They attempted to cover up their crime.
What part of illegal doesn't Tom understand?
Hypocrite.
They attempted to cover up their crime.
What part of illegal doesn't Tom understand?
Hypocrite.
Maybe I'm reading this article wrong... what crime did the border agents commit, and how did they try to cover it up?
So there's no problem with justice's actions in your universe?
"They attempted to cover up their crime.
What part of illegal doesn't Tom understand?
I have no inside knowledge of this case- from what I have read when this incident happened no one on the scene or on the area seemed to think anything had been done wrong or illegal. There were supervisors in the area and yet nothing was said until later when the incident blew up, then many turned on these two BP.
My thinking is if they violated laws or procedures then it should have been wrong in the beginning. If it was not wrong in the beginning and only later when the heat was on did their actions become problems then to me it seems they were made scapegoats to keep Mexico happy.
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 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.
That’s the just of it. However from everything I have read there was no underlining crime. The agent stated he thought the perp had a gun and the only witness who claims he did not was the perp. The perp jumped into the Rio Grande so the weapon could not be recovered.
The agents claimed that they did not believe they hit the perp so rather than spend the rest of the day writing memos, they made the mistake of not reporting the weapons discharge. (a policy violation not a crime).
If the perp had a gun, then no “crime” was committed, only a policy violation (failure to report a weapons discharge) to which I believe they should be fired not imprisoned.
There are only 3 entities that “know” if the perp had a gun, the agent, the perp and God. Since God has not weighted in on the issue, it comes down to the credibility of the other two. Two highly regarded Agents who have never had a disciplinary action or a career drug smuggler.
Well I guess U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton is on the payroll of at least one Mexican drug lord. It's amazing what the war on drugs has produced. Mexican drug runners have enough money to buy literally anyone.
I guess we can forget about border Patrol agents catching anyone now. It's already policy for them not to chase anyone. Now they know that if they do they will go to prison.
BTW, you seem to also be on the side of the drug runners. Are you a drug lord or have you been bought too?