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

Skip to comments.

Border Agents Who Shot Smuggler Denied Appeal (Ramos & Compean)
newsmax.com ^ | September 11, 2008 | staff

Posted on 09/12/2008 6:00:19 AM PDT by kellynla

EL PASO, Texas — Two former Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a drug smuggler and trying to cover it up have been denied a request for a new hearing.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans denied the request by Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean on Wednesday. The same court upheld the men's convictions in July.

No reason was given for the Wednesday's denial.

Ramos and Compean are each serving sentences of more than 10 years for shooting Osvaldo Aldrete Davila in the buttocks while he was fleeing from an abandoned marijuana load in 2005.

Aldrete was sentenced to 9 1/2 years in prison for his role in two seperate smuggling efforts later that same year.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: abadshoot; aliens; appeal; badshoot; borderpatrol; compean; dirtycops; immigrantlist; injustice; jackbootcrime; jackbooterslobby; johnnysutton; justice; openborderslobby; ramos; ramoscompean; travesty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 851-896 next last

1 posted on 09/12/2008 6:00:19 AM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kellynla

This is so disgusting.


2 posted on 09/12/2008 6:02:47 AM PDT by webrover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

This really pi**es me off. It is the main reason that I have lost all respect for Bush. Heck, if McCain had not picked Palin (finally, someone with balls), I’d have sat out this election. Should McCain get elected, I expect him to free these agents asap. If McCain even thinks about amnesty, it’s just about time for a revolt.


3 posted on 09/12/2008 6:03:02 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

No reason was given for the Wednesday's denial.

Why not? Black robes are beginning to look a lot like white sheets.

4 posted on 09/12/2008 6:03:53 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: webrover

Petition at grassfire.org
Also, freep President Bush

comments@whitehouse.gov
202-456-1111

These guys deserve full pardon


5 posted on 09/12/2008 6:04:32 AM PDT by mouse1 (McCain/Palin 08 Palin/Jindal 12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

This is a travesty of justice.


6 posted on 09/12/2008 6:05:42 AM PDT by alicewonders (Sarah Palin is the face of America's future.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders

What can we do? Call Trancedo? This is an atrocity... we are going go hang ourselves. I don’t know what has happened to this world.


7 posted on 09/12/2008 6:09:54 AM PDT by Blue Turtle (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All

Sounds like these judges are on the Mexican Drug Cartel payroll...

Doubt McCain will pardon the BP agents...he is as pro-illegal as Bush...

Only Chuck Baldwin has publicly stated that he will pardon Ignacio and Ramos


8 posted on 09/12/2008 6:11:22 AM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (Whats Palin's Stance on Illegal Alienism and Open Borders?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Why not? Black robes are beginning to look a lot like white sheets.

Oh, please.

Appeals courts rarely give reasons for why they will not review cases. That's not normal practice.

They almost never give reasons when its as econd appeal after the first appeal was rejected.

These two are guilty, period.

The more immigration reform advocates cling to these two losers, the more unhinged and less focused they become.

9 posted on 09/12/2008 6:11:59 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Once Senor McCain gets elected, you might as well throw away any chances of those 2 getting out.


10 posted on 09/12/2008 6:14:34 AM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Why not? Black robes are beginning to look a lot like white sheets.

Maybe they are racists, Ramos and Compean are hispanic after all.
11 posted on 09/12/2008 6:15:24 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Voting Conservative isn't for the faint of heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: max americana
Once Senor McCain gets elected, you might as well throw away any chances of those 2 getting out.

Hopefully Bush will pardon Ramos & Compean just before he leaves office.

12 posted on 09/12/2008 6:18:28 AM PDT by TYVets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

finally, someone with common sense on one of these threads....those two belong in jail


13 posted on 09/12/2008 6:21:22 AM PDT by joe fonebone (The Second Amendment is the Constitutions reset button)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Ramos and Compean = political prisoners.

Unacceptable doesn't even begin to cover this situation.

14 posted on 09/12/2008 6:21:47 AM PDT by AngryJawa (09/11/01 - Never forget. Never forgive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Outrageous.

Nifong has been removed from office. Same needs to be done to Sutton. IMHO, Sutton has many skeletons in his closet in addition to they horrific way he handled this case. For example for one professional directory, he refused to answer the question about his marital status. Made me wonder if his wife - if he has one - is involved in something controversial.

15 posted on 09/12/2008 6:22:16 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
These two are guilty, period.

