PDA

View Full Version : Ex Border Patrol agent beaten in prison



FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 05:48 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-06-agents-convicted_x.htm

I posted an article a few weeks ago about two border patrol agents sentenced to 10 years in prison for shooting a border jumper from Mexico in the rear. The guy was a DRUG SMUGGLER with 800lbs of marijuana on him.

Not only did they grant the drug smuggler immunity from US prosection, but they wanted him to testify against the agents. He did, and they were found guilty.

Well, one of them was beaten in prison recently, probably by a group of border jumpers that we are paying to house in our prisons.

George DUBYA could have pardoned the guys and let them remain free while the trial was appealed but he didn't because he's a moron.

We failed these two guys in every way possible.

migt8
02-07-2007, 05:51 AM
This is why we shouldnt stereotype all prisoners as bad people who should be executed.

There are so many political prisoners in prison over bull**** thought crimes.

efini84
02-07-2007, 05:59 AM
karma's a bitch


i'm amazed at the sheer amount of half-truths and outright lies the media has mouthed off with in this case.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/2007/Compean_Ramos_factsheet1.pdf

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:01 AM
karma's a bitch


i'm amazed at the sheer amount of half-truths and outright lies the media has mouthed off with in this case.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/2007/Compean_Ramos_factsheet1.pdf
I don't care if he was unarmed. If a BORDER JUMPER comes into this country smuggling drugs he should be shot on sight. Period. End of conversation.

AdonisSMU
02-07-2007, 06:02 AM
They are using these border patrol agents to push an agenda. I don't see democrats and liberals speaking out when people are killed as a result of drug trafficing from illegal immigrants.

migt8
02-07-2007, 06:09 AM
I don't care if he was unarmed. If a BORDER JUMPER comes into this country smuggling drugs he should be shot on sight. Period. End of conversation.

Even if he has no drugs on him IMO they should be allowed to shoot him.

joelz54_99
02-07-2007, 06:14 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-06-agents-convicted_x.htm

I posted an article a few weeks ago about two border patrol agents sentenced to 10 years in prison for shooting a border jumper from Mexico in the rear. The guy was a DRUG SMUGGLER with 800lbs of marijuana on him.

Not only did they grant the drug smuggler immunity from US prosection, but they wanted him to testify against the agents. He did, and they were found guilty.

Well, one of them was beaten in prison recently, probably by a group of border jumpers that we are paying to house in our prisons.

George DUBYA could have pardoned the guys and let them remain free while the trial was appealed but he didn't because he's a moron.

We failed these two guys in every way possible.

Try to talk to someone in the law enforcement area so you can gain some knowledge. Shooting someone is always the last option and should only be done if you are threaten. You need to look at all wrongs equally. You post is not valid.

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:15 AM
I don't care if he was unarmed. If a BORDER JUMPER comes into this country smuggling drugs he should be shot on sight. Period. End of conversation.fyi the agents had no idea at the time of the shooting that he was smuggling drugs.

15 rounds fired at an unarmed man and then trying to cover it up = federal pound me in the ass prison

i feel no pity for these men.

Geno
02-07-2007, 06:21 AM
Strong hatred.

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:23 AM
read it:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTQ4OWJjZTNmODMwNzhlMzA2MzZhYzJmYWM2NjBkYzI=

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:26 AM
Strong hatred.
who?

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:27 AM
Try to talk to someone in the law enforcement area so you can gain some knowledge. Shooting someone is always the last option and should only be done if you are threaten. You need to look at all wrongs equally. You post is not valid.
Well yeah, I guess they should have just let him walk right into the country freely. What's one more illegal alien here, right?

How easy would it be for some al-Queda terrorists to shave their bears and sneak over the border from Mexico in order to carry out some sort of attack or setup shop here and wait for the opportunity? You fail to see the big picture. We need much tigher borders here.

Geno
02-07-2007, 06:27 AM
I wonder how many unnarmed people these guys have killed.

They had the audacity to attempt to smack a man who is surrendering with the butt of a shotgun, shoot at him 15 times as he ran away (in front of other officers) and then leave him when they finally did hit him.

This is not conduct we should be tolerating in our LEO's. They are where they deserve to be and are there because of their own actions.

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:29 AM
Well yeah, I guess they should have just let him walk right into the country freely. What's one more illegal alien here, right?wait, so the 2 choices in your eyes are
a) shoot the mother****er on sight, without knowing who he is, what he's doing, or what he may be transporting

b) let the bastard walk right in?


surely you're not that stupid?

Geno
02-07-2007, 06:30 AM
Well yeah, I guess they should have just let him walk right into the country freely. What's one more illegal alien here, right?

Nope - they should have apprehended him when he tried to surrender and then they would have been able to charge him with trafficking (drug laws are BS but that's not really the point here). You really haven't payed attention to anything but the bull**** newspaper article about these guys have you?

