Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ramos and Compean: Illegal Immigration Issue Leaves No Justice For Border Agents
RFFM.org ^ | July 29, 2008 | Laurie Roth

Posted on 07/29/2008 12:22:41 PM PDT by Daniel T. Zanoza

Guest Commentary by Laurie Roth

This week I thought I would lose my mind when I heard of the horrifying decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals against Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. So many of us who had followed this case for the last few years were hoping that once all the evidence had finally been heard, unlike with the first trial, that justice would be done. Wrong!! Justice was not done!!!

You may recall in the first trial that the illegal alien, drug thug Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, who brought 743 pounds of marijuana over our border was given immunity by Prosecutor Sutton to testify against the two agents. I remember hearing Sutton and his cronies implying that the two agents were rogue racists against Mexicans and had shot a poor, desperate illegal alien in the back of the butt while he was running away from them. On and on the distortion, misinformation….ok….lies went on. I had thought from the very beginning that the racist accusations regarding the two agents against Mexicans was fascinating since Ramos and Compean are Mexican-Americans. It was also fascinating that ‘suddenly’ ...

(Excerpt) Read more at rffm.typepad.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: aliens; border; borderagents; borderpatrol; donutwatch; fifthcircuitcourt; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; jackbootedthugs; judiciary; justice; mexico; ramoscompean
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last
To: NRA2BFree; Daniel T. Zanoza
I was sooo angry when I heard what they had done. The only thing that will get them out of prison now is a pardon, either by Bush or Congress. We KNOW Bush will not do it, so we’re going to have to put pressure on Congress.

Any comments yet from Juan McCain concerning this travesty of justice?

21 posted on 07/29/2008 1:35:02 PM PDT by E. Cartman (I didn't leave The GOP. The GOP left me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
This was topped by applying a law in a fashion it was never meant to be applied in the most aggressive fashion possible according to those who originally wrote the legislation.

The law wasn't misused, it's simply a bad law.

Law enforcement officers should not get special treatment when they break the law.

How is it different if it is a law enforcement officer than a private security guard, or even a private citizen who regularly carries a firearm for self defense.

Keeping and bearing arms is a constitutionally protected right. We should not have laws that increase penalties for crimes if you happen to be exercising one of your constitutional rights at the time you committed it.

USC 924c should be struck down. If it is not struck down, it should apply equally to everyone, regardless of if some legislators say after the fact that they didn't intend for it to apply to law enforcement officers.

I do however agree that the defense was not allowed to properly present their case and crucial information was withheld from the jury.

The two should get a new trial. Though even with a new trial, getting acquitted is hardly guaranteed, especially for Compean. Ramos I'd say has a considerably better chance.

It does seem to me that the DOJ went a bit overboard in making an example of these two after discovering that a shooting was not reported, and even arguably covered up by Compean's actions. However, these two are obviously not completely innocent either.

22 posted on 07/29/2008 1:35:45 PM PDT by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree

Muchas Gracias, Jorge El Segundo!!!!!


23 posted on 07/29/2008 1:46:49 PM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
The testimony of the victim is not why they were found guilty of misreporting (delibrately so) the use of their firearms (how often it was discharged).

We do not live in a police state - Now I can agree the length of the sentence was too long.

24 posted on 07/29/2008 1:56:59 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: deport

I have a problem with the gun charge.

If they had reported the discharge of their weapon, might they still be on the job?


25 posted on 07/29/2008 1:59:51 PM PDT by griswold3 (Al qaeda is guilty of hirabah (war against society) Penalty is death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

Based largely on the perps testimony, they were put away. And there was absolutely no reason to go after the mandatory 10 year sentence for using a gun “in the commission of a crime”. That was Johnny the dirtball Sutton’s call.

AND, they gave the perp full immunity AND never told the jury that their star witness was busted running another load of drugs while awaiting the Ramos/Compean trial. Their perp/star witness had ZERO credibility, yet they built him up as some f****K altar boy (”he was smuggling a load to pa mfor his mama’s medicine”)

This is a damn atrocity.


