Posted on 02/20/2009 11:48:03 AM PST by AndrewC
EL PASO, Texas -- U.S. Border Patrol agents have shot a man authorities describe as a suspected drug smuggler in the New Mexico desert west of Santa Teresa. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at ktar.com ...
Another “abuse of Border Patrol authority”. Hope these agents have better luck than Ramos and Compean. Since the story lists the victim as a “suspected” drug smuggler these agents are in big trouble. There could have been a mother and her children in the vehicle.
Too little info to determine anything at this time. Apparently the FBI has opened an assualt on a federal officer investigation into the suspected drug smugglers activities according to another article.
The shooting action apparently taken by the agent[s] was after the suspected drug runner ran over the BP agent with his truck. The agent apparently was checked out in an El Paso hospital and no major injuries were found.
That's not a "view of testimony." It's what happened.
I feel badly for Ramos, I really do. But it was his choice to throw his career away. Compean is just a disgrace to the badge.
Yet that brings up questions. For instance, in Ramos and Compeans case, why would veteran officers who had never fired (in the case of Compean) their weapons in non-training situations suddenly do so? And the same agents who had never shown any dispensation to do harm to anyone suddenly change their manner of human interaction?
It most certainly is not in the testimony. You made that up. Ramos never saw Compean pick up anything. Neither did Yrigoyen nor Mendez who were on the levee and saw Davila as he walked in Mexico.
And the same agents who had never shown any dispensation to do harm to anyone suddenly change their manner of human interaction?
curious......... Didn’t Ramos have some sort of domestic abuse situation happen a couple of times?
I think it was alleged, but that information is on the level of the info that Davila always carried a gun, maybe true, but it is not testimony.
And he paid for his mistake with his job, and some time in prison to think about how he should've done things differently.
I'm not making any of this up, and you need to stick to explaining your version of the case to people who are not familiar with it. Of all the BS I hear about this case, what ticks me off the most is people explaining that something didn't happen when the defendants themselves admit in court that it did.
but it is not testimony.
Didn’t say it was testimony as it wasn’t a part of the trial case that convicted Ramos/Compean. But it represents a side of the human regarding the violence potential. I wonder who alledged the domestic abuse?.... His wife?
Again, that is not tampering with evidence, that is administrative error. You made this statement....Ramos knew the scene was tampered with, and didn’t report it. ". Which is to what my post 42 refers.
I didn't say you did. But giving any credence to it requires some backing other that just "I heard...". If you really want to know, contact Joe Loya, Ramos' father-in-law. He happens to be a champion for Ramos, so I kinda doubt any really abusive actions on Ramos part towards his wife, but I could be wrong.
He didn't do his job. And it was demonstrated in court.
As for Compean, maybe he and Aldrete-Davila could've gotten cells across the hall from each other so both of them could look at each other and think, "I am such an idiot."
BULL! What did Ramos do? The only testimony as to what Ramos did was Ramos own testimony. He did not see any "tampering" with the scene. He did not explicitly report shots to the supervisor as has been mentioned. He only knew that someone had fired shots(he was in a ditch when he heard shots) and that he fired once at a fleeing suspect. So your "special" view of the testimoy, is truly "special".
After the smuggler escaped into Mexico, R & C, were walking back up to the rest of the group and Ramos specifically heard them discussing the "gunshots" with the supervisor. Ramos assumed that the supervisor had been informed that the guns had been discharged. That may not have been the correct assumption, but under the circumstances, I can see how that assumption could have been made.
My take is that the supervisor was made aware that the guns being fired by at least one other agent at the scene. But since the smuggler escaped back into Mexico, he figured that they wouldn't be seeing him again, so why write out all that paperwork and process it...?
Also, they should have never been charged under the 924-c law. There already actions being taken in Congress to have L.E. explicitly exempted from statute. Unfortunately, there a some overzealous prosecutors out there with axes to grind.
Ramos assumed that a supervisor had been informed that he fired his weapon? How effed-up is that?
As the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals noted, law enforcement officers had been prosecuted under 924c in that jurisdiction a number of times before. And it's nice to see that Congress is on the ball. /sarc
The supervisor always tried to claim that he was completely in the dark with regards to any firing of sidearms.
Sutton should have never been allowed to alter the language of the statute.
And the same agents who had never shown any dispensation to do harm to anyone suddenly change their manner of human interaction?
This is the statement I was responding to which prompted my curiosity about Ramos and domestic abuse. Any dispensation?
All this Ramos/Compean discussion really isn’t the topic of this thread but it got interjected early on. My belief is that this situation in Santa Teresa is different from the Ramos/Compean fiasco and will be treated differently as it appears that the FBI is involved.
We don’t have much info to judge what happened in this case but it seems the shooting was acknowledged by the agents involved, one agent apparently was assualted by the drug smuggler so we have an upfront ongoing investigation apparently without coverup from the participating parties. We’ll see.
The Department regulation merely stipulates that an agent at the scene inform the supervisor that a sidearm(s) has been discharged within in an hour of the incident. And, no, it does not have to be the agent that fired the gun.
Isn’t that the charges [tampering with evidence, etc] which the 5th Circuit threw out and reorder sentencing?
Yep. That’s the one.
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.