Pardon Border Guards Ramos and Compean

Stiff Right Jab ^ | August 14, 2008 | Eagle Forum

[Bob J]

“No, it shows your lack of understanding and the prosecutor’s lack of understanding how agencies use the tools provided to them.”

And you are suggesting one of those “tools” is mixing up call signals?

“It is fairly evident that everyone, including supervisors, understood the message since they all responded.”

I’m assuming they figured it was a mistake on Compeans part since he called it out with a suspicious van leaving the area. It doesn’t change the fact it was the wrong call signal for the situation at hand.

[calcowgirl]

The only thing you seem to be "blowing out of the water" is your own assertions.

9 A. The first thing I did, as soon as I called out the blue van
10 leaving the area, after I got a response, I then switched my
11 radio to — to direct. And then I gave them a better
12 description of the vehicle. I — I told them it was going to
13 be a light blue van, maybe a gray van, but it was going to be a
14 full-sized van.

[AndrewC]

You got two agents who testified under oath that they believed they heard “mini-van” somewhere in the transmissions from Compean that day.

And you have enormous amounts of testimony that indicate that Compean did not say minivan. Mendoza who was the closest to Compean and out of Fabens buildup(ie not likely to have a dead spot) heard "van" and never heard "minivan". Further, Jacquez, one of your two believers, testifies(in my previous post page 68) that the initial transmission he heard mentions the van leaving the 76 area and that Compean had lost sight of it. It is incredible to believe that Compean would change that initial description after losing sight of the van. Since Jacquez testifies that he was on repeater this call was the initial call heard by everyone. And that recorded message excludes the word "minivan". Therefore the conclusion to be drawn is that Jacquez was mistaken about what he heard not that some unrecorded transmission was made which included the word "minivan". What the heck difference does it make whether Davila drove a Ford, Chevy, or Subaru? The fact is, the vehicle was as the the testimony shows and the repeater transcript indicates. And finally, it was Juarez that made the decision that there was probable cause to stop the vehicle, Compean was nowhere near the initial interception.

You haven't been paying attention. I certainly admit discrepancies in the testimony. I have even called two of the agents verified liars. But I know that the weight of evidence sides with Compean. About the worst you can say is that he got the color wrong, but that is mitigated by the fact that it was an overcast day. Grey and blue tend to look alike as light intensity lessens, especially at a distance.

[AndrewC]

And you are suggesting one of those “tools” is mixing up call signals?

Okay, give me the one he mixed it up with. Ten what?

[Bob J]

Hehehe...you respond with copies of Compeans trial transcripts. You’re laboring under the delusion that I take anything Compean testified to at face value.

His entire time on the stand was so full of discrepancies and CYA, even the simplest of statements must be viewed through a veil of stupifying incredulity.

[Bob J]

I don’t know. What I do know is that a “10-46” means narcotics apprehended, not possible narcotics smuggling.

[calcowgirl]

Hehehe...you respond with copies of Compeans trial transcripts. You’re laboring under the delusion that I take anything Compean testified to at face value.

I posted back with a part of the transcript that YOU posted!

[Bob J]

“And then I gave them a better description of the vehicle.”

“Better description” would mean more information. Now, since Compean testified he originally called it out as a blue full size van on the repeater, what possible additional information might he give them when he switched to the non-recording local?

Let me see, he only saw the vehicle at a distance through field glasses, he didn’t have the license plate number, he had no information on the driver, could the “additional information” he gave be a more detailed description of then van? Like, maybe, it was a mini as opposed to full size?

[Bob J]

“I posted back with a part of the transcript that YOU posted! “

Yes, but I only do that for comedic value.

[calcowgirl]

What I do know is that a “10-46” means narcotics apprehended, not possible narcotics smuggling.

So, when someone puts out on the radio that it's going to be a "possible 10-46," what does that mean to you?

To me it means that, if successful in stopping the van and the driver, they will find narcotics and be able to apprehend a smuggler.

[AndrewC]

I don’t know. What I do know is that a “10-46” means narcotics apprehended, not possible narcotics smuggling.

No what you do know is that some list that Kanof used mentions 10-46 as apprehended. What that list is you obviously don't know since you essentially state that. For the record I don't know what the codes are, but what I do know is that everybody understood the code and the red herring that Kanof and you are waving is of no consequence to the event. The van was full-sized and it did contain narcotics.

The relevant testimony.

22 Q. And so in the area, the 76 area, they smuggle aliens there,
23 too, don't they?
24 A. Yes, they do.
25 Q. But you had already made up your mind this was marijuana?
David A. Perez, CSR, RPR
Ramos - Cross by Ms. Kanof 7
1 A. Yes, ma'am.
2 Q. Nobody had told you it was marijuana?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Nobody had told you it was drugs?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Just somebody coming into the 76 area going fast?
7 A. Well, Agent Compean had said 46.
8 Q. Well, 10-46 doesn't mean loading marijuana, does it?
9 A. In the 10 code it means narcotic smuggling.
10 Q. Well, in the 10 code, doesn't it mean narcotic
11 apprehension? The actual definition in the 10 code for
12 10-46 --
13 MS. KANOF: May I approach?
14 BY MS. KANOF:
15 Q. Would it help you to refresh your memory as to a list of
16 the Border Patrol 10 codes?
17 A. I guess it would.
18 MS. KANOF: Approach the witness, Your Honor?
19 THE COURT: Sure.
20 BY MS. KANOF:
21 Q. I've highlighted it to assist you. Isn't a 10-46
22 apprehended narcotics?
23 A. Yes, ma'am, it is.
24 Q. Past tense, correct?
25 A. Yes, ma'am.

The fact is everybody understood it to mean that a van was leaving area 76 and it was possibly carrying narcotics. Even had it not been carrying narcotics, the agents were justified in investigating the van. When the van left and headed for the border it was justification to follow it. When Davila entered the ditch, it was justification for the Border Patrol to stop him from crossing into the levee and ditch area. That is a controlled area. When I went to the ditch and was measuring it, the Border Patrol came to the location Compean would have been and talked across the ditch to me. They asked me what I was doing. I told them. They then went about their business. Since I did not flee, did not enter the ditch to cross, and did not ignore their requests, they did not need to arm themselves nor did they feel compelled to prevent me from doing anything. No agent was charged with illicitly following or pursuing Davila. They were well within the limits of their power. In fact, the prosecution essentially admitted that physical force was justified to be used against Davila. They brought up the asp.

[AndrewC]

Hehehe...you respond with copies of Compeans trial transcripts. You’re laboring under the delusion that I take anything Compean testified to at face value.

Only Compean testified that he picked up 9 or 10 shells or shot 10 or eleven shots. No one else had primary knowledge of the number of shots or of the number of casings that Compean picked up. So you must be taking Compean at face value. And no(to your predicted rebuttal), Vasquez testified he did not count casings so he does not have primary knowledge of how many casings Compean picked up.

[Bob J]

“Only Compean testified that he picked up 9 or 10 shells or shot 10 or eleven shots. No one else had primary knowledge of the number of shots or of the number of casings that Compean picked up. So you must be taking Compean at face value.”

Uhhh, no.

“And no(to your predicted rebuttal), Vasquez testified he did not count casings so he does not have primary knowledge of how many casings Compean picked up.”

Well here you are again debating what the meaning of the word “is” is. Here is the testimony of Compean counting out the casings in front of Vasquez (BTW - he also testifies Compean admitted to emptying a magazine, reloading and shooting again) and then Compean asking Vasquez to get the casings he missed. THis is why Vasquez lost his job, he was an accessory in the tampering with evidence portion of the charges. Poor Vasquez, tries to help out his BP buddy and loses his career over it.

This is the most damning piece of evidence against Compean because it suggests several things. First, that Compean shot from on top of the levee, not at the bottom, that there never was a “struggle” with OAD, and that he probably got his face dirty and the small cuts he had, when he fell into the ditch after trying to hit OAD with his shot gun and slipped.

It also explains why Compean simply didn’t pick up the shotgun (he never “threw it down”...who throws a shotgun “down” to the ground?) at that time (it was a distance down the slope and would have taken too much time to retrieve), so he gets his dirty, scratched self up, turns, draws his weapon and starts firing at OAD as he crosses the levee and then a few feet down the opposite side, as Juarez testified that he saw.

Compean and Ramos picked up the shell casings on the side of the levee, the ones they could without being seen by the agents and officers on the other side, then Compean got Vasquez to get the ones on top the levee after everyone else left the scene.

Most of Compeans version of the events is a complete fantasy, created to give him cover/probable cause for the illegal and unjustified shooting. The jury saw through it and so did the appeals court.

You support R&C because “they only shot a mexican illegal”. Why don’t you be a man and admit it?

Q. He opened his hand?

A. His hand, and showed them to me like that. And I told him “how many do you have”?. He goes, “Let me see”. He counted them. I didn’t count them. He said “there’s nine”. And then I asked him again “How many did you fire?”.
He said “I don’t know”, so he went back to the magazines.

—snip—

Q. And when he finished examining both magazines, what did he say?

A. “I’m probably missing about five, five rounds.”

—snip—

A. I told him “I got to go”. And he says “I also have to go to the station to do the report. By the way, can you find those casings for me?”

Q. And what did you do when you got there?

A. When I got there, I just sat on my vehicle for a while, made surew nobody else was there. Got off the vehicle, started walking around. And I found four casings in the levee, one between the levee and the drain canal on the slope. I got them all and threw thm in the drainage canal.

Q. Total number of casings you found?

A. Five.

[AndrewC]

Uhhh, no.

Vasquez lost his job, he was an accessory in the tampering with evidence portion of the charges. Poor Vasquez, tries to help out his BP buddy and loses his career over it.

No he was not an accessory. Vasquez had no knowledge of any crime being committed. He did not know that Juarez, Ramos, and Compean would not report a shooting. He certainly didn't know that Davila was hit. So he was not knowingly doing anything to coverup. Plus he did not lose his career for that. He lost his career for lying.

Border agents who testified against convicted co-workers will be fired

All three agents gave sworn testimony against Ramos and Compean for the U.S. Attorney's Office, which successfully prosecuted the shooting case in March. The agents were given immunity in exchange for their testimony despite changing their accounts of the incident several times.

"On March 18, 2005, and on May 11, 2005, you provided different statements to DHS OIG investigators regarding your knowledge of the February 2005 shooting incident," Vasquez's proposal for termination states.

"Specifically, you said in the March 18, 2005, statement that you heard radio traffic by (Border Patrol Agent) Jose Compean that there was a 10-46 (apprehended narcotics case) in progress in the area. You testified in court on February 24, 2006, and admitted that your March 18, 2005, statement regarding a 10-46 in progress was inaccurate."

The termination proposal also noted Vasquez told prosecutors that Compean used an expletive to describe drug smuggler Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila when the smuggler threw dirt in his eyes during a tussle prior to the shootings. Vasquez's sworn statement of March 18, 2005, contains no mention of an expletive.

Vasquez also said that when he opened the door to the van, he couldn't smell the nearly 800 pounds of marijuana in the vehicle, contradicting statements made by other agents on the scene, according to trial testimony.

In trial transcripts of Vasquez's testimony obtained by the Daily Bulletin, Vasquez tries to explain why he lied to investigators.

"So this statement, your March 18 statement, would be inaccurate," asked Stephen Peters, co-counsel for Ramos, on Feb. 24, 2006.

"On that part, yes," Vasquez replied. He explained that he wasn't sure why he thought Compean called for backup while pursuing a narcotics suspect, and did not directly answer Peters' question as to why other agents went to Compean's aid.

Now back to the "Uhhh, no." He testified he did not count. He testified that Compean counted and said there were nine. Vasquez did not have them in his hand so what was the necessity of stating "I didn't count them" except to verify that he did not count them but that the number came from Compean? He did not testify, "I saw Compean count out nine casings". He did not have primary knowledge of the number of casings. In fact, the whole episode as testified by Vasquez is suspect.

First, Vasquez does not even know if Ramos has crossed the ditch when he leaves the scene to go to the CC Bills gate(Vasquez testimony pg 31). Every other agent that testified is well aware that Ramos crossed the ditch. In fact, supervisor Arnold, who arrived a minute after FOS Richards, testified that everyone was next to the van on the drivers side conferring with Richards. He testified that it appeared that Ramos was being the main responder to Richards. That would be expected since he was on the north side and one of the two that pursued Davila. Arnold testified that Vasquez was there. If he is the only one of all of the agents that did not recall that Ramos was on the north side of the ditch, he is either lying or his memory is so bad that his testimony is not to be trusted.

But before I go on into Vasquez testimony, let us set a timeline. We know that the call made by Compean occurred at 1311. We also know that someone made a call at 1328 to end the event. That call would not have been made by anyone not at the ditch and would have most likely have been a supervisor. Since it was recorded on the sector traffic it was not from a walkie talkie and would have been from a vehicle radio or the station. Therefore, that call happened after Richards arrived since he was the first supervisor at the scene. Well, we also know that Juarez made a call at 1319 saying "We got this baby"

Benavides testimony vol 8 pg 134.

16 A. Well, I couldn't characterize it that there might be a
17 pursuit. I would characterize it as suspicious.
18 Q. Okay. Now, what about -- and I'm looking at page 3, but
19 I'm sure you remember this comment, when -- 1319, when Juarez
20 says, It's close. We got this baby.
21 Doesn't that give you an idea that there's some sort
22 of pursuit going on?
23 A. It's an assumption, yes.

Okay, so now we know that the pursuit was still on at 1319. Since the dirt road was dusty and Juarez could not see in front of him as he testified, that call had to be prior to reaching the dirt portion of Jess Harris. That dirt portion is 1 mile long and ends at the ditch. It would take 1 minute at 60 or 2 minutes at 30. The road was most likely traversed in 1.5 minutes. So if Juarez made the call just as he entered the dirt portion of Jess Harris, there would be only, 1328 - 1319 - 1.5 = 7.5 minutes for everything to transpire at the ditch including the return of Ramos. Why? Because only Richards was in a vehicle when/after Ramos crossed the ditch. Richards testified that Ramos was already across when he arrived. Jacquez arrived just before Yrigoyen and before Richards. He sees Ramos and Compean arrive from the levee at about the same time that Yrigoyen arrives and testifies that Richards arrives after that. Since Richards places Ramos on the north side of the ditch when Richards gets there and Yrigoyen and Mendez are the only indivduals other than Richards to be in a vehicle it must be after Richards arrival that the last call is made, most likely by Richards or Arnold. Now there is one other timing point. At 1354 the call is made for information about the van license plate. There are 26 minutes from 1328 to 1354, 1354 - 1328 = 26 minutes. Now to continue with Vasquez testimony.

Vasquez testifies that he reaches the ditch soon after Juarez, sees the dust clear from the scene, opens his door to hear shots, and sees Juarez looking out over the levee. He does not see anyone other than Juarez. Davila testifies that while in the ditch he sees two or three agents pointing pistols at him. Ramos testifies he hears agents arriving behind him at the ditch. We know that a wind of over 10 miles per hour is blowing from the southeast. That wind would clear the road within seconds. Why would Vasquez not be able to see Compean fire from the top of the levee if Juarez could see him. Mendoza places Vasquez at around twice the separation from Juarez as Juarez is from Ramos. Since Davila could not have made the trip across the ditch, while laterally avoiding Compean, and then running across the levee and halfway into the vega in "Speedy Gonzalez" time, Vasquez was at the scene prior to the shots being fired. That is validated by the few seconds it would take to clear the road of Juarez's dust ahead of Vasquez. Davila testifies that the wind is clearing the road behind him. So had Compean fired from the top of the levee, Vasquez would have seen him. Vasquez testifies that he does not see a shooter.

Okay, then Vasquez testifies that after hearing shots he goes to the van from which he testifies Juarez is going away. He testifies he passes the drivers door looks in and sees a cell phone. Kanof prompts him by asking "In order to talk to Agent Juarez, you had to pass right by the driver's side of the van, correct?" He answers, "yes". That is preposterous. He testifies Juarez is walking away from the van and the only clear view into the van on the driver's side is the driver's door(window) which is right at the edge of the ditch since the front end of the van is hanging over the edge.

Vasquez then testifies contradictory things such as "He's chasing these guys down", and quoting Juarez, "They're at the vega chasing these guys down". Plus the phone jumps from him to Juarez and back in a dizzying fashion. In any case we know that a few minutes passes as Richards comes to the assembly of agents and discusses the events. At the conclusion of this discussion which would have lasted 2 or 3 minutes, Richards directs that the drugs be unloaded and taken to the BP office. He further directs the remaining agents to resume their patrols, this includes Vasquez. But prior to that direction, Richards had taken the photos at the scene which would have taken about a minute or two(one shows the bales of marijuana in the van). So in relation to these events, when was the 1328 call made? It is most likely after all this has happened. That gives 7.5 minutes minus around 4 minutes or 3 and a half minutes for the events at the ditch to transpire. Even disallowing the 4 minute reduction gives 7.5 minutes for everything to transpire. And you suggest that Ramos and Compean had time to muck around looking for casings? And the 1328 time point butts head with the 1354 time point. If the 1328 time point is moved in relation to the events happening at the ditch, for instance saying that someone called the incident over before Ramos and Compean appeared crossing the levee, not only is there a problem identifying the potential caller and the reasons for calling the incident complete, the events happening after that time impact the time Vasquez has to get back up to the levee, wait, search for and collect the 5 casings, dispose of them and then get back to the vehicle to call for the license plate information at 1354.