Try looking into the testimony of the other agents at the scene.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:31 AM
wait, so the 2 choices in your eyes are
a) shoot the mother****er on sight, without knowing who he is, what he's doing, or what he may be transporting

b) let the bastard walk right in?


surely you're not that stupid?
I say try to capture them. If they run, shoot them.

I just think we need to seal these borders. I am all for LEGAL immigration, but that doesn't happen to often from the folks in Mexico now does it?

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:35 AM
read it:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTQ4OWJjZTNmODMwNzhlMzA2MzZhYzJmYWM2NjBkYzI=
since no one will actually read it i'll post some highlights:

"The sordid details that should condemn these corrupt agents — agents who make the jobs of honest law-enforcement officers galactically harder both in the field and in the courtroom — have been obscured by layers of hyperbole. Hyperbole by which they’ve ludicrously been portrayed as “heroes.” Truth be damned, they have somehow managed to make themselves the rallying cry for Americans enraged by their government’s conscious avoidance — indeed, its active facilitation — of exploding illegal immigration and all its consequent social maladies. "

"One such dope-smuggler, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, is at the center of the storm around the two mythologized agents. The propaganda version holds that Aldrete-Davila got off scot-free, while our brave “heroes,” agents Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio Ramos, are serving heavy-duty jail-time for just doing their jobs.

That's just not the truth."

"The rogue duo had two easy opportunities to arrest Aldrete-Davila: First, when he attempted to surrender and Compean decided it would be better to smash him with the butt of a shotgun than to put cuffs on him, as it was his duty to do; and then, when the “heroes,” having felled the unarmed, fleeing suspect with a bullet fired into his buttocks, decided to leave him there so they could tend to the more important business of covering up the shooting."


"The preponderance of the evidence established that Aldrete-Davila was unarmed. Besides Compean and Ramos, there were several other agents on the scene. None of them believed Aldrete-Davila posed a threat to their safety; none, other than the two defendants drew their weapons; and Compean and Ramos neither took cover nor alerted their fellow agents to do so.

More to the point, Compean admitted to investigators early on that the smuggler had raised his hands, palms open, in an attempt to surrender. This jibed not only with Aldrete-Davila’s account but with that of another Border Patrol agent. Compean opted not to take surrender, not to place the smuggler under arrest so he could be prosecuted.

On that score, for those over-heatedly analogizing the border to a battlefield, it is worth noting that even under the law of war, quarter must be given when it is sought. Compean, to the contrary, tried to strike Aldrete-Davila with the butt of his shotgun. But it turns out the agent was as hapless as he was malevolent. In the assault, he succeeded only in losing his own balance. The smuggler, naturally, took off again, whereupon Compean unleashed an incompetent fuselage — missing Aldrete-Davila with all fourteen shots.


It was only after the surrender attempt that Ramos opened fire as the unarmed smuggler neared the border. Defending his decision to bring the case, U.S. attorney Sutton later explained: “Border Patrol training allows for the use of deadly force when an agent reasonably fears imminent bodily injury or death. An agent is not permitted to shoot an unarmed suspect who is running away.” The fact that Aldrete-Davila was a drug-dealer — something the agents may have suspected but had not yet confirmed at the time they were shooting at him — did not justify the responsive use of potentially deadly force under standard law-enforcement rules of engagement. "

"Instead of arresting the wounded smuggler, they put their guns away and left him behind. But not before trying to conceal the improper discharge of their firearms. Compean picked up and hid his shell-casings rather than leaving the scene intact for investigators. Both agents filed false reports, failing to record the firing of their weapons though they were well aware of regulations requiring that they do so. Because the “heroes” put covering their tracks ahead of doing their duty, Aldrete-Davila was eventually able to limp off to a waiting car and escape into Mexico."

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:37 AM
I say try to capture them. If they run, shoot them.

I just think we need to seal these borders. I am all for LEGAL immigration, but that doesn't happen to often from the folks in Mexico now does it?so just to be clear, this isn't about agents shooting a drug smuggler. this is about agents shooting illegals, which evidently you are all for.

correct?

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:38 AM
so just to be clear, this isn't about agents shooting a drug smuggler. this is about agents shooting illegals, which evidently you are all for.

correct?
If they are spotted by a border agent, asked to surrender, and they DO NOT, then yes, I am for shooting them. What is wrong with that?

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:41 AM
If they are spotted by a border agent, asked to surrender, and they DO NOT, then yes, I am for shooting them. What is wrong with that?

thanks for the clarification. just wanted to confirm it.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:43 AM
thanks for the clarification. just wanted to confirm it.
Care to tell me what's wrong with that?

Also offer your solution as to what to do if they flee. Then I will consider it.

