This guy looks like he's about to poop himself.
Posted on 04/09/2007 10:25:31 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
ping...
Maybe that’ll teach those ICE agents to mess around with CIA drug smugglers.
Ping
If this were a TV mystery, it would turn out that the prosecutor was actually taking bug buck$ under the table for “keeping things cool” for the smugglers.
I don’t think the Border Patrol agents should be in jail, but having said that, I do not see the relevance of whether the witness lied about being a repeat drug importer. As I understand it, the principle under which they were convicted was that law enforcement officers are not justified in using potentially deadly force against someone who is fleeing from them, but only to protect themselves and others from probable use of force by the suspect. Personally, I disagree with that principle and think that law enforcement officers should be able to use force to prevent a suspect from escaping, but that’s not the law as it currently stands. If it was established that they shot a fleeing suspect, it isn’t really relevant whether the suspect claimed to be a first time offender when he was actually a career criminal. It impeaches the suspect as a witness, but I’m assuming the DA had independent evidence that they had shot at someone who posed no danger.
Yes nevermind all of the other testimony from other Border Patrol agents who testified against these two. Maybe next weeks story will be that the judge once got a parking ticket.
Well, obviously, we have to believe this drug smuggler and disbelieve the other drug smuggler.
How does this impact the cover up of the shooting? Never mind.
I’ve read about this one as well...
Another truely over-the-top prosecution of a decorated law enforcement officer...
If she had been really negligent in the use of the police dog, it would have been handled there on the spot...But the rush to beat the deadline to get in the paperwork to the grand jury to indict her was absolutely flagrant in its intent...They waited till the day before it would have been negated by the statute of limitations before rushing to the grand jury with the “evidence”...
All of it being BS...
Seems she had a penchant for letting her dog maul people for the sport of it.
Well your lack of information about poor Stephanie is troubling. http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/mohr.asp
Seems she had a penchant for letting her dog maul people for the sport of it.
/////////////////
you should actually take the trouble to read the contents of the links you post. That link went to plaintive plea on Mohr’s part because of the terrible injustice she has been subjected to.
Read down further.
yeah you’re right. she did have a penchant for loosing the dog on perps.
“Poor execution of justice, is not proper justice...”
I agree with you on that, and you know a lot more about the details of this case than I do. If the lying witness’ testimony was crucial to making the case, then showing that he lied should get the conviction reversed. I thought the DA had independent evidence about shooting the fleeing suspect.
Whether or not OVD had 100 mule loads under his belt is immaterial to whether the shoot that day was good. R&C had no knowledge at the time whether OVD was either a drug runner or just someone who had a couple beers at work and tried to outrun the BP because he had an outstanding traffic ticket.
All that matters is what happened between when OVD took off for the border and when Ramos shot him. Did the BPA have justified cause to shoot and kill him (and they testified they were shooting to kill)? Was OVD an immediate threat to the BPA or to the public that necessitated taking him down?
That is the question. Now, if you believe the “black shiny object” story, than you have reason to believe the shoot was good, if you don’t (like the jury and just about anybody who read the transcripts), then it was a bad shoot and they BPA need to be disciplined.
Whether or not that means going to jail or just losing their BP jobs, I don’t know. But you just can’t allow LEO’s to excuse any shooting, no matter how questionable, by allowing them to claim “He had a black shiny object in his hand”.
Next time it could be you or son or daughter coming home from a party a little tipsy, who speeds away from a cop because you are not thinking clearly.
This is about allowing police state tactics against citizens, guilty or innocent.
And those of you who publicly/privately justify it because he was an illegal or a Mexican (as has been stated on these threads many times), you need to take a good look at your yourself.
OVD at the time had not been convicted of any crimes. We still live in a society that believes in innocent until proved guilty. One you allow any LEO to become judge and jury dispensing justice and the end of their gun, we are half way to being a totalitarian state.
You might think this time it is okay because it was only a drug mule, an illegal, a Mexican. Who will it be next time? Either we protect our civil liberties for everyone, even the most despised in society, or they can’t be protected for anyone.
This guy looks like he's about to poop himself.
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.