Border Patrol case up in air

[Carib]

Border Patrol agents face 20-year terms in wounding of illegal

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
October 18, 2006


Two U.S. Border Patrol agents are facing up to 20 years in prison at a sentencing tomorrow for shooting a Mexican national in the buttocks as he fled to the border after leaving 743 pounds of marijuana in an abandoned van in Texas.
The two agents, Ignacio Ramos, 37, and Jose Alonso Compean, 28, had sought a delay in the sentencing, but their motion was denied and the Justice Department has yet to release findings of a review of the case requested by Congress.
The agents were convicted by a federal jury in March of causing serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, and a civil rights violation.
Federal prosecutors brought the charges against the agents after Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila was given immunity from any drug smuggling charges and agreed to testify for the government following an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General.
Aldrete-Davila was shot after he illegally entered the United States and refused efforts by the agents to stop his vehicle. Court records show he jumped from the van and ran south to the river, where he was confronted by Compean, who was knocked to the ground. Aldrete-Davila managed to cross the border and escape in an awaiting van.
Several members of Congress, including Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, have suggested congressional hearings in the matter and have asked the Justice Department to review the case.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, also asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Republican, for a full hearing, saying "the facts do not add up or justify the length of the sentences for these agents, let alone their conviction on multiple counts."
On July 25, the U.S. Probation Office in El Paso recommended to U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone, who oversaw the trial, that each agent serve 20 years in federal prison. The sentencing is scheduled for tomorrow in U.S. District Court in El Paso.
In an unusually detailed three-page statement issued last month, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton in El Paso, whose office prosecuted the case, said the two agents were charged because they "fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender by holding his open hands in the air."
He said Compean tried to hit Aldrete-Davila with the butt of his shotgun, "causing the man to run in fear of what the agents would do to him next." Mr. Sutton said that while both agents reported that Aldrete-Davila was not armed, they fired at least 15 rounds at him, hitting him once.
Mr. Sutton said that if the agents thought the shooting was justified, "there was no reason for them to conceal it from supervisors and remove evidence from the scene."
The prosecution began after an investigator from the inspector general's office located Aldrete-Davila following a complaint about the shooting by his mother, who lives in Mexico. Court records show the mother called a Border Patrol agent in Arizona who notified homeland security officials.


Lawmakers urge Bush to pardon 2 border agents

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
December 8, 2006


A Republican congressman yesterday asked President Bush to have "some Christian charity and pardon" two U.S. Border Patrol agents facing lengthy prison terms following their convictions for shooting a suspected drug smuggler in the buttocks.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California said Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean are scheduled to begin serving 11- and 12-year prison terms, respectively, in January and called on Mr. Bush to "do the right thing and not allow the lives and families of these fine men to be destroyed this holiday."
Mr. Rohrabacher made the request during a press conference, joined by Republican Reps. Walter B. Jones of North Carolina, Ted Poe of Texas and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, to announce that more than 50 members of Congress have signed on to a pardon request letter to Mr. Bush.
"These Border Patrol agents are heroes," said Mr. Rohrabacher. "Because of their actions, over a million dollars in illegal drugs were stopped from being sold to our children. Bringing felony charges against them is a travesty of justice beyond description.
"The president needs to send the right message by showing they are on the side of law enforcement, not drug traffickers," he said.
Compean, 28, and Ramos, 37, were sentenced Oct. 19 by U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Cardone in El Paso, Texas, to prison for causing serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence and a civil rights violation. A federal jury convicted the two men in March after a two-week trial, and Judge Cardone ordered them to report to prison Jan. 17.
The government brought the charges after Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a Mexican national, agreed to testify against the agents in exchange for immunity after an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General. The immunity deal protected Mr. Aldrete-Davila from being charged in this country as a drug smuggler. Ramos and Compean found 743 pounds of marijuana in the van he abandoned near the border.
Mr. Aldrete-Davila was shot after he illegally entered the United States near Fabens, Texas, and refused efforts by the agents to stop the van. Court records show he jumped from the vehicle and ran south to the Rio Grande, where he was confronted by Compean, who was knocked to the ground.
Although wounded, Mr. Aldrete-Davila managed to cross the border and escape in a waiting van.
"The U.S. Attorney wrongly focused on the minor mistakes of the officers instead of on the illegal drug trafficker," Mr. Rohrabacher said.
"When American citizens see an illegal alien narcotics trafficker being given immunity and free health care while the officers who risked their lives to stop him are going to prison, they must believe we in Washington either do not care about the uncontrolled flow of criminals or illegals or they just think we have lost our minds," he said.
The government's prosecution began after an investigator from the Office of Inspector General located Mr. Aldrete-Davila in Mexico. The investigator had been dispatched after Mr. Aldrete-Davila's mother complained to a Border Patrol agent in Arizona that her son had been shot. That agent notified Homeland Security.