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:48 AM
Care to tell me what's wrong with that?

Also offer your solution as to what to do if they flee. Then I will consider it.by compean's own mouth, the drug smuggler was unarmed and tried to surrender; which is just about when he was shot in the ass.


can you tell me what's wrong with that?

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:49 AM
by compean's own mouth, the drug smuggler was unarmed and tried to surrender; which is just about when he was shot in the ass.


can you tell me what's wrong with that?
I will tell you what's wrong with that whenever you answer my question.

You are dodging it because you have no alternative.

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:54 AM
I will tell you what's wrong with that whenever you answer my question.

You are dodging it because you have no alternative.you said a) arrest them or if they don't surrrender b) shoot them.

the drug smuggler was unarmed and tried to surrender but was shot anyway, yet you see absolutely nothing wrong with that?


i'll humor you though: anyone crossing the border should be treated the same way as a suspected criminal on the streets of nyc, la, chicago, or hickville tn. if he's armed and won't relinquish his weapon, shoot the ****er. if he's unarmed and won't surrender, call in backup (perhaps a friendly german shepherd) and apprehend his ass. you lose your privilege of being an officer of the law when you shoot an unarmed man that's trying to surrender.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 06:56 AM
you said a) arrest them or if they don't surrrender b) shoot them.

the drug smuggler was unarmed and tried to surrender but was shot anyway, yet you see absolutely nothing wrong with that?


i'll humor you though: anyone crossing the border should be treated the same way as a suspected criminal on the streets of nyc, la, chicago, or hickville tn. if he's armed and won't relinquish his weapon, shoot the ****er. if he's unarmed and won't surrender, call in backup (perhaps a friendly german shepherd) and apprehend his ass. you lose your privilege of being an officer of the law when you shoot an unarmed man that's trying to surrender.
Well as long as everyone has a German shephard with them that might work.

If not, what if backup doesn't find him?

efini84
02-07-2007, 06:59 AM
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:00 AM
Well as long as everyone has a German shephard with them that might work.

If not, what if backup doesn't find him?i humored you, now you humor me

answer my question

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:01 AM
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Does that count towards someone who isn't a citizen of this country trying to come here illegally?

I can see you are all for wide open borders. Lets just let everyone in, Al-Queda and all.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:02 AM
i humored you, now you humor me

answer my question
What's wrong with that is that it's wrong since he had tried to surrender.

Now I still say they should be allowed to remain free while the case is being appealed.

RIP_Quorthon
02-07-2007, 07:02 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-06-agents-convicted_x.htm

I posted an article a few weeks ago about two border patrol agents sentenced to 10 years in prison for shooting a border jumper from Mexico in the rear. The guy was a DRUG SMUGGLER with 800lbs of marijuana on him.

Not only did they grant the drug smuggler immunity from US prosection, but they wanted him to testify against the agents. He did, and they were found guilty.

Well, one of them was beaten in prison recently, probably by a group of border jumpers that we are paying to house in our prisons.

George DUBYA could have pardoned the guys and let them remain free while the trial was appealed but he didn't because he's a moron.

We failed these two guys in every way possible.

Holy ****. If these guys shot the fella in the ass and he was detained, you'd blame Bush for having the US border Mexico.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:04 AM
Holy ****. If these guys shot the fella in the ass and he was detained, you'd blame Bush for having the US border Mexico.
I voted for Bush. However I have come to realize that his border policy is a JOKE.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:10 AM
Does that count towards someone who isn't a citizen of this country trying to come here illegally?don't ask me. ask the supreme court.

i'll give you a hint. the answer is an "e" sandwiched between a "y" and an "s" and no it's not "sey".


I can see you are all for wide open borders. Lets just let everyone in, Al-Queda and all.hey, plus one for you for putting words in my mouth. nicely done.

so in your mind, not wishing for the killing of unarmed people is equivalent to wanting open borders? awesome!

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:11 AM
Now I still say they should be allowed to remain free while the case is being appealed.yeah, you and every other convicted criminal in this country feels the same way.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:12 AM
However I have come to realize that his border policy is a JOKE.well holy **** on a stick. we agree on something.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:14 AM
Well this debate is winding down it looks like. Your only alternative to my suggestion of shooting those who flee was "put a german shepherd on them"

Illegal Aliens have no rights in this country, or at least should have none. I am still for shooting them if they run.

drstrangepimp
02-07-2007, 07:17 AM
Try to talk to someone in the law enforcement area so you can gain some knowledge. Shooting someone is always the last option and should only be done if you are threaten. You need to look at all wrongs equally. You post is not valid.

I look at it differently. Foreign invader, shot on sight. Too expensive, not worth it to detain and interview. They'll just come back and waste our time again.