Guilty of what? Trying to guard the border? Trusting their supervisor to file the correct report? Of not letting an international felon escape?

Which side are you on here? You haven't turned ACLU/La Raza moonbat on us have you?

16 posted on 09/12/2008 6:22:32 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
This whole case is a perfect example of an overzealous prosecutor who is using his position to advance his political agenda. It's a true miscarriage of justice and no one seems to car; however had these two raped and murdered a couple of women, molested a child, knocked off a convenience store or murdered a police officer; the libs would be all up in arms demanding justice.
17 posted on 09/12/2008 6:22:47 AM PDT by IMissPresidentReagan (I love the Obama and Biden Show- they're a "gaffe" a minute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCFRoadWarrior
Only Chuck Baldwin has publicly stated that he will pardon Ignacio and Ramos

Oh wow, I'm gonna vote for Chuck Baldwin now.

What is he running for?

18 posted on 09/12/2008 6:24:48 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: UCFRoadWarrior

It does appear as if the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals has been infiltrated. This is such a travesty. And so few care. They are more concerned with flip comments made by politicians and pundits than they are with this horrific miscarriage of justice.


19 posted on 09/12/2008 6:27:03 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IMissPresidentReagan

Darn those overzealous prosecutors when the law is on their side!


20 posted on 09/12/2008 6:27:27 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
“These two are guilty, period.

The more immigration reform advocates cling to these two losers, the more unhinged and less focused they become. “

Do you have no sympathy for them? I actually agree that they screwed up. I think it is really unfortunate that they got charged under that stupid firearms statue with the ten year mandatory minimum though. I do not think this is the type of conduct Congress intended to punish when they wrote that vague statute, and I think the prosecutors were jerks for even filing under it. This is all typical though. Prosecutors heap on the charges, stretch the laws as far as possible to add more charges, and then punish people who do not shut up and plead. I bet these two could have pled out on misdemeanor charges.

21 posted on 09/12/2008 6:27:30 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Maybe they are racists, Ramos and Compean are hispanic after all.

It was meant to convey the idea that judges have become tyrannical and despotic.

Maybe I should have said: "Black robes are beginning to look like brown shirts."

22 posted on 09/12/2008 6:29:08 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dante3
Sutton may have not answered a question about his marital status in some obscure directory, therefore Ramos and Compean are innocent. Absolutely brilliant.

Perhaps the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals should look into the issue.

23 posted on 09/12/2008 6:30:07 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Do we know the WHOLE story?

I am sure many of us want to read the trial transcript(s) and see for ourselves if the “guilty verdict is appropriate!


24 posted on 09/12/2008 6:31:10 AM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound (NOBAMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
These two are guilty, period.

Yep, guilty of protecting you. (if you are an American)

The more immigration reform advocates cling to these two losers, the more unhinged and less focused they become.

You've got it completely backwards as usual. We don't advocate reform. We advocate enforcing the law vis-a-vis immigration.

25 posted on 09/12/2008 6:31:19 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek; All
Does anyone know if there is a Web site regarding Johnny Sutton? I have found very little about his personal life. One way to discourage this kind of miscarriage of justice is to start looking into the private lives of those who commit these travesties. Are their spouses related to drug figures or have a history of drug abuse? Do they suddenly live beyond their means? Do they hang out with unsavory characters? Etc.
26 posted on 09/12/2008 6:31:48 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
If Ramos and Compean were ordinary policemen and did what they did to a white, American-born citizen there would be many people on this thread denouncing them as "jack booted thugs" and "fascist drug warriors."

But because these particular incompetent and criminal officers worked for the border patrol instead of the Shelbyville Township PD and because the drugrunner they tried to execute was an illegal, they are heroes to some.

27 posted on 09/12/2008 6:31:52 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

How does it smell way up there where you have your head?

Common sense? You two half-wits obviously have sub-standard components.


28 posted on 09/12/2008 6:32:58 AM PDT by catchem (NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE STUPIDITY OF THE AMERICAN VOTER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dante3
Does anyone know if there is a Web site regarding Johnny Sutton? I have found very little about his personal life. One way to discourage this kind of miscarriage of justice is to start looking into the private lives of those who commit these travesties.

All the other people who think as nobly and rationally as you do are busy trying to find dirt on Sarah Palin.

29 posted on 09/12/2008 6:33:17 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
I am sure many of us want to read the trial transcript(s) and see for ourselves if the “guilty verdict is appropriate!

