
Unless the guy was fully searched, who knows?
Ping!
ping
I like it!
How many times do we have to see things like this before we can start blaming the pro-agent regulars for wanton disregard for the truth in their threads?
The news reports that he sustained "minor cuts and bruises".
Heads should roll, but not Ramos and Compean's.
Russell is not the supervisor. He's the UNION REPRESENTATIVE who was representing the agent's at the meeting in question.
The supervisor is not quoted at all in the story, because he is not part of the evidence WND listened to.
The entire WND article is based on testimony given by Compean and his Union representative when they were trying to get his job back.
It proves NOTHING except that, by May, Compean was saying that he told his supervisor. If you believe Compean is telling the truth, then you believe the headline. If you believe Compean is lying to save himself 10 years in prison, than the headline is false.
But nothing in the story provides any evidence for the headline or the conclusions drawn from the story -- it is simply a recounting of the accused's denials.
The DHS report does not "document" a conversation, it provides one side's recollection of what happened in a conversation -- the agent Compean.
It's just Compean's attempt to get himself off the hook. It could be the truth, or not, but it's just his word to the investigators.
If we had quotes from the supervisor backing up this story, I would be both surprised, and willing to reconsider.
Hell, forget about a pardon. This thing ought to be appealed and dismissed, pronto.
BTW, this is one of the things that makes WND such a poor "new source". They wrote an entire article full of false assertions about what the evidence said, simply to push a cause they are advocating for.
They keep saying the memo shows somethig, proves something, contradicts something -- but the memo is nothing more than a supposedly factual report about what Compean said to investigators.
That would be like saying the Starr report refutes the claim that Clinton lied about Monica, because in the Starr report he provides quotes from Clinton where Clinton says he had nothing to do with Monica and was not lying about it.
Were the supervisors on the scene of the incident? Yes or No?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.