As long as you warn them they will be shot it's fair warning. And yes, those signs can be in Spanish :)

Besides LE shoots people in the back all the time. Why should it be only American citizens who have to worry about getting shot in the back?

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:17 AM
Well this debate is winding down it looks like. Your only alternative to my suggestion of shooting those who flee was "put a german shepherd on them"fa·ce·tious /fəˈsiʃəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fuh-see-shuhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.
2. amusing; humorous.
3. lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential, amusing, or frivolous: a facetious person.



Illegal Aliens have no rights in this country, actually they do. pay more attention in social studies next time.


or at least should have none. then bring it up to congress and the supreme court.


I am still for shooting them if they run.yes, we're well aware you want unarmed people killed; no need to repeat.

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:25 AM
fa·ce·tious /fəˈsiʃəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fuh-see-shuhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.
2. amusing; humorous.
3. lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential, amusing, or frivolous: a facetious person.


actually they do. pay more attention in social studies next time.

then bring it up to congress and the supreme court.

yes, we're well aware you want unarmed people killed; no need to repeat.
It's nice to see you liberals so concerned for the little innocent border jumpers rights, but don't care when they come here and get involved with gangs/other crime and kill cops/innocent people

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:32 AM
It's nice to see you liberals so concerned for the little innocent border jumpers rights, but don't care when they come here and get involved with gangs/other crime and kill cops/innocent people
do you mind if i print this post out and frame it on the wall? see, it's the first time in my entire life that i've been called a liberal and this moment is well, special. no one will believe it if i don't have proof of it. so do you mind?

geno called it: "strong hatred". your qualm is not with the fact that these guys were imprisoned, it's with the fact that shooting illegals on sight isn't lawful.

i'm all for a big ass wall on the border; i'm all for making it hard as **** to get in this country; and i'm all for sending them back from whence they came after they're apprehended not housing them in US prisons using taxpayer dollars.....but wait, i'm a liberal right.


liberal lol. you made my day man, kudos.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:33 AM
great thread A+++++ will read again

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:35 AM
great thread A+++++ will read again
Well we've been posting back and forth for an hour or so so I believe it was worth something :)

\I agree with your above post. We just differ in the shooting part of this I guess.

And I don't care if Geno says Strong hatred.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:48 AM
\I agree with your above post. We just differ in the shooting part of this I guess.do we? by your own words: "What's wrong with that is that it's wrong since he had tried to surrender."

so which is it: was getting shot in the ass while surrendering right or wrong?

FSUFan4
02-07-2007, 07:49 AM
do we? by your own words: "What's wrong with that is that it's wrong since he had tried to surrender."

so which is it: was getting shot in the ass while surrendering right or wrong?
Well he was running at the time :)

But if he tried to surrender they should have just apprehended him.


But I'm saying we disagree in that I think you should be able to shoot them if they flee and you do not.

efini84
02-07-2007, 07:55 AM
Well he was running at the time :)ntlry :)

"Compean admitted to investigators early on that the smuggler had raised his hands, palms open, in an attempt to surrender. This jibed not only with Aldrete-Davila’s account but with that of another Border Patrol agent. "


But if he tried to surrender they should have just apprehended him.well if they were doing their jobs, they would have but:
"The rogue duo had two easy opportunities to arrest Aldrete-Davila: First, when he attempted to surrender and Compean decided it would be better to smash him with the butt of a shotgun than to put cuffs on him, as it was his duty to do; and then, when the “heroes,” having felled the unarmed, fleeing suspect with a bullet fired into his buttocks, decided to leave him there so they could tend to the more important business of covering up the shooting."

ERCVGII
02-07-2007, 08:09 AM
Even if he has no drugs on him IMO they should be allowed to shoot him.

I think they should try tranquilizers; no bullets.

xer0xed
02-07-2007, 04:18 PM
Does that count towards someone who isn't a citizen of this country trying to come here illegally?

I can see you are all for wide open borders. Lets just let everyone in, Al-Queda and all.

Counts for everyone as an inalienable right, granted by the Creator and not the government.

But, I didn't know the illegal attempted to surrender. That changes my view on this case significantly.

efini84
02-07-2007, 04:20 PM
But, I didn't know the illegal attempted to surrender. most people didn't know that. the media paints the picture of an illegal brandishing weapons and being a serious threat to our heroic border patrol agents that protected this country. it's one of the most uniformly biased cases i've ever seen in the news media....

974g63awd
02-07-2007, 04:34 PM
most people didn't know that. the media paints the picture of an illegal brandishing weapons and being a serious threat to our heroic border patrol agents that protected this country. it's one of the most uniformly biased cases i've ever seen in the news media....

EXACTLY. And I love how some people here will accuse you of being pro-illegal immigration just because you do not agree with what this poor excuse for a border agent did. And then there are those idiots who agree with our millitary shooting all illegals.