Are prosecutors allowed to lie and misrepresent the facts? No, they are not but that is exactly what Debra Kanof did. She argued in pretrial motions that Aldrete Davila should be portrayed as an innocent hiker that mistakenly crossed the border and was set upon by two murderous rogue Border Patrol Agents that have absolutely no authority to enforce the law. The fact is, if this case had any merit the prosecutor would not have had to lie her ass off. Here are just some of most popular lies AUSA Debra Kanof told during the trial:
It is illegal for Border Patrol Agents to pursue fleeing suspects
Border Patrol Agents don't have title 21 authority.
— but the fact is the ONLY evidence against A-D in the “2nd smuggling event” is the statement of a known drug dealer caught with 5000 pounds of drugs, in a statement he gave trying to blame someone else for drugs being at his house.
Try reading the transcripts. Even the prosecutor Debra Kanof admitted in court before judge Cardone that Aldretre had smuggled another load. In fact much of the pretrail arguments were about whether or not to allow Aldrete's second load to be admissable in court.
Kanoff admitted that there was evidence that he was involved in a load, not that it was true. As they were not discussing the evidence, we have no idea what exactly she was referring to, but WND keeps publishing the “evidence” which seems to be the claims of Ortiz.
As to the other information about Ortiz, I simply don’t have the time to try to fact-check everything WND said about him, nor do I really care. So I’ll say that I simply have NO OPINION on whether Ortiz was actually caught several times or not, and reading it in WND doesn’t provide me ANY evidence I will accept without a 2nd source.
I’m not saying it’s true or it’s false, I’m saying that to me it’s simply idle speculation because I’ve only read about it from WND and WND has proven itself to be a poor source of fact.