How cozy was Border Patrol with smuggler?

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | February 12, 2007 | Jerome Corsi

[La Enchiladita]

There was probably blackmail involved. If our side of the border did not comply with their side of the border, then . . . . .

. . . . .

[CharlesWayneCT]

I just told you what the DHS report said -- it was NOT his van, he did not steal it. He was hired to cross the border and then meet up with the VAN and drive it to a drop-off point.

Questions about the van are interesting, and one would hope there was an investigation into the van to see if it could be tied to anybody on this side of the border.

[calcowgirl]

You're welcome.

The testimony was only if you wanted to go pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to buy the transcripts. The docs I have pulled online cost 8¢ a page--the court reporters charge $2 to $3 per page. Of course you will note on the docket that transcripts are expressly not available online. What a racket.

I do think that Corsi should just let loose with some real information instead of musings from Andy Ramirez. We've heard them before. If it hasn't been said, then just say it. If he has the transcripts, post them. I hate the spoonfeeding approach, but I guess that's the way the media makes money.

[calcowgirl]

The cell phone was not the drug "smuggler's" phone.

The report didn't say that. It just talked of a cell phone left in the van, not whose it was.

[angelsonmyside]

Twice in the memorandum on 3-14 from Chris Sanchez, he stated that Osbaldo said an unknown BP agent shot him in the groin. I don't get where the "shot in the butt" we keep hearing about comes from.

He said in the first paragraph that Osbaldo was shot entering the US. Then in paragraph 4 he was attempting to return to Mexico after being caught. The drug runner says he heard 5 or 6 shots being fired before he was shot in the groin.

So he was either spinning like a top to get shot in the groin, Osboldo lied, or Sanchez lied according to this report alone.

[TomGuy]

...investigation into the van to see if it could be tied to anybody on this side of the border.

And I posted that an earlier report indicated that the van had TX tag. If it had TX or any US state tag, it would be tied to anybody on this side of the border -- unless Mexicans register their vehicles in TX -- and that would raise other questions.

[calcowgirl]

For the record, I've read the report and don't find half the stuff in there that you are saying. I understand that it is your interpretation of what is written, but you have posted a lot that one cannot find in the report. For example, since all of the names are redacted, how do you know who took Ramos' gun and that it wasn't C.Sanchez? It clearly says "DHS OIG and OIA agents encountered Ramos at his residence and exchanged Ramos' duty weapon with another weapon."

And while I haven't bought into the theory that he shot himself later (or other theories), you can't conclude that a bullet couldn't be switched. Couldn't one find a bullet after a trip to the target range? (I am not suggesting this is reality, only pointing out that you are jumping to some conclusions that are not in the report).

[bluedogpdx]

I would think that normal police procedure, when you confiscate a drug-laden vehicle with a cell phone, is to immediately gather evidence in order to try to identify suspects in order to make arrests. So, why does it seem like that didn't happen in this case?

[calcowgirl]

Compean's initial statement for example, corroborated testimony from Davilas. Davilas had told the agents he had heard an agent yell "hit him" when he was trying to surrender to Compean. Compean said in his statement that he had heard someone yell "hit him" at the same time. See, corroboration by two people interviewed separately who don't know the other's testimony.

I think it is a little too much corroboration. And Davila's "statement" is one that was written in November 2006 and the paragraphs that reference it do not include reference to an exhibit supporting it. I don't buy into this one, unless I see statement or testimony from Davila, or a report from Sanchez written sometime before June of 2005. (Yes, I'm a skeptic).

I laughed when I read the Agent's note about the shotgun--it was overkill to sell one possibility, the one they wanted to write. I can think of plenty of ways to have my hands on the barrel without pointing it straight at myself. Again... these are C.Sanchez's words (and another agent), not Compeans. I want to hear his testimony.

[GOPPachyderm]

Why do you put "smuggler" in quote marks? Paid paid to cross into the US, meet the person with the van and drive to another location would seem to earn him the right to smuggler without the quote marks.

[calcowgirl]

I don't know, Chucky. If the van belonged to Rene Sanchez, wouldn't that be important? ;-)

[Arizona Carolyn]

This gets thicker and thicker.... and the more convinced I am the wrong men are sitting in prison right now... I can draw a lot of conclusions from this article that tells me The Border Patrol and HLS and Sutton should have all looked a whole lot closer at Rene Sanchez and never brought charges against Ramos and Compean.

[shield]

bttt

[WesternPacific]

You quote the DHS report as the gospel while totally disregarding any report by WND and insinuating it to be a fabrication. Is it not possible the DHS report is biased and or untrue as well? I look at both with a suspicious mind.

I would have a more open mind.

[calcowgirl]

The report then says that in this initial interview, Compean claimed he thought Davila had a gun, but that, quoting from the report: even though Compean later recanted his original statement by stating he was "never really certain" that Aldrete-Davila had a gun.

This is the kind of garbage that makes OIG and the AUSA lose total credibility with me. He did not "recant." He said "it looked like a gun. This is when I started shooting." The fact he said he wasn't certain (i.e. positive) is an honest statement, but it does not change his belief that "it looked like a gun" and that is why he reacted as he did. The word "recant" was added in by our famous DHS-OIG liars as CYA fodder. It is disgusting to see them do this, just like Debra Kanof reiterating her garbage about an unarmed fleeing Mexican who only wanted to surrender and/or only wanted to go home.

[1rudeboy]

I think the distinction is being made here between the person who "smuggled" the drugs across the border, and Davila acting as a "mule."

Making no difference in terms of possession, naturally, just a difference in terms of terminology.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

I've been reading the DHS report, and it is an eye-opener

Here is an EAR-opener, for those who will listen:

FreeRepublic Exclusive - COVERAGE & AUDIO of Free The Texas Three Rally, Hollywood, CA 2/10/07

[calcowgirl]

The bullet entered the left buttocks and lodged in the right thigh, leaving some small fragments in the pelvis. It was reported during the trial in early 2006 that it "shattered" his urethra. As the story goes, his left side must have been facing the shooter for the bullet to go left to right.

[1rudeboy]

With regard to the DHS report being treated as "gospel," there is no shortage of people (at World Net Daily and elsewhere) who are telling us what the report contains. When their contentions are proven to be incorrect, it is not the person who points it out who is treating the report as "gospel," but rather the people doing the proselytizing.

[Terabitten]

Do you have a link to the DHS report?