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 ...
2. It doesn't make me feel better.
3. I'm not trying to fool anyone. I'm an open book on the subject.
4. If it was bad enough to try to stop it 30 years ago, it is more so now, not less, and the remedy must be at least as (draconian? no...the right word fails me just now) as then, not less.
5. 30 years ago I was 14 and living in Utah. Came to Grand Rapids in 1999 after my Army service ended. Whatever beef you have with Rapidians and their ilk cannot extend to me. I have thought there was something serious to be done about illegal immigration since I became aware of it.
6. The day laborers aren't the problem. I wish they were.
7. Your last paragraph makes me wonder why you're fighting me on this.
Peace out, fellow citizen. If the balloon goes up, I have your back, and will not be so ungracious as to remind you of this day and leave you to your fate.
This is one of the most disreputable accusations of the pro R&C crowd, that several of the officers were lying.
Yes, a couple did lie by not initially telling anyone about the shoot. They were trying to cover for R&C, the “blue wall of silence”. When confronted with the fact they could be indicted and go to jail by continuing their silence and by not telling everything they knew or saw, they saw the writing on the wall and came clean.
But R&C supporters continually mischaracterize this to imply the agents were lying about R&C and tried to put them in prison.
Not only is it a complete misrepresentation, it's despicable. They will go any lengths, even impugning the reputations of good solid veteran BP agents in order to justify the unwarranted shooting of an illegal alien drug mule.
Because shooting one of them is worth the careers and reputations of a couple LEO’s.
Seriously, how low can they go to advance their extreme border security agenda?
Fair enough. I hope you understand my own anger at this when we could have solved it long ago. But many of the very people now demanding a draconian response were the same ones that told the border states to pound sand, and only because it hadn’t happened to them yet and they could care less.
Well, they care now but only because they see it themselves. I stand by my point that they only have themselves to blame.
BTW - The situation is now almost unsolvable. Anyone who says we will round em all up and deport them then build and an East Germany type wall with armed soldiers and gun turrets along the entireee southern border are living in dreamland.
It’s never going to happen, politically or physically. So we are left with developing a program where we can have some control as they come in, know who and where they are, keep out the criminals, collect taxes and some system of insuring they go home when they are supposed to.
And if you think we are going to do better than that then you should just collect your guns and go live in a hole somewhere because you’re not being realistic.
The jury made no such ruling.
What other BP agent testified that Compean told him such a thing about Ramos?
The individuals there at the scene and later at the station were:
Juarez Vasquez Jacquez Mendoza Yrigoyen Mendez(he did not testify) Richards(FOS) Arnold(Supervisor) MedranoWhich one? Here is what Jacquez and Mendoza testified
Mendoza - Direct by Mr. Gonzalez 35 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. And is he a stickler for all kinds of paperwork? 3 A. Oh, yes. 4 Q. Why do you say that, Oh, yes? 5 A. Well, he goes by the -- by the books. He will go the extra 6 mile to -- to do the job. 7 Q. And, sir, on -- at any time, did either Agent Ramos or 8 Agent Compean, on March -- I'm sorry -- on February 17, 2005, 9 ever tell you that they were in fear of their lives, that they 10 had been shot at? 11 A. No, sir. 12 Q. Did they ever tell you they had shot at anyone? 13 A. No. Mendoza - Cross by Mr. Peters 37 1 Border Patrol agents kind of like to seize these loads, right? 2 A. Well -- well, yeah, to some people it is. 3 Q. Okay. On this day -- and I've listened to your testimony, 4 and I've read your statements. And I -- did you do anything 5 wrong on February 17th? 6 A. I don't believe I -- I did. But apparently, to the eyes of 7 the Border Patrol I did, since they put me on administrative 8 duties. 9 Q. Well, I was going to ask you about that. Why are you on 10 administrative duties? 11 A. Well, I came to find out that Agent Compean had mentioned 12 something about telling me that he had -- they had shot 13 somebody. 14 Q. I see. So they put you on -- did they -- they didn't -- 15 but you gave a statement, and I think your first statement was 16 back in March, last year? 17 A. Yes, sir. Jacquez - Direct by Mr. Gonzalez 75 1 Q. Start fueling what up? 2 A. Fueling up? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. At that time, at the gas pump. 5 Q. Who comes up to you? 6 A. Vasquez. 7 Q. What does he say? 8 A. Tells me there were shots at the scene, and that Compean 9 had shot him. 10 Q. And does Vasquez tell you he picked up the casings? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Who had shot him? 13 A. Compean.I post the testimony. So don't make demands on me buddy.
