Border agents sent to prison

Amid protests and a flurry of last-minute efforts by congressmen, two border patrol agents are scheduled today to begin long prison sentences for shooting and wounding a Mexican drug smuggler who was given immunity to testify against them.

In an interview with WND, an angry Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., called President Bush a "disgrace" for refusing to pardon Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio Ramos, who were sentenced to 12 years and 11 years, respectively, in October. With hopes for a presidential pardon dwindling, the lawmakers had requested that Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez assist in a motion to keep the agents free on bond during the appeals process. But late yesterday, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in El Paso, Texas, ruled the men must surrender to federal marshals at 2 p.m. Central Time today.

"This is the worst betrayal of American defenders I have ever seen," Rohrabacher said of the president. "It's shameful this was done by someone who is in the Republican Party. He obviously thinks more about his agreements with Mexico than the lives of American people and backing up his defenders."

The California lawmaker charged the Bush administration has been playing a "cruel game." Initially, he said, officials insisted the agents could not be pardoned because they had not filled out the proper paperwork. But Rohrabacher told WND the White House did not explain to the public that the agents were being required – without justification, he contended – to first admit guilt.

Then, last Friday, presidential press secretary Tony Snow addressed the issue for the first time, arguing that prior to the shooting, the agents did not know if the smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, was an illegal, and they were unaware he had about 750 pounds of marijuana.

The agents, Snow said, "had received arms training the day before; that said, if you have an incident like this, you must preserve the evidence and you must report it promptly."

"Instead," Snow continued, "according to court documents, they went around and picked up the shell casings. Furthermore, they asked one of their colleagues also to help pick up shell casings. They disposed of them."

Rohrabacher argues that if the men did anything wrong, they should have simply received a reprimand, but instead they are being placed in the general prison population among hardened criminals where their lives may be at risk.

Ramos' attorney, Mary Stillinger, told the El Paso Times the men, both married with young children, may have to spend several weeks at the El Paso County Jail before being transported to a federal prison.

"Why does [President Bush] have to send these men to prison in order that his policy not be disrupted?" Rohrabacher asked San Diego radio host Roger Hedgecock after speaking with WND last night. "He talks about being a Christian, but he has shown no Christian charity."

Asked by WND for a response to Rohrabacher's remarks, White House spokesman Alex Conant deferred to Snows comments on the case.

Rohrabacher told WND he sees a serious residual result of the administration's handling of the agents.

"The word is out that the southern border is undefended," he said. "Border agents won't dare to draw their weapons, and the drug cartel will double their effort to drive a wedge in our border."

Rohrabacher said he has been disturbed by an "arrogant" lack of response from senior Justice Department and White House officials who have "shoved over" their inquiries to lower-level staff.

"I've never seen an administration that does it this way," he said. "In the past, if there is a senior member of Congress calling, it would require a call back directly from the administration official in question."

Bush has received a letter about the case from more than 50 Congress members, and yesterday an online petition by Grassfire.org with more than 225,000 signatures calling for a presidential pardon was delivered to the White House.

As WND has reported, a federal jury convicted Compean, 28, and Ramos, 37, in March after a two-week trial on charges of causing serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence and a civil rights violation.

Ramos is an eight-year veteran of the U.S. Naval Reserve and a former nominee for Border Patrol Agent of the Year.

According to the agents, Ramos responded Feb. 17, 2005, to a request for back-up from Compean, who noticed a suspicious van near the levee road along the Rio Grande River near the Texas town of Fabens, about 40 miles east of El Paso. A third agent also joined the pursuit.

Aldrete-Davila stopped the van on a levee, jumped out and started running toward the river. When he reached the other side of the levee, he was met by Compean who had anticipated the smuggler's attempt to get back to Mexico.

"We both yelled out for him to stop, but he wouldn't stop, and he just kept running," Ramos told California's Inland Valley Daily Bulletin.

"At some point during the time where I'm crossing the canal, I hear shots being fired," Ramos said. "Later, I see Compean on the ground, but I keep running after the smuggler."

At that point, Ramos said, Aldrete-Davila turned toward him, pointing what looked like a gun.

"I shot," Ramos said. "But I didn't think he was hit, because he kept running into the brush and then disappeared into it. Later, we all watched as he jumped into a van waiting for him. He seemed fine. It didn't look like he had been hit at all."

The U.S. government filed charges against Ramos and Compean after giving full immunity to Aldrete-Davila and paying for his medical treatment at an El Paso hospital.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Texas issued a statement in September arguing "the defendants were prosecuted because they had fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender by holding his open hands in the air, at which time Agent Compean attempted to hit the man with the butt of Compean's shotgun, causing the man to run in fear of what the agents would do to him next."

The statement said, "Although both agents saw that the man was not armed, the agents fired at least 15 rounds at him while he was running away from them, hitting him once."

There are always more than one side to a story..... These agents were convicted by a jury in the region and sentenced as prescribed under laws established by the Congress. They are either guilty, had incompentent counsel or the jury was bought off....

