Posted on 01/03/2007 1:21:09 PM PST by Tim Long
Our nation is governed by laws....federal agents cannot kill an unarmed fleeing man. If they couldn't act under the rules, they shouldn't be BP. When they shot at him, they did not know he was smuggling.
People's use of this as a weapon in the political arena is disgusting. They were blatantly wrong, and convicted by a jury of their peers. They turned down a plea bargain that would have saved them the long sentences.
The only reason anyone would support these guys is because they tried to kill a Mexican.....a lot of people's racism is showing on this matter IMO.
I have not read all your posts yet, but I know that there are cooler heads than mine in this forum. That is why I love it so much.
Well..on to the posts. I am expecting to get flamed.
Yesterday (OK, today as well), I saw it as "go ahead and cross our Borders, those watching it are not allowed to shoot". Of course, I thought this well before this incident.
Now, that is just not true. How do you know that I am not a Mexican or related to a Mexican family? As a matter of fact, the Father of my favorite little nephew happens to BE Mexican, from Mexico. I have many Mexican friends here in Texas.
The border patrol agents being charged are MEXICAN. I'll bet they knew a lot more than you seem to think they did. But THEIR word was not good enough. The word of a LAWBREAKER was.
No, we want much worse. The Mexican army protecting smugglers for instance. They get away with it because WE can't protect our own borders.
Which means buying a witness with immunity, I guess.
The obstruction of justice charges are ludicrous. George W. Bush should use his power to pardon these two men, and restore morale to the Border patrol and the American people.
Is he afraid he might offend the Latio movements, who encourage their people to illegally cross our Borders?
To hell with the American people? I don't know what is going on with him anymore..
sw
So... which cops should be able to just execute anyone they wish... just the federal agents? or should it include state and local cops too?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1761985/posts
Read this thread and then tell us about the rulr of law.
Just my opinion.....why would this man's life be so worthless, when far worse criminals are given the same protection by the law that he is, with no public outcry?
I will remind you that they tried to cover the shooting up by making a second trip to the sight to get casings they missed picking up at the time. I will also remind you that they did not know he was smuggling.
They tried to kill a man for a misdemeanor, entering the US illegally. They shot him in the back. That's inexcusable, and they knew it. So should everyone else, unless there is something else besides the facts involved.
The smuggler was not murdered, he was shot at. He could have been running towards hidden weapons, they do that you know, hide weapons. There are many reasons to shoot at an invader, even fear for your own life.
I do not advocate murder, but I do believe that an alien invader can be shot the same as any other enemy.
One skunk is sitting in the White House, and the other is sitting in the Attorney General's office...
It's unbelievable and disgusting to realize the low level these "leaders" have sunk to...
Your argument makes sense, I'm not saying it doesn't. But overlook my bad writing skills and hear me out past the first two paragraphs, OK?
The Southern Border can be a very dangerous place to patrol because Mexico does not want us to patrol it and neither does the current Administration. Slanted reporting is one method used to keep the Border "clear" for illegal entry.
I witnessed such slanted reporting a few years back when some U.S. Military Personnel got shot at by a "Poor Mexican Goat Herder", and they shot back in self defense. (guess who got in trouble?)
There may very well be circumstances other than the "facts" that were presented - that happens in trials all of the time..red tape inadmissible stuff.
I sat on a jury in a murder case once. After we came to a verdict, We found out a lot of facts that were inadmissible so the jurors "opinion" would not be swayed. (pissed me off, and if the judgment had of been different, I'd have been on the news complaining we were "mislead"). That experience changed my opinion about "fair trials" forever.
The Border Agents shot the guy (whether or not it was in the back is irrelevant, he could have been running towards hidden weapons, you never know)
These Border agents obviously got emotional,angry, not unlike a like we've seen Police Officers do sometimes after a chase. They tried to hide excessive use of their arms, knowing that spelled trouble for them. They are guilty of those offenses.
The witness in the case, IMO, was allowed to insert "facts" that are basically his word against theirs, as far as what "went down".
We are to believe the Border Patrol agents did not know he was smuggling at the time. LOL! Bet they knew him though, bet they knew his M.O., his past..they knew exactly what he was doing, they have been agents a long time.
The Agents are guilty alright. But they deserve a Pardon, because the whole thing smells BEYOND what "facts" were presented. You don't send an Officer to jail for ten years for firing his gun and not killing someone, or not reporting the useage. You fire them.
You, of course, know that the agents were convicted for Obstruction of Justice.
Your, "...defend yourself against a drug smuggler." is as dishonest as your fellow agents testimony.
Is jury misconduct a good thing? What about prosecutorial musconduct? Two Border Patrol Agent engage in misconduct and you have a problem with that. The judge, the jury and the prosecutor engage in misconduct and that's alright with you. What an interesting twist of logic.
Apparently you missed the part about the illegal alien fighting with the agents and then attemtping to shoot them.
No, show me where it happened in this case.
What about prosecutorial musconduct?
No, show me where it happened in this case.
Two Border Patrol Agent engage in misconduct and you have a problem with that.
Uh, yeah. "Misconduct" in this case is Felony Obstruction of Justice.
The judge, the jury and the prosecutor engage in misconduct...
Link, please.
Duh.
The man was a known Mexican drug dealer, and was offered immunity (FGS) to testify against OUR officers. We gave him immunity, and he went back to smuggling drugs into our country.
Some people are worth defending more than others. Scum who sell our children drugs are worthless in my book.. I choose to defend our Border Patrolmen over the drug dealer..I'm funny that way..
sw
end of the line...............
this will be a major part of the bush legacy if he chooses to let these 2 twist in the wind...........
wait and see
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.