[Durandal]

Jesus...

These two patrol officers are bad guys and need to be locked up.

I know I wouldn't want a cop in my family's neighborhood that did what they did regardless of who the perp was or was not.

That is what has amazed me about this case, if anyone actually bothers to read about it and see the reality for the passion here.

My guess is that the politicians that have urged Bush to pardon them are actually completely unfamiliar with the case...maybe not and simply think, like all the drug dealers/users Bush has pardoned to date, these two bad guys are also above the law.

[Mastermind]

I think you are right, Durandal...to a degree. But, this case has transcended the justice considerations of the individual case....it now has far greater implications. I don't think the two culprits should be pardoned...but I think they do not deserve this harsh punishment...and if they were pardoned, I would not be dissappointed. I MM

[Carib]

Durandal, I'm confused is there more to it than I might know? It seems as if they did what they had to, or am I completely off?

[Mastermind]

Defend the border......or not? Legally defend it, certainly. MM

[Laconian]

Depending on the circumstances at the time of the shooting, they may have been able to justify the shooting (yes, even at an unarmed person). However the lying to bosses, tampering with scene, etc. all add up to a less than credible justification.

Unless politicians are trying to show this as a proof of a border problem, this is not a case with facts you'd want to adveritse (ie, giving a known drug-smuggling illegal alien immunity in return for testimony against 2 agents that violated both Federal law and agency policy).

But I didn't read the transcripts either, maybe there is more here.

[tyovan]

This guy tries to smuggle in 700 pounds of drugs into our country.
We shoot at him.
He runs home to Mexico.
His momma calls us from Mexico to complain about it and we throw the two agents who shot him into jail.


If they had just shot some unarmed innocent person, maybe I would feel differently. This guy wasn't an innocent tourist who the drugs could have been planted on - if you're transporting 700 pounds of marijuana you know what you're doing.
I have no problem with the agents shooting him.

[alfigel]

If they had just shot some unarmed innocent person, maybe I would feel differently. This guy wasn't an innocent tourist who the drugs could have been planted on - if you're transporting 700 pounds of marijuana you know what you're doing.
I have no problem with the agents shooting him.

But the guy was unarmed, and running away. Shooting unarmed people who are running away from behind is a really cowardly act, and shall be punished accordingly. But 20 years are definitely too much. A year or two would have been enough (and maybe some time of it on probation), in my opinion, but I don't know what the local laws are.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

But the guy was unarmed, and running away. Shooting unarmed people who are running away from behind is a really cowardly act, and shall be punished accordingly. But 20 years are definitely too much. A year or two would have been enough (and maybe some time of it on probation), in my opinion, but I don't know what the local laws are.


So the other day when the smugglers tested the waters by attacking one of our OP's on the border, had we engaged them, then retreated and one of their guys shot our guys, we would be able to go to Mexico, with immunity mind you and prosecute the drug smuggler and get him a 20yr sentence?

This guy was a f*ckin' drug smuggler, if he had the chance, he would of shot and killed the agent pursuing him, just like the drug runners who executed the patrolman the other day.

Whats wrong with some of you, these guys are infringing on our sovreingty by coming across the border, unchecked, with 700+ lbs of marijuana, more than likely armed to the teeth and some of you want our guys to run away.

F*ck that sh*t, I want our guys to shoot at them to set an example that we are not going to allow any more these vehicle bum-rush tactics or all out assaults like the one that occured not too long ago with Hummers and Suburbans with mounted machine guns.

[HR24]

Definately an interesting case. Many are up in arms over the US Attorney granting the doper immunity. For Christ's sake, he was moving a load (albeit small by SW border standards, but still easily prosecuted). Hit him with charges, then flip him as a cooperating defendant. His substantial assistance is helping in the case against the BP guys. He committed a crime just like they did. He should pay too.

