Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Border Agents Who Shot Smuggler Denied Appeal (Ramos & Compean)
newsmax.com ^ | September 11, 2008 | staff

Posted on 09/12/2008 6:00:19 AM PDT by kellynla

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 881-896 next last
To: Bob J
I don’t know how old you are, but seriously, if you’re older than say 14, seek some help.

You remain in character, Biden.

661 posted on 09/16/2008 11:10:35 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]

To: Pelham

Not for a minute.


662 posted on 09/16/2008 11:11:55 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.


663 posted on 09/16/2008 11:13:51 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC; Bob J; calcowgirl; Pelham
>>And a pin, your ass and a tractor makes more sense to me.

There you go with that gay stuff again.

No doubt. Even Andrew Sullivan would be embarrassed by that kind of statement. Very Freudian.

664 posted on 09/17/2008 3:08:00 AM PDT by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 655 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC; Ajnin
Well, you certainly don't remember that it was not Ajnin [NOTE TO the rude one, the "NOT" modifies the noun "Ajnin"] who introduced the subject of reporting.

Except that, when I stated "some guy", I was referring to Ajnin. Which means that I clearly remember, and you are full of crap.

In any case, let me add the following for the record:

Ramos had been involved in an incident previously that involved him pulling his weapon and firing it. [ya don't say!] After that incident he wrote a report and was chastized for it because that report was not required or wanted by the supervisor. [oh really?] Ramos was told that the supervisor would have asked for a report if the supervisor wanted one. [of course]

181 posted on Friday, September 12, 2008 22:41:19 by mjaneangels@aolcom

We have one Border Patrol agent left on this thread. He claims to be a policy expert. Perhaps he can direct us to the section of the regulations that states, "no need to report a weapons discharge if you've been told not to file a written report in the past?"
665 posted on 09/17/2008 5:44:15 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

It’s a little late for that, don’t you think?


666 posted on 09/17/2008 5:47:28 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: Bob J; AndrewC
You know what I'm beginning to notice here? These people are not arguing with the government's case, they are arguing with the way they perceive the government's case was made in the media.

I'll give AndrewC some credit for returning to the transcript. His problem is that he rejects the jury's, the judge's, and the appeals court judges' reasoning and substitutes his own.

667 posted on 09/17/2008 6:02:40 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte
I say he was shot in the back because he was...as proof i offer the webster dictionary definition of back: "1back Pronunciation: \ˈbak\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Old English bæc; akin to Old High German bah back, Old Norse bak Date: before 12th century 1 a (1): the rear part of the human body especially from the neck to the end of the spine (2): the body considered as the wearer of clothes (3): capacity for labor, effort, or endurance (4): the back considered as the seat of one's awareness of duty or failings (5): the back considered as an area of vulnerability b: the part of a lower animal (as a quadruped) corresponding to the human back c: spinal column d: spine 1c"
Now, for those too damn illiterate to look up things, the back extends to the end of the spinal column, which is the tailbone, which is located in the center OF YOUR ASS....now go and read something....
668 posted on 09/17/2008 6:15:42 AM PDT by joe fonebone (The Second Amendment is the Constitutions reset button)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; Ajnin
Except that, when I stated "some guy", I was referring to Ajnin. Which means that I clearly remember, and you are full of crap.

You continue to attempt to tap dance out of your idiotic statements. You charged Ajnin with going on and on about the border patrol policy. It was important to note that he entered the discussion to spank you. He did that. The discussion went on because you kept going on and on about it.

669 posted on 09/17/2008 6:25:27 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; Ajnin
His problem is that he rejects the jury's, the judge's, and the appeals court judges' reasoning and substitutes his own.

It is called thinking for yourself. You might try it sometime.

670 posted on 09/17/2008 6:27:56 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
You continue to attempt to tap dance out of your idiotic statements.

Which include, for the record, #194:

At the scene, Compean was asked by a supervisor if he had been assaulted and responded that he had not been. Neither he, nor Ramos, nor several of the other agents who had heard shots reported to their supervisors that a weapons discharge had taken place. All agree that this failure to report was a violation of clearly-established Border Patrol policy. Nor did the defendants report that they had been threatened by Aldrete-Davila. Ramos and Compean suggested that their failures in reporting that they fired their weapons arose variously from simple mistake and fear of getting in trouble.
[citation ommitted]

And #212:

From the 5th Circuit opinion:

The government produced evidence showing that the defendants violated a number of Border Patrol policies in pursuing and firing upon Aldrete-Davila. The defendants characterize the trial as one in which the Border Patrol policies were substituted for the actual crimes charged and that by permitting evidence that established policies were violated and strict rules were broken the district court allowed the government to avoid the more difficult task of showing that the defendants had engaged in criminal conduct. The defendants were charged with tampering with an official proceeding under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) by failing to report the shooting to their supervisors. They argue on a number of grounds that such a failure to act constitutes neither tampering with evidence nor inhibiting an official proceeding, an argument that we conclude has merit.

The 5th Circuit vacated the portion of the convictions regarding "tampering with an official proceeding." Unfortunately, it is not the "meat" of the (other) convictions that are keeping Ramos and Compean in prison. In other words, the whole "was or was not policy violated" argument is really a red herring, and taken in a light most favorable to the defense (and there is no reason we shouldn't) is still a Pyrrhic victory for Ramos and Compean.

Like I said, you guys keep returning to this issue like dogs to vomit, but you can't argue substance.

Incidentally, #212 is a fairly good example of what is called a "counter-argument." Try providing one some time . . . it may even make people believe you are capable of "thinking for yourself."