If you haven't already, you're a little late to this game.

30 posted on 09/12/2008 6:35:06 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: IMissPresidentReagan

care; not car.


31 posted on 09/12/2008 6:37:24 AM PDT by IMissPresidentReagan (I love the Obama and Biden Show- they're a "gaffe" a minute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

appeals are normally over a flaw in the trial process and not a retrial

i’m afraid the best bet for these guys is a pardon or commutation


32 posted on 09/12/2008 6:37:25 AM PDT by wardaddy (Obama/Pol Pot 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catchem
How does it smell way up there where you have your head? Common sense? You two half-wits obviously have sub-standard components.

Thanks for the really intelligent, well-thought out post.

With individuals like yourself on their side, I'm sure these two crooks will be out of prison in no time.

33 posted on 09/12/2008 6:37:42 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
It was meant to convey the idea that judges have become tyrannical and despotic.

I got your point and really don't believe racism plays a part. After al the years we got called racist for supporting border control I just wanted to toos that out there to see what reaction would be.
34 posted on 09/12/2008 6:38:32 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Voting Conservative isn't for the faint of heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
“We advocate enforcing the law vis-a-vis immigration.”

You can't really enforce some laws and not others though. A jury of their peers found them guilty. I can accept that. What bothers me about this case is the stupid firearms law. The reason they got ten years is because they were convicted under a firearms statute for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. Obviously this was not the sort of conduct Congress intended to punish with this law, and ten years? They got more time then the drug smuggler who got caught twice. The only reason for this is because of that darned firearm statute with the ten year mandatory minimum. The jury found them guilty on the much lesser crime, and therefore they were found guilty of using a firearm in the commission of a crime. One thing we should take from this is that we need to really rethink long mandatory minimums because often they result in unintended and tragic consequences like we saw in this case. If not for the mandatory minimum the judge never would have given these guys anywhere close to ten years.

35 posted on 09/12/2008 6:41:35 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Yep, guilty of protecting you. (if you are an American)

Because of their incompetence, an illegal drugrunning criminal escaped prosecution.

They endangered me - the only people their actions were designed to protect were themselves. But that also backfired due to their incompetence.

You've got it completely backwards as usual. We don't advocate reform. We advocate enforcing the law vis-a-vis immigration.

The existing Democrat-crafted immigration laws are stupid and counterproductive. They reward sloth and punish industry, and they prioritize blood instead patriotism.

Those laws need to change.

If you advocate nothing more than enforcing the existing broken laws, you're not much help.

36 posted on 09/12/2008 6:42:23 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: IMissPresidentReagan
All I know about Sutton is that he's one of the least believable persons I've ever seen in an interview. And I tried to keep an open mind about it.

Might try to talk my neighbor out of joining the border patrol because out of all of the places where you need “we've got your back” that isn't one of them.

37 posted on 09/12/2008 6:46:18 AM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult (The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
More information from Edd Hendee here.
38 posted on 09/12/2008 6:46:44 AM PDT by Lord Basil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
“I am sure many of us want to read the trial transcript(s) and see for ourselves if the “guilty verdict is appropriate!”

You may very well be right. If we had have sat on that jury we may very well have convicted too. To me the travesty was the sentence. They got hammered with a ten year mandatory sentence for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. The judge had no choice but to give them this sentence because there was a mandatory minimum sentence, and of course the drug smuggler caught twice got less time because that's what the sentencing guidelines called for. If people learn anything from this I'd like to see them learn that long mandatory minimum sentences aren't always such a good thing, that we should have very few of these in our criminal statutes because so often we have cases where the mandatory minimum sentence is way too much when you look at the actual underlying conduct in a particular case.

39 posted on 09/12/2008 6:49:07 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Guilty of what?

Attempted murder.

Trying to guard the border?

Is taht what they were trying to do? Given their clowning it's kind of hard to tell.

Trusting their supervisor to file the correct report?

Heh heh.

First, both of them knew that it was their responsibility to file an incident report and furnish their supervisor with it. Not the other way around.

Second, tampering with evidence is even worse than not filing a report.

Aldrete-Davila didn't escape? He didn't get away? Ramos and Compean took him into custody?

Everyone with any familiarity with the case knows that Aldrete-Davila got away.

Which side are you on here?

