Good luck. I salute your diligent efforts in this matter. The innocence of the border thugs is an article of faith amongst the believers here. Arguing fact probably puts you at a disadvantage.
Charles isn’t citing facts. He’s arguing about what he thinks other people believe. The facts are in the trial transcripts and they unequivocally demonstrate Ramos and Compean were tried by an unethical and corrupt prosecution team.
Charles certainly has done some yeoman work in trying to keep this case in the realm of the rational.
Trouble is, it ain't rational. While I find Compeán and Ramos somewhat less than ideal as heroes, about as credible as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, I think Johnny Sutton about as believable as that late other Johnny. Cochran that is.
Every fact argued here is in real dispute. Thus, the facts are not really facts. A most smelly affair. Compeán and Ramos? Guilty. A Johnny Sutton jury found them so. Just as a Johnny Cochran jury found OJS Not Guilty.
The difference? OJS was ''not guilty'' when he walked. R&C will still be ''guilty'' when they walk. And walk they will. Both cases a slap in the face of the system.