Replies

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.

The DA went to Mexico himself and had to wait till the drug runner completed his latest endeavour before offering him this immunity deal to testify against the BP agents...It IS relevant in the fact that anyones prior criminal activity and testimony IS germane to this case...Whether he lied about it or not...

This was a pure railroading if there ever was one...And the government knows this...

If this other guy can prove there were abuses in the prosecution of the BP agents, then yes they need to be released right this second...

Poor execution of justice, is not proper justice...

Otherwise, I would not blame a single BP agent to just sit up on a hilltop and sip ice tea and watch the goobers walk right by...

“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.