Transcripts of Trial - Border Agents Compean and Ramos

DOJ - U.S. Attorney's Office (Johnny Sutton) ^ | February 13, 2007

[calcowgirl]

The complete (I think) transcript was filed with the Court on Friday and entered in the Court record yesterday. The DOJ is hosting the transcripts on their website in a series of 18 PDF Files. They range in size from 5 pages to over 300 pages, covering pretrial matters, sentencing, as well as testimony.

The transcripts are linked at the site above, as well as most of the press releases issued by the U.S. Attorney office on this matter.

I am setting up this thread (in chat) as a place for us junkies can comment on the testimony and to post any revelations anyone might find. Have at it!!!!

VOLUME I: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%201.pdf

VOLUME II: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%202.pdf

VOLUME III: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%203.pdf

VOLUME IV: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%204.pdf

VOLUME V: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%205.pdf

VOLUME VI: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%206.pdf

VOLUME VII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%207.pdf

VOLUME VIII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%208.pdf

VOLUME IX: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%209.pdf

VOLUME X: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2010.pdf

VOLUME XI: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2011.pdf

VOLUME XII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2012.pdf

VOLUME XIII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2013.pdf

VOLUME XIV: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2014.pdf

VOLUME XV: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2015.pdf

VOLUME XVI: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2016.pdf

VOLUME XVII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2017.pdf

VOLUME XVIII: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Volume%2018.pdf
.

[FOXFANVOX]

The relationship with Renee Sanchez and Aldrete-Davila [OAD] has been bounced around in various coverages. He is specifically addressed as a "family/friend" in Vol. 15 pg. 46. Pages 65-66 develop the pretrial relationship a bit more.

What I think is ironic is that the prosecution's case hinges on OAD being believed as truthful. It is my opinion that his testimony of help from Renee Sanchez may be one of the few truthful statements he actually did make during the trial.

I do not think that a smuggler's word should be taken over that of a Border Patrol Agent's. But, if you build your case on that proposition, it is hard to simply choose those statements that support your case, and ignore those that do not.

[calcowgirl]

Question on the voir dire, if you don't mind.

On the bottom of Vol 6, p.81, when they are introducing various witnesses to the jury to determine whether any jurors might know them, they identify DHG-OIG Agent Chris Sanchez as sitting at the counsel table. Is that normal for a witness to sit with counsel?

[Arizona Carolyn]

As a juror I would not be able to find beyond a reasonable doubt if the agent testifying these men lied because they told him one thing and wrote another could not give me visual or audio proof they lied.

[erton1]

I don't understand your post. Were these agents guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? The jury answered that question with their verdict. You question hearsay being admitted. There are over 25 exceptions to the hearsay rule. In law school, spent a week on the hearsay rule and the rest of the semester on the exceptions. Additionally, if a hearsay statement is not properly objected to, the testimony is admitted and any error is waived. It is not up to the judge to exclude testimony or evidence unless a proper objection is lodged by the opposing party. I can't put any credence in your thoery that the judge was in cahoots with the prosecutor. That is truly tin foil hat without ANY evidence. These defendants received due process under all applicable standards. I have now read portions of the transcript( mostly Ramos, Compean) and it is obvious that the defendants did not make very good witnesses. Frankly, IMHO, it looks like to me that Ramos sunk his own boat. It is going to be an uphill battle for agents in the 5th circuit.

[Arizona Carolyn]

If you need links to articles we can probably steer you, but a lot of the back up to that is actually in the testimony. After what I've read I have more questions about Rene Sanchez and what he is really doing in the Arizona border area than I did before from articles I've read.

[erton1]

You would probably not be on a jury in Texas if you needed visual or audio proof of a confession or statement made to a LEO that was an issue in the case. Either you would be struck for cause or the prosecution would use one of their peremptory strikes on you.

[Iwo Jima]

Parties are allowed to sit at counsel table. When the party is an entity as opposed to a natural person, the party is allowed to have a representative. If a corporation is sued, it can select its representative.

I never thought about it but I suppose that the government is entitled to have a representative the same as other entities.

I thought that it was worth noting that the government chose Chris Sanchez as its representative. Sort of tells you who is driving the ship.

