Posted on 09/12/2008 6:00:19 AM PDT by kellynla
No it doesn't. The testimony discloses that no one saw a gun in Davila's hands while he was scrambling through the ditch. The testimony indicates that Ramos and Compean both saw Davila perform actions perceived to be threatening. Ramos had seconds to assess the situation after he heard shots while climbing through the ditch and finally arrived over the levee to see Compean not standing and Davila at the edge of the river reaching back with his arm. Davila denied ever looking back, but the path of the bullet injury surely supports the testimony of Ramos.
You’re playing excellent defense on this thread. I haven’t read much about the case outside of FR headlines, but I think you’ve swayed my knee-jerk opinion on the matter. Well done.
That being said, Compean argued he saw a weapon, but that argument was rejected by the jury.
Yes it does. The testimony clearly shows that Compean was well aware that Aldrete-Davila was unarmed, and that Ramos only fired because Compean fired first and Ramos thought there was an actual emergency.
Davila denied ever looking back, but the path of the bullet injury surely supports the testimony of Ramos.
No it doesn't, and the trial transcripts show that the path of the bullet does not provide any evidence for or against either party's claim.
The normal side-to-side motion of someone running over rough ground makes it impossible to tell if Davila was looking back or looking ahead.
The whole situation is a complete mess.
Basically, at the core you have Aldrete-Davila and Jose Compean - two very slimy individuals - who dragged down Ramos and tarnished the Border Patrol.
I really do believe that Ramos' initial actions were likely honest and well-intentioned. He allowed a fake friend to corrupt his judgment and now his life is ruined. He should have known from the moment that Compean started tampering with evidence that he should have kept well clear of Compean.
YOU made it personal when you said, "They endangered me..."
Unless you were there hiking in the woods when this happened using the personal pronoun "me" suggests an exercised ego.
Ooooh! You really are taking this personally.
I think cross-border invaders should be shot on sight.
They turn out to be carrying drugs, that’s a side issue.
Cleaning up a scene is just— good, dangit.
Well, when you think someone is pointing a gun at you I think that emptying a gun at them is a typical reaction. Look at all of the videos of police encounters. In any case, the charge of firing from the second magazine only came from a certified liar, Juarez. He changed his testimony numerous times. He testified that he saw Compean fire from the top of the levee, reload, fire some more then run into the vega. No other testimony supports four firing episodes: Compean visible to the world at the top of the levee firing(1), reloading, firing(2), proceeding into the vega, firing again(3 -- this particular episode testified to by Vasquez who claimed hearing multiple shots without seeing the shooter, he should have seen Compean had Juarez seen Compean) and finally the single shot by Ramos which hit Davila. So it is not credible to believe Juarez and shooting from the second magazine. Compean, in his statement completed on the morning of his arrest, indicated that he fired from only one magazine. He was fumbling with the second magazine as Ramos arrived and fired the last shot, so indicates the testimony.
Nice try at misdirection, but allow me to quote you verbatim:
"Yep, guilty of protecting you. (if you are an American)"
Since you said that these individuals were protecting me, I responded to you by explaining how they weren't.
I didn't even bother to address that slap at my patriotism.
Just describing the facts, unless you are willing to argue that Compean is a model of fitness and that Aldrete-Davila is a really good guy.
That’s great. Compean needs a cellmate, anyway.
I doubt it. He always came off as pretty gay to me.
Ummmm, he did get sentenced. Somewhat recently.
Yes, prosecuted by Sutton, in fact. But for a subsequent crime . . . no thanks to this mess.
Wait, was I drunk a few months ago when I thought that dude got sent to the slammer?
In this case, however, Compean knew full well that Aldrete-Davila had no weapon.
According to his own testimony Compean stood between Aldrete-Davila and Aldrete-Davila's path of escape; he (Compean) was armed with a shotgun but he dropped it; Aldrete-Davila physically grappled with Compean; Aldrete-Davila threw dirt in Compean's eyes and while Compean was on the ground, blinded with dirt and disarmed, Aldrete-Davila ran away.
If Aldrete-Davila was armed and wanted to kill Compean, Compean was right in front of him, disarmed and off-balance. Why would Aldrete-Davila grapple with him instead of shooting him? If, after this grappling, Compean was blinded and disarmed and down, why did Aldrete-Davila not take Compean's shotgun that was lying on the ground? Or why did Aldrete-Davila not produce and fire his weapon?
Why would he wait until he was almost to safety and then stop and turn and produce a weapon for the first time?
Where is the common sense analysis?
Where does the testimony indicate that Compean was well aware that Davila was unarmed? The testimony states that Compean did not see a gun in Davila's hands while Davila climbed through the ditch. Juarez and Ramos also indicate that they did not see a weapon in Davila's hands at that location. But the testimony also indicates that Compean and Ramos both observed Davila to have something in his hands when he was on the vega. No one had a chance to pat him down while he evaded them through the ditch.
The trial transcript does show that the path of the bullet did support Ramos version of the events. What the hedge was, that the trajectory could also be explained by Davila running at an angle to the shooter(Ramos). Davila's own testimony indicates that he was running directly away from Compean and Ramos. So he was not running at an angle nor side to side. To believe otherwise, puts your estimation of Ramos in jeopardy. He would have been lying about Davila's actions and the reason for him to be shooting the single shot.
Your silly DNC-style ad hominem aside, there is no reason why scumbags cannot also be victims of "thuggish border guards."
I suppose it is fair to ask whether or not, on principle, you approve of "thuggish border guards."
I’ve gotta give everyone credit. This thread has actually been a pretty cool discussion and has not gotten gayed up like most of the threads on this topic.
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.