Ramos and Compean Screwed, Continued

| | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you needed any further evidence of the futility of "Republican" governance, please read the following update on the case of the U.S. Border Patrol agents currently imprisoned for shooting a drug smuggler.

Long story short: Our government has a soft spot for criminals from south of the border. Scroll to the end for the money paragraph.

"Why" exactly? I don't know. I will bet it has something to do with cheap labor.

Are there any voices of reason in the U.S.? Well, yes there are - namely Tom Tancredo. Can he win the nomination for President? Who knows, but now is the time to be thinking about it and working for it.

If Tancredo cannot be the nominee: How's about a third party, folks? If not now, when?

Here is the latest Guard the Borders Blogburst from Euphoric Reality:



By Heidi Thiess



We are still closely watching the Border Patrol case, especially after last week's explosive news that the DHS had lied to Congressmen who were looking into the case. Close on the heels of that shocking revelation, we noted that US Attorney Johnny Sutton, the prosecutor in this case, has lied openly and repeatedly about this case to the media. In an effort to counter Sutton's lies, here is one of his favorite public statements about Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean deconstructed:

"These guys did very serious crimes and once anybody who knows all the facts of this case - the fact that they shot at an unarmed guy 15 times, lied about it, covered it up, destroyed the evidence ... it's hard for me to imagine a prosecutor would look the other way," he said.

1. It has not been proven that the drug smuggler was unarmed. Sutton has been unable to prove it, yet he states it like it's a fact. Furthermore, two of the drug smuggler's own family members have made statements that he has been running drugs since he was 13 or 14 and has never smuggled drugs without being armed.

2. Compean and Ramos DID NOT LIE about shooting the drug smuggler. They didn't know that they had until almost a month later! And it's still not proven that Ramos is the one who shot the drug smuggler.

3. They DID NOT try to "cover it up". They verbally reported to their superiors that they fired their weapons.

4. They DID NOT destroy evidence. Sutton has been harping on this because he claims that the site of the shooting was a "crime scene" and that the BP agents knowingly altered the scene of the crime by picking up their shell casings. That is FALSE. The agents, including the agents that were with them at the time of the shooting, did NOT designate the area a crime scene, since they did NOT know that the drug smuggler had been shot.

5. In fact, far from lying about the incident or "covering it up", Ramos and Compean followed procedures exactly:

U.S. Border Patrol firearms policy specifically states that agents are prohibited from filing a report if a shooting incident takes place and that only an oral report to supervisors is required.

"Ensure that supervisory personnel or INS investigating officers are aware that employees involved in a shooting incident shall not be required or allowed to submit a written statement of the circumstances surrounding the incident," according to the firearms policy. "All written statements regarding the incident shall be prepared by the local INS investigating officers and shall be based upon an interview of the INS employee."

INS refers to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which oversaw the Border Patrol prior to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. The shooting policy has remained unchanged.

Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General documents obtained by the paper show that all nine agents on the scene at the time of the shooting - including two supervisors - knew shots had been fired.

Oscar Garcia, El Paso Border Patrol Union representative with Local 1929 and a firearms instructor, said that the Report of Apprehension or Seizure filed by Compean and Ramos on the day of the incident was accurate. Garcia stated that the agent's omission of the shooting in the drug seizure report followed firearms policy.

"Our own policy prohibits them from filing any report on the shooting incident," Garcia said. "The U.S. Attorney's assertion that they covered up the incident by not filing a report is ridiculous."

6. On Saturday, it was further revealed that two of the Border Patrol agents that had testified on behalf of the prosecution against Ramos and Compean also lied in their testimony during the trial.


Two Border Patrol agents who testified against two co-workers convicted of shooting a drug smuggler will be fired for changing their stories about events surrounding the shooting, according to documents obtained by the Daily Bulletin.

Sources inside the Border Patrol also say Oscar Juarez, a third agent who testified against Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, resigned from the agency last month shortly before he was to be fired.

All three agents gave sworn testimony against Ramos and Compean for the U.S. Attorney's Office, which successfully prosecuted the shooting case in March. The agents were given immunity in exchange for their testimony despite changing their accounts of the incident several

"When you give deals to witnesses like immunity, the government usually gets the testimony (it wants)," said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, a former judge and prosecutor. "This case is a perfect example."