[investigateworld]

Is that normal for a witness to sit with counsel?

Yes, the prosecutor is allowed to have one 'case agent' at his side. In state courts they are referred to as 'designated investigating officer'.

(Been there done that)

[abigailsmybaby]

No. I do too.

And if Aldrete-Davila's lawsuit goes his way I'll bet Rene Sanchez gets a big chunk of it.

[erton1]

The prior relationship between Sanchez and Davila will not effect the admissibility of the testimony of either. The relationship must be disclosed to the defense. The defense is allowed to cross exam the witness regarding the prior relationship in an attempt to attack the credibility of the witness. This was done in this case. It is then up to the jury as to whether they believe all, some or none of the testimony based on how credible they believe the witness. In this case it appears the jury believed Sanchez and Davila rather Ramos and Compean. In reading the testimony of the agents, I can understand how this occurred. The agents were fairly poor witnesses, especially Ramos. IMHO, this is not an area that is a fertile for the appeal.

[Chena]

The prior relationship between Sanchez and Davila will not effect the admissibility of the testimony of either. The relationship must be disclosed to the defense. The defense is allowed to cross exam the witness regarding the prior relationship in an attempt to attack the credibility of the witness. This was done in this case. It is then up to the jury as to whether they believe all, some or none of the testimony based on how credible they believe the witness. In this case it appears the jury believed Sanchez and Davila rather Ramos and Compean. In reading the testimony of the agents, I can understand how this occurred. The agents were fairly poor witnesses, especially Ramos. IMHO, this is not an area that is a fertile for the appeal.

Thank you for your comments, erton1. I'm not a legal expert by any means so my opinion isn't worth a hill of beans. However, from what I've read on this case, it is my opinion at this time that their appeals will not be successful.

[calcowgirl]

Thank you both for your reply. It just seemed odd that the agent chosen could also be the primary witness in the entire matter (who truly didn't "witness" anything on the day in question). Almost 500 pages of the 2600 pages of transcripts are of Chris Sanchez's testimony. Having him sit with counsel just seems like a lack of independence, or something.

[erton1]

Typically the gov't will have the agent who has the most knowledge of the case sit at the counsel table. What I find interesting, apparently the prosecutors were not too worried about the defense impeaching their designated representative.

[erton1]

I would not give up completely on the appeal. It appears they have excellent appellate attorneys. If reversible error occurred, I am confident that their attorneys will bring it forth in the appeal. It will be an uphill battle, especially in the 5th circuit. You never know until the court issues it's ruling.

[Iwo Jima]

I am very confident that the 5th Circuit will reverse this conviction. Bush will see to it. He won't pardon them (he can't), but he will take the heat off by getting the 5th Circuit panel to in essence do it for him.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Volume V only has 7 pages. :-)

[FOXFANVOX]

Charles, I changed tactics and started reading from the back forward. Volume 16 has only 4 pages!

If we later divide the Volumes up by individual FReepers in order to become resources, I volunteer for Volume 16, if you want to take Volume V.

8)

[ContemptofCourt]

I am very confident that the 5th Circuit will reverse this conviction. Bush will see to it. He won't pardon them (he can't), but he will take the heat off by getting the 5th Circuit panel to in essence do it for him.

OK, IJ, you lost me there. How is "Bush going to see to it"? That's the whole friggin purpose of the lifetime appointments...so the executive or legislative branches can't screw with the judiciary or their work.

I know plenty of circuit court judges, and not one of them is beholden to anyone in the executive branch.

[FOXFANVOX]

"Bush......won't pardon them (he can't), but he will take the heat off by getting the 5th Circuit panel to in essence do it for him."

CoC critiques the last part of your statement, I would question the first part. Pres. Bush can pardon the USBP Agents. It is stated in the US Constitution that he has that power. [The nonsense about waiting for the proper process is just that, nonsense.] Unfortunately, his Texas pal Johnny Sutton has his ear so I don't look for a pardon unless the people of this country ratchet it up several more notches.

[Iwo Jima]

How naive you are. I could name several Fifth Circuit judges who could be easily swayed by a subtle indirect word from Bush. Some justices are highly political.

Also, the fact that the judgment should be reversed will make it easy to do what they know that Bush wants them to do.