Posted on 01/29/2007 2:14:21 AM PST by Man50D
Ballistics reports, used in the trial of Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, one of two Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting fleeing drug dealer Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, do not support the prosecution's claim the bullet was fired from Ramos' gun, according to documents provided to WND from Andy Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of the Border Patrol.
Despite the conclusion of a laboratory criminalist that he could not conclusively link the bullet removed from Aldrete-Davila with Ramos' service weapon, a Department of Homeland Security agent swore, in an affidavit of complaint filed against Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, that Aldrete-Davila was hit by a round fired by Ramos.
"Johnny Sutton and his assistants are guilty of malicious prosecution," Ramirez charged to WND. "The prosecutors lied to the jury and he twisted evidence to make it fit his case. And when he couldn't twist the evidence, the government demanded that the court seal evidence which would have been exculpatory to the defense."
Nearly two years after the conclusion of the trial, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas has yet to release a transcript of the trial.
WND asked Ramirez if he was aware of the seriousness of his charges.
"I am very aware and I am accusing Mr. Sutton of a felony," Ramirez told WND, "but I am basing my conclusion on the evidence I have examined in this case and the refusal by the government to provide evidence to substantiate its claim to the Congress and the American people."
"Back on Sept. 26, 2006, officials from the DHS Office of Inspector General made serious allegations against both agents Ramos and Compean to four members of Congress from the Texas delegation," Ramirez said. "The Inspector General has subsequently refused to provide their evidence to substantiate their claims to Congress. So I am also accusing the DHS Office of Inspector General of making false statements to Congress in order to prevent a congressional inquiry. I am asking the U.S. Congress to subpoena all documents pertaining to this case including the full transcripts, sealed testimony, and the sealed indictment against Aldrete-Davila in order to get to the truth of this case once and for all."
WND previously reported that Congressman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, has accused DHS of stonewalling on the release of documents. Despite persistent requests to hand over promised internal reports, Rep. McCaul told WND that Congress had not yet received the materials.
In the Sept. 26, 2006, meeting with the Texas Republican delegation, the Inspector General's office claimed it had substantiating investigative reports that could back up their criminal charges against Ramos and Compean. Among the charges made by IG was that Ramos and Compean had stated on February 17, 2005, the day of the Aldrete-Davila shooting, they "wanted to shoot a Mexican."
WND also reported Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, last week filed a Freedom of Information Act request against the DHS Inspector General's office to obtain those investigative reports. Poe took this action after DHS informed the Texas Republican delegation the documents would not be turned over to them because the Democrats were now in control of Congress and Rep. McCaul was no longer chairman of the Investigations Subcommittee of the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Ramirez has worked on the Ramos and Compean matter for nearly two years, investigating the facts of case and interviewing Ramos, Compean, their families and others knowledgeable about the proceedings. He shared two documents with WND that, he says, undermine the prosecution's case against Ramos.
In an affidavit filed by DHS on March 15, 2005, with the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas, special agent Christopher R. Sanchez swore the following:
Ballistics testing confirms a government-issued weapon belonging to U.S. Border Patrol Agent Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, a 96D Beretta .40 caliber automatic pistol, serial number BER067069M, fired a bullet (a .40 caliber Smith & Wesson jacketed hollow point) which hit the victim in the left buttocks while he was attempting to flee to Mexico.
The second document, a ballistics report completed by the Texas Department of Public Safety, interests Ramirez both because of the agency that did the testing and the results of the test.
"For some unexplained reason, U.S. Attorney Sutton had the ballistics test performed by the Texas Department of Public Safety in El Paso, rather than by the FBI," he said. "This was a federal issue that should have gone to the FBI and only to the FBI. The Texas Department of Public Safety had no business running a ballistics report on a federal case. The FBI handles all shooting incidents, whether it involves assaults or otherwise, concerning federal agents. DPS should have refused the case and demanded that the bullet be picked up by the FBI for analysis.
"If you ask the Texas DHS how many shooting cases they handle involving federal agents, they would have said, 'None'. Then, if you asked the FBI how many shooting cases they handle involving federal agents, they would have said, 'All of them.' Yet that isn't how it went in this case. Nothing was done by the rules."
The results of the ballistics tests were reported in a letter written by Joseph J. J. Correa, a Criminalist IV with the Texas DPS El Paso Laboratory, on March 18, 2005, and addressed to Brian D. Carter of DHS in El Paso.
The letter states that Correa examined one fired copper-jacketed bullet presented to him by Carter on March 17, 2005. The letter identifies the victim shot by the bullet as "Osvaldo Aldrete."
In the letter, Correa notes that he was asked to determine the manufacture of the firearm that fired the submitted bullet.
Correa could not positively identify Ramos's weapon as the one which fired the submitted bullet. His report concludes:
The copper-jacketed bullet was fired from a barrel having six lands and grooves inclined to the right. The manufacturer of the firearm that fired the copper-jacketed bullet is unknown, but could include commonly encountered models of .40 S&W caliber FN/Browning, Beretta, Heckler & Koch, and Ruger pistols.
Correa's report gives no indication the bullet submitted for analysis was disfigured or in fragments, despite having been supposedly extracted from Aldrete-Davila's body after reportedly doing massive damage to his groin area and hitting bone.
"The problem was that the ballistics report did not match the bullet to Ramos' gun," Ramirez said. "The ballistics report said the bullet could have been fired by any one of four different makes of gun. So, the affidavit of complaint against Ramos and Compean made a statement that was not substantiated by the ballistics report. That is a big problem for the prosecution. Their evidence does not support their accusation."
The arrest warrant issued for agent Ramos, a copy of which Ramirez also supplied WND, attests that Ramos was charged with, "Intentionally assaulting a Mexican national, one O.A.D., resulting in serious bodily injury." This conclusion is not supported by the ballistics letter written by Texas DPS specialist Correa.
WND has not investigative documents from the prosecutors which would establish the chain of evidence between the time the bullet was extracted from Aldrete-Davila's groin and the time Carter of DHS presented it to Correa for analysis.
"How do we know that the prosecutors didn't simply fire a round from Ramos' gun into gel?" Ramirez asks. "That could explain the nearly pristine bullet the prosecutors presented for ballistics analysis."
The failure of the prosecution ballistics reports to link the bullet with agent Ramos' weapon directly challenges a claim made by Sutton to WND in an exclusive interview. In that interview, Sutton claimed that agent Ramos hit Aldrete-Davila:
WND: So, Compean shot 14 times and missed everybody, but Ramos shot one time and hit the drug dealer in the buttocks?
Sutton: That's correct.
WND: Is Ramos that much better a shot than Compean?
Sutton: Ramos is a marksman.
WND has further learned the bullet was not extracted from Aldrete-Davila's body until DHS special agent Christopher R. Sanchez brought him back from Mexico, at some unspecified time after the February 17, 2005 incident in which Aldrete-Davila was supposedly wounded by agent Ramos' fire.
A doctor in Mexico had inserted a catheter to reverse the damage done to Aldrete-Davila's urethra, but did not extract the bullet.
The bullet was extracted by a U.S. Army doctor, at government expense. According to the physician, the bullet entered Aldrete-Davila's left buttock from the left side, traversed his groin, damaged the urethra, hitting bone in the process, and lodged in his right thigh. The bullet was extracted from Aldrete-Davila's right groin and he received reconstructive surgery for the damage done to his groin and urethra and a catheter was reinserted.
WND has obtained the post-operative release form for the U.S. operation. That document specifies that Aldrete-Davila was released to the custody of DHS special agent Christopher Sanchez. WND has not been able to obtain evidence regarding where Sanchez took Aldrete-Davila next, or why.
The Army doctor's description of the wound directly contradicts U.S. Attorney Sutton's repeated claim that agents Ramos and Compean shot Aldrete-Davila in the back.
The doctor clearly stated that the wound he observed was consistent with Aldrete-Davila turning to assume a "bladed position" with his left arm extended back toward the officers. This corroborates agent Ramos and Compean's claim they observed Aldrete-Davila turning back toward them while fleeing, extending his arm and holding an object in his hand that they took to be a weapon.
Aldrete-Davila is left-handed, consistent with the bullet entering his left buttock laterally as he fled and turned back toward the officers, possibly pointing a weapon at them.