[alfigel]

So the other day when the smugglers tested the waters by attacking one of our OP's on the border, had we engaged them, then retreated and one of their guys shot our guys, we would be able to go to Mexico, with immunity mind you and prosecute the drug smuggler and get him a 20yr sentence?

This guy was a f*ckin' drug smuggler, if he had the chance, he would of shot and killed the agent pursuing him, just like the drug runners who executed the patrolman the other day.


In Austria, we have this saying, "If there only wasn't the little word 'if'". If he was armed and had used it against the border patrol, then of course shooting him would have been justified. But this doesn't apply in this specific case.


Whats wrong with some of you, these guys are infringing on our sovreingty by coming across the border, unchecked, with 700+ lbs of marijuana, more than likely armed to the teeth and some of you want our guys to run away.

This guy wasn't armed to the teeth, and at the time he was shoot he wasn't a threat anymore.

And don't forget, these people are only following the principle of supply and demand... informal economy is also a branch of economy. ;-)


F*ck that sh*t, I want our guys to shoot at them to set an example that we are not going to allow any more these vehicle bum-rush tactics or all out assaults like the one that occured not too long ago with Hummers and Suburbans with mounted machine guns.

Have you ever heard about something called "proportionality"? If they are armed and dangerous: shoot them. If they are unarmed and not dangerous: try to catch them, while using only proportional force, like non-lethal weapons. And it would make people look less trigger-happy, too.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

He didn't die, did he, he lived another day to try and implement more restrictions on how we secure our border, you're trying to liken this to a cop who has let his lil bit of power get to his head, and goes off thinkin hes super cop. This is not the same, while cops do face danger everyday, they do not face it on the scale the border patrol and NG do daily, they face armed gangs with AKs and AR's and even mounted machine guns on vehicles, theres no way to tell who's just trying to run drugs over to just run them over and who's trying to ensure that the drugs get over no matter what, spotters sit right across the border, scouting their every move and passing the information along to the would be smugglers, some of these patrolmen are patroling by themselves or maybe paired uped' in some cases, but two versus any of those f*ckers who have it burned into their minds that not making the drop is not an option, is enough to keep me on edge and ready to stop the person at all cost.

You know, the hummer incident started off quite similarly, started off with a smaller shipment ahead of the main convoy, when the 2 units engaged the van, the main convoy showed up and all hell broke loose.

[alfigel]

He didn't die, did he, he lived another day to try and implement more restrictions on how we secure our border, you're trying to liken this to a cop who has let his lil bit of power get to his head, and goes off thinkin hes super cop. This is not the same, while cops do face danger everyday, they do not face it on the scale the border patrol and NG do daily, they face armed gangs with AKs and AR's and even mounted machine guns on vehicles, theres no way to tell who's just trying to run drugs over to just run them over and who's trying to ensure that the drugs get over no matter what, spotters sit right across the border, scouting their every move and passing the information along to the would be smugglers, some of these patrolmen are patroling by themselves or maybe paired uped' in some cases, but two versus any of those f*ckers who have it burned into their minds that not making the drop is not an option, is enough to keep me on edge and ready to stop the person at all cost.

You know, the hummer incident started off quite similarly, started off with a smaller shipment ahead of the main convoy, when the 2 units engaged the van, the main convoy showed up and all hell broke loose.

Again, to say it loud and clearly: I do agree that it is justified to shoot at people who pose a real threat to border patrol. But shooting at an unarmed person that is running away and poses no threat to the border patrol is in no way justified, and has nothing to do with danger prevention.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

Again, to say it loud and clearly: I do agree that it is justified to shoot at people who pose a real threat to border patrol. But shooting at an unarmed person that is running away and poses no threat to the border patrol is in no way justified, and has nothing to do with danger prevention.


Again, to say it LOUD and CLEARLY,

The previous engagement involved a scout vehicle a mile or two ahead of the main convoy, which, when engaged, called in the main convoy for backup and the battle ensued.

This almost has the hallmarks of a planned ambush, but, oh yeah, this in no way poses a threat to the border patrol.

[praetorian6]

Depending on the circumstances at the time of the shooting, they may have been able to justify the shooting (yes, even at an unarmed person). However the lying to bosses, tampering with scene, etc. all add up to a less than credible justification.

Unless politicians are trying to show this as a proof of a border problem, this is not a case with facts you'd want to adveritse (ie, giving a known drug-smuggling illegal alien immunity in return for testimony against 2 agents that violated both Federal law and agency policy).

But I didn't read the transcripts either, maybe there is more here.

I agree with Laconian.

I think it's sad that the US would give immunity to an illegal drug smuggler just to go after two of it's own agents in service of their country. What kind of message are we sending?

The two should be punished for altering the crime scene and lying, that's it. The fact that they felt the need to do that in the first place tells you something.

This fvck wasn't some tourist who commited a petty crime, he was an illegal alien who was trafficing 700+ pounds of drugs into the country. All the sobing people who think this poor schmuck was somehow violated should try doing what he did in Mexico.

[Abolith]

But the guy was unarmed, and running away. Shooting unarmed people who are running away from behind is a really cowardly act, and shall be punished accordingly. But 20 years are definitely too much. A year or two would have been enough (and maybe some time of it on probation), in my opinion, but I don't know what the local laws are.

and these officers had no way of knowing if the smuggler was armed or not.

[tyovan]

You know what - ok, he wasn't armed. But he was running away - he was resisting arrest. He made it back over the border. You think we'd be able to identify him after that? Huh? You think the Mexican government would actually extradite him even if we did identify him??

I honestly wish they would have had more luck with their shooting and that he died. If we start shooting these criminals (before any of our touch-feely European friends try to twist my words - there is a big difference between shooting drug smugglers who are resisting arrest and shooting unarmed migrants) maybe some more will learn a lesson.
Others will say, if we start shooting at them they're going to start shooting at us. Hell, they already are. I'm tired of enforcing our border with both hands tied behind our back.

Let the Mexican government cry and moan all they want about the 'racism' of us up here - maybe if we're so horrible they can try fixing their own damn country instead of sending everybody up here to work to send money home to them.

I've seriously had enough of Mexico.

[Mastermind]

we probably are not privy to all the details and certainly not privy to all the secondary and even tertiary motivations going on in this case. In my opinion, I think there are probably some "Ivy-leaguer" types with a massive dose of "white self loathing" who are trying this case with a bit too much zeal.

Think of the Texas rancher who held a couple of these border crashers at gun point...did not shoot them..and ultimately lost ownership of his ranch to the Mexicans he was holding for the border patrol to pick up....they sued in US court and he could not afford to defend the case...judgement was for the Mexicans who's suit was financed by the Mexican gvt directly...our gvt tossed our citizen under a bus in the case.

These two border guards are nothing but Bush fodder to tell The Mexican gvt..."See how much we love your people...we are willing to scramble the lives of two of our best just to prove how fair and just we are to Mexicans."

Look what happened to the Marines who shot that kid who was taking pot shots at them from Mexico...they damn near were court martialed and their lives were turned upside down for quite a while for defending not just the border..but themselves against these savages.

Now, with California applying state financed health care to every illegal Mexican ...might as well open up a taco stand and learn Mexican...cause it is going to get damn uglier before long. MM

[Mr. JOSHUA]

we probably are not privy to all the details and certainly not privy to all the secondary and even tertiary motivations going on in this case. In my opinion, I think there are probably some "Ivy-leaguer" types with a massive dose of "white self loathing" who are trying this case with a bit too much zeal.

Think of the Texas rancher who held a couple of these border crashers at gun point...did not shoot them..and ultimately lost ownership of his ranch to the Mexicans he was holding for the border patrol to pick up....they sued in US court and he could not afford to defend the case...judgement was for the Mexicans who's suit was financed by the Mexican gvt directly...our gvt tossed our citizen under a bus in the case.

These two border guards are nothing but Bush fodder to tell The Mexican gvt..."See how much we love your people...we are willing to scramble the lives of two of our best just to prove how fair and just we are to Mexicans."

Look what happened to the Marines who shot that kid who was taking pot shots at them from Mexico...they damn near were court martialed and their lives were turned upside down for quite a while for defending not just the border..but themselves against these savages.

Now, with California applying state financed health care to every illegal Mexican ...might as well open up a taco stand and learn Mexican...cause it is going to get damn uglier before long. MM

You make a damn good point and parallel with this post, but your earlier post sounds nuthin like this one, i'm not trying to call you out, just tryin to figure out where ya comin from.

[alfigel]

Again, to say it LOUD and CLEARLY,

The previous engagement involved a scout vehicle a mile or two ahead of the main convoy, which, when engaged, called in the main convoy for backup and the battle ensued.

This almost has the hallmarks of a planned ambush, but, oh yeah, this in no way poses a threat to the border patrol.

But that was another incident. In this specific incident, an unarmed man was running away. See the difference? Armed vehicle convoy engaging border patrol vs. a single unarmed person running away from border patrol?

[alfigel]

and these officers had no way of knowing if the smuggler was armed or not.

He was running away. You don't engage people or otherwise pose a threat by running away.

[tuercas]

You know what - ok, he wasn't armed. But he was running away - he was resisting arrest. He made it back over the border. You think we'd be able to identify him after that? Huh? You think the Mexican government would actually extradite him even if we did identify him??

I honestly wish they would have had more luck with their shooting and that he died. If we start shooting these criminals (before any of our touch-feely European friends try to twist my words - there is a big difference between shooting drug smugglers who are resisting arrest and shooting unarmed migrants) maybe some more will learn a lesson.
Others will say, if we start shooting at them they're going to start shooting at us. Hell, they already are. I'm tired of enforcing our border with both hands tied behind our back.

Let the Mexican government cry and moan all they want about the 'racism' of us up here - maybe if we're so horrible they can try fixing their own damn country instead of sending everybody up here to work to send money home to them.

I've seriously had enough of Mexico.
most law enforcement agencies throughout the world will not shoot at someone who, even if having committed a crime, does not pose a direct threat to the officers and is fleeing.
on the subject of extradition, Mexico readily allows extradition of accused nationals convicted in the US or other countries with similar treaties unless the accused faces the death penalty. With the US , Mexico has an excellent record of extraditions , here is a recent official document from the US embassy stating this fact

http://mexico.usembassy.gov/mexico/ep031016extraditions.html

NEW RECORD IN EXTRADITIONS FROM MEXICO TO THE U.S.A.
Ambassador Garza salutes increased bilateral effort to bring criminals to justice
Mexico City
October 16, 2003

With two accused drug traffickers and one person charged with money laundering extradited from Mexico to the United States today, the total number of extraditions rose to 28 so far this year - exceeding the record of 25 in all of 2002.

"The cooperation between U.S. and Mexican law enforcement officials means that more of those who should be tried for their crimes are going to face justice," U. S. Ambassador Antonio O. Garza, Jr. said Monday. "The number of extraditions in the last two years represents a major change; we still have a long way to go to ensure justice can be done on both sides of the border but Mexicans and Americans are showing their commitment to this goal."

The Ambassador expressed his gratitude for the cooperation from the Mexican Attorney General's Office (PGR) and the Secretariat of Foreign Relations in facilitating the arrest and extradition of the 28 accused criminals. He noted that, from 1995-2000, the average number of extraditions per year was 11, and to date more than twice this number have been extradited in 2003.

"All crimes for which we seek extradition are serious - murder, attempted murder, rape, kidnapping, narcotics, ****** assault of children, money laundering and major fraud," the Ambassador said. "Mexicans and Americans want to see those responsible behind bars."

Since the Mexican Supreme Court prohibited the extradition of defendants facing life sentences in October 2001, the only cases in which the United States seeks extradition are those for which U.S. prosecutors give assurances that they will not seek the penalty of natural life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. (Death sentences are excluded under the U.S.-Mexico Treaty.)
there are several similar examples from this embassy

[Durandal]

You know what - ok, he wasn't armed. But he was running away - he was resisting arrest. He made it back over the border. You think we'd be able to identify him after that? Huh? You think the Mexican government would actually extradite him even if we did identify him??

I honestly wish they would have had more luck with their shooting and that he died. If we start shooting these criminals (before any of our touch-feely European friends try to twist my words - there is a big difference between shooting drug smugglers who are resisting arrest and shooting unarmed migrants) maybe some more will learn a lesson.

Hey, no problem Saddam, and when the Men's Olympic Soccer team fails tto win a medal, maybe we can torture them.

That is where your logic leads us.

All the investigation work has been done, ad nauseam.

Bad cops, shot what they though was an unarmed man innocent man, in the back, and then tried to cover it up.

Its like saying Clinton did not do anything bad...except he lied twice in court, while under oath.

So who has the RIGHT these days to be ABOVE the law and who gets to determine this?

[tyovan]

Whats the problem with shooting large scale drug smugglers who resist arrest?

And how does shooting criminals lead to torturing Olympic athletes??????

[kosse]

Whats the problem with shooting large scale drug smugglers who resist arrest?

