Former United States Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean have been re-sentenced after partially successful appeals of their convictions. Ironically both received substantially the same sentences received after being convicted two years ago in the non-fatal shooting of Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, an admitted, and now convicted, drug smuggler. Ramos will spend 11 years and 1 day in federal prison. His former partner, Compean was re-sentenced to his original 12-year sentence, 10 years on a charge of using a weapon in the commission of a felony and another two for assault and other charges. There has been a national outcry at their convictions and the harsh federal inflexibility of their sentences. Prior to their arrests and convictions, both former agents worked the dangerous and desolate Mexican drug corridor. How did these two soldiers in the battle against Mexican drug lords and illegal immigration make the journey from defending our borders to defending and subsequently losing their freedom?
Approximately 2 1/2 years ago Compean and Ramos were on patrol in the barren Texas tundra southeast of El Paso. They shot at an illegal alien as he was fleeing back to the Mexican border. Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, a Mexican national was in the process of smuggling approximately a million dollars worth of marijuana into the U.S. Testimony showed that the agents fired 15 bullets at a the unarmed Davila who was fleeing on foot toward the border. He was hit once in the buttocks and survived. Compean and Ramos were convicted by a jury of violating the civil rights of Davila when they shot him and then tampering with evidence by picking up shell casings from the shooting. The ex-agents stated that deadly force was justified because Davila had a gun. No gun was ever found. In exchange for his testimony against the former agents, Davila was granted immunity from prosecution by the U.S. government with regards to his attempt to smuggle nearly 750 pounds of marijuana into the United States on the day he was shot
There is no dispute that Davila is a drug dealing scumbag. He was later convicted of drug smuggling in an unrelated prosecution. There is no dispute that he was smuggling drugs when shot. He was offered immunity on those charges in exchange for his testimony against the agents. Should Davila’s status as a drug smuggler and illegal alien have any bearing on the propriety of the agent’s actions?
I dispute that doing a dangerous public job and even being in a position of having to make tough split second decisions with less than perfect information puts law enforcement above the laws they are sworn to uphold. They are well trained in when they can and can not use deadly force. Our body of laws puts the general population at a higher standard when dealing with law enforcement. We in return get the expectation of safe discourse of mind and body when we interact with a law enforcement officer even in the commission of a crime. Part of that is the expectation that we will not be shot at simply because we flee, unarmed in fear of apprehension in committing a non-violent offense. This is not about drug smuggling, illegal immigration, or the patriotism of these agents. It is about their attempt to seriously injure/kill a person who did not present a deadly threat. Even more importantly, apart from any sympathy we have for two men doing a dangerous thankless job, it is about the attempt to cover-up their actions. Should these officers be pardoned by the outgoing President Bush or the incoming President Elect Obama? Nearly 400,000 people have signed a petition demanding a presidential pardon for the agents. There are several bills to pardon them pending in Congress. One lawmaker stated:
“The federal government was on the wrong side in this case. This drug dealer was not just bringing in a little bit of marijuana,” Poe said. “Our federal government goes to Mexico, finds this drug dealer, gives him immunity … they’re [Ramos and Compean] being punished basically, for doing what they’re supposed to do.”
I do not believe they should be pardoned. They lied to federal investigators. No free-passes for law enforcement cover-ups. End of story. This is worse than the crime itself. It impugns all of law enforcement and the justice system. Nothing that is said can ever be trusted. To pardon them would send the message that our law enforcement officers have carte-blanche to lie, cheat and steal to achieve a desired judicial result.
Should their sentences be commuted? The proper thing to do would be for either President Bush or President-elect Obama(when he gets in office) to communte the sentences to what they would get for the cover-up of the offense, and a concurrent time served sentence for the other convictions. That would leave them as convicted felons no longer able to hold any type of law enforcement positions. The cover-up mandates that they never again be allowed to wear a badge in furtherance of the public trust. That is the price of the high standard to which we hold those who wear badges and carry guns to protect us. There is a price for mistakes in the face of accountability , it sucks but unless you are two years old, it is the world we live in.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
November 19th, 2008 at 9:28 am
"Former United States Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Ignacio Ramos" they have the same name?
November 19th, 2008 at 9:46 am
appears to be a Facebook glitch.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Dude, you are so right on this one. I fear, however, that your post will stir the passions of those that can't separate the crime(s) committed by the border agents and the crimes and legal status of Mr. Alderete. You're going to get a bunch of the following: "Mexican illegals don't deserve the right to not be shot", "Compean and Ramos are heros and they are being treated worse that the illegal alien(s)", "Johnny Sutton's priorities are in the wrong place. He is unfairly targeting law enforcement agents."
Remember the Medellin-death-sentence post a few months ago? Many of your readers weren't able to separate the interesting legal points about the Supremacy Clause you were trying to raise from the nature of the disgusting crime committed.