The judicial system provides for an appellate process in which these agents are now persuing. Let it work it course and establish if anything occurred in error during the criminal trial.

From the US Attorney's Office: [let the disecting begin]

Page 1

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Attorney’s Office

Western District of Texas

Johnny Sutton, U.S. Attorney

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Shana Jones, Special Assistant

Daryl Fields, Public Affairs Officer
August 11, 2006
(210) 384-7452
STATEMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY JOHNNY SUTTON REGARDING THE

CONVICTION OF FORMER BORDER PATROL AGENTS COMPEAN AND RAMOS

In response to misstatements and misinformation being reported in the media regarding the

prosecution of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, relating to a shooting that occurred while they were

on duty as U.S. Border Patrol agents on February 17, 2005, the United States Attorney’s Office for the

Western District of Texas releases this advisory summarizing the evidence presented at defendants’ trial.

As will be demonstrated by the summary below, the defendants were prosecuted because they had

fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender by holding his open hands in the air, at which

time Agent Compean attempted to hit the man with the butt of Compean’s shotgun, causing the man to run in

fear of what the agents would do to him next. Although both agents saw that the man was not armed, the

agents fired at least 15 rounds at him while he was running away from them, hitting him once.

On February 17, 2005, Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean were on duty

along the U.S./Mexico border, working out of the Fabens Border Patrol Station. At approximately one

o’clock in the afternoon, Agent Compean observed a van near the border about two and a half miles west of

Fabens. According to the testimony, the driver of the van, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, failed to yield to Agent

Ramos’ attempt to stop him, jumped out of his vehicle and attempted to run back to Mexico. After Ramos told

Aldrete-Davila to stop, Ramos drew his service revolver and pointed it at Aldrete-Davila. Aldrete-Davila

jumped into a steep ditch filled with dirty water and when he tried to climb the steep incline out of the ditch,

he was confronted by defendant Compean, waiting for him with a shotgun pointed directly at him. During his

testimony, Compean acknowledged that at that time Aldrete-Davila held his hands up, as if to surrender, with

his palms open, and no weapon was in either hand, or evident on his person. Another agent, who had arrived

by this time and observed the scene, heard someone yell “hit him.” Aldrete-Davila, who was at one time a

legal resident alien of the United States and speaks some English, also heard someone yell “hit him, hit him,”

and specifically heard Compean yell: “Parate, parate, Mexicano de mierda.” (“Stop, stop you Mexican

shit.”) According to testimony, Compean swung his shotgun around in an attempt to hit Aldrete-Davila with

the butt of his weapon, but lost his footing and fell face down into the dirt and brush. Aldrete-Davila began to

run to the river and did not look back. Agent Ramos also testified that when he saw Aldrete-Davila in the

ditch, he had an opportunity to look at Aldrete-Davila’s hands, which he is trained to do for self defense and

defense of another, and did not see any weapons in either of Aldrete-Davila’s hands. When Aldrete-Davila

almost reached the river, but while he was still out in the open vega area, he heard numerous gun shots.

Compean fired at Aldrete-Davila at least fourteen times and Ramos fired at Aldrete-Davila once. Aldrete-

Davila felt a sting in his left buttock and fell to the ground. When he reached for the location of the pain, his

hand came away bloody. Fearing the shooters were about to reach his location and kill him, he turned his

head and saw the two defendants holster their weapons, turn away from him and walk back north.

– more –

Page 2

Sutton Statement re: Ramos and Compean conviction

August 11, 2006

Page 2

He got up, limped to the river and returned to Mexico where he sought medical attention and learned that the

bullet had caused serious inury. The bullet remained lodged in his body, causing him pain and impeding his

ability to walk, until extracted by a military physician in the United States. On March 16, 2006, the bullet

extracted from Aldrete-Davila’s body was matched to the service weapon carried by defendant Ramos,

evidencing that Ramos fired the shot that struck Aldrete-Davila.

At the time of the shooting, neither agent Compean nor agent Ramos knew that the van driven by

Aldrete-Davila contained 743 pounds of marijuana. The evidence was un-controverted that, at the time the

victim was shot, neither agent knew whether the driver was illegally in the United States or whether a crime

had been committed. The only information they had was that the driver had failed to pull over to be

identified.

According to the testimony of seven other Border Patrol agents who arrived at the scene of the

incident after the shooting, neither Compean nor Ramos mentioned that the driver who absconded had a gun,

or that any agent’s life was in danger. Defendant Compean repeatedly denied that he had been injured by the

driver and refused the supervisor’s offer to file a Report of Assault on his behalf.

At the scene, Ramos told a supervisor that as the suspect fled from the vehicle, agent Compean was on

the levee attempting to apprehend him. Defendant Ramos said that as the suspect tried to flee Compean

either tried to grab the suspect, or did a “side to side” movement, but fell to the ground and got dirt in his

eyes. Ramos did not mention the shooting, and said nothing about the suspect having a weapon. At the

scene, when asked why he was so excited, Ramos told another agent that it was just the adrenalin that had him

all pumped up.

