Heck, in this thread you’ve still got people arguing that there’s no evidence Ramos SHOT the guy.
**********************************************
NEGATIVE Chucky ,,, didn’t say that ,, what I said was that we had no proof ,, Ramos shot at the perp but we have no direct evidence that he was hit at that time. All you’ve shown as evidence to the contrary is inuendo and presumptions by people at a distance from the perp. I haven’t seen the FBI bullet match “evidence” and based on the fact that there is a current FBI scandal over faked and false bullet matches presented as fact (the kind of match we have here where a tiny fragment is tested for “composition” of the metals in manufacturing ,, the WEAKEST kind of match possible) in hundreds of cases AND a prosecutor that tainted the case by suppressing evidence through unscrupulous maneuvers intended to hide the truth of the case I’m backing the Border Patrol.
Your exact words were: "It also needs to be noted that it has never been shown that he was shot by Campean and Ramos "
The trial testimony clearly "shows" that he was shot by Ramos. It doesn't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, but with no evidence presented at trial to counter the stipulation, it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
But your distinction is noted. I'm not sure it's a useful distinction, because most things are never "proven" under that definition, and that's not what is usually meant by "shown".
Your argument that the detailed ballistics test may have been faulty is an interesting one. I haven't seen anybody say it's part of the appeal. Given that Compean was convicted even though he didn't hit the guy, and received a longer sentence, it does not seem that actual injury was a deciding factor. I also don't know (having not seen the ballistics test, just as you said you hadn't seen it) that the test was of the variety that have been called into question.
I apologize for saying "no evidence", as that was clearly a stronger statement than your "never been shown".