"The doper after the surgery was transferred back to the personal custody of DHS special agent Sanchez," Ramirez said. "So Christopher Sanchez has both the doper and the bullet. Aldrete-Davila was not transferred to a hotel, escorted by federal marshals. Aldrete-Davila wasn't escorted from Mexico by the Mexican government. Everything involving Aldrete-Davila was left to the personal custody of Christopher Sanchez. Anything could have happened and who would know?"
WND is left to ask the following questions, which the Texas DPS ballistics analysis does not resolve:
How did Aldrete-Davila continue running far enough to cross the Rio Grande back into Mexico after he had been hit by a round that passed through his left buttock from the side and damaged his urethra before lodging in his right thigh? How do we know that the bullet extracted from Aldrete-Davila could not have been fired into him during an unrelated incident in Mexico subsequent to February 17, 2005, by a weapon among those of the type described in Correa's report?
Conceivably, agents Ramos and Compean did not hit fleeing drug smuggler Aldrete-Davila on February 17, 2005, despite firing multiple rounds at him.
"Johnny Sutton and his office have intentionally distorted and misrepresented the facts in this case," Ramirez charged. "There's something clearly wrong in the federal prosecutor's office in El Paso. The Ramos and Compean case is a witch hunt. Every law enforcement agent on the border from Border Patrol agents to ICE agents to deputy sheriffs and sheriffs have gotten the message."
What's the message, WND asked?
"The message is simple," Ramirez replied. "Enforce our drug laws aggressively on the border and you risk going to jail, not the drug dealers. We have a drug war going on along the Texas border and the U.S. government has backed off to the benefit of the drug lords.
Ramirez ended the interview with WND by noting: "After the Ramos and Compean case, no U.S. law enforcement officer on the border will ever again draw a weapon against a Mexican illegal transporting drugs without worrying that effort to enforce our laws may place him in jail, not the doper."
On August 17, 2006, Ramirez gave sworn testimony on the Ramos and Compean case to the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, a copy of which is posted on his website.
2. If the agents' attorneys were so incompetent as to not have investigated the chain of custody and/or raise these issues at trial, then it would appear that they have a pretty good argument on appeal re: incompetent trial counsel. Somehow, though, I find it hard to believe that a defense attorney would miss these basic defenses.
He discharged his weapon. Nobody is arguing that, and I doubt the smuggler shot himself in the ASS.
What is not right with this trial, is that it should never have occurred and the agents should have been disciplined by the department. This might have averted the suit, but even if it did not, there would have been a totally different outcome, as there would not have been a apparent cover up which pissed off the jury.
This story needs to go into the garbage can.
Second, I will note that within this one story are two contradictory arguments. It's easier to argue if you get to argue multiple different stories as if they are all true, because it is nearly impossible to intelligently argue against contradictory arguments.
So note in this story, first that the ballistic evidence "proves" the agents were telling the truth about the drug-smuggler turning and pointing a gun at them:
The doctor clearly stated that the wound he observed was consistent with Aldrete-Davila turning to assume a "bladed position" with his left arm extended back toward the officers. This corroborates agent Ramos and Compean's claim they observed Aldrete-Davila turning back toward them while fleeing, extending his arm and holding an object in his hand that they took to be a weapon. Aldrete-Davila is left-handed, consistent with the bullet entering his left buttock laterally as he fled and turned back toward the officers, possibly pointing a weapon at them.
Then, right after arguing that the Ramos' bullet hitting the smuggler this way shows he was turning (it doesn't, but I've argued that before), the story THEN claims Ramos didn't hit him at all:
How did Aldrete-Davila continue running far enough to cross the Rio Grande back into Mexico after he had been hit by a round that passed through his left buttock from the side and damaged his urethra before lodging in his right thigh? How do we know that the bullet extracted from Aldrete-Davila could not have been fired into him during an unrelated incident in Mexico subsequent to February 17, 2005, by a weapon among those of the type described in Correa's report? Conceivably, agents Ramos and Compean did not hit fleeing drug smuggler Aldrete-Davila on February 17, 2005, despite firing multiple rounds at him.
It's like the "magic bullet theory". The bullet's trajectory show Ramos shot him while turned, but the evidence also suggest Ramos didn't hit him at all, but instead the bullet wound is from a different shooting some other time.
Well, it can't be both. Either Ramos hit him, or he didn't. The article claims he didn't hit the drug smuggler, and then tries to argue that the SAME evidence shows that the shootings were in self-defense.
