Posted on 03/05/2007 9:16:23 AM PST by pissant
I would like to thank Polipundit and Michael Illions, who has been helping out my campaign, for giving me the opportunity to write a guest post about the injustice that has been done to two of our border guards, Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio Ramos, both of whom have been sentenced to jail for more than a decade each.
Now certainly our border patrol agents are not above the law and it is not acceptable for them to abuse or mistreat illegal aliens. That being said, the Border Patrol is America’s first line of defense against the terrorists, drug smugglers, and gangs who try to illegally enter the United States. Acting as the first line of defense for our country, the men and women of the Border Patrol are in a very dangerous position. Every day they risk their lives guarding our borders.
I have read the relevant portions of the trial transcript. Agents Ramos and Compean have a version of the facts that is different than the drug smuggler’s. However, it is not necessary to determine whose testimony is more believable (although I find the Border Agents’ testimony more credible than the drug smuggler’s) for this reason: even if you believe the drug smuggler’s testimony that he was slightly wounded while escaping to Mexico, his wounding cannot, by the greatest stretch of criminal justice, justify the 11 and 12 year prison sentences given to Ramos and Compean. The average convicted murderer in America spends less than 8 1/2 years behind bars. That means that Ramos and Compean have been given murder sentences for the slight wounding of a drug smuggler. Thus, the prison sentences of these two agents represent a severe injustice.
For those who point out that the agents picked up the expended brass from their pistols after the incident and did not report it to their superiors, the answer is simply that picking up brass and failure to report is not murder and does not justify a murder sentence in the federal penitentiary. As a member of the Armed Services Committee for 26 years, I have never seen a Marine or soldier treated as severely as Ramos and Compean.
We cannot turn our back on Agents Compean and Ramos or the rest of the public servants in the U.S. Border Patrol and that’s why I urge George Bush to pardon both agents. I intend to keep attention focused on this case to insure their safety while they are in prison and to secure their release as soon as possible so they can return home to their families. That is also why I introduced H.R. 563, which would pardon Compean and Ramos. The bill already has more than 85 sponsors in the House. If that bill fails and President Bush does not do the right thing, I pledge that if I’m elected President, one of my first acts will be to grant pardons to both agents.
Ramos and Juarez had to do the same thing. They didn't fall back to 900 feet! It is also testified and central to obscuring that there is a wind blowing and Davila testifies that the dust is being blown off the road.
Your "6 vehicle length distance" between Juarez and Vasquez is rubbish. It is also the primary number you use to base your conspiract theory on so the entire thing collapses like a wet noodle.
It's not rubbish it is testimony! If you look at 600(44*14.5=638), that calculation is over 30 vehicle lengths, 30 vehicle lengths not 6. I just state that the 6 vehicle lengths are what separates Juarez and Vasquez at the beginning of the dirt portion of Jess Harris. The 600 feet from the calculation is what I assume as the separation between Juarez and Vasquez when Juarez gets to the ditch. That doesn't even work because you still need to account for the actions of Juarez at the scene.
I've answered every one of your questions. My theory is not the question nor did I say it was a fact. One fact is that 218 feet divided by 15 feet per second is 14.5333 seconds. Another fact is that 218 feet divided by 10 feet per second is 21.8 seconds. Those two facts can be utilized to analyse the testimony and arrive at a conclusion or conclusions. I have done that.
They did not stipulate nor admit to committing a crime.
Baloney yourself! Back up Davila 8 to 10 seconds from 14.5(the middle of the vega) and Compean from 14.5(the top of the levee) and see where that places them. I bet that places them where Vasquez can see both of them. So to correct that failure we must move Vasquez farther away in time(or more than 8-10 seconds).
They stipulated and admitted to facts during the trial that could constitute a crime, depending on whether the jury believes their defense of legal justification. I don't see any court or reviewing panel cutting them loose because they believe the defendants to be innocent as you try to be saying.
