And does a lie mean one is magically guilty of the violent felony being claimed, or merely of lying?
This is a discussion on Ramos-Compean convictions affirmed within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by BikerRN Sorry guys and gals, but they were rightfully convicted and need to do their time. You aren't getting the whole story ...
I seem to recall the drug smuggler saying that he was NOT smuggling drugs or doing anything wrong, and then a few months later, he was caught again, with possession?
So, lets see, who do I believe? The Border Patrol agents, or the drug smuggler?
And does a lie mean one is magically guilty of the violent felony being claimed, or merely of lying?
I've based my opinions from people that were there, that I have talked with while eating supper and drinking a beer or two.
They tried to cover up their shooting. That is what I have a problem with. We expect the POS drug smuggler to lie, but not the one's that are suppossed to be enforcing the law and defending the Constitution.
Do I think 10 years is excessive? I don't know. As far as having to do it all in solitary confinement, so what? They won't be the first ones, nor the last, that do time in solitary. In fact solitary is pretty safe, but your amount of human contact is minimal.
This has become a political "hot button" and I've avoided saying much about it until now. Personally I think a better "hot button" issue could've been chosen. I don't have a problem with them shooting, heck you could get in to a shooting nightly with the BP if you wanted to in some sectors. My problem is the tactics used after the fact by them to cover up what they did.
How much time should they receive? I don't know, but I do know they were rightfully and legally convicted. Now I'm done with this thread, and I'm out.
This case stunk from the beginning. Did you know that the perp who was shot in the butt and got immunity, was arrested again for bringing another 750# in the country, got immunity again, and that information was kept from the jury?
Ramos and Compean are guilty. There is no doubt about it.
Was the state's key witness a scumbag? Absolutely. Was his drug smuggling kept from the jury? Yes, it was. It would have certainly biased the jury and was not relevant to the charges against the BP agents.
Ramos and Compean were involved in a bad shoot and covered it up.
That said, the guy 'needed shooting.' The BP's job is hard enough without giving them inadequate leeway on the rules of engagement. For my money, which it is, the illegal alien invasion should be defined as a war and the rules of engagement changed so we can stop the influx of terrorists, drugs, and human smuggling into our sovereign nation.
Bush should pardon Ramos and Compean.
Wow, SD, that almost sounds like you would have agreed with jury nullification, or judicial activism.
From what you are saying, the law makes the two wrong, and yet, it is not right and they should be excused from their sentences.
I did not think you fell into that line of reasoning...
I'm still not so sure about the overwhelming evidence that the DA presented that they committed a crime. I'll have to look into the facts quite a bit further. As BikerRN pointed out, this has become a political hot button item, so I would like to know if I am on the right side of this issue or not.
I listened to the DA during one of his interviews. Although the illegal alien did provide key evidence, there was other compelling evidence, as well. It was not simply a his word against them type of case.I'm still not so sure about the overwhelming evidence that the DA presented that they committed a crime. I'll have to look into the facts quite a bit further. As BikerRN pointed out, this has become a political hot button item, so I would like to know if I am on the right side of this issue or not.
Sorry , there's just no way I could think of Sutton as a honest prosecutor.
This case was only prosecuted after the Mexican government demanded that it be.
The mexican that was 'supposedly' shot by the agents was seached for in Mexico and given immunity, free passes to cross the border, freee passes to be arrested and released again, and paid to be a witness against our border agents. I believe he was even given a social security card.
Much evidence that Sutton did not want the jury to know was withheld from the courtroom.
Multiple jurors, later being presented with evidence that had been withheld from them during the trial, said that if they had known all of the evidence then they would have ended up with a different decision against Ramos and Compean.
Do you really think that US Prosecutors don't pick and choose as to what evidence will be allowed into the courtroom?
A similar case is here...
The Welch Report
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson
"Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage
GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself
It is my understanding, both from other border agents I've spoken with and trust and also from those who at least I feel are credible investigators was that the allegations of a cover up stemmed from the agents not reporting it immediately and that they policed up their brass (in an attempt to cover up their crime).
They did not report it because there were two supervisory agents on scene within 5-10 minutes of the incident. And that they policed up their brass because they were instructed to do so by the supervisory agents on the scene. Because the supervisory agents who were on the scene failed in their responsibilities and did not write up that a shooting took place, it appeared that Ramos and Compean failed to report it.
It is also my understanding that the supervisory agents told them to do that because at the time of the incident no one believed that they had actually hit the suspect.
It has been explained to me that Border Agents discharge discharge their weapons often enough that supervisors often have them keep incidents like that low keyed when no one was injured and the suspects successfully flee back across the border so that the supervisors do not have to be constantly overwhelmed with reams of paperwork.
I'm not condoning their actions... as we all know, not following procedure and bad practices do come back to bite you in the butt from time to time. It is also my understanding that the lax in procedure comes from the top down because they are being inundated with incursions across the border in these high traffic areas.
This doesn't happen at all parts of the southern border... but the agent I spoke to commented similar circumstances in his high traffic area on the Arizona border.
I also understand that the violations that transpired would ordinarily result in about a weeks suspension.
Again, I don't condone the way things transpired but I can smell something fishy, and to me you don't hang two otherwise good guys out to dry when the ones driving the bus appear to be just as dirty.
I also know that 3 of the border agents who testified against them at trial have since been fired by the border patrol because they lied during their testimony. Prosecutor Johnny Sutton offered them immunity from prosecution to get them to testify but that agreement didn't apply to keeping their jobs. When they admitted lying on the stand they were fired.
I don't think anyone knows the complete truth, however when the whole case stinks from top to bottom, I believe the benefit of the doubt should have gone to the two agents!
But, if you are going to throw them in prison and say they deserved what they got.... then you also should believe that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if so...
U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton really needs to be gigged for Prosecutorial Misconduct. I think if people were to look at all the documents that have thus far been disclosed from freedom of information act that he at the very least, suborned perjury from key witnesses, botched the trail of evidence and offered immunity to people who were not qualified to receive immunity and possibly conspired to create a cover-up himself.
Just my 0.02 cents.
"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."
Here's how I look at it as just another dumb citizen: If I am armed and surprise someone I think is committing a crime (whether I know for certain he is committing a crime at the time or not) and I believe he is pointing a gun at me (whether in fact he really is pointing a gun at me or not), I'm going to shoot at him until the threat is gone (as will almost everyone who frequents this forum). If he then runs off, and the police show up and tells me "we don't have to investigate the shooting any further", I think I believe the authorities. I might even pick up the brass. If later said criminal shows up somewhere with one of my bullets in his rear end, complaining I shot at him for no reason, I don't think I should go to prison for 10 years for using a gun in a crime, the crime being the shooting and conspiracy to cover up the shooting. You can actually KILL someone and not serve that long.
I've been involved in 3 trials as a juror. I learned that determining truth is the least important goal of both prosecution and defense.
Point #2 Not so sure. Yes, covered up by picking up their brass in plain sight of their supervisor, but not later reporting it. This deserves a reprimand, not 10 yrs.
Point #3 Never happen. Bush sent a message to every Border Agent, "Mess with illegals and this could happen to you."
I just saw a story today where the mexican army was in Arizona and drew down on some Border Agent. No shots were fired and the mexican army returned to mexico. It is believed that the mexican army is providing security for drug smugglers and illegals crossing the border.
I ask: Where is Homeland Security?
If I were President, I'd have the National Guard on the border. Enough is enough.