Border Patrol agents may have been charged with non-existent crimes - what do you think?

Question

Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are serving 11- and 12-year sentences respectively for shooting and wounding a Mexican national who was trying to escape after attempting to smuggle 743 pounds of marijuana across the Mexico-Texas border in February 2005.

Cybercast News Service obtained a copy of an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") legal brief filed by Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Virgil Goode (R-Va.), and Ted Poe (R-Texas) in the former agents' appeal before the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans.

They accuse the prosecution of "creating a purported criminal offense never enacted into law by Congress," and of charging Ramos and Compean with a "non-existent crime."

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2412

I can't believe that anyone would think that a drug smuggler wasn't armed while carrying that much weed.

So it was these Border Patrol officers against how many drug smugglers?

I once heard someone say that they need to go back to school to be able to shoot better. These brave men tried to stop these illegal aliens who were smuggling drugs. When the illegals wouldn't stop, they got shot in the sit down - the least likely area to cause permanent injuries. These brave men should have aimed a little higher and then there wouldn't be illegals to give false testimony.

Border Patrol are there to protect us against these criminals! They were doing their job.

Answer 1

I've been hearing about this case ever since it started.

Here's the rundown:

Ramos and Compean did violate protocol and should have been punished, perhaps with a reprimand or thirty days of jail time.

TEN YEARS of jail time is not punishment, it is political vengeance. The jurors DID NOT KNOW that they would go to jail for this long. If they did, R&C probably would have acquitted.

The Mexican drug smuggler was given complete immunity -- outrageous!!! And didn't he try to smuggle drugs AGAIN after he got off?

A family member of the drug smuggler had connections with somebody that worked in border security. This connection is how they did the legal manipulations to crack down on R&C.

The US congress is now acting to defund the imprisonment of R&C, meaning that the jails would have to let them go!

If R&C are not set free, no border guard will DARE go up against the Mexican drug mafias, since they know that the US government will actively work AGAINST THEM.

Answer 2

Johnnie Sutton that crooked sob has lied and forged court documents, to get what he wants. He fully supports illegals and our government is not help these guys out who did nothing wrong but stop a armed drug runner. Bush supports Johnnie Sutton which should tell you where bush stand on this tough issue. Our government does not have the balls to stand up to the Mexico's pressure which is responsible for a lot of drugs that are brought across the border. Our government is more worried about their political face then they are support their border patrol agents and get their back when low life scum traffic drugs and people across our borders. All the evidence that Johnnie Sutton showed in court was forged and was not the legal documents, the drug dealer was not shot in the back but on his as$ while he turned to pointed a gun at border patrol agents, this same drug dealer has been caught many times and each time has had a weapon on him and for them to say he did not have on this time is BS and something is not right. People need to get their facts straight.

Answer 3

"The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled it is a violation of someones Fourth Amendment rights to shoot them in the back while fleeing if you don't know who they are and/or if you don't know they have a weapon," said Kanof.
The smuggler was shot in the but.
Compean picked up his shell casings, but Ramos did not. He also did not follow agency procedure and report that he had fired his weapon. These two guys wanted to be heroes but there plan back fired when they couldn't catch the smuggler so they tried to Cover it up. We don't need trigger happy cowboys at the border, we need intelligent individuals that can fallow procedures and be held accountable for there actions.

Answer 4

It is hard to believe that they were convicted of a non-existent crime. It sounds more like typical legalize that is said by defense attorneys. I hope that I am wrong and they are set free because I am very angry that they were treated so harshly. It is as if they are scapegoats to reassure Mexico that we won't treat the enforcement of the border seriously.

Answer 5

Good. They brought in a filthy illegal drug dealer and gave him immunity to testify against them! How stupid do they think we are? I don't agree that any crime was committed, other than a lawful attempt to stop drug dealing illegals! They should have really hurt him instead of shooting him in the azz.

Answer 6

A number of big name liberal democrats in Congress have also jumped on accusing the prosecutor of basically being an idiot. They did some wrong but what has happened is ridiculous

Answer 7

Actually one of the biggest crimes they were charged with (Not filing a report) is actually not a crime at all. According to the Border Patrol manual, they are not supposed to take a report after an incident like that.

All goes to show that Johnnie Sutton is dirty and needs to go to prison. Hopefully he will soon.

Answer 8

Well, obviously the court believed that the statute had been enacted. So did the prosecutor.

And if even the defense attorney didn't try to assert that the law was non-existent, that tells you how far off in right field the amicus brief was.

Answer 9

Last time I checked (actually I never did check) if you commit a crime, like shooting someone and other illegal actions, you will go to jail or prison. Those 2 deserve everything they are getting.

Answer 10

In a sane society, those law officers would be out busting the law breakers, instead of in jail...and that multiple drug smuggler would be dead in a ditch somewhere.