who voted for Bush are feeling
this about him about now?!
Posted on 02/12/2007 1:35:42 AM PST by Man50D
The Border Patrol agent with family ties to the Mexican drug smuggler in the case of two jailed border agents may have been involved in back-channel communications with Mexican drug cartels, investigative reports obtained by WND suggest, prompting calls for a special prosecutor to look into the charges.
"We now know that DHS and prosecutor U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton found [smuggler Osbaldo] Aldrete-Davila because the mother-in-law of Border Patrol Agent Rene Sanchez talked with Aldrete-Davila's mother on the phone," Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Friends of the Border Patrol, told WND. "How many other conversations in Mexico did Border Patrol Agent Rene Sanchez have and what was the purpose of those conversations?"
An investigative report filed by Department of Homeland Security Special Agent Christopher Sanchez on July 18, 2005, stated that on July 11, 2005, the DHS Office of Inspector General in El Paso spoke to Agent Rene Sanchez in the Wilcox, Ariz., BP Station, concerning a telephone call Sanchez made to Border Patrol Agent Nolan Blanchett in the Ysleta BP Station in Texas.
At the time of the phone call, Blanchett was temporarily assigned to the Fabens BP Station, the scene of the Feb. 17, 2005, incident with Aldrete-Davila that led to the imprisonment of agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean.
According to the July 18, 2005, DHS memorandum of activity:
(Rene) Sanchez stated that he called Blanchett one or two days after he spoke to DHS OIG on March 5, 2005. Sanchez said he asked Blanchett if he knew anything about a shooting that occurred on February 17, 2005 involving a van loaded with dope in which BP agents shot at the driver. Sanchez said Blanchett told him he knew nothing about the shooting.
A separate March 14, 2005, DHS memorandum of activity filed by Christopher Sanchez, documents that agent Rene Sanchez "queried the Border Patrol Tracking System and found that the Fabens Border Patrol Station seized a load of marijuana on February 17, 2005."
These reports drew the suspicion of Ramirez.
"Why is this Border Patrol Agent Rene Sanchez over in Wilcox, Arizona, so interested in searching out this drug bust information in Fabens, Texas?" Ramirez asked WND. "Sure, we know that Aldrete-Davila and Rene Sanchez grew up together in Mexico. But how much more to the story is there than that?"
WND has learned that prosecutor Sutton's office took steps to prevent Agent Nolan Blanchett from testifying in open court, claiming that Blanchett's testimony would compromise an ongoing investigation.
WND has also learned that Blanchett had received phone calls from BP Agent Rene Sanchez tipping Blanchett off that a sensor hit was about to take place on the border, giving advance warning that a drug-smuggling transport across the border was going to take place. Knowing in advance the when and where of a sensor hit on the border would allow a Border Patrol agent to be in position to interdict the drug shipment and arrest the smuggler.
"How do we know that Agent Rene Sanchez wasn't working with Aldrete-Davila's drug cartel?" Ramirez asked. "Calling Blanchett in advance and letting him know where to interdict a drug shipment might be a good way to eliminate the competition of Aldrete-Davila or whomever he is linked to."
At the Ramos-Compean trial, the defense was not allowed to call Border Patrol Blanchett to the stand for testimony.
"The connection is a little bit too convenient," Ramirez pointed out to WND. "Here we have this Border Patrol Agent Rene Sanchez over in Wilcox, Ariz., and the only way DHS and Johnny Sutton's office find out that Aldrete-Davila was the drug smuggler is because Rene Sanchez tips them off. Then Aldrete-Davila gets immunity and medical care from the prosecutor. Just how closely was Rene Sanchez working with the drug smuggler and what did Rene Sanchez stand to gain when Aldrete-Davila got immunity?"
WND has previously reported Aldrete-Davila's cell phone was found in the abandoned vehicle. This directly contradicts prosecutor Sutton's repeated claim that there was no evidence at the scene, which would have permitted law-enforcement investigators to identify Aldrete-Davila as the perpetrator.