You are very generous with the scissors on Vasquez testimony. Why? Could it be that you are ashamed of the missing reference to the "little b*tch" comment? The one missing from all of the statements Vasquez swore were complete and true? Whatever the case, Vasquez has to go back to include the counting story. He certainly has a bad memory. But even more preposterous is the notion that upon a question as to how many shots he fired Compean would answer that question by having casings magically appear in his hand. If it was his shooting hand as Kanof asserted, that hand was the one the was empty as Compean showed Vasquez the injury to the web of his thumb and forefinger. In any case, the time that this supposed interchange took which included counting casings and bullets from two magazines, one of which would have been in the gun, and which would have required emptying to count and reloading to return the counted bullets into the magazine, would have eaten into the 26 minutes available. That does not include the times mentioned before. The distance from the Jess Harris point at the ditch to the CC Bills gate is around 3 miles. Total distance would be 6 miles. At 30 mph (fast for the levee road) the time to travel is 12 minutes. Time left after travel time is 14 minutes. How long did the interchange at the gate take? How long did it take Vasquez to extract his vehicle from the array of vehicles on the Jess Harris dirt road? He was right behind Ramos and in front of Mendoza, Jacquez, Richards, Arnold, and Medrano. Assuming a very fast talk and count of 3 minutes, 11 minutes remain for Vasquez to do everything at the levee. However, he does not receive directions from Compean on where to look for the casings. He did not see a shooter, but he did hear shots and did see Compean returning from the vega. So where did he first search? Vasquez is a confirmed liar.

so he gets his dirty, scratched self up, turns, draws his weapon and starts firing at OAD as he crosses the levee and then a few feet down the opposite side, as Juarez testified that he saw.

Bull Crap! I've been to the ditch. If one falls headlong into that ditch, there is no way in hell that you will recover within a half a minute. By that time Davila is in the Rio Grande. First you are head down in a greater than 50 degree incline. Second, falling headfirst from a standing position at the top of that severe incline would knock you senseless since the head would traverse 8.5 feet or so before it impacts the ground. Third, you would probably not stop sliding until your face was in the ditch water.

You support R&C because “they only shot a mexican illegal”. Why don’t you be a man and admit it?

I don't admit to your fantasies. I support Ramos and Compean because I have read the testimony. And get it through you thick head. My wife was an illegal. Her children were illegals. They now are not. The children are now citizens. I do not take kindly to the idea of shooting illegals without cause. I also don't take kindly to felons illegally entering this country to perform more felonies. I believe Ramos and Compean. You believe a felon. Why don't you be a man and admit you hate authority?

[Bob J]

I quote direct testimony from the trial and you spend an hour concocting a bizarre scenario full of what ifs, maybes, assumptions involving a time line that Einstein couldn’t make sense of. I’m not going to go through your post and point out every unsupportale assumption or error in logic, I simply don’t have the time nor the inclination.

The world is much simpler than that and so is the explanation for this incident.

The bottom line is you take every word of Compeans as the absolute truth. To do that one would also have to believe the entire incident was a great conspiracy. Everyone else has to be lying. Most of the other BP agents at the scene, the supervisors, Agent Sanchez, the prosecutor, the judge, Sutton, Homeland Security, Bush, Cheney...they were all involved in a grand scheme to falsely accuse and imprison two career Border Patrol agents of crimes they didn’t commit.

To believe all that, one must be quite literally insane.

[AndrewC]

I quote direct testimony from the trial and you spend an hour concocting a bizarre scenario full of what ifs, maybes, assumptions involving a time line that Einstein couldn’t make sense of.

I have continually posted direct testimony from the trial which you tend to ignore. I included some testimony in my response above in order to produce the time line that seems to flummox you. Undoubtedly, Einstein could do simple math calculations such as subtracting two numbers.

Every assumption I have made, I have supported. And no, I do not believe every word that Compean uttered. On the other hand, you give that "honor" to three verified liars(or seem to). Among the things I don't believe from Compean is that he picked up 10 casings. Had he picked up that many, there would not have been 5 shells for Vasquez to pick up nor would it have made sense for him to tell Vasquez that he might see casings. That is one reason why I believe Vasquez picked up five casings. There was also external evidence that a cell phone call was made. And your faulty conclusion that everyone else is lying in order to make the case for Compean is laughable. I use everybody else's testimony to show that they along with Ramos and Compean are indicating a common scenario. In my previous post I show that the testimony from everyone present at the ditch indicates that Ramos crossed to the north side of the ditch. Only Vasquez unbelievably does not know that Ramos crossed. I also use everybody's testimony to establish when they entered the ditch venue. I use testimony apart from Ramos and Compean to establish the 3.5/7.5 minute period that the encounter at the ditch covered. It is incontrovertible that the initial call took place at 1311 and the final call took place 1328. That spans 26 minutes. Further it is incontestable that the pursuit was still ongoing at 1319 due to Juarez's call. It is arguable where in the chase that occurred, but I justified my argument that it occurred prior to reaching the dirt part of Jess Harris. I did not include the fact that it is highly unlikely that someone who had to slow down, as Juarez testified he had to, would at that time choose to indicate the imminent capture of the prey.

