Posted on 05/16/2008 9:51:33 AM PDT by kingattax
If President Bush would simply pardon the unjustly imprisoned former Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, we could all rest much easier knowing that in the United States, a foreign drug smuggler's word does not prevail over the word of federal agents in the line of duty.
This week, the Kentucky-based group, Christians Reviving America's Values, filed an ethics complaint with the Texas Bar Association to investigate U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, whom the group argues willfully misled a jury to convict the agents. Here is a refresher on the case for those who need it: Messrs. Ramos and Compean are serving 11- and 12-year federal prison sentences, respectively, for shooting in the buttocks an admitted drug smuggler who abandoned 743 pounds of marijuana. As the men tell it, they shot Mexican national Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila southeast of El Paso three years ago after the suspect refused the agents' orders to stop. Wounded, Mr. Aldrete-Davila fled to Mexico, leaving behind the van containing the massive drug load.
Here's the awful turn: Federal authorities subsequently located Mr. Aldrete-Davila in Mexico to offer immunity in exchange for his testimony against the border agents. He then filed a $5 million suit against the federal government for violating his civil rights.
On this man's testimony, the border agents were convicted by a federal jury on charges that included: assault with a dangerous weapon, lying about the incident and violating the alleged smuggler's Fourth Amendment right to be protected against illegal search and seizure.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Covering up a bad shoot is stressful.
Gee, kinda proves you haven't read the testimony.
He counted them out in his hand? You mean he picked them up? Isn't that tampering?
Covering up? To later count them in front of someone not involved in the shooting? That someone having been in a group at the scene which included the supervisors.
So stated the lying agent. Take it up with him. And Compean on his original statement admitted to picking up the casings.
Yes.
To later count them in front of someone not involved in the shooting?
To pick them up. To not tell the supervisors. To get the other agent to disturb/destroy evidence.
That someone having been in a group at the scene which included the supervisors.
Did that agent tell the supervisors at the time? Or did he assist in the coverup?
So stated the lying agent.
He lied about the shell casings? He lied about the coverup? Both? Neither?
And Compean on his original statement admitted to picking up the casings.
Good for him.
Yep, it’s that one from February of last year. It’s where he rips into Sara Carter and WND for their coverage of the case.
“Trying to free them wastes resources that could be otherwise used to lobby for a better border enforcement and deportation of illegals.”
The Border Patrol is border enforcement.
“The Duke students fired their weapons”
When did firing your weapon become illegal?
The guy who picked them up never testified that Compean told him to not tell the supervisors. You made that up. Compean never told the Vasquez(the guy we are talking about) to pick them up. He didn't even go wink-wink. Not much of a coverup to include someone not involved in the shooting. An innocent person turning himself into a felon just because someone said he might see some casings.
Did that agent tell the supervisors at the time? Or did he assist in the coverup?
Tell the supervisors what? Compean had no idea at the time what Vasquez could have known about the situation. Compean only testified that saw up to the waist of an agent and heard others.
He lied about the shell casings?
Yes, and he was fired for lying in general about the case. Juarez resigned before he was fired.
“Their jobs don’t include shooting an unarmed man in the back.”
Their job is to prevent an invasion from another country (Mexico, in this case), and this whole event started very near the border when sensors went off.
They tried to stop Davila and Davila kept going. I find these few facts tell me they were preventing an invasion, and when Davila did not stop, they were justified in shooting.
This is an issue of security of our borders, not typical inner-city crime.
“Compean and Ramos are guilty of shooting an unarmed man in the back, lying about it, and tampering with evidence.”
What proof is there that Davila was unarmed other than his testimony?
What evidence is there that Ramos tampered with evidence? What evidence?
Specify the lies told.
“The physical evidence corroborated his story, and not that of the agents’.”
What physical evidence? I thought you just said they tampered with evidence? Also, I read that there was no investigation of the scene immediately after the shooting.
“Answer me this: if this was such a clean shoot, why did Compean and Ramos destroy evidence and lie about it to their supervisor?”
I can tell from the above that you do not know what a “clean shoot” is.
Also, Ramos and Compean were not questioned by their supervisor. They did not lie. They were not even asked about the shooting by their supervisor.
“What about the physical evidence of the shell casings?”
Would those be the shell casings at the scene that was not investigated?
“When he heard other agents talking about shots, did he say, “We fired them and tossed the shell casings into a ditch”? Why not?”
Probably not since Ramos did not toss shell casings anywhere. He did not even pick any up. Also, he did not know at the time that Compean did, or was going to pick up the shell casings.
“You bet. It’s also incumbent on the shooters to explain what happened. Without trying to hide evidence.”
Ramos had been in a previous shooting (I am not sure if he fired a weapon in this prior incident). After the shooting he made a written report and was chastised for making the written report. The demand is only that a supervisor be informed that a shooting took place within 1 hour. There is no demand for who report it, only that someone at the scene inform a supervisor.
If you think about this, it does make sense. How often does a LEO or other official go to a situation, get involved in an exchange of gunfire and end up dead or unconscious? The answer is often enough that we do not send them to jail if they do not report the exchange within an hour.
“Describe the evidence that Ramos destroyed.”
“
The shell casings.”
Wrong. Ramos did nothing with shell casings. Try again.
“And list the lies to their supervisor.”
“For starters, failing to tell the supervisor about the shoot would constitute a lie of omission.”
Ramos, nor Compean were required to tell their supervisor anything about the shooting. The only requirement was for the supervisor to be informed that a shooting took place within an hour by someone there.
Also, not telling the supervisor is not a lie. A lie is telling someone an untruth, not a lack of telling someone something that the person believes the other person already knows about.
“He also didn’t tell his supervisor he made a U-turn in the intersection while attempting to apprehend Davila. Another lie of omission?”
Actually, that one might have been a lie of omission since Ramos had no reason to think the supervisor had been informed of his U-Turn. (smiling)
..he's just sittin' there grinning & carefree.
And why not!
Unlike the rest of us, the American citizen peons, he will never have to worry about high gas prices...
... high costs of food, medical expenses
..or if an illegal will take our loved ones job OR our identity....
..or rape, rob & murder our family members.
No, he sits in high cotton while the rest of us seeth, yell and cry.
It's like water off a duck's back for him.
He's set for life with money, security, protection and luxury....
..while the rest of us wonder if the long, hard work ethic we held so proudly .....will bite us in the nether regions....
..and if we will still have a Republic once it's officially handed over to the millions of illegals.
It still hurts!
Sorry, but I think a pardon is the least acceptable legal alternative; a last resort in order to gain them their freedom. This case must be thrown out. If these men are pardoned, it is tantamount to an admission of guilt.
It will also mean that any BP officer is exposed to federal whimsy and pressure from the Mexican government (whatever the hell that is).
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.