What else is Johnny Sutton up to, besides being a bald-faced liar and coercing others to lie? As we've already reported in our previous coverage, he's an over-zealous prosecutor of American law enforcement officers who are doing their best to protect America and themselves from coyotes, drug smugglers, and the other criminals turning our borders into a war zone. Ramos and Compean are not Sutton's only victims:

A Texas deputy sheriff who fired shots at a fleeing vehicle after the driver tried to run him down faces 10 years in prison for injuring one of the passengers, a Mexican national being smuggled illegally into the United States.

The U.S. attorney, who won lengthy prison terms last year for two U.S. Border Patrol agents in the shooting of a drug-smuggling suspect, also prosecuted Edwards County Deputy Sheriff Guillermo F. Hernandez, who is to be sentenced next month.

The deputy's boss, Sheriff Donald G. Letsinger, said his officer -- who had been on the job for a year -- "followed the letter of the law" in defending himself in the April 2005 incident and questioned why the government brought charges.

"This is a fine young man, and I just don't believe he committed the wrong of which he was accused," Sheriff Letsinger said. "I have never had anything hurt me so badly as this prosecution. We've got to make this right."

Rep. Ted Poe, Texas Republican, called the prosecution and conviction of Hernandez, known to his friends as "Gilmer," "another example of how the federal government is more concerned about people [who are] illegally invading America than it is about the men who protect America."

"Once again, our government is on the wrong side of the border war," Mr. Poe said.

The deputy's Dec. 1 conviction has enraged his hometown of Rocksprings, Texas, population 1,250, where "Free Gilmer" signs have been posted. The Baptist church is paying the deputy's mortgage and others have come up with costs for the family's truck, propane and water bills. Hernandez, 25, and his wife, Ashley, have a 4-month-old daughter.

"The town is outraged that this has happened to our deputy," said the Rev. Albert Green, pastor at the First Baptist Church. "Those people were in this country illegally, and they tried to run him down. They were the criminals, but the prosecutors made our deputy out to be the criminal."

"I do not know a single person who doesn't feel Gilmer was prosecuted for doing his job," said Mr. Green, who is the deputy's pastor. "I do not know a finer, more well-behaved gentleman. He would not purposely or willfully hurt anyone."

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, appointed in October 2001 by President Bush, said Hernandez fired shots at the vehicle as it sped away "knowing it was occupied with the nine individuals," at least seven of whom were illegal aliens -- some of whom later were called to testify for the government.

Hernandez was convicted after a jury trial in U.S. District Court in Del Rio, Texas, 75 miles southwest of Rocksprings -- found guilty of violating "under the color of law" the civil rights of Maricela Rodriguez-Garcia, a Mexican national.

Furthermore, those same illegals LIED about Hernandez shooting at them after they crashed their vehicle and fled on foot:

Sheriff Letsinger also said the Rangers and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents, using dogs and metal detectors, found four shell casings at the traffic stop site but none at the crash site -- discounting claims by two of the vehicle's occupants that Hernandez fired shots at them as they fled the vehicle.

Nevertheless, Sutton treated the testimony of illegals already proven to be liars as inviolable, while painting Hernandez as a "rogue cop" (sound familiar?) and has imprisoned Hernandez for doing his job. But it doesn't stop there. Sutton has a very dirty track record. In 2004, in an effort to protect one of his star witnesses - a Mexican informant - he covered up the informant's participation in 15 tortures and murders at the "House of Death" in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.

Apparently, no crime is too vile for Sutton when it comes to protecting his informants. Just as he protected the notorious drug smuggler Aldrete-Davila and provided whim with taxpayer funded benefits such as a vehicle and a green card, so he has previously protected and paid off an informant that he KNOWS is a mass murderer. In fact, Sutton's office has gone to great lengths to conceal the heinous crimes of their informant and have moved him frequently to keep him away from other American law enforcement agencies, such as the DEA. Furthermore, Sutton has been involved in making huge payments in "hush money" to this informant - over $50,000 - which was disguised as a payment to a different informant who was already dead. Now Sutton has gone to his high-level contacts inside the Department of Justice (I've previously revealed his insider connections with Alberto Gonzales and George Bush) in order to shut down a DEA officer who is brought serious charges against Sutton for his complicity in covering up torture and murder.

Several sources within the Department of Homeland Security, the parent agency of ICE, confirmed that the informant Lalo was moved around frequently after DEA was forced to evacuate its agents from Juarez and the full extent of his - and the ICE agents' and U.S. prosecutor's - complicity in the murders became known to DEA.

"They (the ICE agents and U.S. prosecutor Juanita Fielden) couldn't get rid of him (Lalo), so they tried to control him, and they moved him from place to place, to Albuquerque (N.M.) then to San Antonio (Texas), so no one could talk to him," one source says.

