Exclusive Guest Post For Polipundit: Free Compean And Ramos By Duncan Hunter

PoliPundit ^ | 3/5/07 | Duncan Hunter

[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.

[calcowgirl]

Do you believe a 5'4" portly thirty something with a heavy utility belt and Doc Martins could chase down and tackle a tall, thin, wiry 24 year old in sneakers with a 15-20 foot lead over a distance of 50-60 feet?

15-20 foot lead over a distance of 50-60 feet? On a high-school track, probably not. But that is not the case we have here. Doc Martins? Sneakers? LOL. You makin' this stuff up again?

Note that OAD is still in the ditch in loose soil at the time Compean's foot slips and that Compean says he recovers within one second. OAD does not dash immediately out of the ditch but moves to the right, still in the ditch, before climbing out. So, how many foot lead is that? 5? 10?

Also, the surface of the levee is dirt and gravel so, if either lose their footing while running up the levee, it would change their relative distance. Note also that being above average weight does not equate to "portly," unless you would have called Schwarzenegger "portly" at his peak. What kind of shape was Compean in? I don't know. What kind of shape was the drug dealer in, I don't know (he doesn't look real healthy to me). Being tall and thin does not necessarily make one healthy or fast. In summary, I think it is possible that Compean could have been within the distance he states to "jump" on OAD's back while moving down the south side of the levee.

[superfries]

Thanks Bob J,
So forgive me for not reading through all 500+ posts to this thread but I assume you still believe that the trial proved that R&C were basically guilty as charged? And while there may be plenty of blame to go around.....this is still where you stand on the issue, correct?

[calcowgirl]

Wasn't there a FReeper who had read every word of the trial transcripts and posted an article basically explaining that these 2 were guilty as charged? Anyone out there remember that posting....it was quite long as I recall. Need a link if you can provide it!

There was a freeper who claimed to have read every word who had the OPINION that they were guilty, while many other freepers also claimed to have read every word and found that freeper's arguments to be made of nothing more than whole cloth. Don't believe everything you read.

[calcowgirl]

Wasn't there a FReeper who had read every word of the trial transcripts and posted an article basically explaining that these 2 were guilty as charged?

There are several Freepers who have read every word, many who are in complete disagreement with the post you refer to.

[superfries]

Easy calcowgirl,
If I go with your motto of not believing everything I read,...............why would I believe what YOU have to say. I just wanted the link and wanted to know who posted it! I can make my own decisions............if you let me:) Now, back to trying to read the 500+ post to THIS thread.

[AndrewC]

They tend to retract parts of their direct testimony, for instance when asked in detail about previous testimony on direct they often say it was an assumption.

Not from my reading of the testimony. Here are all of the "assumptions" I found in the testimonies of Ramos and Compean. Those are followed by the "assumptions" I found in Juarez's testimony. I did not search Vasquez, because his testimony was an image scan not a searchable text document.

3 Q. Why not?
4 A. Because, with all the agents that were arriving, especially
5 with Agent Yrigoyen arriving on the levee, I had heard somebody
6 yelling, Shots, when I was crossing through the canal. I
7 assumed it had been reported by somebody.


9 Q. Well, did you see the driver throw dirt on Mr. Compean's
10 face?
11 A. No, I did not.
12 Q. So you told Mr. Richards something that you had just made
13 up?
14 A. I assumed.


4 Q. Oh. Well, so you assumed he had a gun?
5 A. When we're taught at the academy, we have to take those
6 assumptions into consideration, yes, ma'am.


13 Q. You didn't see it happen?
14 A. No, ma'am.
15 Q. How did you know it was a gun exchange?
16 A. It was an assumption.


11 Q. And, instead of protecting him from any other threat, you
12 wanted to catch it, right?
13 A. At that point I wanted to catch him because, in my mind, he
14 had hurt Agent Compean.
15 Q. Without even asking Agent Compean?
16 A. He was down. I mean, I assumed.


