[TexasCajun]

I'm not happy with this prosecutor, but one also has to look at the jury that convicted them.

I would be interested to know more about them and why they believed an illegal immigrant drug smuggler over our border agents.

[samtheman]

I'm not happy with this prosecutor, but one also has to look at the jury that convicted them. I would be interested to know more about them and why they believed an illegal immigrant drug smuggler over our border agents.

Juries do get it wrong. Sutton did have the power of the presidency behind him. I'm not sure if or how that power actually manifested, but it was definitely there. Maybe it was a subtle check on the judge during the trial, making rulings favorable to the prosecutor. I don't know. I wasn't there. But the hand of The President was definitely in this prosecution and it quite possibly had its intended effect.

[Suzy Quzy]

I agree....what about the JURY? I would never want to go in front of a jury these days.

[A. Patriot]

I'm not happy with this prosecutor, but one also has to look at the jury that convicted them.

Juries today are usually made up of the ignorant underclass. They have no capacity for analytical thought because they are no longer taught that in school. They don't really understand the jury system, which includes the concept of innocent until proven guilty. And most of them just want to get done and go home. In this case, was the jury hostile to boarder patrol agents because of cultural biases?

With your best Cheech Marin accent: "If the prosecutor says they're guilty, hey man, who am I to argue. ha ha ha."

[Iwo Jima]

The trial was held in El Paso, which can barely be considered America. It is far closer to a city in Mexico. I doubt that anyone who supports border enforcement can get a fair trial in El Paso.