Then, the first hints of the informant's role in the murders in Juárez hit the media in the spring of 2004, and the cover-up went into full swing, according to sources. The problem is that the informant Lalo had leverage because of what he knew. He was demanding more money, sources indicate.

That's what allegedly led one of Lalo's ICE handlers, a high-level supervisor in El Paso, sometime between March and June of 2004, to put a payment through to him using a dead informant's "source number," which is a number assigned to all confidential sources in order to keep their identity concealed.

Although it is not clear how much money was given to Lalo through this means, sources indicate that it was discovered by someone at ICE headquarters in Washington, D.C. The sources add that because the payment required headquarters' approval, the amount likely exceeded $50,000.

"The confidential informant (Lalo) said the government owed him money," one source says. "They decided they better pay him or he would start talking."

According to law enforcement sources, a high-level ICE supervisor in El Paso allegedly sent out the word to members of his staff that no one was to cooperate with any investigation into the informant's role in the murders, or they would face discipline. Ironically, that supervisor has since been promoted, sources indicate.

To date, no one directly involved in overseeing the informant has been brought up on criminal charges, at least no such charges have been publicly announced. One field agent has been put on administrative leave, however. Law enforcers familiar with the case believe that Hispanic agent, unless he has documentation to prove otherwise, will likely be the only person set up to take the fall.

Any investigation into U.S. prosecutors in this matter, of course, would have to go through Sutton's office - absent the appointment of a special prosecutor - or through the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility, which is under the charge of San Antonio native Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Given those realities, most law enforcers who spoke with Narco News believe that, absent intervention by Congress, nearly everyone involved will get a pass on the House of Death murders.

"If Sandy Gonzalez or I had done something like this, we'd be in prison," says a former high-ranking DEA official who asked to remain anonymous. "When a U.S. attorney is incompetent, there are no sanctions. You have the Department of Justice that is supposed to control these U.S. Attorneys, but they don't when it comes down to nut-cutting."

As for Sandalio Gonzalez, he can't believe justice is being sacrificed in this case, that some 15 murdered people are deemed expendable for the sake of salvaging careers and promoting political ambitions.

"If someone in Congress is not willing to take a stand on this, the nation as a whole loses some integrity in the process," he stresses. "This isn't about national security, spies or intelligence work, this is police work, right here. There are bodies out there."

All the details of the above case are presented here. There is no crime so vile - not drug smuggling, not torture, and not mass murder - for U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton to overlook in order to further his career. How many lives does he get to destroy with impunity before he's held accountable? U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton is a despicable and incredibly corrupt individual. And because of his long-held and close ties with President George W. Bush, and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and other high-ranking Texas politicians in D.C., Johnny Sutton gets a free pass for crimes that would put any other American into prison for the rest of their lives! Who is paying Johnny Sutton for his crimes?


This has been a production of the Guard the Borders syndicate. It was started by Euphoric Reality to educate the public about the vulnerabilities of our open borders during an age of global terrorism and the resultant threat to our national security and sovereignty. If you are concerned about the lapses in our national security and the socio-economic burden of unchecked illegal immigration, join our blog syndicate. Send an email with your blog name and url to admin at guardtheborders dot com.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Ramos and Compean Screwed, Continued.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/921

5 Comments

Ted said:

Here's another shameless invitation for people to join the Yahoo discussion group I created:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VirginiansForTancredo2008/

Stay Puft Marshmallow Man said:

I love third parties!

.... wise guy ...

charles said:

You are way off base on this one, Joe.

"Euphoric Reality" is apparently a different reality than the real world kind, maybe they've been smoking some of that stuff from the van.

Sutton has not be shown to have lied. Some DHS people lied about how the type of evidence they had in written form, which has nothing to do with the trial.

The only "evidence" that the victim was armed is the self-serving statements of the two BP agents that they "thought" they saw something shiny in his hand.

According to their claims, the man pointed a shiny object at them twice, but never fired.

BTW, Compean's statement includes the fact that he stopped shooting because he was no longer in danger. Oddly, at the same time he was no longer in danger, he testifies that Ramos ran past him and shot the guy -- Ramos claiming the guy turned back and aimed at him. So Compean's testimony refutes Ramos. Meanwhile, Ramos claimed Compean was lying on the ground at the time, but Compean has said both that he was standing, and that he was kneeling, at the time, but never laying on the ground.