Yrigoyen testified that Compean told him about the wrestling event when they met on the levee within the minute or so after the event. So there is great reason to believe Compean's story and not the story Juarez dreamt up in September after changing his story umpteen times under threat of jail time.
Heheh. All you’ve done is prove that at least one agent testifies that after the shooting Compean was aware of the fact they hit someone. Now I don’t remember the exact wording, he might have said “I think we might have hit him” leaving the question of whether it was Comp or Ramos open to the agent and he assumed it was Comp because Comp was counting out shell casings and telling him to pickup the ones he missed around on top of the levee area. After 15 rounds I’d also assume it was Compean who hit him as well, I mean how does a well trained BP agent sharpshooter miss 15 times? ;-].
You know, the TOP of the levee where Jacquez testifies he SAW Compean shoot and where that agent found 5 new, spent .40 caliber Beretta shell casings right where Comp told them they would be?
Of course, Compean testified he never shot from the levee but at the bottom or just inside the vega, you know, right after his struggle with OAD where he got dirt thrown in his face and scratched up.
Because if it was true Comp shot from the top of the levee it would mean he was lying about chasing him down, struggling and getting dirt “throw in his eyes” and that was his explanation for the dirt and scratches the other agents noticed.
What a situation for Comp, getting bested and bloodied by an illegal alien AND then not even capturing him would make him look really lame in front of his peers.
“Yrigoyen testified that Compean told him about the wrestling event when they met on the levee within the minute or so after the event.”
I guess that makes it true, you know, because Compean said it.
I don’t blame him, heroic fighting with drug kingpin “Scarface” sounds much more manly than slipping and doing a header into a ditch because you’re overweight and out of shape.
I wasn't talking about everyone else. I was talking about you. YOU will not admit you are wrong about anything. Whether it's the case as a whole or simple facts about the case like policy, you will not admit when you are wrong. I will prove this once again by posing the question, what does the Border Patrol's written policy say about the on duty discharge of a service weapon?
Hehheh. All you've done is assume something wrong. Read the testimony I've posted. You'll find no such admission from Compean. Now all you have to do is support your assertion with testimony.
And you know, the TOP of the levee where Juarez lied about Compean shooting from one complete clip and then firing multiple shots from the second. Well that would mean that Compean picked up all of the shells from the TOP of the levee in full view of Yrigoyen, Mendez, Juarez, Vasquez, Jacquez, Mendoza, and Richards. Only Arnold and Medrano would have arrived after Compean had been on the levee for a period. Not one of those at the scene saw Compean pick up anything. Juarez was lying about the story which he changed in September. We know that Yrigoyen verifies that Compean told him that he wrestled with Davila on the south side of the levee on the day of the event. More evidence that Juarez was lying. And get your numbers straight 9+5 = 14 not 15.
The rest of your B.S. needs no answer.
It makes it more believable than a changed story coming from a verified liar 7 months after the event. Especially since Compean related the encounter to Yrigoyen within a few minutes of the occurrence. Remember Juarez was on the road still chasing Davila's van at 1319 and Richards called the event clear at 1328.
Oh you mean the "header" the liar Juarez made up. As I stated, I've been to the ditch and if anybody did a header into the ditch that person would have been knocked senseless and be unable to recover by the time Davila was halfway across the vega.
Do me favor, go to the top of your house and take a header into the top of your car, then try to chase someone after getting back up to the top of your house.
Wrong. MS-13 is an El Salvadorian gang. It was brought to Los Angeles by immigrants from El Salvador. I wouldn't call that "home grown." The INS was deporting their local leaders back to El Salvador as early as 1989. Too bad the INS stopped doing their job.
