Posted on 09/08/2006 10:27:53 AM PDT by radar101
Members of Congress petitioning the president to pardon two U.S. Border Patrol agents convicted of assaulting an illegal alien who was trying to smuggle drugs into the U.S. are now calling for an investigation of the U.S. attorney who prosecuted the agents.
"These were good agents doing their job," said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). "There is something that stinks to high heaven."
On Feb. 17, 2005, U.S. Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean were on duty when they encountered Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila in a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana. When the agents tried to stop Aldrete-Davila, he fled. Unable to shake the pursuing agents, he abandoned his van and continued running toward Mexico.
The agents' version of what happened next contradicts Aldrete-Davila's testimony. The one thing all agree on is that, while fleeing on foot, the illegal alien and drug smuggler was shot. Aldrete-Davila was treated at a hospital in El Paso and then returned to Mexico.
After learning of the shooting, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton sought out Aldrete-Davila in Mexico and offered him immunity from prosecution if he would return to the United States to testify against Ramos and Compean.
The initial immunity offer covered Aldrete-Davila's illegal entry into the U.S., the drug smuggling and his unlawful flight from the agents to avoid arrest. Sutton expanded the immunity to include a subsequent drug offense, when Aldrete-Davila tried to smuggle another 1,000 pounds of marijuana into the United States.
"The Justice Department says they don't have the resources to secure our borders, but somehow they found the resources to send agents to Mexico to find Aldrete-Davila and prosecute these agents," Tancredo said.
Rep. Red Poe (R-Texas) said the Justice Department is "on the wrong side" of this case.
"It appears as though they are working for the government of Mexico instead of the government of the United States," Poe said. "Instead of prosecuting [the agents], they should be giving them a medal."
Sentencing hearings for the agents have been postponed twice and are now scheduled for Oct. 18. They each face from five to 20 years in prison.
"It will absolutely be a sin, it will be a crime if these agents go to jail," said Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.).
Jones has discussed the case with Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and the White House. He told Cybercast News Service that "Something is not right. Washington, D.C. needs to look into that office's activities."
"We need to start asking questions and go down to Texas and find out if there is a problem," he added, noting that there is a history of Sutton pursuing cases against law enforcement officials. "If the American people rally behind these two agents, then we can certainly look into the actions of the federal office down in Texas."
Sutton's office did not return phone calls requesting comment for this article.
The illegal application of deadly force is correctly known as "attempted murder." Am I correct in assuming you favor an amnesty for every attempted murderer currently in the joint?
The part I have trouble with, as a former cop, is the alteration of evidence. That action speaks to a consciousness of guilt that argues against granting any form of amnesty.
Only if they're union members. ;)
To say that you are an idiot is to insult idiots. Give these guys medals and maybe some additional target practice so next time they kill the SOB!
What's your take on Waco?
How about Ruby Ridge?
I understand that part of it, I have to go back and review some of the accounts as I also seem to recall that the perp had turned and the agents thought they saw him reaching for or holding an object (isn't that what most if not they all say?), I could be wrong on that, but I hear ya on the evidence tampering part as well.
Completely different situations than a drug smuggler entering my country illegally. I think Waco was a law enforcement travesty. I still don't get the problem that they had with the Waco people. Too many guns? What's the deal with that. And, they could have picked him up in town on many occassions. Ruby Ridge was shameful in every possible way.
So, in essence, I do not think that law enforcement is always right but I couldn't care less about this scumbag who gets amnesty for God's sake while he was breaking numerous laws of our country. I will repeat- I wish the killed the SOB!
What crime? They violated some administrative policies of the BP (not reporting the discharge of a firearm, not getting superviors permission to pursue, etc.), which would at most warrant a suspension. The only evidence the prosecution has for the perp being unarmed is the perp's word. Since he escaped into Mexico, he could easily have ditched the gun. His immunity, plus being peeved that he was shot in the ass, plus his $5 milion lawsuit against the US is a powerful motivator for lying about everything in this case. What I REALLY don't get (among the many many weirdnesses of this case) is how BOTH agents got convicted. Even if you buy the prosecution's argument that the perp was unarmed and didn't deserve to be shot, only one of the agents pulled the trigger.
If he'd turned toward them, why did he only get shot in the a$$?
So, you're OK with cops altering and destroying evidence in a shooting, but only as long as you dislike the person who gets shot.
The application of deadly force was not warranted in this situation. Further, they deliberately attempted to conceal their use of deadly force, and then proceeded to fabricate an account of said use of deadly force that was rather obviously not true. The latter two actions are always considered to show consciousness of guilt, unless the perpetrator(s) can demonstrate that they were not in full command of their faculties at the time of the actions in question.
Attempted murder, concealment and destruction of evidence, and false official statement are all felonies.
only evidence the prosecution has for the perp being unarmed is the perp's word. Since he escaped into Mexico, he could easily have ditched the gun.
OK, let's add another element to their crime: they technically committed an act of war against Mexico without express permission of the United States government.
His immunity, plus being peeved that he was shot in the ass, plus his $5 milion lawsuit against the US is a powerful motivator for lying about everything in this case.
Well, the agents have lied--but you seem to be all right with that. And immunity is not a motivator for falsehood, as there is no penalty for telling the truth if one is immune from the adverse consequences of self-incrimination.
What I REALLY don't get (among the many many weirdnesses of this case) is how BOTH agents got convicted. Even if you buy the prosecution's argument that the perp was unarmed and didn't deserve to be shot, only one of the agents pulled the trigger.
The other agent was an accessory after the fact.
If all they were brought up on was tampering with evidence, I could live with that. But, you seem to think that it's OK to cross our border illegally, not once but twice, flee law enforcement and get amnaesty for it. Meanwhile, IF these guys covered up what they did, that is far worse. Yeah, that makes sense.
The use of deadly force is only legal when it is to prevent the commission of a capital crime such as murder or rape.
I have an idea - Why not give the border agents immunity to testify against this complete scumbag?!
Your answer to that ought to be quite enlightening.
The situation did not call for the application of deadly force.
Meanwhile, IF these guys covered up what they did, that is far worse. Yeah, that makes sense.
Attempting to conceal, destroy, or alter evidence of one's actions when employing deadly force has always been considered to show wrongful intent of applying deadly force.
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.