Posted on 02/06/2007 6:18:29 PM PST by calcowgirl
Good points.
The fact is the bullet was taken out of chain of custody and is not reliable proof of much of anything. We don't know that this bullet came from either Ramos or Campeon, this guy could have been shot by a buddy down in Mexico for all we know. This is why they have chain of custody and Sanchez had to know this when he took the fragment with him to his home with Davila for the night.
I mean, hell, Tony's a longtime freeper. He knows what this whole case looks like to us. Does the WH really want us all contorted and enraged? Can't they say *anything* to explain this case to us?
Charles is ignoring the supervisors didn't want to file a written report because to do so required calling in the FBI and it was near end of shift and the super didn't want to stick around after hours. Also the one so-called government witness claimed he was in a specific position watching all this and it is physically impossible for him to have seen the goings-on from the spot he claimed to be located.
Would jury nullification come into play here?
Until we see the court transcript, we won't know if there was any evidence presented that the bullet was from Ramos' gun.
I suspect there was not, since the story is Ramos STIPULATED that the bullet was from his weapon. When the prosecution and defense stipulate to a fact, it is rare to present any evidence regarding that fact.
Using stipulation so that you can later claim there was no "evidence presented" is a good rhetorical trick, and might work with politicians and a gullible public, but I doubt the appeals court will look kindly on that sort of argument.
But still, my point wasn't to argue if the bullet was Ramos' or not. As I pointed out elsewhere, we KNOW Compean wasn't claimed to have hit him, but Compean got more total time than Ramos -- and Ramos admits he shot at the guy. "attempted" applies whether you are a good shot or not.
My point was that, if we accept the claim that the bullet was NOT Ramos' bullet, then the medical report gives NO backing to the claim that Ramos was threatened, since the bullet wound does NOT indicate that the smuggler turned toward Ramos, because the wound was not inflicted by Ramos.
This is what I mean by being consistant and addressing the facts. It is actually pretty easy to take things in tiny pieces and make up stories that sound like they back your position, but if those stories are inconsistant with each other, and inconsistant with the known facts, all you've really done is told a poorly constructed fairy tale.
My pencil is on my desk. It is in two pieces. It did not splinter, it actually broke pretty much perpendicular to the axis - the lower portion looks almost like a fresh pencil unsharpened out of the box, except for shorter.
I forgot to mention that when I told my story. I've never seen a pencil break in two when it landed on the floor before.
explains everything except why Bush kept these varmints in place
We don't have the court transcript, so I can't comment on what was testified to at the trial.
I have no idea if any of the claims you make here are true or not, as I don't recall reading an interview with Compean's and Ramos' immediate supervisor who would have been responsible for a written report.
No, I didn't miss it, that's the one I'm talking about. As I said, are you actually citing that as evidence against Sutton? Do you understand what the issue is in "The House of Death"?
I read the transcript of Jeff Toubin's interview with Lou Dobbs yesterday and he said no transcripts, even after Freedom of Information Act requests, after all this time is "unusual."
It's just too easy to say "Bush's Fault" when staff about 11 pay grades lower should have taken care of it.
I think Bush could have cleaned up alot more after Clinton than he did!
Sounds like a cover-up of a frame-up.
I stand somewhat corrected... he stated in his Myth/Reality statement that the agents claimed this happened in the middle of the night and stated the events of February 17, 2005 occurred at approximately 1:00 P.M. MT...
According to the National Border Patrol Council, who has corrected myths Sutton perpetrated in his report:
Fact: Neither of the BP agents has ever alleged nor intimated that they were unsure of what they saw because of the time of the incident...
In other words the agents never said this was the middle of the night and their supervisor knew this since the supervisor was on the scene and took a verbal report -- as required by the code of the BP. The supervisor did not want to do a written report because they were at end of shift and the paperwork and waiting for the FBI to report there was a shooting would have taken them beyond shift.
Read the whole article, this is only a snip
Despite the allegations about a cover-up in the House of Death case, Attorney General Gonzales in May 2005 appointed Sutton to the post of vice chairman of his Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys, which plays a key role in determining DOJ policies and programs. In late March of this year, Gonzales tapped Sutton to be chairman of the committee.
“Johnny Sutton is a well-wired guy, all the way to the White House,” former DEA supervisor Gonzalez said in a prior interview with Narco News. “No one is going to go after him. That’s the bottom line.”
and it has tenacles all the way up the ladder.
Yes, and Sutton is involved in this case, too...
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.