SENATE TO EXAMINE BORDER GUARDS' CASE
Bill Haymin
July 16, 2007
By Phillis Schlafly, eagle@eagleforum.org
Urge your Senators to Support a Presidential Pardon for Ramos and Compean!
In light of his recent commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence, not to mention his pardoning of five drug dealers this past Christmas, President Bush certainly should have no objection to extending the same courtesy to U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. The timing couldn’t be more perfect for the U.S. Senate to hold a hearing to examine the events that led to the unjust prosecution of the two border guards and to recommend a presidential pardon.
Ramos and Compean, who are currently serving 11- and 12-year prison sentences, were guarding the Mexican border near El Paso, TX on February 17, 2005 when they intercepted a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana and attempted to stop the illegal drug-smuggler from crossing the border. Although they successfully prevented the man from crossing into the U.S., they were convicted for allegedly shooting one bullet into the buttocks of the drug-smuggler and for failing to report the discharge of their firearms—acts which call only for an administrative reprimand!
Despite requests for a congressional pardon in H.R. 563, which currently has 100 cosponsors, and at least 160,000 petitions and 15,000 faxes from U.S. citizens to the U.S. Department of Justice and the White House, the Bush Administration continues to maintain that the border guards received a fair trial, even though the facts of the case all point to the contrary. To learn all the details surrounding this case, be sure to read Phyllis’ columns:
We Need Compassion for Our Border Guards
Let’s Prosecute Drug Smugglers, Not Border Guards
Open Letter To President Bush
On Tuesday, July 17th, at 10am in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary will hold a hearing to “Examine the Prosecution of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.”
Take Action
Call your Senators’ offices and let them know that you expect them to support a presidential pardon for our border agents, Ramos and Compean!
Call Your Senator Today!
Capitol Switchboard: (202)-224-3121
We Need Compassion For Our Border Guards
by Phyllis Schlafly
January 3, 2007
President George W. Bush pardoned 16 criminals including five drug dealers at Christmastime, but so far has refused to pardon the two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were trying to defend Americans against drug smugglers. It makes us wonder which side the self-proclaimed "compassionate" President is on.
Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were guarding the Mexican border near El Paso on February 17, 2005 when they intercepted a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana. For what happened next, they were convicted and sentenced under a statute that was designed to impose heavy punishment on criminal drug smugglers caught in the commission of a crime.
The two agents are scheduled to start 11- and 12-year prison terms, respectively, on January 17, for the crime of putting one bullet in the buttocks of the admitted drug smuggler, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, and failing to report the discharge of their firearms. The non-fatal bullet didn't stop the smuggler from running to escape in a van waiting for him on the Mexican side of the border.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher called the two agents heroes. "Because of their actions, more than a million dollars in illegal drugs were stopped from being sold to our children. Bringing felony charges against them is a travesty of justice beyond description."
The White House and the U.S. Department of Justice are stonewalling requests for a presidential pardon from 55 Members of Congress and U.S. citizens who have sent at least 160,000 petitions and 15,000 faxes. When the Bush Administration deigns to respond at all, the official line is that the Border Patrol agents got a fair trial.
But that's not true; they didn't get a fair trial. They were convicted because the Justice Department sent investigators into Mexico, tracked down the drug smuggler, and gave him immunity from all prosecution for his drug smuggling crimes if he would please come back and testify against Ramos and Compean.
It was massively unfair to give immunity to an illegal alien narcotics trafficker while destroying the lives and families of two Border Patrol agents who risked their lives to stop him. Ramos and Compean were convicted mainly on the testimony of the immunity-sheltered drug smuggler, whose integrity should have been called into question, but Ramos and Compean were forbidden to do that during the trial.
The prosecutor even tried to get Ramos and Compean convicted of attempted murder! The jury acquitted them of that outlandish charge, but the government still asked for a sentence of 20 years for the other counts on which they were convicted.
How did the prosecution go from an administrative violation for failing to report a firearm discharge, with the penalty of perhaps a 5-day suspension, to prosecution for intent to commit murder?
After the trial, two jurors gave sworn statements that they had been pressured to render a guilty verdict and did not understand that a hung jury was possible.
A major argument used by the prosecution during the trial was that our government has a policy forbidding agents from chasing suspected drug smugglers without first getting permission from supervisors. That sounds like a no-arrest policy; by the time an agent gets permission, a smuggler can be out of sight and safely back over the border.
There were a couple of factual discrepancies between the smuggler's story and the agents' testimony, but the government chose to believe the immunity-motivated repeat drug smuggler rather than Border Patrol agents with clean records. Ramos was nominated for Border Patrol Agent of the year in 2005, and Compean served honorably in the U.S. Navy before joining the Border Patrol.
The Bush Administration tidied up Aldrete's wound at a U.S. hospital at our expense and opened the way for him to sue the U.S. government for $5 million for violating his civil rights, which he is now doing.
This case exposes the misplaced priorities of the Bush Administration. The case also reminds us that our Border Patrol agents are in daily danger from hardened criminals.
The Department of Homeland Security issued this Officer Safety Alert on December 21, 2005: "Unidentified Mexican alien smugglers . . . have agreed that the best way to deal with U.S. Border Patrol agents is to hire a group of contract killers." The alert cautions that, to perform the killings, the smugglers intend to use the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) street gang, known for its unspeakable atrocities and torture.
T.J. Bonner, national Border Patrol Council, said: "There is a palpable sense of outrage and betrayal. Here, you have five convicted drug dealers being pardoned, and two border patrol agents, who were doing their job, fighting the war on drugs on the front lines, and they're going to prison."
This case is a test of George Bush's character, compassion, and concern for drugs coming across our border. He can't duck responsibility: the prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, and the judge, Kathleen Cardone, are both Bush appointees.
Call the White House Opinion Line: 202-456-1111.
Further Reading:
Imprisoned border agent beaten by fellow inmates, Jerome Corsi, Feb. 6, 2007
The two border agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who are now in prison serving 11- and 12-year sentences, while a Mexican drug peddler goes free with U.S.-granted immunity, were prosecuted under the wrong statute -- a law that was intended to increase the sentence for violent criminals. Read all about it, including a revealing interview with the prosecutor at: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53873
White House invites review of Compean, Ramos cases, WorldNetDaily.com, Jan. 13, 2007
White House Press Briefing by Tony Snow, WhiteHouse.gov, Jan. 12, 2007
People of the Year: Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, FrontPageMag.com, Jan. 1, 2007
Lawmakers urge Bush to pardon 2 border agents, The Washington Times, Dec. 8, 2007
Let's Prosecute Drug Smugglers, Not Border Guards
by Phyllis Schlafly
February 21, 2007
With mounting bipartisan criticism from Republican Congressmen and Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Department of Justice has stepped up an unprecedented public relations campaign to defend its prosecution of Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, now serving 11- and 12-year prison terms. But new facts keep emerging to prove that this prosecution was a gross injustice.
CNN judicial expert Jeffrey Toobin described it as "one of the most unusual prosecutions I've ever seen ... I am baffled why this case was brought." So am I.
The government prosecuted Ramos and Compean criminally for acts that called only for an administrative reprimand, based the case on the testimony of an admitted drug smuggler brought back from Mexico and induced to testify by a grant of immunity, withheld crucial evidence from the jury, used the wrong law (that carries a mandatory additional 10-year sentence), and now won't release the transcript of the trial without which the border guards cannot appeal.
The smuggler's reward for his testimony was immunity, U.S. medical treatment, and a government-issued border pass.
Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now admits that its official lied to Congressmen in claiming that Ramos and Compean had confessed, lied, destroyed evidence, and said they did not believe the smuggler was a threat. No evidence ever existed for those damaging accusations.
The government denied their freedom pending appeal and put Ramos in a prison where five criminal illegal aliens took their opportunity to severely beat him up and kick him with their steel-tipped shoes. No prison guards defended him from this attack.
Prosecutor Johnny Sutton claims that Ramos shot an unarmed drug smuggler in his rear end as he was running away. But the ballistics report did not prove that the bullet came from Ramos' gun, and the medical report showed that the bullet entered the smuggler's buttock on his side at an angle consistent with Ramos's contention that the smuggler was turning around with what looked like a weapon in his hand.
Ramos and Compean didn't believe they wounded the smuggler because he kept running and escaped across the border into a waiting vehicle. The doctor's description of the trajectory of the bullet he removed from the smuggler's body casts doubt on the whole assumption that his wound came from shots fired by the border guards.
Sutton claims that Ramos and Compean were prosecuted because they "lied" and covered up their actions. The alleged lie was that they gave an incomplete report of their confrontation with the smuggler on Feb. 17, 2005.