Note that many of the charges are based NOT on hitting the drug smuggler, but on SHOOTING AT HIM. The only way they get off the charge of shooting at him is if they show they had reasonable fear of danger. That's why you argue that the bullet shows he was turned.
But if at the same time you argue the bullet didn't hit the guy at all, then the location of the wound can't possibly show the drug smuggler turned toward the agents.
I'm guessing they didn't make both of these arguments in court, because if they did the jury would certainly see the obvious self-contradiction.
Last debunk, because I don't have time to debunk every last false statement or illogical conclusion. The story argues that: "The problem was that the ballistics report did not match the bullet to Ramos' gun," Ramirez said. "The ballistics report said the bullet could have been fired by any one of four different makes of gun. So, the affidavit of complaint against Ramos and Compean made a statement that was not substantiated by the ballistics report. That is a big problem for the prosecution. Their evidence does not support their accusation."
But the affidavit is not based on a single piece of evidence, but on ALL the evidence, which included the testimony of the drug smuggler that he was shot by the border agent, AND the testimony of the border agents that they were SHOOTING at him. Now obviously testimony is not proof, but an affidavit is based on the evidence, which then is weighed in a court of law.
An analogy. A killer with gloves is caught in the act, and the defense notes that the killer's fingerprints were not found on the gun, and claim "their evidence doesn't back their charges", ignoring the obvious evidence that he was caught in the act.
OK, a few more. Because I am tired of this.
The Army doctor's description of the wound directly contradicts U.S. Attorney Sutton's repeated claim that agents Ramos and Compean shot Aldrete-Davila in the back.
No it doesn't. Note "the back" never meant in the physical back, it meant "while he was running away". It was consistantly said he was shot in the buttocks. And if he twisted his body while running, he would still be "shot in the back". The original claim made on FR was that the guy turned AROUND, not that he just twisted. But as that didn't work out, we now have this "twisted" story.
The doctor clearly stated that the wound he observed was consistent with Aldrete-Davila turning to assume a "bladed position" with his left arm extended back toward the officers. This corroborates agent Ramos and Compean's claim they observed Aldrete-Davila turning back toward them while fleeing, extending his arm and holding an object in his hand that they took to be a weapon.
I'm left-handed. If I was running and wanted to shoot someone, I wouldn't twist with my LEFT shoulder back toward the people I wanted to shoot, I would twist so my RIGHT shoulder went back, because it's a lot easier to shoot backwards by bending your elbow than by trying to get your entire arm straight. Of course, the drug smuggler could be stupid and not know this, but it's natural to turn the way that is easier. And of course, if I was a drug smuggler who pulled out my gun to point it behind me while running away, I would have pulled the trigger, because just waving a gun does nothing for me but get me shot. Doesn't prove anything, but if the bullet went in the other way I'm certain the defense would make the argument I just made.
Meanwhile, getting shot in the side of the hip is consistant with RUNNING AWAY. When people run, especially when they are being SHOT AT, they are likely to run in a zig-zag pattern, which would expose their sides to bullet shots. Or he could have turned to go around a rock, or a shrub, or he could just run oddly.
Of course, none of this proves they shot him, or that he didn't turn around. It merely shows that the evidence doesn't prove the BP agents are telling the truth. And since we know they lied about shooting, and even here they are arguing both that the bullet proves the guy was turning, AND that Ramos didn't HIT the guy at all and the bullet was from a different shooting, it's hard to believe anything they tell us.
WHAT this was an airtight case, you had a sworn statement from an admitted drug mule. How can this be? Did the jury hear this?/s
Looking back , I can understand why Police carry, throw away guns, and plant them on creeps like this drug runner.
If they killed the creep and planted the gun they would not be in prison now.
What a Sham !!
I've seen it discussed. According to one news article, the bullet was in the custody of an investigator, and that might not have been the appropriate chain of evidence. They know who had it, I guess the question is whether the investigator was authorised to be a courrier for evidence or not. The implication is no, and I don't have the ability to check the records in texas to see if he was or not.
They are not arguing that the doctor didn't examine the bullet, just that the bullet that was tested the next day might not have been the one pulled out of the guy (however, the doctor did not suggest that the bullet tested looked different from the bullet he pulled out, and remember the testing didn't prove the bullet came from the guy's gun according to the evidence presented in this story -- if they were REPLACING the bullet with one fired from the guy's gun into gell (as suggested in this story), you'd expect it to definitively match the gun.
W's second term has been just awful. his first wasnt a mixed bag, good on taxes and terror but horrible on spending (prescription drugs, education bill, etc) and his signing of Campaign Finance reform while acknowledging it was unconsitutional publically, borders on impeachable in my opinion. But I supported him for re-election. His second term has been a nightmare.
The only good thing he did so far has been to nominate Alito, which he did grudginlgy after his preferred crony pick was universally panned. Other than that, I cannot think of one good thing he's done since 2004. The war has been fought half heartedly with political and press considerations taking precedent over winning, his primary lobbying of the American people has been on essentially ceasing all efforts at immigration control, failed to make a credible case for "staying the course" or offer an alternative that allows for winning and consequently he failed to maintain congress, failed to set a winning agenda, failed to win support for any of his initiatives, failed to do anything to support the base that elected him, and he almost seems pleased that with a dem congress he can finally offer concessions willy nilly and go down in history as a bipartison unitor. Other than Alito the only good thing he's done has been his total failure to set up a transitional candidate. Whoever runs as the Republican nominee will not have the pseudo third term aura which works for popular presidents like Reagan but is the kiss of death for unpopular ones. So maybe he hasnt totally ruined the chances of a GOP president in '08. But he still has a year, let's not underestimate him. Situations like sacrificing a couple of Border Patrol agents at the altar of immigration reform don't help.
The FACTS show that they almost DID get away with it. Their fellow BP agents weren't turning them in, and they thought they got lucky and didn't hit the guy.
Remember, nobody is disputing that they shot at the guy 15 times.
The only reason they got arrested was that the guy actually WAS hit, and told the story to someone who was related to another BP agent who told the story to that agent, who decided it was the job of a BP agent to report a shooting, so they did.
That BP agent, along with the BP agent who testified against Ramos/Compean, have been villified by the "pro-BP agent" crowd, who might more accurately be called "pro-BP agents who shoot illegals" crowd.
I read this stuff over a week ago, and it's hardly "new evidence", as the trial was long ago.
I think that you misunderstood calcowgirl's reply. The dates don't match the story is all she was saying.
The skin is beginning to peel off this rotting beached whale.
Your whole post is a strawman.
It was his job to discharge his weapon when the perp failed to stop, and the perp was not "shot in the ass," he was shot in the side, and he was in a shooting stance.
Your post needs to go into the garbage can.
They were not even given opportunity to investigate; information was witheld. Contempt of Truth !!!!!!!!!!
The only people we know lied for sure are the prosecutors.
The rest is conjecture, since the gestapo is hiding massive exculpatory evidence. Warren Commission redux.
Groundhog day anyone?
But since testimony was to be given that the bullet hit bone in the other leg, they had to shoot it into a cadaver, as the feds are well known to do, from the Klinton days.
But why would the court transcript be sealed for nearly a year?
ping
That is not the way it works bubba....
Force is used via a protocol that was not employed by these agents, and that is why they tried to cover their asses.
Juries are not stupid.
If you were to take your blinders off for a second, and lose the fringe wacko extremist BS that has infected your brain, you and other might see the truth.
Strawman my ass! It is you who employ the device, and you do it so often that nobody cares about you opinions on illegal immigration no matter how truthful some of those opinions are. you have damaged the issue. You have subsequently lost it, and you will not win the hearts and minds of the public any longer.
This is the political reality, and you and your ilk are directly responsible for it.
This is not the only issue that has been distorted by a bunch of crap. Abortion, homeland security, religious freedoms, freedom of speech, and even the 2nd amendment fights have all seen their share of hyperbole that has caused public backlashes.
It has now risen to the level of a national disgrace!
Hold on to your seat bubba, because the retaliation for the abuses that you and others have fostered on the right, is going to bring the entire Republican House down around our ears, and I know for a fact that you will never accept the reasons why.
Go ahead, make my day, and throw some more invectives my way! I'm so sick of this crap that I can't seem to hold back what is really on my mind, so if you want a earful, just keep it coming.
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.