English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Did you know about the Border Patrol rules ?
Did you know that the two agents followed BP policy ?

Ramos and Compean were convicted last spring for shooting Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a Mexican drug smuggler, in the buttocks on Feb. 17, 2005. The agents are now serving 11 and 12 years, respectively, in federal prison.

The agents were convicted partly due to the government's successful argument at trial that the two men failed to file a report about the shooting.

But 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.

2007-02-10 10:20:59 · 17 answers · asked by Yakuza 7 in Politics & Government Immigration

"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.

"

2007-02-10 10:21:41 · update #1

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

2007-02-10 10:21:57 · update #2

What are your views on this ?

2007-02-10 10:24:24 · update #3

The agents did not know the drug smuggler had been hit in the butt at the time of the alleged incident it would have been regular routine.I think it was several days before anyone at BP knew.

2007-02-10 10:50:02 · update #4

17 answers

This is the Bush administration standing in defiance of the American People and thumbing his nose. This has been a sham since day one.
Bush mentions this case in his state of the union address, then allows Ramos to be attacked, and then makes him wait three days for medical attention. He is doing this right in front of us. Tell me Bush could not pick up the phone and ensure the man's safety. Tell me he couldn't get the man medical attention when he can go to Mexico, pick up a drug smuggler, return him to the US and treat his wounds.

We know that DHS lied and Debra Kanof and the judge coerced at least three members of the jury to vote guilty and yet these men remain in jail despite our protests. The ACLU has really shown their true colors because they have been totally silent.

If Bush and his cronies can get away with this on such a highly publicized case, it really scares me to think what they could do to an average American.

Just have the DHS lie, coerce the jury and kiss your a** goodbye.

Lesson learned. Don't mess with the drug smugglers in Texas or Bush and his cronies will come down hard. Somewhat reminiscent of the way Al Capone ran Chicago.

2007-02-10 12:58:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 3

It's a shame that these agents were sentenced for doing their job. Kind of makes you wonder why there is a shortage of agents. These two should have been pardoned by Bush before Ramos was beaten in prison. But we all know Bush is too busy sucking up to the President of Mexico.

2007-02-10 15:31:49 · answer #2 · answered by Knowledge 4 · 1 2

I am from south America and my points of view should be the same as the Mexican's, but I don't agree with the way the Mexican immigration perform their job, and think that the US immigration should be toward the violators of the laws of immigration, as strict as the Mexican immigration laws.

In fact, if a non Mexican latinamerican is found illegally in Mexico, he will be put in jail, all his money will be stolen and after at least three months will be told he's gonna be deported but he have too [pay the cost of such deportation, meanwhile he will remain in jail until he receives moire money from his country to make such payment.
The Mexican government is responsible on not stopping the massive exodus of nationals to the for the Mexicans only known foreign country of the world

2007-02-10 11:07:18 · answer #3 · answered by QQ dri lu 4 · 5 3

perhaps we would desire to start the calls lower back,to make it a terrorist act to circulate into the USA illegally.How approximately putting up indications on the border announcing . previous this factor your are entering into the USA. stay firing selection .Survivors would be prosecuted, of path it would be in all languages.

2016-09-28 22:38:23 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I think this entire case is a complete sham. If this case were about two regular police officers shooting a fleeing suspect with van (never mind the contents of such van), this whole thing would have gone unnoticed and the bad guy put in his place. Instead, the bad guy has been given the royal carpet treatment to show up in court, immune from any prosecution, and help put two men who were merely doing their jobs like any other law enforcement agency. Evidence played no part in any of this case. It was a drug dealer's word against Ramos and Campean. OK, well, this is what our politicians want in order to pander to latino votes.

2007-02-10 10:39:37 · answer #5 · answered by speedmonkey350 1 · 7 5

I think the sentences were out of line for what they were accused of. As I understand it the issue was paperwork and false statements. In that case it was not a 'crime of violence' that the 10 year minimum sentencing rule even applied to, in my mind. The shooting wasn't a crime. The paperwork was, maybe, from what I hear.

I think it stinks.

However, I understand that Feinstein got the Judiciary Committee to order an investigation.

2007-02-10 13:10:29 · answer #6 · answered by DAR 7 · 1 5

our border patrol policy is a joke!! What I don't think is funny is the fact that our government is spitting in the face of the american people. We cry out for border reform and enforcement. They pretend to listen and send troops and more agents, but at the same time give them no power to protect them selves or even enforce the border in any way, and the rights of these aliens supercede the rights of citizens who are in a position of authority and supposed to protect us. our government needs a wake up call from its people! Our agents and national guard need our support and protection from prosecution by people who should not even have access to our legal system. They should only have access to the end of a rope!! I say anyone crossing the border should be shot on site.
PARDON OUR AGENTS AND GIVE THEM AND THE GAURD THE POWER TO ENFORCE THE BORDER NOW!!!
Just a pissed off american!

2007-02-10 10:43:34 · answer #7 · answered by Elvis 3 · 7 6

It's a tragic story. It absolutely pisses me off to know that our own government can choose an illegal alien drug smuggler over two law enforcement heroes.

2007-02-10 11:02:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6 3

This thing enrages me. 2 BP agents, who are of latino descent, probably children of immigrants, were protecting this country from scum, did nothing wrong, are now being victims in preelection democrat/liberal games.


Would you expect of other latino immigrants to assimilate into US, after this???.. or better to be a scumbag??.

2007-02-10 10:32:08 · answer #9 · answered by type2negative 4 · 6 3

In light of new details, I think they deserve a new trial. I originally thought they should be pardoned. I no longer think that is the case because they went to jail for obstruction, not for shooting a drug smuggler. I think it is reprehensible that the drug smuggler was given immunity. I also think the attorney suing the US on behalf of the drug smuggler is an opportunistic a hole who is selling his soul to the devil to make a buck.

2007-02-10 10:30:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 7

fedest.com, questions and answers