Posted on 07/17/2007 7:55:33 AM PDT by Calpernia
Ping
ping
I heard the prosecuting attorney and he made some interesting arguments.
The agents are not in jail for doing their job but because:
1) The officers shot then tried to cover it up.
2) Because of their attempted coverup they had no case against the mexican drug smuggler.
If this is true, then it sheds a different light on this case- Does anyone else know more about it?
ping
BTTT
Gotta respect this man ... Someone good and right from CALIFORNIA ... there are a few of us here amongst the fruits and nuts. :-)
I’ve heard that argument; but it didn’t appear to be the exact story when I read the transcripts that were posted on WND.
“Aldrete-Davila, who faces no charges, is believed to be considering a civil suit against the agents and the United States Government. It is believed that he will seek $5M for the violation of his civil rights.”
Since when do wetbacks have civil rights?
BTT!
bump
Your headline makes it sound like he's against it.
From memory - I don’t think there was a cover-up, I think the proper paper work was not submitted after the incident despite supervisors on scene. If this is true then the supervisor was at fault for not following procedure, at worst the agents should be reprimanded for the same. The whole issue is that the federal gov’t backed the drug dealer to testify against the agents when he was committing a crime.
The whole thing smells.
BTW DH is risking his entire candidacy on R&C. He has read the transcripts and believes that they are innocent of the level of crime which they have been convicted.
Sutton has a propensity for prosecuting law enforcement for excessive force when illegals are involved.
I understand that this morning there is a Senate Judiciary meeting being held looking into the prosecution of these agents. My Senator, John Cornyn, in the meeting is law and order but he especially wants to look into this matter.
These agents do not need to be where they are.
>>>Since when do wetbacks have civil rights?
Say thank you to Clinton and Zedillo
http://justwhatithink.com/blog/zedilloandclinton.html
Drug smuggling wetbacks. Some greedy plaintiffs lawyer is licking his chops over this one. The slime rises to the top. 99% of all lawyers give the other 1% a bad name.
I couldn’t fit the whole headline in the posting space provided.
Illegal immigrants do not have any US Civil Rights. But it is common these days to misuse the therm "civil rights" as though it were synonymous with "human rights."
Civil rights are those rights granted to citizens. In other words, they are privileges. Referring to them as "rights" is purely metaphorical (a usage I detest.)
Human rights are those rights that all humans have at all times and in all places. There is no need to "grant" them. They are not privileges. The US Constitution recongizes them, and requires that the government respect them. But it does not grant them.
And just think about it
If the smuggler sues and wins the money will be immediately taken to Mehico where the smuggler can start his own drug business and not have to smuggle for someone else.
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.