I am on the side of having border enforcement personnel who do their jobs properly. Who don't let individuals like Aldrete-Davila escape and who do not obviously violate the Fourth Amendment, ensuring that a judge will let the criminal escape.

You haven't turned ACLU/La Raza moonbat on us have you?

Not at all. Championing Ramos and Compean is to champion the wrong way of doing things and to celebrate incompetence.

When you read the trial transcripts you have to wince at what a bad job Compean admits to doing.

40 posted on 09/12/2008 6:51:28 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

McCain should state that his very first act as President will be to issue a full pardon for these two men.

These men never should have been prosecuted.
At times the Bush Justice Department seems to function as a fully owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.


41 posted on 09/12/2008 6:54:14 AM PDT by Iron Munro (The Alaskan landscape is littered with the bodies of those who have crossed Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz
Do you have no sympathy for them? I actually agree that they screwed up.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for Compean. He is a contemptible toad.

I believe that Ramos actually thought he was defending a fellow officer - but instead of doing the right thing after he realized this was not the case, he stuck by Compean's lies rather than honor his oblighation to the public trust.

In my personal opinion, Ramos' sentence was too harsh and Compean's sentence was far too light.

42 posted on 09/12/2008 6:55:06 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: catchem
It did not take long for Sutton groupies and/or open border fanatics to show up with their spin. Their comments follow almost identical patterns of personal attacks against those expressing support for Ramos and Compean or various conservative views - as if they follow common talking points. They distort the meaning of a poster's comments. They accuse those who are pro BP agents or express certain conservatives views as being anti Palin, belonging on DU, supporting Obama, etc. Absurd.

I usually ignore these posters whose purpose appears to be to disrupt, distort, and trash conservatives on FR.

BTW, I expect Palin would pardon Ramos and Compean if she had the power - which she will not have as VP.

43 posted on 09/12/2008 6:59:07 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Dante3

How interesting. How do you reconcile your comment above with your comment #26? ROTFLMAO


44 posted on 09/12/2008 7:04:05 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz
“Do you have no sympathy for them? I actually agree that they screwed up. I think it is really unfortunate that they got charged under that stupid firearms statue with the ten year mandatory minimum though.”

Meanwhile swat teams can break into the wrong house, shoot innocent people, and not only do they not go to jail or lose their jobs, they don't even have to apologize to the victims family. I guess Mexican drug smugglers are more important than innocent Americans, at least to the Bush administration.

45 posted on 09/12/2008 7:11:35 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: monday

That’s not a very good analogy, unless you wish to argue that Ramos and Compean were shooting at the wrong guy.


46 posted on 09/12/2008 7:13:18 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

IMHO the correct procedure:

—Pardon.

—Reinstate with back pay. Relieve their former “superiors”.

—Promote ahead of peers. Consider them first when finding replacements for their former “superiors”.

—Make the actions for which they were charged Official Policy. I mean, shooting invaders on sight and giving plausible deniability ought to be POLICY.

—Oh yes...marksmanship training so the invaders don’t survive/escape.


47 posted on 09/12/2008 7:13:23 AM PDT by ExGeeEye (I'm Right Guard, here to prevent B. O.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
“In my personal opinion, Ramos’ sentence was too harsh and Compean’s sentence was far too light.”

How about the smuggler? Was his sentence too harsh or too light? I just don't agree with you about Compean. These guys were on the job. They were in a risky business where things can get really dangerous, where people carry guns and people do get shot and killed. He got excited and started popping off rounds and then he tried to hide his screw up. Yes, he should lose his job, maybe even get some time, but ten years with no parole? No way. People get a lot less for far worse conduct. It was too much time for both of these guys.

48 posted on 09/12/2008 7:20:49 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mouse1
Wasting your time with W. The only option now is the Supremes and I do not think they will reach down and pick it up. They could try a Habeas Corpus - oh wait W suspended that.
49 posted on 09/12/2008 7:21:50 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: monday
“Meanwhile swat teams can break into the wrong house, shoot innocent people, and not only do they not go to jail or lose their jobs, they don't even have to apologize to the victims family. I guess Mexican drug smugglers are more important than innocent Americans, at least to the Bush administration.”

It is rare that law enforcement get charged for their screw ups. When it happens they usually don't get hammered this hard. The problem was the firearms statute with the ten year mandatory minimum sentence. That's why these two got so much time. If not for the mandatory minimum sentence they'd probably be home today.

50 posted on 09/12/2008 7:23:33 AM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 851-896 next last

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