Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pardon Ramos and Compean now[Washington Times Editorial]
The Washington Times ^ | 17 Dec 2007 | Washington Times Editorial

Posted on 12/18/2007 5:54:38 AM PST by BGHater

Last week, the White House released a list of 29 pardons issued by President Bush. It included drug dealers, carjackers, a moonshiner, a man convicted of stealing government property and another for receiving kickbacks in military procurement contracts. Conspicuously missing were former U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean — who are currently serving 11- and 12-year federal prison sentences, respectively, for shooting a suspected drug smuggler in the buttocks on Feb, 17, 2005, about 30 miles southeast of El Paso. The border agents were convicted by a federal jury on charges that included assault with a dangerous weapon; lying about the incident; and violating the alleged smuggler's Fourth Amendment right to be protected against illegal search and seizure. The Ramos/Compean prosecutions are but one in a series of questionable ones undertaken against law enforcement personnel who used force against criminals or illegal aliens by U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, a longtime political ally of Mr. Bush.

The man the agents shot, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, fled to Mexico after refusing Ramos's and Compean's orders to stop and abandoning a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana. Mr. Aldrete-Davila was located in Mexico by an investigator with the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general and offered immunity for his testimony against the border agents. The suspected drug smuggler subsequently filed a $5 million suit against the federal government for violating his civil rights. "This case represents the worst kind of distorted and upside-down values," Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, said last year. "The drug smugglers are treated like innocent victims and the good guys protecting our borders are given the harshest possible punishment."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: border; compean; pardon; ramos

1 posted on 12/18/2007 5:54:41 AM PST by BGHater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Big bttt!!!!!


2 posted on 12/18/2007 6:02:03 AM PST by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter...President '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
it sends a message to every law-enforcement agent that if you shoot in the line of duty and cannot prove you were justified in using deadly force you will be prosecuted and receive about 10 years incarceration.

Small correction. It should read:

"it sends a message to every law-enforcement agent that if you counter the Bush agenda on unfettered illegal immigration, then you will be charged with something, no matter how ridiculous, and sent to prison for a long time.

3 posted on 12/18/2007 6:02:09 AM PST by Barney Gumble (A liberal is someone too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel - Robert Frost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
So nice to know that our Fourth Amendment covers drug running illegal aliens.

From the Fourth concerning border searches --''That searches made at the border, pursuant to the longstanding right of the sovereign to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into this country, are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border, should, by now, require no extended demonstration.'' Authorized by the First Congress, the customs search in these circumstances requires no warrant, no probable cause, not even the showing of some degree of suspicion that accompanies even investigatory stops. Moreover, while prolonged detention of travelers beyond the routine customs search and inspection must be justified by the Terry standard of reasonable suspicion having a particularized and objective basis, Terry protections as to the length and intrusiveness of the search do not apply.

4 posted on 12/18/2007 6:03:25 AM PST by mtbopfuyn (I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Barney Gumble

***”it sends a message to every law-enforcement agent that if you counter the Bush agenda on unfettered illegal immigration, then you will be charged with something, no matter how ridiculous, and sent to prison for a long time.***

Yours reads better.


5 posted on 12/18/2007 6:07:15 AM PST by rineaux (How dare you, how dare you question the Clinton's wrecked record.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

We’ve gotta disassociate ourselves from Jorge—or we’re toast.
This act (or inaction) is way beyond disgusting.


6 posted on 12/18/2007 6:07:48 AM PST by Flintlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Personally, I don’t think President’s should be pardoning anybody, under most circumstances.

And sorry, these two should not be ‘pardoned’.

A commutation of sentence, perhaps, but not a pardon. They’ve shown they should NEVER be allowed to carry a firearm and a badge again. The poor judgement they exercised cannot be denied.

But you can make the case the sentence was way to harsh given the circumstances.


7 posted on 12/18/2007 6:11:25 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
Are you referring to them in a Time of War or during a normal time period?

Quite frankly, the BP should have ‘sentry’ powers during the WOT and should be able to fire or shoot at anytime.

8 posted on 12/18/2007 6:14:02 AM PST by BGHater (If Guns Cause Crime Then Matches Cause Arson?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

I’m noting we as a society can’t have LEO’s of any stripe, under any conditions that existed when this happened, fire off rounds and then try to cover it up.

Thats unbelievably poor judgement. As such, they can’t be allowed to reenter their profession, which would be possible if they were pardoned.

I don’t want LEO’s that think the way they do, in short.


9 posted on 12/18/2007 6:17:42 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
However poor Ramos and Campeon’s judgment may be, it absolutely pales and dissolves in the face of the judgment of Johnny Sutton and the gov’t.

President Bush should pardon them TODAY. RIGHT NOW.

10 posted on 12/18/2007 6:29:50 AM PST by ishabibble (ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

These two were featured on Americas Most Wanted in a segment that completely ripped the Federal Prosecutor. As big a fan as I am of John Walsh, I still couldn’t believe it was so absolutely one-sided in favor of the BP agents.


11 posted on 12/18/2007 6:32:52 AM PST by samson1097
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ishabibble

Nope, sorry.

If you have a problem with Johnny Sutton, prosecute/remove Johnny Sutton.

Its not an ‘either/or’ thing. To suggest it is ignores our judicial system completely. You do see that, right?


12 posted on 12/18/2007 6:38:22 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
No, sorry, I don’t. The “victim” in this case was not even an American citizen, and he was treated like royalty by Sutton and the prosecution team. Now he himself is in prison for...the exact same crime that Ramos and Campeon tried to stop. The case stunk to high heaven from the start, and ruining the lives of these two men was unnecessary. It should have never gone into a courtroom.
13 posted on 12/18/2007 6:43:36 AM PST by ishabibble (ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ishabibble

You bring up things irrelevant to the case against these two.

The ‘victim’ is irrelevant.

They fired off rounds, and then tried to cover it up. Period.

We cannot allow LEO’s to do this. Period. for the obvious reason.


14 posted on 12/18/2007 6:51:18 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
They fired off rounds, and then tried to cover it up. Period.

That's an administrative infraction, not cause for a sentence longer than the average carjacker or rapist.

15 posted on 12/18/2007 7:35:10 AM PST by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona

‘That’s an administrative infraction,’

Ah, no. Its a criminal act, one that involved ‘conspiracy’.

’ not cause for a sentence longer than the average carjacker or rapist.’

I tink the sentence was too harsh. but I don’t have any problem with the verdict.


16 posted on 12/18/2007 7:37:39 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Badeye; BlazingArizona
‘That’s an administrative infraction,’

Ah, no. Its a criminal act, one that involved ‘conspiracy’.

Agreed. The shooting itself might have been an administrative infraction, but the coverup was not. Had they come clean right away instead of trying to hide their actions, the situation would be different.

Cops who lie and falsify reports are crooked, cannot be tolerated and can't be trusted with the authority of law. That the "victim" is a scumbag has nothing to do with it - cops who'll lie about a bad guy will also lie about an innocent man.

17 posted on 12/18/2007 7:50:06 AM PST by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: highball

‘Cops who lie and falsify reports are crooked, cannot be tolerated and can’t be trusted with the authority of law. That the “victim” is a scumbag has nothing to do with it - cops who’ll lie about a bad guy will also lie about an innocent man.’

Bingo.


18 posted on 12/18/2007 7:52:16 AM PST by Badeye (No thanks, Huck, I'm not whitewashing the fence for you this election cycle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
“That’s an administrative infraction, not cause for a sentence longer than the average carjacker or rapist.”

It’s not an administrative infraction if they shoot an unarmed fleeing suspect, as the jury decided. Compean signed a statement he wrote himself saying he told another agent at the station that he thought Ramos had hit the guy. So all this “they didn’t know they shot someone” is hooey and just another lie in the cover up.

Another constant proclamation from R&C supporters is that R&C received a longer sentence than murderers, rapists and carjackers. That may be true but it is immaterial. First, this was a federal crime in federal court subject to federal laws, one of which was the mandatory ten for using a gun during the commission of a crime. You are comparing apples to oranges when you put this crime next to those handled by local cities and states, who do not have mandatory sentencing.

If you want to compare sentencing, do some research on the sentences of those convicted in federal court for the same crimes on which R&C were convicted.

The last thing I’d like to point out is that the Judge, whom R&C supporters constantly attack and condemn, did back flips to reduce the sentence of R&C to the minimum she could. Taking away the 10 year mandatory, she sentenced them to one and two years respectively for all the other counts on which they were convicted, including assault, destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice.

Notice that all this grandstanding and demagoguery that is being exhibited by politicians calling for a pardon has not been accompanied by legislation to correct what they claim to be a miscarriage of justice, the 10 year mandatory being applied to LEO’s. In other words, a cop accused today of the same crime is STILL going to be subject to that 10 years in prison.

One would think if they were that outraged by what happened they would immediately work to fix that. But they haven’t, preferring to make grandiose pronouncements about righting the wrong visited on R&C...but doing nothing to keep other LEO’s from suffering the same fate.

Makes one think.

19 posted on 12/18/2007 10:04:39 AM PST by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Remember GWB is said to be “loyal” to his “friends”. So Johnny Sutton can block such pardons. In fact, the pardons were never even considered by the stubborn GWB.


20 posted on 12/18/2007 10:37:38 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

Even if all you wrote is exact, the punishment has already been sufficient, and the two must start new careers if the liberals ever let them out.


21 posted on 12/18/2007 10:38:50 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Even if all you wrote is exact, the punishment has already been sufficient, and the two must start new careers if the liberals ever let them out.

Not if they're pardoned - a pardon would let these crooked cops back into law enforcement.

How can the punishment be "sufficient" if the judge threw out the mandatory sentence in favor of one 1/5 as long?

Are mandatory sentences good enough for other crooks but not these two? If you're for removing all mandatory sentences, you could perhaps make that case. Are you?

22 posted on 12/19/2007 11:02:57 AM PST by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson