I read the transcript, as did you, [although I will need to reread it to refresh myself at this late date] and did not arrive at the same conclusion you did. Others likewise read it and differed in their opinions. Reading the transcript, while giving you creditability, does not give you infallibility. Nor does the fact that the jury decided a given way make that opinion true. It may be a legal decision, but the question is was it an uninformed or coerced verdict? Because of evidence withheld or, worse, distorted, the jurors might not have made a “proper” decision. That is why we have judicial reviews and, as a last resort, pardons.
The pass you question was reported to be a humanitarian pass not requiring an escort across the border or specific appointment. I think his pass was finally revoked last January when it became apparent, even to the prosecutors, that Davila was using his pass for no good.
Just yesterday, on the nightly news, it was reported that Congress had finally gotten through the FOIA confirmation that Davila was identified carrying drugs a second time that October.
Davila confessed on a call to a US Border Agent, whom was a boyhood friend of his, that he smuggled drugs into the US and that was why he was reluctant to come forward about the shooting. [Who prompted him to come forward is still murky.] Davila’s relationship with that Agent was never fully explored. However, Sen. John Cornyn stated he felt there was adequate evidence to charge Davila. Sutton chose not to and chose to blame Ramos and Compean.
While it may not amount to a conspiracy, there was Mexican gov’t involvement in this case and others. At this point no improper connection has been made...at this point. Your belief in the execution of laws is laudable, but when those laws are improperly or excessively applied, people lose respect for both the laws and those who administer them. What I see is not a single case, Ramos-Compean; what I see is an abuse of prosecutorial power by Johnny Sutton and his cohorts and that concerns me gravely.
Really? I count two. Are there more? At any rate, this is the way crimes get prosecuted;you work with the whitnesses you've got. If imunity from prosecution invalidates a testimony, 90% of all perps would get off.
Often that testimony, including Davila’s and including an agent’s changed several times.
Really? Please indicate how Davila's testimony changed. I also see that you fail to mention that Compean and Ramos changed their stories numerous times.
It may be a legal decision, but the question is was it an uninformed or coerced verdict? Because of evidence withheld or, worse, distorted, the jurors might not have made a “proper” decision.
What evidence was withheld?
As regards to how Davila used his pass into the states, it's not relevant to the question of whether C&R are guilty.
Davila confessed on a call to a US Border Agent, whom was a boyhood friend of his, that he smuggled drugs into the US and that was why he was reluctant to come forward about the shooting. [Who prompted him to come forward is still murky.] Davila’s relationship with that Agent was never fully explored.
Again, not relevant to the guilt or innocence of C&R.
However, Sen. John Cornyn stated he felt there was adequate evidence to charge Davila.
Even if that were true, how in the world were they going to get their hands on him? Remember, he was in Mexico.
As the the connections of the Mexican government in this case, they are also not relevant to the guilt or innoncence of C&R.