The point being, the entire case for letting the BP agents off hinges on their own statements that they thought the guy had a gun.

Since they didn't catch the guy, how would you ever prove he did NOT have a weapon? The defense has presented NO evidence that he owned a gun, had a gun, has ever been seen with a gun, or was ever reported as carrying a gun. The entire basis for the claim that he had a gun is that they said they saw what they thought was something shiny in his hand.

Which might have been enough for two law enforcement officers, except that their testimony contradicts one another.

Well that, and they destroyed evidence, covered up the shooting, got other border agents to help cover it up (three other agents joined the cover-up: although they eventually took immunity to testify to the facts of the shooting, they were all removed from their jobs (two fired, one resigned).

The article also makes a big deal out of ballistics testing, suggesting there was serious doubt about the bullet.

The DHS report states a positive match was made, but further, RAMOS stipulated at the trial that the bullet was from his gun. In other words, the defense agreed to the fact that it was Ramos's bullet that hit the guy. You don't appeal that kind of admission, it's like a signed confession.

But the whole bullet thing is just a smoke-and-mirrors ploy anyway. What difference would it really make if Ramos had MISSED? Compean missed 14 times, and he got one more year than Ramos did.

Funniest "testimony" from the BP agents. If you read the signed statement from Compean made in March of 2005, he talks about the part of the story where the prosecution claimed and the jury convicted him of swinging his shotgun at the smuggler when the smuggler was surrendering.

Compean agrees with the smuggler's testimony that another agent yelled "hit him". But he doesn't say he swung at him. In Compean's signed statement, Compean writes that he took his shotgun, stuck the BUTT END of the shotgun into the smugglers chest, and pushed him with it.

Now, picture that scene. Compean is standing there, holding the barrel end of a loaded shotgun, and he sticks the butt end into the chest of the smuggler, who no doubt would grab at the butt end of the shotgun to steady himself, putting his hands -- ON THE TRIGGER.

In other words, Compean's statement is that he handed the trigger of his shotgun to the smuggler, while holding the barrel pointing at himself.

The problem the BP agents have is that the actual facts as known from that day are overwhelmingly against them.

Regardless of your position on illegal immigrants, drug smugglers, border security, or the criminal justice system, there has been no credible doubt raised to the facts on the ground from the incident in question.

All the "smoke and mirrors" thrown about by the pro-pardons crowd (sometimes I call them "pro-amnesty") is about why they were charged, or smears against all the people involved in the criminal justice system that found them guilty. The prosecuter lied, the investigators are crooked, the 5 BP agents who testified against them are all liars and maybe drug smugglers, the jury foreman bullied the jurors, the judge incorrectly ruled evidence out of order, the defense lawyers were incompetent.

None of which changes the basic truth, which is the evidence overwhelmingly is against these two. IN fact, there is NO evidence in favor of their position, either in their depositions, the investigative reports, OR the trial testimony currently known or reported on -- except for their self-serving statements that each of them separately "saw something shiny in the guy's hand".

Something that every single cop who ever shot an unarmed victim says.

Sutton, the "crooked prosecuter", investigated 14 other border shootings, and in every case defended the BP agents. This case is different, and the difference is that it appears these two agents used excessive force and a disregard for police procedures and the rights of even illegal immigrants not to be shot at for no good reason.

I suggest you stop reading WND and their sisterhood of reporting outlets like Euphoric Unreality, and get a hold of the DHS report (and now I understand the Trial Transcript might be available).

I still hope that something comes out that would prove these two BP agents were innocent. I'd rather them be out and the smuggler in prison.

But sometimes people are actually guilty of crimes, and they deserve punishment (probably not 11 years, but that's another issue that has nothing to do with their guilt).

Charles, all you are doing is taking the side of the prosecutors and the smuggler against the BP agents. You prefer to believe the unverifiable reports against Ramos and Compean rather than those that support them.

"The defense has presented NO evidence that he owned a gun, had a gun, has ever been seen with a gun, or was ever reported as carrying a gun."

Ok, granted. Not that such evidence against a foreign national would be easy to obtain, but technically you are correct.

I won't say. "glad to see where your sympathies lie" because I think I know you better than that. But I wonder what inspires you to give the benefit of the doubt to the bad guy rather than to the agents who both have stellar records.

A larger question is why it would not be assumed that BP agents would blast the crap out of a drug smuggler in a border confrontation, and ask questions later.

Then there is the little issue of the smuggler being granted immunity to testify. What is that all about?

It's a wonder we have anyone willing to do the BP job out in the desert.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM