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 ...
That is a great post.
But somehow I think even that sledgehammer of sarcasm won’t make a dent in Johnny Sutton’s loyal toadies.
“Ramos and Compean were indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced for a non-existent crime.”
Possibly, but that would only be the mandatory 10. If that happens, I’d be okay with it.
“Your well known reputation as a toady and suckuop for federal LEOs renders any opinion that you have on this matter insignificant.”
I kick your butt in a debate and your response is that I’m a toady and suckup.
Nice. BTW - Aren’t R&C federal LEO’s?
“I hope that now people like BobJ will actually read the brief and then tell us how he can continue to defend these convictions.”
I’ve always questioned the sanity of the 10 year mandatory.
AOK, sometimes everyone gets rolled up in the same burrito.
There, fixed it for you.
Thanks for the ping.
It never ends. The BP Agents must feel like they are
in a Kafka Novel.
Agents could be home in bed asleep and attacked by illegals
and it will be the agents fault according to some.
Some folks would rather pay for cheap labor and overlook the fact they are illegal and leave it to the taxpayers
of cities especially like San Diego to pick up the Social Service tab and judiciary costs at mega millions a yr.
These open bordenbots are just another branch of the enemy we face.
And you brilliant cogitators never give up your Art Bell.
Better to be an Art Bell fan than a labial-rectal sycophant of Johnny Sutton.
Prayers are in order.
That's the one thing that a lot of people get upset about that really doesn't bother me.
Of course Mexico gets involved when one of its citizens is claiming they get shot in the back when they were unarmed. Of course they say they want the issue investigated and the perpetrators prosecuted.
However, since the Mexican government doesn't exactly cooperate with us on prosecutions in Mexico or with extraditions, and this is a person who was smuggling drugs, they don't exactly have a lot of pull with our government on such things.
It doesn't help foreign relations much to talk about things publicly, especially when some people just seem to love to get upset whenever they hear that the government of a foreign nation actually does what it is supposed to do and look after the interests of it's citizens while they are abroad.
While I do think our government unjustly persecuted these agents rather than properly investigating the incident, I think it is far more likely due to a bureaucratic vengeance upon those who violate internal procedures more so than because of any pressure from Mexico.
What is Mexico going to threaten to do? Refuse to extradite criminal suspects to stand trial in the US? They already do. Are they going to turn a blind eye on smuggling and illegal border crossing? They already do? Are they going to file a complaint with the UN?
Mexico is going to raise a fuss because doing so is good politics at home. The state department is going to make a show of acting like they care. However in the end, the it is the justice department that is going to investigate the incident and deal with it, and the justice department doesn't exactly have the best working relationship with the Mexican government which keeps harboring drug smugglers.
You can shuck and jive, use smoke and mirrors, engage in obfuscation and misdirection but it will never conceal the fact that 12 jurors ruled R&C shot OVD without justifiable cause. Everything is a sideshow. If it is found that the underlying basis for the 10 year mandatory was without merit, that conviction may be removed but the others will remain.
“When you got the facts on your side, pound the facts. When you got the law, pound the law, when you got neither, pound the table.”
I’m surprised you’re table hasn’t buckled from all the pounding.
It’s just too much for you that you can’t bully and coerce everyone, isn’t it.
When you follow those orders up the chain of command you find a Presidential Executive Order.
That's the guy you have to prosecute for the crime of having a gun present during the commission of a crime.
I'm pretty sure even Crazy Ruther Ginzburg would find that out of bounds ~
Sutton should have reviewed the law with some of the folks who wrote it. Now he's going to find it quite difficult to ever get employment in a major law firm, and certainly not as a US Attorney in any future Republican administration. I bet he even has a bad credit rating now ~ man can't be trusted.
Is that the same standard you apply to the OJ jury?
It’s always the guy losing the argument that first reaches for the gratutious personal swipes.
You still wear your Pinocchio suit?
Bob said:
“I’ve always questioned the sanity of the 10 year mandatory.”
Actually, the way I read the Gun Owners of America Amicus Brief, they attack the complete conviction because of the way that the plain error in the instructions on counts 4 and 5 affected the jury’s deliberations. I think that they are arguing that the entire conviction should be set aside.
The brief pretty much accuses the prosecutors of misconduct because they used the gun offense in a way that departed from DOJ policy.
Absolutely incorrect. You have either still failed to read the brief, or are unable to comprehend it. The result is the same--you're wrong.
I’m surprised you’re table hasn’t buckled from all the pounding.
Coming from someone who has been proven wrong on thread after thread, this is almost amusing. Mostly, it's tiresome.
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.