2 Q. Okay. So, an hour later, you were still so full of
3 adrenaline that you forgot to report it?
4 A. No. I just made the assumption I shouldn't have.
5 Q. Well, what assumption is it that you made, again?
6 A. That somebody else had told him.


16 Q. Well, whose shooting?
17 A. I mean, I thought he was shooting at Agent Compean.
18 Q. Right. Okay.
19 A. I mean, I didn't know where the shots were coming from.
20 But I'm assuming Agent Compean was firing for a reason. I had
21 to trust his instinct, or his judgment.

18 Q. Then is it at this point that Agent Ramos arrives?
19 A. I didn't see if it was Agent Ramos. I assumed it was,
20 because I heard -- I heard the first -- I heard him as being
21 the first vehicle.

---------------------------------------------------- Juarez below---------------------------

7 Q. Yes, to the station. And the super- -- at the Border
8 Patrol station they monitor the radio traffic, right?
9 A. I'm assuming they do.

19 Q. I'm sorry. Let me back up. Before it turns to a dirt
20 road, are there people and vehicles on that road that you're
21 passing?
22 A. It was a public road. I'm assuming there were. I was
23 just -- focusing on the unit in front of me.

1 Q. Okay. Is there sewage water in there?
2 A. Yes. I mean, I'm assuming, if it smells.

3 Q. Okay. And is that why you didn't go help Compean because
4 you assumed he was going to let the driver go?
5 A. Yes.

16 Q. And that's why you assumed, in fact, that Compean didn't
17 need your help, because he wasn't going to stop this guy,
18 right?
19 A. Yes.

Stating that something is an assumption, is not a retraction.

[Bob J]

All I'm saying is it was a bad shoot. The 10 year sentence was for the "assault with a deadly weapon" charge. Since Compean was also found guilty and he didn't hit OVD, I assume shooting at someone falls under this charge.

Then we come to whether they were actually shooting to down him. If you shoot 20 feet to the left someone and never had any intention of hitting him, would that be AWADW or an illegal discharge of your weapon? Maybe one of the attorneys on this thread can help.

For me, the evidence didn't support OVD having a gun and I wasn't convinced by R&C's testimony. Compean claims OVD turned and pointed a "black shiny object" at him which he took for a gun. He then shot 10 times. OVD sees bullets hitting the dirt around him. Then when he gets to the river and is just feet from freedom, Ramos says he again pointed it him and that was when he took the fateful shot.

One, it doesn't make sense to me why OVD would turn and point a gun when his only thought is hightailing it to the Rio Grande and safety. It doesn't make sense to me why he would stop and point again, literally feet from freedom, when the last time it unleashed a barrage of lead. And he never fires? The guy is going to point a gun at well armed BP agents, giving them probable cause to kill him, and he doesn't shoot once?

I've read other items from people who know about these things and they say the "mules" are never armed. These guys make a few bucks moving weed, they don't own the load the only stake they have is getting to a destination and making a paycheck. They aren't going to defend it if it is hijacked, they aren't going into shootout with LEO's if they are caught, being armed will only get them killed.

If it's a hijacker, they only want the load and usually set the mule free. If it's LEO's, what mule is going to go into a firefight with a group of BPA's, cops or DEA agents who have not only pistols, but shotguns and AR-15's?

That doesn't mean there never is gunplay. But if they run into anyone who is armed it's because they are the real drug smugglers and drug cartels who are defending their million dollar loads.

[erton1]

AC, I didn't expect you to agree with me based on your previous posts. I have tried to take an objective look at the case. I assume that you agree with me regarding the cover up hurting the defendants credibility with the jury since you didn't respond to that insight.

[AndrewC]

Not to mention the fact that Davila had to cross and "climb" out of a 30 to 40 foot wide ditch that was 11 feet deep. In that ditch he ran like a "bullet" through an area of knee deep water.

[superfries]

Thanks for taking the time to give me a brief overview...I appreciate it.

[erton1]

Bob, the reason Compean was also found guilty of the assault with a deadly weapon charge is because of the law of parties. Basically if you are an actor in a criminal episode or transaction, are can be charged with and be guilty of the most serious offense of the episode. An example is if you and a friend go to store to rob it and you wait in the car as the getaway driver and your friend shoots and kills the clerk during the robbery, you can be charged with murder even though you didn't know your friend was going to shoot the clerk.

[AndrewC]

I have tried to take an objective look at the case. I assume that you agree with me regarding the cover up hurting the defendants credibility with the jury since you didn't respond to that insight.

See, you are assuming things. I don't believe you are objective when you use the words "cover up". It is obvious that something "convinced" the jury of Ramos and Compean's guilt. To me it is obvious that it wasn't an "objective" analysis of that testimony. I'm trying to analyze it by bending over backwards for the prosecution when using the data drawn from the testimony.

I need to know from the lawyers at what time in the process of investigation would a prosecutor be assigned to the case? When would Chris Sanchez notify the United States Attorney?

[Bob J]

"On a high-school track, probably not."

It doesn't matter what they are running over because they are both running over the same terrain making all things equal. If OVD has problems with the slope or dirt, so will Compean. The question is who would be slower and maybe have more difficulty. OVD is younger and by the BPA's testimony, quick and wiry. He is not weighted down with any equipment. Compean on the other hand is only 5'4", rotund (I've seen pics, he is a little portly) he has a heavy equipment/utility belt and is wearing heavy work boots.

OVD has a lead on him. We can dispute how much but Juarez testifies Compeon falls head first into the ditch. Compean says he only falls to one knee, which again to me is not credible because he drops his shotgun. If you take a swing and drop to one knee, there is no reason to drop your shotgun. You only drop it if you need use your hands to break your fall, per Jaurez's testimony.

But the bottom line is no matter how much the lead, I believe OVD would only increase that for all the reasons stated. Compeon would not catch up with him.

Now, you can argue that OVD might have slipped along the way and Compeon didn't. Okay, but there was no testimony from Compean that he saw OVD do that. If he only drops to one knee and immediately gets up and runs after him, he has him in his sight the whole time. Particularly if he was close enough to run him down as you believe.

[Bob J]

I understand but in this situation wouldn't there have to be premeditation or a conspiracy to shoot OVD by the R&C? If that law were applied to LEO's acting in the course of their duties, then the BPA's involved in this pursuit could equally be charged?

Any LEO involved in any incident where one single officer discharges his weapon unlawfully, would be exposed.

[Bob J]

I understand but in this situation wouldn't there have to be premeditation or a conspiracy to shoot OVD by the R&C? If that law were applied to LEO's acting in the course of their duties, then the BPA's involved in this pursuit could equally be charged?

Any LEO involved in any incident where one single officer discharges his weapon unlawfully, would be exposed.

[Bob J]

Another thing about the dropped shotgun. If Compean didn't fall and only drops to one knee, the shotgun wouldn't be far away. Why didn't he pick it up? Why would he leave it on the ground where OVD might get a hold of it and shoot him or others? Why wouldn't he take it with him if OVD is still a threat? If his intention was to run OVD down and tackle him OVD could overwhelm him or incapacitate him and return to get the shotgun.

Plausible explanations are it did fall further into the ditch than Compean states (and as Juarez says) and would take too long to retrieve, OR, OVD had a significant lead on him and he didn't believe there would be any chance of OVD returning to get it (which eliminates the "scuffle" story), OR, he didn't pick it up because his intention at that time was to use his pistol to "push OVD back" into Mexico. He couldn't use the shotgun to do this as the spread might hit him and didn't have any intention of hitting him.

[AndrewC]

There are several Freepers who have read every word, many who are in complete disagreement with the post you refer to.

Have you seen this?

Rene sure has a lot of information about Fabens("unusually well informed" according to Blanchette"). And he lives a State away from that area. I wonder who his source is and I wonder who the Fabens agent is?

[calcowgirl]

The 10 year sentence was for the "assault with a deadly weapon" charge.

