Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fire US Attorney General Gonzales!  
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1186 times:

Just finished watching a clip of a speech by Attorney General Gonzales today in which he claimed, straight-faced into the camera, to respect the contributions of the US border patrol. This is simply outrageous!

He continues to defend the conviction of US Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean in spite of all the particulars of the case that have gone far beyond a seemingly simple violation of law enforcement procedures. It is unacceptable for this man to be running the DOJ any longer! The prosecutor leading the case made a deal with the drug smuggler involved and barred his past history from reaching the ears of the jury in the agents' trial. On top of that, DHS lackeys lied to Congress about phantom confessions from the agents and have since gone unpunished.

Every day these railroaded men spend in prison is an insult to every person defending America's borders. So far there are 92 signatories to Rep. Duncan Hunter's bill to pardon the agents, since the DOJ and the PotUS have been absolutely unwilling to waver in their positions on the matter (what else is new?).

Anyone still suscribing to the 'facts' of the case that the Administration, DOJ and others with nebulous interests at stake want us to swallow should take a look at the rebuttal to the case issued by the National Border Patrol Council:

http://www.nbpc.net/ramos_compean/rebuttal_to_sutton.pdf


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1169 times:

For other reasons to numerous to mention, I agreed that Gonzales should walk the plank, but not going to happen, since he is one of the President's favorites.

But from what I read, Ramos and Compean were both an embarrassment to the uniform, hot dogs you might say and they were found guilty by a Texas jury which should say something.

.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Rep. Duncan Hunter's

Did you know that Rep. Hunter's brother is one of the leaders here in Arizona, working to provide water etc to the border crossers. Since the illegal traffic has moved from California to Arizona the number of deaths in the desert continues to increase each year.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1168 times:

Quoting AirCop (Reply 1):
they were found guilty by a Texas jury which should say something.

they were found guilty based on testimony that came solely from a guy who was bringing $1 million of marijuana into the US. except that, ya know, the jury wasn't allowed to hear anything that could pass him off as anything other than a credible witness.

the agents' personalities are immaterial.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1163 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 2):
they were found guilty based on testimony that came solely from a guy who was bringing $1 million of marijuana into the US.

Might want to recheck your fact, there fellow officers testified against them. Again remember these two officers fired on the guy before they had any PROOF that he was a drug smuggler and he was running away..Not sure where the $1 million of marijuana came from, do you realize how much that would be?


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1154 times:

According to the NBPC's rebuttal to the US prosecutor, the smuggler had 743 pounds of marijuana in his van.

Not sure where you're getting information about testimony against the officers by other agents. The DHS already admitted their past testimony to Congress on the matter was false and based on assumed information.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1142 times:

Try this site:
www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/02/17/news/nation/15_36_002_16_07.txt

But then again Democrat Senators Patrick Leahy and Dianne Feinstein are both calling for hearings into this case..


User currently offlineMaidensGator From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1121 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
The prosecutor leading the case made a deal with the drug smuggler involved and barred his past history from reaching the ears of the jury in the agents' trial.

The prosecutor can't bar the past history; that's a decision that has to be made by the judge.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 2):
they were found guilty based on testimony that came solely from a guy who was bringing $1 million of marijuana into the US. except that, ya know, the jury wasn't allowed to hear anything that could pass him off as anything other than a credible witness

Prior felony convictions may be used to impeach a witness. However, the rules are very specific that details of the conviction, even what it was for, may not be used. While this guy may have been running drugs, I haven't read that he had any prior convictions.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
a seemingly simple violation of law enforcement procedures.

The question that must be answered is whether the officers had the right to shoot an unarmed man in the back, running toward Mexico, when at the time of the shooting they had no real knowledge that a crime had been committed. Not what I'd call a simple violation of procedure....

By the way, I'm no fan of Gonzales either, but I wouldn't pick this battle to try to get him out....



The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1111 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
He continues to defend the conviction of US Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean in spite of all the particulars of the case that have gone far beyond a seemingly simple violation of law enforcement procedures. It is unacceptable for this man to be running the DOJ any longer!

He defends their conviction because they were found guilty by a jury in a trial where fellow law enforcement officers testified against them.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 1):
But from what I read, Ramos and Compean were both an embarrassment to the uniform, hot dogs you might say and they were found guilty by a Texas jury which should say something.

 checkmark  and in addition, they fired on unarmed fleeing felons, which is a violation of the federal use of deadly force policy.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 2):
the agents' personalities are immaterial.

Their actions, were, however, quite relevant, and they were convicted because their actions were not defensible.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 3):
Might want to recheck your fact, there fellow officers testified against them. Again remember these two officers fired on the guy before they had any PROOF that he was a drug smuggler and he was running away..Not sure where the $1 million of marijuana came from, do you realize how much that would be?

Now why would you be trying to argue the facts?  Wink

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 4):
According to the NBPC's rebuttal to the US prosecutor, the smuggler had 743 pounds of marijuana in his van.

So what? shooting an unarmed fleeing drug smuggler is STILL in violation of the longstanding federal law enforcement policy regarding the use of deadly force.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1101 times:

Wonderful precedent being set here. Border jumping smugglers can claim whatever they want and sue the government for $5 million while two sworn officers rot in prison and endure beatings.  Yeah sure


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1096 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 8):
Wonderful precedent being set here. Border jumping smugglers can claim whatever they want and sue the government for $5 million while two sworn officers rot in prison and endure beatings.

What part of the fact that the evidence presented at trial doesn't support the claims made by the officers' supporters do you not understand?

Numerous Congressmen have written the Justice Department asking for the AG to intercede. He has refused all requests because the facts of the case don't warrant his intervention.


User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1092 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 8):
Wonderful precedent being set here. Border jumping smugglers can claim whatever they want and sue the government for $5 million while two sworn officers rot in prison and endure beatings.

You're right, there is a screwed up precedent.

The smuggler should be in jail with the Border Patrol Agents.

They screwed up. They shot a fleeing unarmed suspect and then tried to cover up their actions. They deserve to be in jail.

The smuggler also deserves to be in jail.

However, I suspect the agents are going to get a sucessful appeal after recent disclosures by congresmen that the DEA tried to notify the prosecutor that their star smuggler was still smuggling, and the prosecutor just kind of blew it off. If the prosecutor failed to share information he had with the defense there could be problems with the case. But, the agents still blew it. They still deserve to be in jail.


User currently offlineMaidensGator From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1088 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 8):
Wonderful precedent being set here. Border jumping smugglers can claim whatever they want and sue the government for $5 million while two sworn officers rot in prison and endure beatings

No, the precedent is that rogue law enforcement officers can't shoot unarmed people in violation of procedure.

These former officers were afforded a trial by jury. Your seem to think it's proper to allow the Border Patrol to throw any semblance of due process out the window in the name of securing the borders. I'm very much in favor of secure borders, but not at the price you seem willing to pay....



The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3150 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1053 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
It is unacceptable for this man to be running the DOJ any longer!

Just think, he was put in charge by a person unacceptable to be running the country any longer.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1029 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 12):

Just think, he was put in charge by a person unacceptable to be running the country any longer.

That's completely off the point. Start a new thread for Bush bashing, this one is about the moron running the DOJ.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1019 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
The prosecutor leading the case made a deal with the drug smuggler involved and barred his past history from reaching the ears of the jury in the agents' trial

He didn't bar anything. Like MaidensGator said, only the judge can make such determinations. Further, if he had no past CONVICTIONS, then there is nothing to tell.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 7):
So what? shooting an unarmed fleeing drug smuggler is STILL in violation of the longstanding federal law enforcement policy regarding the use of deadly force.

Not to mention Texas law.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 8):
two sworn officers rot in prison and endure beatings.

First, they will most likely be kept in some sort of cop unit. Second, who cares if they are "sworn officers" or not. When they shot this guy, they broke the oath to which they were sworn, not to mention the law.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineItsjustme From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2768 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1016 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 4):
The DHS already admitted their past testimony to Congress on the matter was false and based on assumed information.

Yeah, this has been a hot topic of discussion on one of the Talk Radio (KFI) shows in L.A. (not sure if it's syndicated). From what I've heard on pretty much a daily basis here, I can't believe these two officers are still in prison, not to mention haven't been totally exonerated. I'm all for dirty LEO's getting what's coming to them but it sounds like these guys were truly railroaded.


User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3150 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 981 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 13):
That's completely off the point. Start a new thread for Bush bashing, this one is about the moron running the DOJ.

Not really off the point at all - Who hired him after Ashcroft left? Who has the power of hiring and firing Gonzales?


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 980 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 16):
Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 13):
That's completely off the point. Start a new thread for Bush bashing, this one is about the moron running the DOJ.

Not really off the point at all - Who hired him after Ashcroft left? Who has the power of hiring and firing Gonzales?

I happen to agree with him NASCAR . . . some folks need to know when it's Bush Bash time and when it's not. PotUS is entirely irrelevent to the topic. In this case, you're in left field - or perhaps not even in the ball park.

Have you an opinion on the point of the thread, the two Border Patrol Agents and their issue? Or do you prefer to continue to toss off topic rhetoric into the thread?


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Friendly Fire In Iraq. posted Tue Feb 6 2007 11:05:06 by CHRISBA777ER
Security Contractors Open Fire At US Marines posted Sat Jun 11 2005 19:54:21 by MD11Engineer
US General Suspended -- 6 Soldiers Charged posted Thu Apr 29 2004 15:44:10 by Russophile
US General Proposed Poisoning Afghan Food posted Wed Mar 6 2002 22:35:56 by PanAm747
New Women's Pro Soccer League(US) To Launch In '08 posted Wed Feb 28 2007 18:23:37 by KROC
Facts About US Greenhouse Emmissions posted Tue Feb 27 2007 15:22:26 by Pope
Why Is Israel Important To The US? posted Tue Feb 27 2007 02:28:00 by Mbj-11
Why Can't This Man Be Our Next (US) President? posted Tue Feb 27 2007 01:01:20 by DL787932ER
US Supreme Court Reviews The PIT posted Mon Feb 26 2007 18:36:53 by MDorBust
US 'Plans To Bomb Iran', Despite Denials posted Mon Feb 26 2007 03:22:03 by NAV20