[PackerBoy]

I have read detailed accounts of the evidence that was gathered and presented in this case.

I am not convinced that these men acted properly at all times and, in fact, I believe their convictions may have been proper under the law.

Undoubtedly preserving and protecting our borders is dangerous work, and the criminal a-hole who was shot is a very unsympathetic "victim", but that doe snot excuse improper conduct.

I am glad that Bush took action; I do not think he should have pardoned them.

[calcowgirl]

I am not convinced that these men acted properly at all times and, in fact, I believe their convictions may have been proper under the law.

Really? You think a Law Enforcement Officer, in the course of his duties of apprehending a perpetrator, should be convicted of ASSAULT? I assume you were displeased that they were not found guilty of ASSAULT TO COMMIT MURDER?

[Cicero]

I think you may be right that they screwed up on technicalities after they were arrested.

But as far as I can see, those were all minor technical offenses, committed because they could see that a corrupt prosecutor was out to get them. I don’t think they committed any basic crime in shooting a drug smuggler who refused to stop when told to and who seemed to be threatening them.

It’s much like the case of Scooter Libby. No crime was committed in the first place, and he wasn’t the guy who first leaked to the press anyway, as Fitz well knew. But they kept pressuring him until they managed to nail him on a probably false technicality—his word against a lying TV talking head.