And how does shooting criminals lead to torturing Olympic athletes??????
Yeah, why to even have a court of justice when you could just kill the perpetrators at sight.

[tyovan]

I'd be happy to haul them into jail and then deport them after they served their sentence.

But if they're going to run, we should shoot. Otherwise, they'll be trying to smuggle something else in tomorrow night.

[Dragunov]

You know what - ok, he wasn't armed. But he was running away - he was resisting arrest. He made it back over the border. You think we'd be able to identify him after that? Huh? You think the Mexican government would actually extradite him even if we did identify him??

I honestly wish they would have had more luck with their shooting and that he died. If we start shooting these criminals (before any of our touch-feely European friends try to twist my words - there is a big difference between shooting drug smugglers who are resisting arrest and shooting unarmed migrants) maybe some more will learn a lesson.
Others will say, if we start shooting at them they're going to start shooting at us. Hell, they already are. I'm tired of enforcing our border with both hands tied behind our back.

Let the Mexican government cry and moan all they want about the 'racism' of us up here - maybe if we're so horrible they can try fixing their own damn country instead of sending everybody up here to work to send money home to them.

I've seriously had enough of Mexico.

Don't trust this guy with a gun.

[tyovan]

Why not?

I own a .22 for hunting and a Mosin-Nagant for target shooting. I handle my firearms safely.

[kosse]

I'd be happy to haul them into jail and then deport them after they served their sentence.

But if they're going to run, we should shoot. Otherwise, they'll be trying to smuggle something else in tomorrow night.
Cops would make a mistake and kill illegals sooner or later. In addition, it would open a door to killing suspects at sight without a change of trial like I already implied in my previous post.

[Mastermind]

Mr. Josh...the thing is, I have my personal feelings about it and I have my ex-prison guard feelings about it...the first post is my objective post, trying to separate my personal feelings on it...I read the case and the two officers really are guilty as sin...they never should have done what they did PROFESSIONALLY...they should have known better about the tampering with the evidence and, although I can understand why they shot at the guy while he was running away, I know I could never do that as a Prison Guard...even though, my post orders are to shoot to kill to protect life....If the prisoners are running away and not directly threatening anyone, I might be making a career changing or freedom changing decision to shoot them in the back. And, I know how the system works...I know I would probably be criminally prosecuted if the escapees are of a minority race. Yes, it really is better to shoot white people than people of color....justice is blind but not color blind.

Yet, I want the border to be secure and well defended...but that is simply not going to happen in this current poltical atmosphere. If I were king of the USA...I can assure you, there would be a whole bunch of difference in the way things are done on that border and inside our border regarding ILLEGAL "immigrants"....

But, in my second post, I am voicing my disgust over the current situation. I honestly think the border is one big part of why the Republicans lost out this last election...car loads of my friends who vote Republican simply stayed home that election day.

Thanks for asking, too...I really needed to clarify all that. MM

[Aztec Eagle 201st]

Why not?

I own a .22 for hunting and a Mosin-Nagant for target shooting. I handle my firearms safely.

If by any chance the guy in your avatar picture looks anything like you and your armed with a .22 hunting rifle you bought at Wal-Mart going after the drug smugler, well my friend!..i wish you the best of luck.

P.S. You might be shot first by the U.S Border agent taking you for a communist trying to attack the U.S...LoL.
rofl

[tyovan]

the avatar is a picture of me ;)
And I only use the .22 for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc)

[callous]

Convicted border agent tells his story


EL PASO, Texas - Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos could hear his heart racing. He could feel the dry, hot dust burning against his skin as he chased a drug trafficker trying to flee back into Mexico.
Ramos' fellow agent, Jose Alonso Compean, was lying on the ground behind him, banged up and bloody from a scuffle with the much-bigger smuggler moments earlier.

Suddenly the smuggler turned toward the pursuing Ramos, gun in hand. Ramos, his own weapon already drawn, shot at him, though the man was able to flee into the brush and escape the agents.

Now, nearly 18 months after that violent encounter, Ramos and Compean are facing 20 years in federal prison for their actions.

Why?

According to the U.S. attorney who successfully prosecuted the agents, the man they were chasing didn't actually have a gun, shooting him in the back violated his civil rights, the agents didn't know for a fact that he was a drug smuggler, and they broke Border Patrol rules about discharging their weapons and preserving a crime scene.
Even more broadly, Assistant U.S. Attorney Debra Kanof said, Ramos and Compean had no business chasing someone in the first place.

"It is a violation of Border Patrol regulations to go after someone who is fleeing," she said. "The Border Patrol pursuit policy prohibits the pursuit of someone."

Her arguments, along with testimony from other agents on the scene and that of the smuggler himself, swayed a jury. It was a crushing blow to Compean and Ramos, both of whom had pursued suspects along the border as a regular part of their job.

It also appears to fly in the face of the Border Patrol's own edicts, which include "detouring illegal entries through improved enforcement" and "apprehending and detouring smugglers of humans, drugs and other contraband."

The smuggler was given full immunity to testify against the agents and complete medical care at William ******** Army Medical Center, in El Paso.

Neither Ramos nor Compean had granted an interview in the almost 18 months since the shooting. Compean's attorneys have told him to not speak to anyone about the case.

But Ramos and his family say they no longer can be silent.

"They don't throw this many charges at guys they've caught with over 2,000 pounds of marijuana," Ramos said. "There's murderers and child rapists that are looking at less time than me.

"I am not guilty. I did not do what they're accusing me of."


Ramos, 37, and Compean, 28, are set to be sentenced Aug. 22 for shooting Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a Mexican citizen, on Feb. 17, 2005, in the small Texas town of Fabens, about 40 miles south east of El Paso.

A Texas jury convicted the pair of assault with serious bodily injury; assault with a deadly weapon; discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence; and a civil rights violation. Compean and Ramos also were convicted of four counts and two counts, respectively, of obstruction of justice for not reporting that their weapons had been fired.

The jury acquitted both men of assault with intent to commit murder.

But the conviction for discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence requires a minimum 10-year prison sentence. The sentences for the other convictions vary.

On July 25, the El Paso U.S. Probation Office recommended to Judge Kathleen Cardone that each man get 20 years.

Ramos, an eight-year veteran of the U.S. Naval Reserve and a former nominee for Border Patrol Agent of the Year, now has but one thing on his mind: What will happen to his wife and three young sons if he spends the next two decades in prison?

"It's (with) a leap of faith and my devotion to God that me and my family will make it through this," Ramos said as he looked at his wife, Monica, during an exclusive interview with the Daily Bulletin this past month in El Paso.

Two things were clear throughout the interview: Ramos is convinced he was simply doing his job when Aldrete-Davila was shot, and he is perplexed as to why he and his partner are being punished so severely.

IGNACIO'S STORY
Here's Ramos' version of what happened that day:

On Feb. 17, 2005, Compean was monitoring the south side of a levee road near the Rio Grande on the U.S.-Mexico border in Fabens when he spotted a suspicious van driving down the north end of the road. He called for backup.

Ramos headed to Fabens, where he thought he could intercept the van at one of only two roads leading in and out of the small town.

Another agent was already following the van -- with Aldrete-Davila at the wheel -- when Ramos arrived.

Ramos and the other agent followed the van through the center of town until it turned back toward the Rio Grande, which marks the border between Mexico and the United States. Aldrete-Davila, unable to outrun the agents, stopped his van on a levee, got out and started running. Compean was waiting for him on the other side of the levee.

"We both yelled out for him to stop, but he wouldn't stop, and he just kept running," Ramos said.

Aldrete-Davila made his way through a canal, and Ramos could hear Compean yelling for Aldrete-Davila to stop, he said.

"At some point during the time where I'm crossing the canal, I hear shots being fired," Ramos said. "Later, I see Compean on the ground, but I keep running after the smuggler."

Through the thick dust, Ramos watched as Aldrete-Davila turned toward him, pointing what appeared to be a gun.

"I shot," he said. "But I didn't think he was hit, because he kept running into the brush and then disappeared into it. Later, we all watched as he jumped into a van waiting for him. He seemed fine. It didn't look like he had been hit at all."

Seven other agents were on the scene by that time. Compean had already picked up his shell casings. Ramos did not, though he failed to report the shooting.

"The supervisors knew that shots were fired," Ramos said. "Since nobody was injured or hurt, we didn't file the report. That's the only thing I would've done different."

The van later was found to have about 800 pounds of marijuana inside. ............


Rest of the article (http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4141562) ...

[tyovan]

Thank you callous for posting!