“Guilty of what? Trying to guard the border? Trusting their supervisor to file the correct report? Of not letting an international felon escape?”
__________________
They are guilty of shooting an unarmed man, altering the scene to cover up the act, and then lying about it afterward.
No matter what you think about illegal immigration, these men did wrong and then were convicted in a court with lawyers to defend them.
Everytime this subject comes up, many Freepers turn into Edward Asner railing about Mumai Mugambi (or whatever the hell his name is).
I know I am about to get a lot of grief but let it go.
The argument is that they were wrongly convicted. Your assertion that they shot an unarmed man was not proven in court. Unless of course you believe the drug smuggler’s testimony.
These people have to be doing this on purpose.
That is what really chaps my hide. Ramos was truly acting in a responsible fashion. He was the only one to cross the ditch to support his fellow agent. He reacted as I hope I would in such a situation. As he crossed the ditch, probably a little less urgent at first, because the ditch water is filthy, he heard the shots which made his trip a little faster. He came running over the levee to see Compean down. He then saw Davila just short of the river and yelledd stop. The rest of the event is known. What we don't know for sure is whether Davila had a gun or not. But dollars to donuts, Davila was turning back to his left when he got the bullet spanking.
I suppose the jury was swayed by the officers being the only ones involved in the incident who were in the possession of fire arms and the smuggler being the only person on the scene bleeding out of a gunshot wound.
Testimony from other law enforcement officers that claim the two border agents picked up empty shell casings to alter the scene may have also been detrimental to their case.
You mean the INS? I agree that the lack of enforcement seems purposeful.
Who the ultimate source of this lawlessness is, or the true objectives of such group, is still unclear to me.
The only ones proven to have outright lied were the agents who testified against Ramos and Compean. The prosectors prime witness, Oscar Juarez, was a habitual liar who only finally gave testimony that the prosecutors needed to make a case after being threatened over and over of being prosecuted. This despite being given a proffer letter from day one! Below are just a few of those lies. My personal favorite was when he said he didn't fear for Compean being alone with the smuggler on the other side of the levee because Compean had the shotgun with him--despite having testified that Compean had already dropped the shotgun in the ditch and left it there.
Can you tell me one thing that Ramos lied about?
Oscar Juarez - Cross by Mr. Antcliff 19 Q. Okay. On April, I think, it's the 25th you went and met 20 with Agent Sanchez again to give a second statement to clarify 21 some of the information in the first statement. Is that right? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. In the second statement you said that when you arrived, you 24 saw Agent Compean and the alien about six to eight feet apart 25 from one another when you first got there. Is that right? 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Is that different from your testimony today where you saw 3 the alien down in the ditch before he got up to the top? 4 A. No, it's the same. 5 Q. It's the same. Very well. In the second statement it was 6 your testimony that you saw the alien using both of his hands 7 to crawl up out of the ditch. Is that right? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Today, I believe it's your testimony that as he was getting 10 out of the ditch, he had his hands raised, correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Okay. In the statement, the second statement -- as a 13 matter of fact, in the first statement, it was still your 14 testimony that you went from your car directly to the van. Is 15 that right? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. But today, you went down into the ditch, correct? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. I'm not sure I followed it. But your testimony is you saw 20 Agent Compean shooting at the alien. Is that right? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And you saw a magazine fall out and you saw him reload. Is 23 that right? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. In the statement that you gave, particularly, I think it 1 was the third one in September, you mentioned that you thought 2 shots could have been from hunters or the Mexican military. Do 3 you recall saying that? 4 A. Not on the third one. I say it on the second one. 5 Q. The second one is fine. But do you recall saying it? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. If you thought that it was the Mexican military or 8 hunters -- oh, tell me why you thought that given that you saw 9 Agent Compean shooting? 10 A. Because I was lying to them. 11 Q. I see. So there were more lies in the first two statements 12 than just the fact that you had not reported you saw the 13 shooting. Is that right? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. One of the conditions of your proffer agreement with the 16 Government is that you not lie to them, correct? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. When you gave the second statement and the third statement, 19 you had a lawyer. Is that right? 20 A. Yes.
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.