Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean (interviews, hiring, support, administration)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, I don't see how law officers can be accused of "intent to commit murder". Isn't that a little different for police? And, they thought he might have a gun, and obviously, he wasn't going to give himself up.
I think they should just have been accused of covering it up, which they probably did because they knew there would be a problem, and that the low-life drug runner would get away with whatever he said. We're kind of partial to illegals here in the U.S. , as opposed to actual citizens.
They were charged with intent to commit murder under a statute reserved for the use of a gun during a criminal act. That's how twisted this whole thing has been from the beginning.
Not taking sides here but I think it is important to get source information out into the discussion. Per the news release by the US Dept of Justice:
This office did not prosecute the defendants because they had violated Border Patrol policies. They were prosecuted because they had fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender, but, while his open hands were held in the air, Agent Compean attempted to hit the man with the butt of his shotgun. In fear of what the agents would do to him next, the man ran away from the agents, who then fired at least 15 rounds at him, although they had seen his open hands and knew that he was not holding a weapon and had no reason to think that he had a weapon, hitting him once causing serious bodily injury. The references to policies are made only to demonstrate that had the defendants believed that the shooting was justified, there was no reason for them to conceal it from supervisors and remove evidence from the scene. The laws of the United States make it a crime for law enforcement officers to use excessive force in apprehending suspects. It is a violation of any person’s Constitutional rights to shoot at them after they have attempted to surrender, knowing that they are unarmed and pose no danger to the officers or anyone else.
Based on all of the evidence admitted during the two-week trial, including the lengthy testimony of both of the defendants, the jury of twelve citizens heard all of the testimony, judged the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses and unanimously found both defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of eleven of the twelve counts alleged in the indictment, including assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with serious bodily injury, discharge of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence and willfully violating Aldrete-Davila’s Constitutional, Fourth Amendment right to be free from illegal seizure, as well as obstructing justice by intentionally defacing the crime scene, lying about the incident, and failing to report the truth.
nd we all know how honest and upstanding the justice department is. LOLOLOLOL
Yes, at a minimum the justice department's handling of this case was tainted, it could also be argued the justice department committed a fraud upon the court treating the case the way they did. There was a clear bias that hampered the defense, and the appellate judges certainly indicated so as demonstrated by the questions they asked while hearing the appeal.
It is my hope the appellate court not only throws out the conviction but goes the extra step and outright reverses it.
Yes, at a minimum the justice department's handling of this case was tainted, it could also be argued the justice department committed a fraud upon the court treating the case the way they did. There was a clear bias that hampered the defense, and the appellate judges certainly indicated so as demonstrated by the questions they asked while hearing the appeal.
It is my hope the appellate court not only throws out the conviction but goes the extra step and outright reverses it.
Let's go even one better than that, Hawkeye
Wouldn't it be great if they handed some type of official reprimand to that "piece of work" Sutton?
Coverage on Lou Dobbs of the Ramos and Compean appeal hearing held December 3, 2007. He points out the comments by the judges and includes interview clips with the attorneys and the wives of the two agents, Monica Ramos and Patty Compean, as well as TJ Bonner and others.
Having gone up against the justice department acting for the Corps of Engineers (taking people's land simply by moving markers), I would say that 90% are corrupt and many are just evil.
Wow. IMO, this is an attempt by the Federal Government to absolutely undermine the integrity of the entire border control. Just think, if you are a border guard, what do you do the next time you encounter a drug smuggler? This could strike fear into each and every border guard and it would certainly hamper the hiring of more border guards.
Question? Why does it take 6-8 weeks for judges to rule on something like this? Ridiculous amount of time for such a decision.
Wow. IMO, this is an attempt by the Federal Government to absolutely undermine the integrity of the entire border control. Just think, if you are a border guard, what do you do the next time you encounter a drug smuggler? This could strike fear into each and every border guard and it would certainly hamper the hiring of more border guards.
Question? Why does it take 6-8 weeks for judges to rule on something like this? Ridiculous amount of time for such a decision.
I agree 100%, Synopsis . . .
How long could it possibly take to determine an obvious TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.