Posted on 02/07/2007 8:18:59 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Where's the headline screaming:
"Homeland Security Officials Lied To Congress, Inspector General admits"
There's no healing process. Till hell freezes over and then we'll fight on ice.
hubris
Of course, because no police officer has ever lied about seeing a gun in a suspect's hands after they are accused of shooting without cause.
The "lie" that is being advanced here by the government is bad information given to congressman about what investigative documents they could provide regarding the case.
It's not acceptable, but by itself does not relate to the trial and conviction of the agents.
If there are witnesses who lied on the stand, that would be an important point. We don't have the transcript, but both defendants and thier lawyers were at the trial (as I imagine was one of their union representatives, but I don't know that for a fact).
So if there were obvious lies told at the trial, we would know about them, and we'd have the names of the witnesses that lied.
Instead, what we have is a smear campaign on the character of the witnesses that testified against him. When you have to smear your accusers, it usually means you don't have a direct refutation of their testimony.
The closest thing we've seen in print to refute anything is a preliminary report that the bullet could not positively be matched to the gun of Ramos. Unfortunately, that isn't meaningful to the case, because Ramos stipulated that the bullet was from his gun, which suggests nobody really had a doubt about it. Plus Compean got more time than Ramos, and Compean didn't even hit the guy. Just shooting at him was considered a crime.
BTW, I'm less certain of Ramos's guilt than Compean, and the fact they got about the same time suggests something in the court record that the defendants are NOT leaking to us. Compean is the one that was lying in wait, and purportedly attempted to strike the man while he was surrendering.
Ramos could make the argument that he heard shots, ran over the hill, saw Compean bleeding, thought he had been shot, saw the defendant turning toward him, and shot back in self defense.
There is some reason he is tied to Compean in this case, and I bet someone knows what it is, but I don't.
Reasonable doubt. The govt is trying too hard to convict. You taking the side of a govt that already lied to convict is despicable. Republican or not, this govt needs to pardon these two.
Show me a lie the government told in the court, and I'll consider your complaint. Telling congress you have a document and later finding you don't have it is something for congress to take up with the agency. It has nothing to do with the case or the agents.
Telling the jury these two had said they "wanted to shoot a Mexican" while portraying the drug dealer as a saint is a lie and dishonest.
How do you know the jury was told they "wanted to shoot a mexican"? Having not seen the transcript, I don't know what was presented during the case. Sutton said he didn't use an investigative report as evidence, but had people testify.
So if it WAS presented, it's because they found a witness willing to testify under oath that he heard them say that. If so, how do we know the witness was lying? All we know is that the government doesn't have some documentation of that statement that they said they had.
I doubt anybody presented a drug smuggler with immunity as a "saint".
These guys have been convicted already. (past tense) Did you expect the AUSA's not to do their jobs and not try convict? I guess if did, then you would be complaining of the waste of gov't funds.
"It's tough going when the MSM, all Democrat politicians, and many Republican politicians are all on the same (criminal) side."
Globalists Elite
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.