Posted on 01/24/2007 5:51:23 AM PST by NapkinUser
There is no FRE 324.
It's not available through Pacer. Congressman McCaul has made repeated requests and told it is not available (see link above). And, according to reports yesterday, they have told Ramos' father-in-law, Joe Loya, it is not available.
Loya told WND that he had sat through the entire trial. A complete transcript of the trial is not yet available and Loya told WND that the U.S. attorney's office told him that the trial transcript would cost $3 per page. "At over 3,000 pages, that means we have to come up with $9,000 just to get a copy of the transcript. And besides, it isn't available yet and the prosecutors' office can’t tell us when it will be available." [source]
"What has President Bush lied about?"
"I am doing everything in my power to secure this country".
GWB
I was joking.
How many "other agents" testified? Where was this agent when the activity occurred? Were all agents in similar proximity allowed to testify? Read some more, rudeboy. We've already determined that the prosecution has put out grossly misleading information.
I really hope President Bush will talk with the wives. If he wants to let the justice system sort this out before making any decisions, that is fine. If he is going to refuse, just let thwm know. People need to know where they stand.
Actually it's all the better. In the few minutes of consciousness that he has as he bleeds into oblivion, he could serve has an example to his mates about the hazards of running from the law.
I am finding more than a good share of humor in the fact that someone posting to me on an internet bulletin board thinks they can defend these agents better than their own defense attorneys, with the implication that these defense attorneys are the stooopidest creatures to walk the face of our Planet since the invention of the wheel.
If that were the end of the story, no one I can think of on FR would have a problem. I certainly would not. I will take the word of two HONEST cops over a punk drug dealer any day. However, the operative word here is HONEST. They clearly were not honest. They lied and tried to cover up what happened (whatever it was). All the hysteria about porous borders and agents under pressure and drugs and terrorists and other stuff is just extraneous fecal matter muddying the water. Had the agents been honest from the get-go, the perp would have been in jail for trafficking and the agents would have gotten off with a slap on the wrists.
Let me type this R-E-A-L S-L-0-W for you folks so you can try to follow it: THEY TRIED TO COVER IT UP, SO THEIR RELIABILITY AS WITNESSES IS SUSPECT. Therefore, the testimony of a scumbag drug dealer trumped theirs. Do I think it despicable that he was given amnesty to testify? Sure. But these two cops have no one to blame but themselves.
Do you think the defense (BP Union) has a copy?
Reading comprehension problem? Try again.
Defense counsel has the right to the trial transcripts, as they are needed to file the appeal.
Transcripts have not been made available to Ramos's father in law, who IS the defense. But, who knows... Ramos just hired a new attorney who has already filed an interlocutory appeal. This story ain't over.
Stop posting statements like that. It will disrupt the open-borders people in their efforts to keep these two Hispanic Americans locked up.
That convinces me. Thinking is soooooo overrated.
Show me the transcript. ;-)
We don't know what the facts are. The agents admitted to trying to cover up the scene and failed to disclose critical details on their report. They claim they thought he had a gun. They probably figured nobody would hear from the smuggler again. A jury of their peers (and juries are notoriously sympathetic towards cops) felt they broke the law.
Not only all you have said...but they cleaned up the scene and falsified their reports. Bad decisions all around.
Show me yours first. I have information in hand that the U.S. Attorney found agents to testify that Compean and Ramos said nothing about a gun, and you are simply blowing smoke by speculating that the defense attorneys failed to cross-examine them properly.
No... I don't think anyone has a full final copy.
I've seen no reports to conclude otherwise.
I have seen a lot of reports, quoting testimony. I can only conclude that they are based on accounts of those in attendance at the trial. Those that were reported from March and February carry more weight than those after-the-fact accounts--until the full transcript is available to the parties and the public.
Your version of the "facts" is based entirely on a thieving, lying, drug dealing scum. My version of the "facts" is based on sworn testimony of two officers of the law. Only discredited bots believe the drug dealer. And only enemies of America want the flood of illegals, crime and drugs to continue unabated view this prosecution and resulting harsh sentence as a good thing.
LOL--I just hope there's room in prison for all the people who follow the advice that was posted, and with which you agree.
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.