But a recently released DHS memo dated May 15, 2005 shows that the two border guards did give a prompt, complete oral report to their supervisors, who actually were present at the Feb. 17, 2005 event. The supervisors decided not to make a written report.
Failing to make a written report isn't a crime anyway. It is merely a violation of a DHS memo stating that the penalty is merely internal disciplinary action, which is not criminal prosecution.
The big question is, why didn't the government prosecute the drug smuggler and give immunity to the border guards (who had good service records), instead of vice versa? The smuggler admitted his illegal-drug project to a Border Patrol agent before Sutton gave him immunity, and the prosecutor did not bother to investigate this drug smuggling by checking the cell phone left in the smuggler's van, or by ordering a fingerprint search of the van until a month after it entered the U.S., and even then didn't have it done by the FBI.
A few days before the Ramos-Compean trial began on Oct. 17, 2005, the same drug smuggler was caught bringing in a second van loaded with nearly 1,000 pounds of illegal drugs, but he was not arrested so as not to interfere with his role as star witness against the border guards. To preserve the smuggler's credibility, Judge Kathleen Cardone sealed the record about the second van so it could not be mentioned at the trial, and she put the families of the defendants under a gag order not to discuss it.
The judge also kept from the jury the smuggler's confession that he and his friends had considered a "hunting party" to go shoot some U.S. Border Patrol agents.
The failure to release a transcript of the trial one year after the trial took place is an outrage that prevents Ramos and Compean from starting their appeal. Nor has any hearing been scheduled on the assertion by three jurors that they were coerced by the jury foreman to vote for a guilty verdict.
The longer President Bush waits to remedy this injustice perpetrated by his two appointees, prosecutor Sutton and Judge Cardone, the more he convinces the public that the answer to our bafflement about this prosecution is that the Bush Administration policy is to intimidate the Border Patrol from stopping the entry of illegal aliens and illegal drugs.
Further reading: Immigration
We Need Compassion For Our Border Guards
Eagle Forum • PO Box 618 • Alton, IL 62002 • phone: 618-462-5415 • fax: 618-462-8909 • eagle@eagleforum.org
Open Letter To President Bush
by Phyllis Schlafly
April 4, 2007
To: President George W. Bush, The White House, Washington, DC 20500, Dear Mr. President:
I am glad to see that you fired some U.S. Attorneys. But you missed one: U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean instead of a professional drug smuggler, and who prosecuted Texas Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez instead of a professional people smuggler.
Yes, you have the presidential prerogative to hire and fire U.S. Attorneys for any reason or for no reason. Any prosecutor has large discretion in whether to bring a case to trial or not, and the public has the right to know why he made that decision.
So much has come out since the Ramos and Compean trial which proves that the decision to criminally prosecute them was a gross miscarriage of justice. Their alleged violation, if true, deserved, at most, an administrative reprimand.
Ramos and Compean did not get a fair trial, and that's a terrible blot on your administration. It's hard to say which was more shocking: the withholding of exculpatory evidence or giving a professional drug smuggler immunity and other goodies to be the star witness against them and withholding evidence that would have discredited his credibility.
Keeping Ramos and Compean in solitary confinement instead of letting them go home pending their appeal shows a maliciousness that is unworthy of your administration.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our Border Guards are not permitted to use force against fleeing illegal aliens, but should allow them to flee across the border with impunity? If so, you should change the rules of engagement.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our border guards, in the act of apprehending a smuggler, may not use their weapons unless they first get permission from headquarters, and that they must assume that drug smugglers are not armed? If so, you should change the rules of engagement to protect our border guys who are risking their lives every day to protect us.
It's not enough to grant a pardon to Ramos and Compean. I hope you will publicly admit that they never should have been prosecuted for using their weapons in the course of doing their dangerous jobs.
I hope your administration will instruct U.S. Attorney Sutton to ask the court, first, that they be freed pending their appeals (so they won't be beaten up again by the criminal illegal aliens housed in the same prison), and second, that Sutton should ask the judge to vacate the convictions on the basis of prosecutorial illegalities in the first trial.
It's become pretty clear that the Ramos-Compean prosecution is not an anomaly but is part of a policy pattern. In the district adjacent to Johnny Sutton's, Border Patrol agent David Sipe was convicted in 2001 for using excessive force against an illegal alien coyote.
The U.S. prosecutor gave immunity to the Mexican criminal in exchange for his testimony and also withheld exculpatory evidence from Sipe. Because of this prosecutorial misconduct, the district court granted Sipe's motion for new trial, but incredibly, the U.S. prosecutor appealed that decision.
