What crime? They violated some administrative policies of the BP (not reporting the discharge of a firearm, not getting superviors permission to pursue, etc.), which would at most warrant a suspension. The only evidence the prosecution has for the perp being unarmed is the perp's word. Since he escaped into Mexico, he could easily have ditched the gun. His immunity, plus being peeved that he was shot in the ass, plus his $5 milion lawsuit against the US is a powerful motivator for lying about everything in this case. What I REALLY don't get (among the many many weirdnesses of this case) is how BOTH agents got convicted. Even if you buy the prosecution's argument that the perp was unarmed and didn't deserve to be shot, only one of the agents pulled the trigger.
The application of deadly force was not warranted in this situation. Further, they deliberately attempted to conceal their use of deadly force, and then proceeded to fabricate an account of said use of deadly force that was rather obviously not true. The latter two actions are always considered to show consciousness of guilt, unless the perpetrator(s) can demonstrate that they were not in full command of their faculties at the time of the actions in question.
Attempted murder, concealment and destruction of evidence, and false official statement are all felonies.
only evidence the prosecution has for the perp being unarmed is the perp's word. Since he escaped into Mexico, he could easily have ditched the gun.
OK, let's add another element to their crime: they technically committed an act of war against Mexico without express permission of the United States government.
His immunity, plus being peeved that he was shot in the ass, plus his $5 milion lawsuit against the US is a powerful motivator for lying about everything in this case.
Well, the agents have lied--but you seem to be all right with that. And immunity is not a motivator for falsehood, as there is no penalty for telling the truth if one is immune from the adverse consequences of self-incrimination.
What I REALLY don't get (among the many many weirdnesses of this case) is how BOTH agents got convicted. Even if you buy the prosecution's argument that the perp was unarmed and didn't deserve to be shot, only one of the agents pulled the trigger.
The other agent was an accessory after the fact.
See post 13. Several crimes are alleged.