Posted on 02/12/2007 9:04:52 AM PST by grandpa jones
Johhny Sutton. You hired him in 2001. It’s time he was on his way. Give him his walking papers. Let him go. Heck, give him a freakin’ medal like you did George Tenhet, I don’t care, just put his azz on the road.
After crucifying Border Agents Ramos and Compean, this piece of legalistic trash has done it again: this time to a 25 year old Texas Deputy who had the misfortune of being the victim of attempted murder by a carload of illegal immigrants. They tried to run him over with a Chevy Suburban. He fired his gun at the tires of the fleeing vehicle which crashed into a fence. One of the illegal passengers was injured. But every dang one of them are alive today, free, and able to complain about the grave injustices done to their freakin’ civil rights. They’re probably lawyerin’ up as we speak to sue the big bad gringos for mega-millions, just like the scumbag drug-runner in the Ramos-Compean case.
Does our government defend the officers charged with the duty of defending our citizens? No. Lawyer Johhny Sutton goes after the deputy with the full force and weight of the Federal government.
Rep. Ted Poe, Texas Republican, called the prosecution and conviction of Hernandez, known to his friends as “Gilmer,” “another example of how the federal government is more concerned about people [who are] illegally invading America than it is about the men who protect America.” “Once again, our government is on the wrong side of the border war,” Mr. Poe said.
I want to see that your administration is on the right side of the border war, Mr. President. It’s time to do the right thing.
Fire Sutton. Pardon Ramos and Compean. Pardon Deputy Gilmer Hernandez.
We’re waiting.
There were 14 previous shootings by Border Agents under Sutton's watch. These included 4 fatalities. In each of those cases, the agents were able to justify their actions. None of them obstructed justice. Result: they were never indicted.
And he will keep on waiting. Our government (except for a few) does not care about American citizens. They have put Mexico's (and other Latin American countries) citizens above American citizens.
Pathetic but true.
Glenn Beck did a really good piece on the Border Patrol agents at the end of last week. He wonders if there is some kind of Mexican style corruption being perpetrated within our own government.
Nice try. A "carload of illegals" didn't try to kill him. If we take him at his word, the DRIVER of a van tried to run him over.
He then shot at the car as it drove past him, hitting it in the tires (something nearly impossible to do if a van is heading right at you.
The crime of the van driver? He ran a stop light. The possible consequences? One passenger was injured in the shooting, but he easily could have killed any one of the passengers, which included women and maybe children.
In many jurisdictions, shooting at a car is never justified. You aren't supposed to jump in front of or stand in front of a car when performing an arrest or check, and it is assumed that if you don't, you can get out of the way of a moving car if it was just stopped.
I'm not saying you couldn't make a case at trial that you were justified in the shooting, but that's a far cry from complaining about a prosecuter going after someone who has committed what could well be a crime that put innocent people in danger.
So the burden of proof is on a law enforcement officer to prove his innocence when facing foreign invaders on US soil? What's wrong with this type of interpretation by federal prosecuters? Reads like they are no longer defending the Consitution from enemies but are instead seeking to appear popular with large Hispanic voting blocks.
innocent people?
We'll have to agree to disagree on this
Every jursidiction in the U.S. has procedures in place to determine whether a shooting is justified. You didn't know?
Yes. While facing anyone on US soil, per the Constitution.
What's wrong with this type of interpretation by federal prosecuters? Reads like they are no longer defending the Consitution
Sutton/DHS/NAU/BushCo didn't convict them, a jury did.
Here's a related article which if true is very informative.
http://www.elandar.com/bush/amigos.html
These cases are getting more complicated by the minute too.
Men who were at scene of shooting fired for changing their stories.
http://www.talkshowamerica.com/2007/02/border-agents-who-testified-against.html
Corruption Cover-Up in Case of Jailed BP Agents?
http://www.talkshowamerica.com/2007/02/corruption-cover-up-in-case-of-jailed.html
Del Rio Texas, occupied. Jury of peers?
Don't think so.
Spend a lot of time reading "progressive" publications?
It doesn't matter what you think. It matters what the law dictates.
"Does our government defend the officers charged with the duty of defending our citizens?"
No, they're scared stiff of the folks from across the border.
Of course, you're right.
The letter of the law has prevailed over the spirit of the law. This young deputy could have been given administrative reprimand, re-training on procedures, etc. Instead, he is now a convict. I don't care how you spin it. This isn't right, which probably isn't important to you either.
Who is spinning?
After crucifying Border Agents Ramos and Compean, this piece of legalistic trash has done it again:
Nice attempt to pivot. I'm impressed. Better luck next time.
At the time he shot at the van, even if you believe HIS story that he was threatened by the van, he had no idea that ANY of the people in the van were illegal. At the time they were all just presumed innocent passengers of a van which ran a red light.
They have been fired because, when the investigation started, the three tried to help Compean and Ramos cover up the shooting. That was when they lied to the investigators.
Their lie was to say there was no shooting at the scene. Once it was clear that the cat was out of the bag, and the shooting was known, the three agreed to testify as to what happened in exchange for immunity from prosecution for covering up the crime of the shooting.
If you truly believe the BP agents should be back at their jobs with commendations, then you should be outraged that these three got fired simply for trying to help Compean and Ramos hide the shooting.
Even though they had immunity from prosecution for obstruction, they still were fired for their lying about the shooting initially.
It is clear why they were fired. WND purposely obfuscated the story so it would look like they were fired for lying in the trial. Many defenders of Ramos/Compean are happy to continue to pretend that's why they were fired because it helps their cause.
I don't see the knowledgeable pro-pardon posters lifting a finger to correct this obviously false characterization of the reason the three agents are being fired (one resigned).
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.