No, it wasn't. The assault gave them 1 and 2 years, respectively.

 

Counts

Disposition

Ignacio Ramos (1)
18:113G.F Assault With A Dangerous Weapon And Aiding And Abetting (2sss)	Sentenced to 12 months and 1 day imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release with a $2000.00 FINE and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with counts 3sss, 8sss, 9sss, & 12sss
18:113B.F Assault With Serious Bodily Injury And Aiding And Abetting (3sss)	Sentenced to 12 months and 1 day imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and a $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with counts 2sss, 8sss, 9sss, & 12sss
18:924C.F Discharge Of A Firarm In Commission Of A Crime Of Violence (4sss)	Sentenced to 120 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run consecutive with counts 2sss, 3sss, 8sss, 9sss & 12sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With An Official Proceeding (8sss)	Sentenced to 12 months and 1 day imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and a $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with counts 3sss, 2sss, 9sss, & 12sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With An Official Proceeding (9sss)	Sentenced to 12 months and 1 day imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and a $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with counts 3sss, 8sss, 2sss, & 12sss
18:242.F Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law (12sss)	Sentenced to 12 months and 1 day imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and a $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with counts 3sss, 8sss, 9sss, & 2sss
Jose Alonso Compean (2)
18:113G.F Assault With A Dangerous Weapon And Aiding And Abetting (2sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release with a $2000.00 FINE and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 10sss, 3sss, 6sss, 7sss, 8sss, & 11sss
18:113B.F Assault With Serious Bodily Injury And Aiding And Abetting (3sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 10sss, 6sss, 7sss, 8sss, & 11sss
18:924C.F Use Of A Firearm In Relation To A Crime Of Violence (5sss)	Sentenced to 120 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run consecutive with 2sss, 3sss, 6sss, 7sss, 8sss, 10sss & 11sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With An Official Proceeding (6sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 3sss, 10sss, 7sss, 8sss, & 11sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With A Official Proceeding (7sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 3sss, 6sss, 10sss, 8sss, & 11sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With An Official Proceeding (8sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 3sss, 6sss, 7sss, 10sss, & 11sss
18:1512C.F Tampering With An Official Proceeding (10sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 3sss, 6sss, 7sss, 8sss, & 11sss
18:242.F Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law (11sss)	Sentenced to 24 months imprisonment to be followed by 3 years supervised release and $100.00 S/A to run concurrent with 2sss, 3sss, 6sss, 7sss, 8sss, & 10sss

 

 

[Bob J]

Could this testimony be any lamer?

4 Q. And so you've gone down on one knee. What do you do in
5 response to that?
6 A. I saw him get up. And once he started climbing out of the
7 ditch, I -- I recover- -- I was able to recover. I stood up, I
8 threw my shotgun down on the ground and ran after him.
9 Q. Well, why would you throw your shotgun on the ground?1
10 A. Because I had a better chance of catching him.
11 Q. Isn't it dangerous to leave a shotgun laying around out
12 there?
13 A. There was already other -- I had already heard the other
14 agents there. And I figured they would cross the ditch, and --
15 and they would be able to help me. So I didn't feel the 16 shotgun was going to be a -- a threat.

He throws his shotgun down on the ground because OVD is so close he can run and tackle him. Not a single agent had crossed the ditch and he didn't see any of them even trying. But he is going to throw is main weapon on the ground where the perp can get it and shoot all of them because others might help him at some later time.

And this is an example of the testimony that AC thinks makes Compean a great witness.

[calcowgirl]

I've read other items from people who know about these things and they say the "mules" are never armed.

The mules were the ones toting the bundles through the river. "Mules" don't drive $1 million dollars worth of pot to a stash-house. OAD was no "mule".

Reporters discovered from talking with OAD's family members that it was his common practice to carry a gun.

Two of Aldrete-Davila's family members, interviewed by the Daily Bulletin in El Paso last week, said Aldrete-Davila has been smuggling drugs since he was 14 and "wouldn't move drugs unless he had a gun on him," said one.