Posted on 09/12/2008 6:00:19 AM PDT by kellynla
EL PASO, Texas — Two former Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a drug smuggler and trying to cover it up have been denied a request for a new hearing.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans denied the request by Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean on Wednesday. The same court upheld the men's convictions in July.
No reason was given for the Wednesday's denial.
Ramos and Compean are each serving sentences of more than 10 years for shooting Osvaldo Aldrete Davila in the buttocks while he was fleeing from an abandoned marijuana load in 2005.
Aldrete was sentenced to 9 1/2 years in prison for his role in two seperate smuggling efforts later that same year.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
“Say, from a constitutional standpoint . . . do you want your rights determined in advance by a LEO?”
I presume your question to imply that you would prefer that we be invaded by a foreign nation and have not constitutional rights.
No it doesn't. An officer was recently acquitted for shooting a fleeing unarmed gang member. Someone running away yet possessing a weapon aimed at you constitutes a potentially lethal threat.
I know what both Agents claimed, but unfortunately, both also changed their stories several times.
I don't believe it. You must be kidding me. I really thought you were a rational person who read the testimony. Ramos never made a statement other than his testimony at the trial. Compean essentially clarified what he originally stated in his arresting interrogation in his testimony. It was Juarez and Vasquez, the main prosecution witnesses other than Davila, who changed their stories numerous times. They were fired for doing that.
Ramos had the opportunity to articulate why he fired and the jury came to the same conclusion as I did.
That testimony was not in isolation. It was countered by the testimonies of Juarez and Vasquez who we know to be liars. Tell me what happened at Fabens based on the testimonies and logic. I'll tell you one thing, the prosecution's story is out to lunch.
Innocent people should be pardoned no matter the number of them.
I'm done arguing about this case. As far as I'm concerned, it's over.
Fine, so stop posting on these threads if you really are stating your belief.
I think this is the only thread on this topic I’ve ever posted on. As for innocent people being pardoned, I agree. It doesn’t appear to me that these two are innocent though. It appears to me that the folks who argue for pardons in this case don’t much care what realy happened in this case. The fact that border guards shot an illegal alien drug smuggler is all they need to hear to declare that these two are innocent and should go unpunished. I’ve had a lot of years experience as a criminal defense attorney though, tried a lot of cases, and in my experience juries believe the guys with badges unless they really screw up. So my gut tells me these two screwed up pretty badly and the jury saw through thier lies. I don’t know exactly what happened. I wasn’t there, and I wasn’t in the courtroom watching all the evidence being put on, looking in people’s eyes to see if they were telling the truth. I’m going to have to defer to the jury on this one.
They did? I don't remember seeing their stories change at all. As I remember from reading the transcripts their stories were consistant with each others testimony as well.
They are not innocent of what? And what specifically makes you think they are guilty?
Well, you don't have to look at people in order to determine if they are lying or not. Vasquez testified that he went back to the location of the Davila encounter(his job was to babysit the van) and waited a while until he was sure no one was around. He then searched for and found five casings. He took them to the ditch and threw them in the water and watched them sink. He then called Compean. There is a big problem with that story. The time stamp on his cell phone call was 2:37 P.M. However, the communications transcript shows that he made a call for information on the van license plate at 1:54 P.M. He lied about his actions on the levee.(or was grossly inaccurate). He would have left the scene on his way back to the levee sometime after the 1:28 P.M. clear call. This time frame would have included the encounter with Compean at the C.C. Bills gate. And that encounter would have involved the intriguing bullet/casing/magazine count which Vasquez mentions. Vasquez is plainly a liar.
Sure, Vasquez had every reason to screw his comrades. Whatever. We weren’t there when this event took place and we didn’t even have the benefit of being there to watch these people testify. I don’t care what you say. Cold transcripts do not compare to actually being there watching people testify in person.
Your mind is made up. So is mine. We are wasting our time here. Let’s drop it. I’ve got better things to do than continue with this.
So what? What is the purpose of watching them testify? It surely is to ascertain their veracity. Well, that can be determined in this case by external evidence which cannot lie. A person can be uncomfortable under interrogation and still be telling the truth and a pathological liar can be confident in their lies, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." My mind is made up by the evidence, yours, apparently, is made up by the process.
You’re right evidence and documentation are good indicators of deciet or truth. Debra Kanof in pre trial motions lied her ass off. She told judge Cordone that Agents were not allowed to pursue fleeing suspects according to Border Patrol policy. Then lied again by stating that Agents don’t have Title 21 authority which gives them authority to make drug related arrests. Such blatant lies make it obvious that Debra Kanof was being malicious in her prosecution. There’s no need to look in a face at all.
I stopped reading after “presume.”
That is odd. You seem to have no problem with presumption here.
|
You were there??
I think he's working off of Compean's own testimony. |
This is the presumptive statement you supported.
“Compean got mad because he was a disgusting, out-of-shape fatbody who got completely clowned by a wiry little dirtbag.”
Your usual good sense takes a nosedive whenever the topic involves immigration and border guards?
Those two morons deserve to serve out their sentences. Whether you acknowledge the truth or not.
They fired 15 shots at an unarmed man who was running away from them at the border...toward Mexico. The marijuana van was discovered AFTER THE FACT.
The FACT they filed a false report, destroyed evidence and lied about it afterward apparently isn't important to you....shame on you.
The prosecution's take on the encounter at the ditch, was that Davila had surrendered with arms raised and Compean fell into the ditch as he attempted to bash Davila. According to them Davila was not attempting to "clown" anybody. Of course, if you really analyze the situation, Davila never intended to surrender. Ramos sensed that as Davila looked back. That is the reason Ramos then jumped into the ditch to help his fellow agent. The two "scumbags" who testified against Ramos and Compean did not lift a finger in support of their fellow agent in the attempt to apprehend Davila. So states their testimony.
You’re ALL nutz! Pick your battles, FReepers. This is not a good one for you. All it does is reinforce stereotypes of conservative republicans.
“Thanks. A lot of people failed to report the shooting, including Juarez and Vasquez, possibly Jacquez and Mendoza.”
More deception and mischaracterization from you.
“A. Any Service employee who participates in or observes a reportable shooting incident, as defined in Subsection 3.H., shall orally report the incident to a supervisor.”
Ramos and Compean were the only agents who “participated in” the incident and only Juarez saw Compean shoot so they were the only ones obligated to report it. Juarez was fired.
And before you go off on another aimless rant, hearing is not observing.
This is the problem DCPatriot and it has taken me ten years on FR for me to realize it.
They are not stereotypes. We have a sub culture of people who CLAIM to be conservatives but only use it as a fig leaf to cover their bigotry, hatred and myopia about the world. They are a small minority but their high visibility and self evident hysteria are huge bulls eyes for the left.
The only way we can heal it is to cut out the cancer...completely. Until then their mud will continue to splash up on our boots and the left will use it to beat us over the head and defeat us.
“The only way we can heal it is to cut out the cancer...completely. Until then their mud will continue to splash up on our boots and the left will use it to beat us over the head and defeat us.”
And without those of us (the majority, btw) that you call a ‘cancer’, what exactly is the difference between you and the left? Other than you post on FR instead of DU?
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.