An agent who encountered defendant Compean sometime later, away from the scene of the incident,

testified that Compean told him, “That little bitch took me to the ground and threw dirt in my face.” Compean

did not indicate that he felt threatened, that his life was in danger, or that the driver had a weapon at any time.

Compean did show the agent nine shell casings that he had collected at the scene and indicated he was

“probably missing five more casings.” Compean told the agent he had “fired some rounds...did a magazine

exchange and fired some more rounds,” and asked the agent to look for the additional casings. The agent

proceeded to the scene of the shooting, located the additional five casings, threw them into the drainage ditch

and called defendant Compean, using his cellular telephone, to tell him he had found five rounds and threw

them away. The removal of the shell casings from the scene made it impossible to do a complete

investigation of the shooting.

According to written Border Patrol policy, an agent who discharges his firearm at anytime, including

off duty or by accident, must report the discharge to a supervisor within one hour. Both defendants Compean

and Ramos had attended firearms refresher training which includes a review of this policy the day before the

incident. Border Patrol policy also requires that the scene of a shooting be preserved so that the Sector

Evidence Team may examine the evidence and file a written report detailing their findings so that a

determination can be made of whether the discharge was justified. Evidence presented at trial indicated that,

in the entire time of the defendants’ employment as Border Patrol agents, every reported shooting had been

ruled justified and no agent was disciplined as a result of a shooting. Defendant Ramos is a trained member

of the Sector Evidence Team and a firearms instructor who teaches the discharge policy.

– more –

Page 3

Sutton Statement re: Ramos and Compean conviction

August 11, 2006

Page 3

Testimony elicited at trial clearly established that, until an investigation initiated at the Washington,

D.C. headquarters of the Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General began on March

4, 2005, no written report had been filed, no oral report had been made, and no person in any official capacity

was cognizant of the fact that a shooting had occurred or a firearm had been discharged by any Border Patrol

Agent in the direction of an individual fleeing into Mexico after having failed to stop for immigration status

identification on February 17, 2005. The only report of any law enforcement activity on file for the Fabens

Border Patrol Station on that date was an Immigration and Naturalization form I-44, Report of Apprehension

or Seizure, authored by both defendants and signed by Jose Alonso Compean. The very brief report stated

that after the driver of the van failed to pull over for an immigration check: “The driver of the van began

driving back south towards Mexico. The driver was able to abscond into Mexico.” The report, admitted into

evidence, then indicated that immediately after the driver absconded, defendant Ramos spotted the bags of

marijuana in the van. No written report exists that indicates that defendant Compean was assaulted by the

driver, tussled with the driver, was threatened by the driver’s actions or thought the driver had a gun. Both

supervisors who arrived at the scene, after the incident was over, repeatedly asked defendant Compean if he

was assaulted or injured and if he wished for them to file a Report of Assault-Service Employees, which is

routinely completed if an agent reports being assaulted by a suspect. Compean did not wish such a report to

be filed.

This office did not prosecute the defendants because they had violated Border Patrol policies. They

were prosecuted because they had fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender, but, while his

open hands were held in the air, Agent Compean attempted to hit the man with the butt of his shotgun. In fear

of what the agents would do to him next, the man ran away from the agents, who then fired at least 15 rounds

at him, although they had seen his open hands and knew that he was not holding a weapon and had no reason

to think that he had a weapon, hitting him once causing serious bodily injury. The references to policies are

made only to demonstrate that had the defendants believed that the shooting was justified, there was no reason

for them to conceal it from supervisors and remove evidence from the scene. The laws of the United States

make it a crime for law enforcement officers to use excessive force in apprehending suspects. It is a violation

of any person’s Constitutional rights to shoot at them after they have attempted to surrender, knowing that

they are unarmed and pose no danger to the officers or anyone else.

At the initiation of their investigation, the DHS Office of Inspector General contacted Aldrete-Davila

who was at the time in Mexico. Aldrete-Davila was at first reluctant to cooperate with the investigation

because he feared that should he return to the United States, he could be prosecuted for the offenses

committed in relation to the load of marijuana he was driving on February 17, 2005. In order to secure his

cooperation and appearance at trial in the United States, this office agreed that in return for his truthful

testimony he would not be prosecuted for the February 17, 2005 offenses. The agreement does not immunize

any other conduct.

Based on all of the evidence admitted at the two week trial, including the lengthy testimony of both of

the defendants, the jury of twelve citizens heard all of the testimony, judged the demeanor and credibility of

the witnesses and unanimously found both defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of eleven of the

twelve counts alleged in the indictment, including assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with serious

bodily injury, discharge of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence and wilfully violating

Aldrete-Davila’s Constitutional, Fourth Amendment right to be free from illegal seizure, as well as

obstructing justice by intentionally defacing the crime scene, lying about the incident, and failing to report the

truth.

#####

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.