26 posted on 07/29/2008 2:20:44 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Melas

They can pass legislation demanding a pardon. They should get busy doing just that.


27 posted on 07/29/2008 2:22:05 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pissant

You mean they can pass a resolution (that means non-binding) demanding a pardon. Congress cannot compel the executive branch. The branches are independent.


28 posted on 07/29/2008 2:51:39 PM PDT by Melas (Offending stupid people since 1963)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Melas

Of course. They pass resolutions all the time. But it could also be formatted as legislation. Not a pardon, but a removal of funding for their incarceration. Tom Tancredo’s bill.


29 posted on 07/29/2008 3:17:19 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rightwinghour

“Has Bush ever said why he won’t pardon these guys?”

Bush wants to discourage any Border Patrol agent from doing their job all in the name of promoting his NAU(North American Union) with Canada and Mexico. It will pass alot easier in this country if we have 30 million new illegal voting.


30 posted on 07/29/2008 3:48:26 PM PDT by doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

“This Congress and this President have been the worst catastrophes to ever afflict the America people.

Its no wonder both their ratings are in the gutter. They should all be fired.”

Stop voting these bast**ds from either party back into office. The only thing they react to is the threat of losing their seat in Congress.


31 posted on 07/29/2008 3:50:44 PM PDT by doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Tancredo’s bill would have failed even if it passed. At least two private prisons here in Texas volunteered to incarcerate them at no expense should the bill have passed.


32 posted on 07/29/2008 4:04:30 PM PDT by Melas (Offending stupid people since 1963)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Melas

The blowback to that would be tremendous.


33 posted on 07/29/2008 4:05:42 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

Regardless, the sentence was overboard.


34 posted on 07/29/2008 4:24:36 PM PDT by IYAS9YAS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pissant
The blowback to that would be tremendous.

Well, if we're being honest here, we both know that Tancredo knew with absolute certainty that his bill could not and would not pass. He was grandstanding for publicity, and so were the corps that own the private prison. He knew they'd never be released (which would have been bad btw) and the private facilities knew they'd never have to make good on an expensive offer.

35 posted on 07/29/2008 4:35:41 PM PDT by Melas (Offending stupid people since 1963)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

If they had reported the discharge of their weapon, might they still be on the job?


You maybe correct about that but I guess we’ll never know now. For sure it couldn’t have made it any worse for them, imo.


36 posted on 07/29/2008 5:40:20 PM PDT by deport ( ----Cue Spooky Music---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: pissant
All that being true - The reality is the testimony of this POS had very little (to nothing) to do with them being convicted - In that it was the reality of them discharging their weapon numerous times (which is a fact) and not reporting such (and in fact trying to deliberately falsify these facts). Officers cannot be firing their weapons and then after-the-fact trying to hide such information (regardless of the POS they are after). We do not live in a police state....but we will very quickly if such is allowed.

Sentence to much. I can agree with that. But so are sentences for thousands and thousands of others.

37 posted on 07/29/2008 6:11:44 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: IYAS9YAS
Likely so. But that is the reality for thousands of people in jail today......And the notion the POTUS should step in here and make this a political case has been nonsense from day one. Those on the "right" trying to make a political case out of this are all wet....foolishly so.

We do not live in a police state.....But we will very quickly ...if such actions are allowed (for any reasons).

38 posted on 07/29/2008 6:13:42 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

They TOLD their supervisor what happened when he showed up. They did not file the paperwork properly but that is a minor violation. Dismissal, maybe. Prison, no way. All they have to say is that they felt in danger, and they did indeed say that. They were not believed. I read the entire transcript. A slap on the wrist was warranted. End of story.


39 posted on 07/29/2008 6:15:47 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: pissant

No. They did not tell their supervisor the truth of what happened (originally) and they also deliberately picked up casings and other evidence as to reflecting how many shots they fired. There is something dead wrong with doing such. Especially when they deliberately chose not to fill out the AAR throughly - They knew not to have a fraudulent paperwork trail to boot -


40 posted on 07/29/2008 8:21:13 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson