Posted on 09/24/2007 6:15:44 AM PDT by Boston Blackie
How do you know they gave “sworn statements” to that effect?
I’m not saying they didn’t, it’s just I haven’t seen the DEA report, and none of the news articles I read said they were sworn statements.
An investigator in the field won’t usually get sworn statements, they will ask questions, and write down the answers, even if they don’t believe the answers. That all ends up in the investigative report, but if they didn’t believe something they might ignore it and not go back to call the witness in for a sworn statement.
Of course, I wouldn’t put it past drug dealers to tell lies in a sworn statement. We know Jose tried to pass of his brother as an innocent mechanic, which we now know to be false. So it is rational to believe that in the same false statement, he might have falsely chosen Davila because he was a known figure who could credibly be suspected.
OK, I will say this as well. It’s possible that Davila was smuggling drugs. It’s also possible that Davila was NOT smuggling drugs, but DID know Jose, or Cipriano, or both, and maybe he HAD visited Jose, which would explain why Jose would feel comfortable using him in his false statement trying to protect his brother. We simply don’t have enough information available to us to know what the facts are.
I’m not as trusting of politicians as you may be, especially when they have “seen secret reports” I can’t see and surprisingly tell me those “secret reports” back up everything they believed.
This is part of my general skepticism. I want to see evidence FOR something before I believe it. Now, this doesn’t to me matter much to the C/R case. It doesn’t in any way reflect badly on Sutton, who by the C/R supporters own admission is still investigating the matter and trying to put Davila in jail for this “2nd load”. It wouldn’t bother me in the least if he was found guilty of smuggling, nor would it change my opinion of the actions of C/R.
My complaint is that there is simply no credible evidence against him in this 2nd bust that we know of, but WND, pretending to be a viable news source, has reported it as if it is the gospel truth, as if they had a camera and filmed in buying the drugs.
They and the C/R supporters then use this false claim of certaintude to attack Sutton for not already having the guy in an electric chair. Just as the faulted Sutton because C/R collected no evidence and failed to report Davila or identify him, making it impossible for Sutton to charge Davila for his van full of marijuana.
Instead of acknowledging that the job of the BP agents was to aprehend or at least identify the suspect, they accuse Sutton of “refusing to prosecute” and suggest that giving him immunity was a pay-off for his testimony, rather than the TRUTH, which is it was a simple acknowledgement of the FACT that there was NO EVIDENCE linking Davila to the van of drugs EXCEPT Davila’s own testimony and physical evidence Davila brought with him (the bullet).
Of course, given that a good number of pro R/C folks even here at FR still question whether Davila was even HIT by a bullet, and still think the ballistics report did NOT prove the bullet was from Ramos’ gun, I don’t see much hope for people understanding that Sutton is not the enemy here.
It’s the attacks on a good man based on lies and half-truths from WND that bother me here. I wish C/R had done the right thing. I wish they had identified Davila. I wish they had apprehended him, or they had reported the shooting. I wish they were NOT guilty. I wish Davila was in jail.
But that’s not the case, and destroying the reputations of good people to make up for that is wrong. I’ve seen attacks on Sutton, on the prosecuter, on the judge. I’ve seen attacks on other BP agents, including the investigator, his family, and those who served with C/R. I’ve seen attacks on the Attorney General that were dispicable. I’ve seen attacks on our president calling him a traitor to our country.
All because two guys failed to stop a scrawny mexican drug runner from getting over the border, and then failed to identify him, report a shooting, or tell a convincing story as to why they didn’t.
“BTW neither one of us is going to change the other’s opinion. But this is much is fact.”
That’s the difference between you and me. If I see additional evidence that changes my mind about what happened, my opinion will change. You are on quest.
“Almost without exception jurors on the trial said they would have voted not to convict had all of the evidence been presented by the government.”
Prove it.
“Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else on this forum was in that area that night in question. NOBODY but the 3 people involved know what happened.”
Again, you say this as if it means anything. A jury still has to decide. Are you suggesting we toss out our system of justice?
“When it comes to the security of my country, I will believe my guards (border patrol agents) LONG before I will ever believe a scumbag SOB (or his supporters) that is trying to sneak into my home and conduct illegal business.’
Without question?
“Who’s side are you on?”
The truths.
“1. Are we at War?”
Technically, no, war was never declared. Democratic Iraq is at war, we are a proxy player.
“2. If we are at War, should invaders not be shot on sight?”
I see, you are one of those “shoot the mexicans on sight” that CCG claims don’t exist.
Question for you, how did R&C know OAD was an “invader” before they shot him?
“3. If no to number 2, how do you propose keeping this nation secure in light of the fact (yes it is a fact), that Middle easterners have used and continue to use our border as an entry point to get into our country to do god knows what?”
Was OAD a “middle easterner”?
You know, I’m not going to go back and check posts, it’s a waste of my time. I’ve apologized to you before and all it got me was more crap. You’re not interested in apologies, you’re interested in extracting a pound of flesh by other means because you keep getting your butt kicked in these debates. You’re using your gender to gain an advantage because you can’t do it with your arguments.
If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
Buh bye.
Because of this injustice and the fact that my President refuses to secure our borders, I cannot even stand to look or listen to him anymore. I consider him a traitor.
See, this is what I mean by people on your side getting the facts wrong, and nobody else who knows better correcting them.
The Bush administration is NOT covering it up. According to the news reports, it’s under investigation. Further, the drugs themselves (the only physical evidence) have been seized, and the person who was CAUGHT with those drugs (the only certain perpetrator) has pled guilty and is doing time.
The only thing that HASN’T happened is enough evidence being collected to tie Davila to the drugs. We have the testimony of the now-convicted drug smuggler, and a statement of some sort from his brother, that Davila was involved.
calcowgirl:
I need some more information, and you are great at this. Was the van in the “2nd run” recovered at Capriano’s house?
If not, do we know for a fact that Davila drove a van up for the trial in October of 2005? It seems there should be records of him getting the van somewhere, of him showing up at the court with it, something like that?
If we KNEW he was driving the van, and then we KNEW the van was dusted and we found marijuana, or we KNEW the van was recovered at Cipriano’s house, that would be some real evidence.
But I don’t remember EVER reading ANYTHING about Davila and the van, other than the statement of the Ortiz brothers.
You think this is fair?
Yes, that is true. He says he wasn’t, and there’s no evidence of it, but still, we can’t know for certain.
If only C/R had capture him, then we would know.
Bob, it would have been a lot easier to find the casings if they had searched for them on the day of the incident, rather than weeks later.
Especially if they had had C/R helping them, showing them where they stood for the shootings.
Obviously some of the casings were obvious and easy to find, because they were picked up and thrown where nobody would ever find them.
I know your frustration, but how does that help get the facts out?
And since the 2nd bust had nothing to do with his credibility on the first bust, since there was no EVIDENCE of a 2nd bust, only a story in the WND, this shows why that was not presented at a trial.
Juries are asked to make decisions based on relevant information.
Anyway, nobody knows what a juror would have done. Jurors can be pressured after the case is over to say whatever they want. Heck, if I believed WND and I was a juror I’d feel pretty bad.
Show me real evidence that Sutton is part of the “corrupt dealings”. You just accused him of a crime.
I always felt bad for Ramos. Of the two, what he did seems much more defensible, if he had only chosen to report the shoot and stand up for it.
I have no facts backing it up, but it would make sense to me that Compean talked to Ramos after he shot the guy, explained the story, and Ramos decided to help his friend out. And now he’s in jail for it.
in fact, if I were to engage in the speculation that passes for facts here, I could see this happening. Ramos, thinking Compean is being shot at and returning fire, runs up the bank. He sees Compean down, and fires one shot, taking down the perp.
Compean screams “What are you doing”, stopping Ramos in his tracks, he turns quizzingly, forgetting the perp, and Compean says “you hit him!”. Ramos says “of course, wasn’t he shooting at you?”, and Compean says “No, I was shooting at him”. Ramos asks why, and compean says “I wasn’t trying to hit him, I was just pissed because when I tried to apprehend him he was giving me lip so I tried to hit him and I fell over and he ran away.”
“So I thought if I fired at him he’d stop, but he didn’t”.
Ramos: “God, I thought he had shot you”. Compean: “He doesn’t even have a gun”. Ramos: “Well, I heard the shots, so I think I’m OK”. Compean: “Buddy, if you tell them I shot, then I have to explain why, and I’ve got no good reason for it. I’d have been fine if you hadn’t actually HIT him”.
Ramos: “Well, maybe he isn’t really hurt. Maybe he’ll get up and go back to Mexico.”. Waits a while, sees him leave. “OK, so now we just have to collect the shells, and keep quiet, and nobody needs to know. If any of our buddies ask, we’ll tell them we just took a couple of shots to spook the guy — they’ll understand and keep quiet as well”.
Thus, two men, neither of whom probably intended to commit any crime, end up setting themselves up for conviction on multiple felony charges.
I know this is speculation, but think of it. Compean by himself would have NO charges. He didn’t hit the guy, the guy was running away, nobody would EVER have accused him of anything.
Ramos by himself would have no charges. He heard gunshot, found Compean on the ground with the suspect fleeing, and rationally took a shot thinking the guy had shot his partner.
But for Ramos to be cleared Compean has to admit shooting at an unarmed man. For Compean to be clear Ramos has to keep quiet about the shooting. And for the two of them to be clear, they CAN’T catch the guy, because that would prove they shot him and he didn’t have a gun.
And the only thing this story has going for it is that the FACTS that we know are consistant with it. They didn’t go after the guy when they shot him, they didn’t report the shooting, they picked up the shells, they told nobody about the gun.
Further, the actions of each of them are understandable, and something you might well expect. Heck, I probably wouldn’t want to press charges against a BP agent for firing wide of the subject to try to get him to stop, even though I’m betting that is against policy.
And I wouldn’t want to press charges against Ramos for shooting a guy if he thought his partner was hit, although I suppose technically if he didn’t see a gun, he wouldn’t be certain the shooting was the right thing (as it seems it was not).
As I said, I have tried to avoid speculation in the past, just dealing with the facts.
I think he was being truthful. I think Ramos could have shown him exactly where the shooting took place, if he wanted to help them find the casing. But in the absense of help from Ramos, I think it would be hard to isolate where the casing would be.
Oh, that’s right, Sanchez is part of the evil conspiracy.
I was referring to this statement you made earlier.
"What I don’t understand is U.S. authorities willingness to jump through hoops to keep Mexico happy."
Now were on a long thread, one of many over the last 8 months, that is discussing the R&C incident. You make that statement on this thread and people might logically think that is to what you are refer.
If I misinterpreted, okay. But it did seem like a logical conclusion.
If you have information/evidence, even anecdotal, of the US's efforts to please Mexico at all costs, please enlighten us. I for one would like to know about it.
As I said, if you, who seem reasonable, would just correct the most egregious of the false statements by people on your side, I’d stay away.
Most of the people here are conspirists who think that Sanchez, Sutton, the prosecuter, George Bush, the head of the DHS, Alberto GOnzalez, and maybe others in government are working together to demoralize BP agents on behalf of the Mexican Government, in a criminal treasonous plot to destroy our country.
Yes, “the organization” said that, but given that 15 other shootings which were reported were all found to be OK, it’s hard to see how the conviction in one bad shooting where it was covered up could really have a “chilling effect” except on other BP agents who think it’s OK to shoot a suspect and then not tell anybody, especially if they think they hit the guy.
Seriously, do any of you think it’s common for a police officer to shoot and wound a suspect, and then NOT TELL ANYBODY about it?
You could presume that all the jurors were asked the same question. And if WND reported that 3 changed their minds, you can rationally conclude the other 9 did not. WND is not known for reporting all the facts, or really any facts, unless they happen to find facts that support their beliefs.
They will claim that they were doing an important investigation of the drug cartel for the last two years and Davila was their star informant. They will produce one accomplice other than Cipriano Ortiz and it will be someone who, like Ortiz, they knew was guilty since Oct 05 but kept this person in place to keep the narcotics flowing into this country.
The investigation will also probably come up with a few other names of supposed members of Davila’s cartel but these names will either be fabrications or members of a different cartel and not the officially sanctioned trafficking operation of the Mexican and US government that Davila belonged to.
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.