Posted on 02/12/2007 1:35:42 AM PST by Man50D
Smuggler PING!
Thanks for posting this. BTTT!
Gosh, I've been following this story and it blows my mind. I believe in a previous article I read that Blanchard was also reassigned because he was suspicious of Sanchez phone calls. The official response for his removal from the area was that his assignment was a temporary one, unbeknownst to him.
One would think the major focus of this whole case would be the drug smuggling. I am sure finding a cell phone would be a huge find in tracking the network involved in the smuggling. It is absolutely sickening.
Another thing that really bothers me about this case is the jury. The prosecution presented the case that the agents shot an unarmed man and tried to cover it up. Please, how can ANYBODY, with a working brain, even think that someone carrying that amount of dope WOULD NOT BE ARMED??????
How's that investigation going, Johnny??? Is it getting anywhere??? or was there ever one to begin with??? It's high time for Johnny to come clean.
As far as I know there has been no transcript.
Like I said before, the jury was asked to believe that the smuggler was unarmed. Was this based on the testimony of the goverment officials who lied? The officials said that Compean and Ramos specifically said they were out to "shoot Mexicans" and that they knew he was "unarmed". Both of these statements have been proven false. That alone should be cause for a mistrial and these men should be released pending a new trial. Personally, I would like to see a whole new trial where ALL EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY is allowed so that these men can be fully exhonerated, pardoning isn't enough in my opinion.
WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD BELIEVE A DRUG SMUGGLER CARRYING 748 POUNDS OF POT WOULD BE UNARMED!!!!!!! PERSONALLY I AM SURPRISED HE DIDN'T HAVE AN ASSAULT RIFLE! I am SPECULATING HERE, but at this point, it would not surprise me in the least that there were fire arms in that van and that they were taken to make them look more guilty.
Filed |
Doc # |
Description |
03/14/2006 |
151 |
Transcript filed as to Ignacio Ramos, Jose Alonso Compean for dates of 2/15/06 (Proceedings Transcribed: Sealed) (Court Reporter: David Perez) (dl1) (Entered: 03/15/2006) |
06/01/2006 |
160 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 2/27/06 Proceedings Transcribed: testimony of David Jacquez. Court Reporter: David Perez. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 06/02/2006) |
06/01/2006 |
161 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 2/23-24/06 Proceedings Transcribed: testimony of Oscar Juarez. Court Reporter: David Perez. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 06/02/2006) |
06/01/2006 |
162 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 2/24/06 Proceedings Transcribed: testimony of Arturo Vasquez. Court Reporter: David Perez. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 06/02/2006) |
09/07/2006 |
172 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 2/21/06 Proceedings Transcribed: Opening Statments. Court Reporter: David Perez. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 09/08/2006) |
09/07/2006 |
173 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 2/21/06 Proceedings Transcribed: Closing Statements. Court Reporter: David Perez. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 09/08/2006) |
10/18/2006 |
190 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 3/30/05 Proceedings Transcribed: Preliminary Hearing. Court Reporter: Leroy Swanson. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 10/20/2006) |
10/26/2006 |
204 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Ignacio Ramos held on 5/12/06 Proceedings Transcribed: MOTION HEARING. Court Reporter: Reporters Ink. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 10/27/2006) |
10/26/2006 |
205 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Ignacio Ramos held on 4/22/06 Proceedings Transcribed: Arraignment. Court Reporter: Reporters Ink. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 10/27/2006) |
10/26/2006 |
206 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 3/24/05 Proceedings Transcribed: Bond Hearing. Court Reporter: Reporters Ink. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 10/27/2006) |
10/26/2006 |
207 |
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Jose Alonso Compean, Ignacio Ramos held on 3/21/05 Proceedings Transcribed: Initial Appearance. Court Reporter: Reporters Ink. NOTE: Transcript document is not available online. (dl1, ) (Entered: 10/27/2006) |
I'm beginning to think that Sutton jumped on the prosecution of the BP agents in order to draw attention AWAY from the drug smuggling. Intentionally.
Someone help me out here. How did Corsi get his hands on the trial transcript?
If he's a mule, I can see it.
Ping
Another article with no new facts, just speculation about stuff WND is incapable of finding out on their own. "We know he had a cell phone, we have no idea what was in it or what has been done with it, so we'll speculate that Rene was in league with drug dealers and his phone number is in the phone"!!!
Blanchett apparently has no information whatsoever about the crimes. The Cell Phone had nothing to do with the crime. That's why they aren't germaine to the trial.
Rene it seems (if anything in WND is to be believed) had sources that allowed us to stop a lot of drugs from coming into our country. We are supposed to lionise the two BP agents because they shot a drug dealer, and therefore helped stop a single shipment.
But we are supposed to hate Rene Sanchez who apparently has been able to stop multiple drug shipments without actually shooting anybody for no reason.
Oh, probably not anymore. WND has pretty much assured that, whatever contacts Rene might have had which gave us this valuable information, we don't have them anymore.
I'm beginning to see a reason why stuff might be under seal -- Sanchez/Sanchez apparently were key players in controlling the drug trafficking over our border, and the focus on their efforts has probably ruined that for us.
Any pro-pardon folks want to speculate on how WND got leaked portions of the transcript if the transcript is under control of the evil empire, rather than pro-pardon folks who might want to hold it up because it's bad for the agents?
Oh yes, the "Bush held the girl's Mexican Flag while he hugged her, so the BP agents must be innocent" argument.
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.