This is the problem with the Compean case and I really credit Johnny Sutton's intellectual honest/bravery for sticking to his guns on this one. An ideal prosecutor is one that can weigh the legal issues objectively without being bullied by the 1-issue-drumbeaters on the radio and their misinformed listeners.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:53 am
One more thing…
A word of caution, however, about one of the arguments you make. Specifically I'm talking about "They lied to federal investigators. No free-passes for law enforcement cover-ups". American history is rife with examples of law enforcement cover-ups that have been given a pass by 50% of this country. Are we prepared to accept the "no free-passes for cover-ups" as a universal maxim or do we pick and choose when it suits us? The ones that come to mind are the Gulf of Tonkin cover-up, the Iran-Contra coverups, Henry Cisnero's cover-up scandal, Bill Clinton's lies about Lewinsky, The yellow cake uranium lies, the Scooter Libby cover up, the US Attorney hiring scandal cover up, etc. I'm not sure that empirically proven cover-ups are easy to forgive when it's your team that perpetrates them.
Anyway, good blog post. I always enjoy what you write.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:58 am
I was not saying it did not happen. I was saying I did not think it should
November 20th, 2008 at 3:18 am
Brian,
I had never really heard the whole story of these two agents before, despite hearing about the story many times in the supposed "fair media".
I never realized they had covered up their full involvement. I have to say I agree with your point-of-view on this one.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:45 am
Brian wrote: "Part of that is the expectation that we will not be shot at simply because we flee, unarmed in fear of apprehension in committing a non-violent offense." Since you seem so cocksure that the only wrong doing here was by the agents, I'm curious: What SHOULD should one expect when one runs from a felony crime scene Brian?
From the appellete decision there is obviously much more to this case that the public, your readership included, doesn't get to see and hear.
Manuel P.: nice try. Your sophmoric and arrogant attempt at reverse phsychology aside, there are two sets of facts here: what the shootee did and what the shooter did that led to the shooting. By choosing to ignore the circumstances surrounding the shootee's actions, you're suggesting that your porous, biased position should somehow make sense to the poor and misinformed among us. Proselytizing like a typical defense attorney, eh dude?
November 20th, 2008 at 10:54 am
What does anything you just said have to do with the fact that they obstructed justice by attempting to cover up what they did ?
November 20th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I agree with you. I didn't say it didn't happen either. (sorry for the double negative.) I'm just trying (inartfully) to make the point that humans have a hard time sticking to universal maxims.
November 21st, 2008 at 8:10 am
Dennis: You better be careful with explaining why you agree with Brian. You might come off sounding sophmoric and arrogant. (see Michael's pithy remarks above)
A summary of the case and the justifications for the agents' prosecution : http://tinyurl.com/ytkfe3
A site dedicated to the Compean-Ramos defense: http://ramos-compean.blogspot.com/
An interesting website for the critics that you might draw for sounding arrogant and sophmoric: http://www.susanjacoby.com/
November 21st, 2008 at 8:20 am
You misunderstand. I think Alderete got what he deserved. I'm trying to make a point(again, it appears I'm doing it clumsily) about judicial reasoning and ethical binds created when we draw hard lines in the sand. (i.e. no free passes for coverups).
If you think that Alderete's bad behavior warranted the bullet in the butt? No disagreement from me. If you think that the perp's bad behavior gave Compean and Ramos the license to cover-up evidence and lie about it? (assuming they, in fact, covered up and lied) Then I think your moral compass is a bit off-center and you wouldn't be a good candidate for a vacant bench or a prosecutor's job. (please tell me you're not a prosecutor)
I'm not a typical defense attorney. I'm a corporate lawyer taking interest in legal "Gordian Knots" for academic/intellectual curiosity reasons. Call it a hobby. You and I disagree. Relax. Take a deep breath. We can discuss this without name-calling and chest beating. Biased? Proselytizing? Reverse psychology? If you say so. Are you one of the poor misinformed? I don't know you.
November 21st, 2008 at 8:25 am
Dennis: You better be careful when explaining why you agree with Brian. You might come off sounding sophmoric and arrogant. (see Michael's comment above)
A summary of the case and the justifications for the agents' prosecution : http://tinyurl.com/ytkfe3
A
site dedicated to the Compean-Ramos defense: http://ramos-compean.blogspot.com/
An interesting website for the critics that you might draw for agreeing with Brian: http://www.susanjacoby.com/
November 26th, 2008 at 1:39 am
Do you have any idea how many websites I had to wade through to find one that isn't praising these two convicted felons as heroes? The rush to judgement against judgement is mind boggling! I would at least like to think that they talk that way because he's a drug smuggler(still doesn't justify it) and he didn't die. I 'd like to think that if he was shot in the back and killed just because he snuck over the border the reaction would be different.
I'd honestly like to think that.