"Where is Aldrete-Davila's telephone?" Ramirez asked WND. "I wonder if Rene Sanchez's phone number was one of the numbers in that phone's memory, or maybe others of higher ranks inside U.S. government agencies or bodies. But then again, what if this guy is a runner for the Tucson Mafia and I am not referring to people of European ancestry either. Why is it that even today nobody knows what network of people Aldrete-Davila called? Why isn't Johnny Sutton going after the drug dealer's network? He gave Davila immunity, not the people Davila liked to call."
WND has obtained the transcripts from the Ramos-Compean trial for the testimony given by Border Patrol Agent Arturo Vasquez on Feb. 24, 2006, and by Agent Oscar Juarez on Feb. 23 and 24, 2006. Both agents gave testimony about the drug dealer's cell phone they found on the scene on Feb. 17, 2005.
Vasquez testified he found the phone in the front seat of the abandoned drug smuggler's Ford Econoline van, with a charging device plugged into the cigarette lighter.
In cross-examination by defense, Vasquez testified about the cell phone as follows:
Q: While you're looking at the phone, you're scrolling through whatever information you can find? A: Yes.
Q: Did you notice whether or not any of the calls are recent?
A: I didn't have the chance to find what I was looking for. I didn't have enough time to get into some of the directory, the actual directory where you can get that information from. Because, while we were going that (Supervisor) Agent (Jonathan) Richards and Lance (Mendrano) got to the area and I had to hand the phone over to Agent Mendrano.
Q: I thought your testimony, though, was tat was, pretty much, all you do is check out the phone.
A: Yes, but I didn't get to the part where I could actually see times and all that.
At this point, prosecutor Debra Kanof interrupted and objected that the testimony was not relevant to the guilt or innocence of Ramos and Compean. Judge Kathleen Cardone agreed, commenting, "It's late on a Friday ... ."
Judge Cardone ruled out cross-examination about the cell phone, stating: "Mr. Aldrete-Davila is not on trial. And everybody knows he's got a phone and everybody knows he was transporting the drugs, but, unless we're getting somewhere that's got to do with this case, I'm concerned we're going of ... ." At that point, Judge Cardone was interrupted once again by Debra Kanof.
On page 186 of his testimony, Agent Juarez corroborated Agent Vasquez's testimony that the drug smuggler's cell phone was found in the abandoned van containing 743 pounds of marijuana.
WND is unable to determine who currently has possession of the cell phone or if any law-enforcement officers made any attempt to identify the owner or the identify of the names in the incoming and outgoing call memory, or the service provider records of the same.
As far as WND can determine, no law-enforcement agency made any attempt to identify Aldrete-Davila's drug network or associates from the recovered cell phone, or if agents were able to determine if the phone records indicate any calls to or received from Border Patrol agents or others connected with U.S. agencies or law enforcement.
As WND previously reported, Agent Vasquez was fired by the Border Patrol and Agent Juarez resigned in anticipation of being fired.
This is the real story being hidden here -- the US Border Patrol is completely compromised. How can you expect an anchor baby to defend the border in any meaningful way?
The Border Patrol needs to be cleansed from top to bottom if we want to be serious about defending our borders. They have some serious institutional problems that MUST be addressed.
I guess it's an interpretation of the phrase "there was a cell phone in the van". I took that to mean "when davilas got into the van". Just as he would say there was drugs in the van.
I would expect that if it was his cell phone, he would have said "I left my cell phone in the van".
C. Sanchez was reported elsewhere to be the agent who was transporting Davilas and the bullet. So he couldn't have been the agent at the scene when they took Ramos's gun, unless I have a serious warp in the timeline.
And at the time Sanchez was transporting Davilas and the bullet, he didn't know which agent had shot at the guy, and which one had hit him, even if he could get his hands on a bullet to swap, he wouldn't know which bullet to swap.
It is clear now why Ramos stipulated that his weapon fired the shot. Everybody agrees Compean missed his mark, and Compean said in his first statement that he thought Ramos hit the guy, and another agent said the guy had to be helped into a van on the other side of the river -- there's little room for the "shot later", substituted bullet theory.
I will agree that I am trying, to the best of my ability, to substitute names back into the report based on other reports, mostly from WND, leaked about the case, and an "analysis" of the amount of space available in the document for names, and occasional edges of letters left visible.
And I think it is reasonable to infer that the three other agents who are accused of lying in the report are the three that have now been terminated (one resigned, two were fired).
You were saying the same thing when WND reported that one of the agents was beaten up in prison. You have no credibility on this issue.
Because "smuggler" is the person who brought the drugs across the border. There is no evidence that Davilas brought the drugs across the border -- nobody saw him drive the van across the border.
The van had Texas license plates, and the investigation report says Davilas met the van in the united states. That makes him a drug courrier, not a drug smuggler.
But I didn't want to change the terms now lest I confuse anybody.
The section in question was about a series of interviews held with Davilas before the trial, but you are correct that the report doesn't have an attachment showing a written statement signed by Davilas. I would hope there is a recording of the discussions somewhere that would contain this information, but I haven't seen it.
This same basic scenario was provided by a Freeper whose name I can't remember now. I told him it seemed feasible then, and it seems even more feasible NOW.
But you are correct. If we assume that Sutton is crooked, that Sanchez (both Rene and Chris) are crooked, that the defense attorneys are idiots, that the 3 other BP agents and their supervisors are crooked, and that they are all willing to commit multiple criminal offenses in order to put two BP agents in jail, then we could surmise that they fed Davilas the correct words to say to match the testimony of the others.
Of course, they could also plant evidence and bribe the jurors.
Problem is, once you assume this stuff is a grand conspiracy, it's a self-fulfilling theory, because any "proof" of guilt is obviously planted evidence.
Gotcha! I just figured they were all about the business of smuggling drugs, but I see the distInction now that you point it out. Davila probably doesn't make as much money as the people who hired him. Thankfully now he has a shot at that five million.
From several things you have posted:
1. Sanchez had NO BUSINESS being involved in this case. He was a childhood friend of Davila. That he is STILL involved tells me volumes.
2. It is apparent to me that Sanchez is running Davila in an undercover operation. I'm HIGHLY suspicious that Sanchez is letting Davila get away with a lot of lawbrealing, just to hide his involvment.
3. I suspect Sanchez is a dirty BP agent. He is in a supervisory position in the ID office. He can spot trouble and warn off his childhood friend.
Yes. If the van belonged to Rene, that would mean something, but it wouldn't mean that the agents were innocent of any of the charges against them, because HOW they were discovered is immaterial to the facts of what happened that day.
And of course there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Rene owns the van -- how do we know YOU don't own the van?
At this point, there is little doubt; they are protecting a compromised agent, and that is the reason for the railroading of these men.
WND is written by people with an agenda, who have shown no particular fealty to the facts in any matter in which they have a vested interest.
The DHS is an official department of the United States which is tasked with investigating criminal activity and providing evidence for trials.
So yes, I give more credence to the DHS report than I do to WND. Of course, WND's facts on the rare occasions that they provide a fact are often from the DHS reports. So they believe them when it's convenient.
My real reason for skepticism of WND is that whenever someone posts a WND article I can trivially show how they have twisted the facts and made up conclusions without basis in order to push their agenda. I post these regularly, and while I am vilified for that with name-calling and the like, nobody has refuted my objections to the articles.
But then you even believe that the sun rises in the east....
In his original statement, he said he thought it was a gun; That "thought" isn't a profession of doubt, but rather a profession of his inability to provide evidence. "I thought I saw a gun" only covers you for shooting at an unarmed man if you are certain that you thought you saw a gun.
So later saying that you were never certain there was a gun means you were NEVER certain you were in danger, and in the absense of clear indication of danger, you aren't supposed to shoot. YOu don't get to shoot people because you think they might be threatening you, you have to have a reasonable certainty that you are in danger.
Coupled with the absense of a single person at the scene who heard the two ever say anything about there being a weapon in the hands of a suspect that was on the loose, it is rational to believe that "I thought he had a gun" was the statement of a man trying to justify why he took shots at a fleeing man, and not a statement of a certainty of fear of danger.
And since Compean says that he no longer felt in any danger when Ramos showed up and shot the guy, it's bad for Ramos as well to claim he saw a gun and felt threatened. So much so that Ramos testified that Compean was laying on the ground, when Compean claimed first that he was standing, and later that he was kneeling, but NEVER that he was laying down.
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.