"Please link me to evidence that the smuggler was unarmed."
That'd be nice wouldn't it? Why don't you link me to evidence that he WAS armed?
If you were (maybe you are) a BP agent, that chases drug smugglers, wouldn't it be reasonable to believe they might be armed?
As I stated in another thread, it is mindboggling that the trial testimony has not been posted on the web. So many people are demanding "justice" for these agents, yet noone knows the "facts" of the case, as per the trial testimony, because noone has said "I was there and this is what he testified." If the testimony is so favorable to the BP agents' defense, then why has it not been posted for all to see by their attorneys?
My point is that we do not know for sure wither way if the smuggler was armed, though common sense would lead one to suspect that a major drug runner crossing an international border would most likely be packing. Anyhow, there have been more than one freeper who have posted "the smuggler was unarmed" as a fact, when it is not.