Posted on 09/24/2007 6:15:44 AM PDT by Boston Blackie
Two former U.S. Border Patrol agents sentenced to lengthy prison terms for shooting a drug-smuggling suspect have asked a federal appeals court to overturn their convictions, saying they were charged with a nonexistent crime and convicted after the jury was given improper instructions by the trial judge.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
There was no evidence, only a suspicion that OVD MIGHT be a drug mule. Compean reported seeing a van being loaded near the border, not one loaded with drugs. It could have been smuggled Madonna statues for all he knew.
The van Compean (the eyewitness to the “loading”) reported seeing was a blue mini van, the van OVD drove was a light grey full size van. Close but enough of a discrepancy that an officer should have some concern that they were actually the same vehicle.
You put a lot of weight on the high speed chase. If this is a felony and you feel it was enough to warrant shooting OVD, consider this. The officers were REQUIRED to immediately call in the pursuit to get an approval to pursue from a supervisor. They didn’t do that. When they continued to engage they were involved in an unauthorized illegal pursuit of OVD. Whatever threat to civilians you want to assign to OVD over this you must also assign to the officers involved. In other words, they were just as guilty as OVD for recklessly putting the lives and safety of the local resident in jeopardy.
NOTE - Once OVD stopped and exited his van the threat to the community ceased, AND any excuse the BPA might have for an authorized shoot.
If you want to believe that OVD was armed, than you are perfectly reasonable in taking a position that R&C were justified in firing their weapons. But that is the main crux of this case and our arguments/discussion on FR. After reading the trial transcripts I do not believe OVD had a gun (neither did the jury...all 12) and that it was only a later, manufactured excuse by R&C to cover their butts once the shoot became known.
IMO, anyone that believes the black shiny object story is willfully ignoring 95% of the facts of the case simply because they WANT TO believe any these officers or any LEO would never lie about something like this. I understand that sentiment but you can’t ignore that their are some bad officers out there or that sometimes they make mistakes and if you turn your head or cover your eyes anytime a situation like this arises all you end up with is corps and agencies filled with bad officers or ones that don’t have the judgment or balance to be carrying a gun.
Well, I’ve lost all hope for the people who keep chanting the same illogical or false information/conclusions, but there may be other people reading these threads who we can save from being sucked into their black hole of lies and diversions.
Funny thing is, I didn’t get ramped up about this case until I saw the lies and “conspiracy theories accepted as facts” that were being put out be the so called supporters of R&C. It made me mad that they were sucking in “normally aspirated” FReepers into their web of deceipt.
If, as conservatives, we don’t value the truth and constantly search for it among all the flotsam and jetsam in the press, we are no better than the liberals.
The strategy of liberals, socialists and communists is to shout their lies and distortions long enough as Goebels said, for them to become the truth.
I think we have to accept the fact that their are conservatives willing to do the same thing as long as it furthers their agendas.
It’s sad and discomforting. Seriously, at times I question why I continue work and fight when some on our side are no better than the Hillary’s of the world.
There were TWO (not one) witnesses that identified Aldrete-Davila and a DEA Report dated Oct. 25, 2005, that states DEA investigators believed they had sufficient evidence to indict Aldrete-Davila, but their requests to do so were denied by prosecutors.
So, NOW you want to say that we shouldn’t believe the witnesses because they were involved with drugs? All the while, you support the conviction of the border patrol agents wherein the only eye witness was a drug smuggler, receiving immunity and free health care, and suing the US Government for $5 million dollars?
My, aren’t you the model of consistency!
And yes... I will fault both you and BobJ for ignoring the multiple news sources, much of the transcript, and making stuff up that fits YOUR version of the story.
ROFL! Yeah, that's the ticket!
After Aldrete-Davila stopped his eratic driving behavior, the guy was a model citizen-to-be!
BTW, who is "OVD"?
Lies and diversions? All one needs to do is read your posts, and see your mythical version of facts refuted time and time again, to see that is a lie.
There you go again! You're losing the argument so it must be time to ratchet up the rhetoric!
>>Do you know what the job of a prosecutor is?
Hey, Bob J. Are you going to answer this question that was directed to you?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1901309/posts?page=109#109
DEA Report dated Oct. 25, 2005
I may be going out on a limb here, but I guess my answer would be to presecute.
I got an idea, instead of throwing out lazy "gotcha' questions, why don't you tell us what you believe to be the job of the presecutor and then we can have a discussion about it.
Sound good?
Show us the report. I’m not denying it exists but up to now I’ve also only heard about one witness and that itself has only been hearsay.
I’d like to see it in person and so would others.
BTW - I’m not sure why 2 witnesses would make more a difference since both of them were probably perps in the same crime. Was it the guy and his wife? His brother? His drug smuggler in arms?
“After Aldrete-Davila stopped his eratic driving behavior, the guy was a model citizen-to-be!”
Uhh, double wide, the poster was trying to make the point that while OAD was leading them on the high speed pursuit he was creating a danger to the local community. I merely pointed out that while that may be true (and that the pursuing officers were engaged in the same unapproved, maybe illegal activity) that once OAD stopped and exited his vehicle, this specific dangerous situation ceased to exist and any justificatin the officers may have had to use their guns ceased as well. Whether OAD later acted in a way that made him a danger (or not) had nothing to do with this exchange.
But it is a good example of how you either have problems with comprehension or simply misrepresent things other people say.
Gee, Bob—are you going to try to say those reports don’t exist, too?
They’ve been reported on when they were leaked to the press—then Sutton’s boys got on the case to squash it.
A Senate committee probing the prosecution of two U.S. Border Patrol agents who shot a fleeing drug-smuggling suspect may have damaged the government’s ability to bring new charges in an ongoing investigation, the Justice Department says.
In a letter this week to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who chaired a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on the conviction of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, the department said sensitive documents in an “active, ongoing investigation” may have been improperly released.
“It has come to our attention that certain committee members or their staffs may have come into possession of law-enforcement-sensitive documents regarding an active, ongoing investigation and may have provided those documents to others,” said Brian A. Benczkoski, principal deputy assistant attorney.
“We urgently request that those in possession of such sensitive law-enforcement materials not disclose them further or make them public,” he said, adding that the documents could “impact potential cooperating sources or even put witnesses in peril.”
“What is your source for the proposition that Davila did not drive the van into the US?”
More evidence that R&C supporters don’t read trial transcripts. Compean testified he saw the van being loaded on the US side with bags that were brought over by hand across the Rio Grande. Then someone got in a drove away “at a high rater of speed”. (There is nothing in the record to indicate where the van was prior to being loaded but since it had US plates one would assume it was in the US. It would be dumb to take it across the border as the border stations usually have cameras and anyone driving it might eventually be tied to a drug bust if the second driver were pulled over.)
OAD testified excactly the same.
I highlighted part of Compeans testimony because this always bothered me. What kind of drug smuggler would get in a van loaded with drugs then “drive away at a high rate of speed”? It was a dirt area and would have kicked up a dust storm visable for miles and alerting any Border Agents in the area, not to mention being highly suspicious in itself. Might as well tie a flashing red light to your roof.
Seems to me either OAD was inexperienced, wanted to get arrested, or, Compean made it up.
And, if true, what is the significance of that fact to you?
See post 138.
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.