Something tells me the story the jury heard was quite different from what we read in this article.
From just reading the article it sounds like a serious injustice has been done to these two border patrol officers by their own government.
But based just on the evidence provided here it does not seem likely this would have made it to court and even far less likely that a jury would convict them of anything more than failure to report firing their weapons.
It doesn't add up.
It's obviously a miscarriage of justice, or we aren't getting all the facts.
It sounds kind of strange that if he thought his partner had been shot, that he would keep chasing the smuggler that he had been chasing, that was just running away rather than looking for the shooter or aiding his wounded partner. However, there's not enough information for me to doubt that his actions were reasonable in the situation, it just sounds a bit strange.
The article mentions that the fleeing smuggler was not actually armed, but how can that be considered a known fact when he was able to flee the scene?
There's just too many missing pieces to the puzzle and what there is doesn't seem to fit together. It doesn't sound like we're getting the whole story here.
Agreed. WND is hardly a credible enough source to draw a fair judgment about the case.