671 posted on 09/17/2008 7:00:01 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; Ajnin
The discussion is who was ultimately responsible for continuing on with the red herring. That person was/is you. You got "bitch-slapped" for making this statement to somebody who challenged the assertion that Ramos and Compean were required to "file and furnish" an incident report.

Your statement was, "Proof or STFU.

Try another tack. Your present one is not working.

672 posted on 09/17/2008 7:10:45 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 671 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC; calcowgirl
Right. And as was noted immediately on the thread (by someone else), there is some confusion between between "file a report" and "make a report" that you refuse to recognize.

In fact, the Inland Daily Bulletin (or whatever it was) article that ccgirl posted contains the same error. But no one appears to have a problem with their reporting, just mine.

673 posted on 09/17/2008 7:16:17 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; Ajnin; calcowgirl
Right. And as was noted immediately on the thread (by someone else), there is some confusion between between "file a report" and "make a report" that you refuse to recognize.

I'm not arguing about the report. I'm arguing as to why the discussion continues. You introduced it into our discussion when you referenced Ajnin in post 278. You didn't like the length of my answer to you which was mostly citations of Ajnin showing that you were wrong.

Now you can clear other people's confusion by stating whether you believe the original statement which started the report discussion is true. It follows:

“First, both of them knew that it was their responsibility to file an incident report and furnish their supervisor with it.”

674 posted on 09/17/2008 9:24:30 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

Comment #675 Removed by Moderator

Comment #676 Removed by Moderator

To: 1rudeboy

Sorry about the triple post the server kept reporting an error.


677 posted on 09/17/2008 9:26:18 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia

Wow, you all are even more ignorant than I thought. You never heard the phrase “You’re wound so tight you couldn’t pull a pin out of your ass with a tractor”?

But I’m not surprised it was made into another homosexual reference. What is it with this group? It’s like your brain immediately translates anything you don’t understand into a queer thing.

And why is it only the Ramos and Compean supporters? Weird.


678 posted on 09/17/2008 9:39:29 AM PDT by Bob J (For every 1000 hacking at the branches of evil, one strikes at it's root.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

It’s simpler than that. They think it should be legal to shoot SUSPECTED illegals on sight. That’s why they get their panties in a bunch over this, it conflicts with the basic wiring of their brain and they can’t handle it.


679 posted on 09/17/2008 9:41:55 AM PDT by Bob J (For every 1000 hacking at the branches of evil, one strikes at it's root.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
Both Ramos and Compean testified they were shooting at “center mass” (center of the back) and shooting to kill...because that is Dept. policy. They can only draw their guns and shoot when it is necessary to take a target down and NO OTHER REASON. Shooting to wing is an immediate termination offense.

That Ramos hit OAD in the butt area only means his aim was off, but there is no doubt he was shooting at OAD as he was running away, that he aimed to shoot him in the back and that he was shooting to kill.

Compean is another story. He shot 14-15 times and never hit. OAD testified he saw “puffs of dirt” around his feet (There's no reason for him to lie about this) which tells us several things.

First, one has to understand the reason for Dept. policy on never shooting unless one believes their safety/lives or that of others is in immediate danger. The purpose is to minimize or eliminate the potential for innocents in the vicinity of getting hit by a stray bullet. The only excuse to put the safety of others in danger is if your own or others is also in danger.

All LEO’s know this. They are taught that if and when they do fire to do so to take the target down immediately and try to minimize potential stray bullet collateral damage.

So how could Compean fire so many times and never come close to hitting OAD in “center mass” and why was he firing into the dirt? Because he never intended on hitting OAD because OAD wasn't a threat AND he was trying to minimize the possibility of one of his bullets crossing the border and hitting an innocent civilian on the other side.

This is why in many previous postings I have argued that Compean in fact DID NOT intend to hit OAD, that he got angry at being bested by the perp and taking a header into the ditch and his only intention was to make OAD “dance” and show him a little BP what fer on his way back to Mexico.

Ramos was unaware of this, must have believed there was good reason for Compean shooting and that is why he took OAD down with one shot a four times the distance Compean was shooting at. He DID believe there was a legitimate threat based on Compeans actions. He believed Compean would be acting in a legal and professional manner. He was wrong and now he sits in prison for it.

Poor Ramos. All he had to do was tell the truth, that he heard the firefight, believed Compean may have been hit and was only protecting his fellow agent. But instead he had to go along with the “black shiny object” story to help out Compean. I also believe he was lying about many things from the shooting to getting back to the levee, in particular not discussing anything with Compean and not being involved in picking up any brass. Once he did that he became complicit in the bad shoot and the cover up. Ramos talks about how Compean looked like he "was in shock" after he shot OAD. Why would he look like he was in shock when nothing happened to him? He was in shock because he knew OAD wasn't a threat, he wasn't trying to take him down and then he sees Ramos mistakenly drop him at the other side of the vega with one shot. He was in shock because he knew right then how bad his screw up was and he knew it was a bad shoot. He knew the shiite would hit the fan if anyone ever found out about it. That is why they waited until they saw OAD exit the Rio grande. They knew he was hit but would probably not do anything because he was a drug mule. The uneasy question I have is what would have happened if the didn't see OAD get up after he was dropped. Would they then have reported it to supers? Would they have gone back there later to collect the body and dispose of it?

680 posted on 09/17/2008 10:13:15 AM PDT by Bob J (For every 1000 hacking at the branches of evil, one strikes at it's root.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 668 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 881-896 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson