Thanks! It should be on in another hour. BOR has been all over the warden. Good for him!
This is really frustrating. The risk to the Agents was presented to the judge before sentencing. Instead of acknowledging it, Sutton's office downplayed the risk to Agents, saying that were considered Heroes and implying that the Real Victims were the Prosecutors. The exact words filed with the court from the U.S. Attorney were as follows:
While the case cited by Ramos is some authority for a Court's consideration of the vulnerability of police officer in prison, the departure by the district judge in Koon v. U.S., 518 U.S. 81 (1996) was predicated on facts that were completely opposite to the case at bar. In Koon, the public outcry was against the police officer defendants. The defendant's concern there was that since there was world wide publicity, including an often played video tape of the police officers beating the victim, the public outcry was to string up the defendant officers. In the case at bar, as a result of the defendants' wide spread and multiple misstatements to the public, the outcry is to string up the prosecution. According to the defendant in this case, in his public interviews and statements, he is a national hero. Thus, by his own hand creating the public outrage, defendant has excluded himself from such a departure consideration. Additionally, the Department of Corrections may, and do often, make provisions to protect all types of vulnerable inmates. The Bureau of Prisons has many federal law enforcement agents housed in their facilities. The government assures the Court and the defendants that the Bureau of Prisons will take every measure to assure their safety.
Someone needs to put a bug in BOR's ear to ask why one was sent to a medium security prison and the other a minimum security prison. OR isn't going to rest until this female warden is gone, though. Wish he would get up to speed enough on this case to really apply pressure.