Juarez vol8, pg 165.

20 A. I had to fall behind, because the road is not all paved.
21 Before you get to -- right after Wingo, it becomes dirt road.
22 Q. Okay. So you fell behind because of the dirt road?
23 A. Very unsafe to drive fast.

So it is easy to see that the scenario at the ditch took no more that seven and a half minutes. And the round trip that Ramos took from the north side of the ditch to return covered around three and a half minutes. Those are undeniable calculations. Further, the 1354 call for license plate info establishes the time Vasquez had to accomplish his "evil" deeds if we accept his testimony. The testimony you cited indicates that Vasquez sat in the vehicle for a period to ensure that the "coast was clear". He then started looking for the casings. The following testimony shows that and that upon finding and disposing of the casings he immediately calls for Compean.

Vasquez testimony pg 39-40.

Q. Okay. Let's go back to your conversation. Did you leave
anything out? After he asked you to pick up -- I'm sorry, to
look for the shell casings, did he ask you to let him know if
you found them?
A. Yes. He said, "Let me know if you find them."
Q. Okay. So did you go to the area where the van was?
A. I went westbound towards the -- on the levee, to where the
van was parked.
Q. And what did you do when you got there?
A. When I got there, I just sat on my vehicle for a while,
made sure nobody was there. Got off the vehicle, started
walking around. And I found four casings in the levee, one
between the levee and the drain canal on the slope. I got them
all and threw them into the drainage canal.
Q. Total number of casings you found?
A. Five.

Same testimony pg 46

Q. And then did you throw all five of them at that same time?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. What did you do next?
A. I got my personal cell and I called the station, and I
asked for Agent Compean.
Q. Why did you do that?
A. Just to let him know that I had found the casings and I
threw them away.
	MS. KANOFF: Approach the witness, Your Honor?
	THE COURT: You may.
Q. I'm going to hand you what's been marked as Government's
Exhibit 96. Is this part of your cell phone bill?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And there is something circled on that, correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And what does that circle indicate?
A. That's the call that I made to the station that day.
Q. Okay. And what time did you make that call?
A. 2:37 p.m.
Q. On February 17, 2005?
A. That's correct ma'am.
Q. What was the purpose of that phone call?
A. Just to let him know that I had found those five casings, that
I put them in into the canal.
Q. Let who know?
A. Excuse me?
Q. Who were you going to let know?
A. Agent Compean.
Q. When you called the station, did he answer?
A. No, somebody else answered.
Q. You know who answered?
A. No, ma'am.
Q. And did you ask for Agent Compean?
A. Yes, I was transferred to him.
Q. What exactly do you tell him?
A. "Hey, I found those casings, and I just got rid of them."
Q. What did he say?
A. "Okay. Laters." Then we hung up.

So we have Vasquez's testimony that he left Compean went to the van's location using the levee road. He then parked and waited for a time until the "coast was clear". He left his vehicle started his search for the casings, found them, disposed of them, and then called Compean. There is no mention of going to the van and getting a license number and calling it in. How do we know that Vasquez made the call? The OIG report says so. He was identified using the radio transmissions and a statement by the tow truck operator. So using his testimony, he had to do all this before he made the 1354 call about the license. Big problem, the call he made to Compean came at 2:37 p.m. (1437).

To believe all that, one must be quite literally insane

Since "all that" is your strawman, I believe you are insane.

[Bob J]

Zzzzzzz

[AndrewC]

Zzzzzzz

Must be that four place subtraction. You must go positively catatonic with two place multiplication.

[Bob J]

Zzzzzzzz

[AndrewC]

Zzzzzzzz

I'll let you continue to make a fool out of yourself. At least for a while.

Remember Vasquez made the call for plates at 1354.

He testified that he first searched for the casings and then disposed of them.

He then telephoned Compean at 1437.

Vasquez is a proven liar.