It doesn't confuse things--the drag road and its location CLARIFIES things. The width of the road is less important than the location of it (i.e. approximately 40 feet south of the bottom of the levee). It accounts for distances and actions for the first 40 feet of the vega, or 40 feet of the 200 feet. It adds more details to allow for measurements and calculations to determine the veracity of various pieces of testimony. For example, if someone were to say Ramos shot "200 feet from the bottom of the levee," we would know that wasn't from the drag road. Conversely, Ramos testifies he found Compean on the drag road, proceeded 10 to 15 feet further, and fired one shot. That places him 70 feet from the top of the levee and approximately 140 to 150 feet from the Rio Grande.
BTW - That 30 foot for the levee slope, is it the horizontal distance from the edge to the bottom or the angled distance, the actual length from the top to bottom?
The 30 foot slope is the linear distance, the distance from the edge of the levee to the bottom of the levee.
They are two different measurements.
Yes, I'm well aware of that.
They did not stipulate to any crimes. And I keep telling you, I don't give a rat's hiney about what a court and reviewing panel think. After all, our Supreme Court cites foreign as justification to overturn state law. My purpose is to show what the testimony shows. I am doing that.
"Ramos and Juarez had to do the same thing."
No they don't. The amount of dust being thrown up is compounded with each vehicle. Ramos might have been able to to see the van fairly well but Vasq would have been screwed.
"The 30 foot slope is the linear distance, the distance from the edge of the levee to the bottom of the levee."
Well, in all of AC's drawings he uses 30' as distance from the edge of the levee to the bottom, measured on a straight horizontal line. If it is 30' on a 45 degree angle, the horizontal distance of the slope is greatly reduced.
We are discussing this case and what an appellate court will do with the testimony and evidence is very germane to the thread. You never want to answer the most important issue, and that is whether the defendants actions were legally justified. Because if there is not legal justification, the testimony and evidence shows that they are guilty of a crime. Why do think these guys testified?
Bull! If Vasquez is 600 feet behind Juarez and Juarez is 300 feet behind Ramos and Ramos is 300 feet behind Davila, that makes Vasquez 1200 feet behind Davila. A 10mph wind will blow at, guess what? around 15 feet per second. So it will blow dust away at that rate. 1200 feet at 30 MPH is 27 seconds. A 10 MPH wind will blow Davila's dust 409 feet away, a 1 MPH wind will blow the dust 41 feet away. It was a windy day, by testimony. Oh, now you're going to tell me the wind was blowing straight down the road at Vasquez.
P.S. You can do your own calculations for Ramos' and Juarez's dust. And yeah, you can whine and moan about "We don't know the wind speed, yada, yada, yada", but I believe sensible people will see through your whining.
BTW, The defendants may not have stipulated " I committed a crime" but they sure stipulated to the key element of the the crime.
Where do you come up with the 40'? I remember the drag road being talked about but I don't remember R or C saying where it was located in relation to the levee or how wide it was.
No, you are discussing the appellate, etc, and that is a soliloquy. I am discussing with others the testimony. The defendants were justified, based on their view of the situation. I have repeatedly stated I believe them. The important testimony comes with the path of the bullet. It is from left to right. Kanof realizes it as I pointed out before, but she tries to brush it off, and I guess successfully convinces the jury to also brush it off.
I believe those were my drawings, and it's a little tough to draw using plain text. The 30 feet is from testimony and presented as a linear measurement.
I believe all of the references to the linear distance are from point x (top of levee) to point y (bottom of levee), which most obviously is at an angle, although not 45 degrees (more like 30 degrees).
The only one that seems to be talking horizontal distance is you. In measuring time of actions such as running, horizontal distance is meaningless.
So what? Being at the scene of a crime may a key element(but not necessary) of committing a crime. Stipulating your presence at the scene doesn't convict you either. Let me ask you this? Did they even have to injure Davila to have committed a crime, given your viewpoint, a felony, in fact.
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.