[Laconian]

IMO if they had not altered the crime scene and had reported the shooting, they may have been able to make a case for shooting a fleeing subject, there are enough facts for a reasonable officer to conclude shooting may be reasonable.

The whole "we didn't think we needed to report it because nobody was injured," deal is a crock. Anytime an agency weapon is discharged, outside of training, it has to be reported. Anybody that got out of the CBP academy (or the old Border Patrol Academy) would know that. I think that is what got them in the most trouble and led to the other charges.

[exarmyguard]

Border Patrol need all of our support. Its a shame they shot that drug runner in the ass and not in the fvcking head.

[exarmyguard]

Whats the problem with shooting large scale drug smugglers who resist arrest?

And how does shooting criminals lead to torturing Olympic athletes??????

Damn right, buddy. I like the was russia deals with their drug criminals. One shot to the head. We seriously need to send some Russia trainers here to the US to train our guys in how to deal with criminals. Then set them loose. Let our Border agents do their jobs. They are intelligent and, though not perfect, they are given a tough job. That job is to keep unwanted illegals off our homeland. If one comes in without permission, they take they're life in their hands. Period.

[Durandal]

Whats the problem with shooting large scale drug smugglers who resist arrest?

Well, considering that is NOT what we are discussing here your question is silly. We are discussing shooting a person, fleeing, in the back and the absence of rule of law. We are talking about agents who, without any knowledge of whom this person was (they had no clue he was a drug runner), discharged their weapons in a attempt to KILL him when he posed no threat. They then tried to alter the crime scene and make it appear that they hadn't...

That is what we are discussing.


And how does shooting criminals lead to torturing Olympic athletes??????

Because as soon as you go down the slippery slope, allowing cops to be police, judge, and jury, you are living in a nation no better than Iraq and then ANYTHING is possible.

[Durandal]

Border Patrol need all of our support. Its a shame they shot that drug runner in the ass and not in the fvcking head.

No one is above the law...

They broke it, now they should pay. We want GOOD cops, not bad ones. This is the United States, were everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It has its flaws for certain, but it is far better than the alternative...

And yeah, the border patrol, as a whole SHOULD receive our support, but not two bad cops.

[exarmyguard]

No one is above the law...

They broke it, now they should pay. We want GOOD cops, not bad ones. This is the United States, were everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It has its flaws for certain, but it is far better than the alternative...

And yeah, the border patrol, as a whole SHOULD receive our support, but not two bad cops.

It seems to me these agents are being lined up against the wall with blindfolds on. In the USA, officers are not given any slack, which is a shame. They have a tough and thankless job for sure. I do not think that undocumented migrants should have the same level of legal rights afforded to US citizens, for starters. These people are knowingly breaking the law and are criminals. They know they should not be crossing illegally, yet they do so and with assistance from their own government!

I think I have it figured out why the USA is Mexico's toilet bowl and why it is permitted to happen. Mexican oil, US companies in Mexico, dirt cheap labor for said companies, no import tariffs. NAFTA has drained the life out the USA. The one's who suffer are us.

[Durandal]

It seems to me these agents are being lined up against the wall with blindfolds on. In the USA, officers are not given any slack, which is a shame. They have a tough and thankless job for sure. I do not think that undocumented migrants should have the same level of legal rights afforded to US citizens, for starters. These people are knowingly breaking the law and are criminals. They know they should not be crossing illegally, yet they do so and with assistance from their own government!

I think I have it figured out why the USA is Mexico's toilet bowl and why it is permitted to happen. Mexican oil, US companies in Mexico, dirt cheap labor for said companies, no import tariffs. NAFTA has drained the life out the USA. The one's who suffer are us.

The problem with this discussion is that you are mixing two issues together.

One is immigration and illegal immigration.

The other is cops doing their job right and committing crimes.

[HR24]

IMO if they had not altered the crime scene and had reported the shooting, they may have been able to make a case for shooting a fleeing subject, there are enough facts for a reasonable officer to conclude shooting may be reasonable.

The whole "we didn't think we needed to report it because nobody was injured," deal is a crock. Anytime an agency weapon is discharged, outside of training, it has to be reported. Anybody that got out of the CBP academy (or the old Border Patrol Academy) would know that. I think that is what got them in the most trouble and led to the other charges.

Laconian is right. The only problem I see here is the immunity deal the doper got. The AUSA running the case could have gotten this guys cooperation without dropping immunity on him. Should have charged the sunofabitch.