The Fifth Circuit upheld the order for a new trial and, instead of dropping the case, the U.S. Attorney forced Sipe to stand trial again. He was finally acquitted on Jan. 26, 2007.
Sipe is now free, after losing seven years of his life and all his savings, while the illegal alien coyote bought a ranch in Mexico with the $80,000 payoff he was given by the U.S. government.
Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez of Edwards County, Texas, was prosecuted by Johnny Sutton for a 2005 incident in which Hernandez allegedly used excessive force against a fleeing carload of illegal aliens. He was convicted on Dec. 1, 2006.
Sutton requested a prison term of seven years, but fortunately the judge sentenced him to only one year. Maybe that was a rebuke to Sutton.
We want to know if these unjust prosecutions were demanded by the Mexican government. You should make public the messages between your Justice Department and Mexico in regard to these cases.
We simply can't have a national policy of intimidating our border guards from arresting drug smugglers -- or even defending themselves against smugglers (who should be presumed to be armed and dangerous). We don't want Ramos and Compean to be the hallmark of your administration's border policy.
Respectfully, Phyllis Schlafly
Further reading: Immigration
Eagle Forum • PO Box 618 • Alton, IL 62002 • phone: 618-462-5415 • fax: 618-462-8909 • eagle@eagleforum.org
Presented by Bill Haymin, 2007
Urge your Senators to Support a Presidential Pardon for Ramos and Compean!
In light of his recent commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence, not to mention his pardoning of five drug dealers this past Christmas, President Bush certainly should have no objection to extending the same courtesy to U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. The timing couldn’t be more perfect for the U.S. Senate to hold a hearing to examine the events that led to the unjust prosecution of the two border guards and to recommend a presidential pardon.
Ramos and Compean, who are currently serving 11- and 12-year prison sentences, were guarding the Mexican border near El Paso, TX on February 17, 2005 when they intercepted a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana and attempted to stop the illegal drug-smuggler from crossing the border. Although they successfully prevented the man from crossing into the U.S., they were convicted for allegedly shooting one bullet into the buttocks of the drug-smuggler and for failing to report the discharge of their firearms—acts which call only for an administrative reprimand!
Despite requests for a congressional pardon in H.R. 563, which currently has 100 cosponsors, and at least 160,000 petitions and 15,000 faxes from U.S. citizens to the U.S. Department of Justice and the White House, the Bush Administration continues to maintain that the border guards received a fair trial, even though the facts of the case all point to the contrary. To learn all the details surrounding this case, be sure to read Phyllis’ columns:
We Need Compassion for Our Border Guards
Let’s Prosecute Drug Smugglers, Not Border Guards
Open Letter To President Bush
On Tuesday, July 17th, at 10am in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary will hold a hearing to “Examine the Prosecution of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.”
Take Action
Call your Senators’ offices and let them know that you expect them to support a presidential pardon for our border agents, Ramos and Compean!
Call Your Senator Today!
Capitol Switchboard: (202)-224-3121
We Need Compassion For Our Border Guards
by Phyllis Schlafly
January 3, 2007
President George W. Bush pardoned 16 criminals including five drug dealers at Christmastime, but so far has refused to pardon the two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were trying to defend Americans against drug smugglers. It makes us wonder which side the self-proclaimed "compassionate" President is on.
Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were guarding the Mexican border near El Paso on February 17, 2005 when they intercepted a van carrying 743 pounds of marijuana. For what happened next, they were convicted and sentenced under a statute that was designed to impose heavy punishment on criminal drug smugglers caught in the commission of a crime.
The two agents are scheduled to start 11- and 12-year prison terms, respectively, on January 17, for the crime of putting one bullet in the buttocks of the admitted drug smuggler, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, and failing to report the discharge of their firearms. The non-fatal bullet didn't stop the smuggler from running to escape in a van waiting for him on the Mexican side of the border.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher called the two agents heroes. "Because of their actions, more than a million dollars in illegal drugs were stopped from being sold to our children. Bringing felony charges against them is a travesty of justice beyond description."
The White House and the U.S. Department of Justice are stonewalling requests for a presidential pardon from 55 Members of Congress and U.S. citizens who have sent at least 160,000 petitions and 15,000 faxes. When the Bush Administration deigns to respond at all, the official line is that the Border Patrol agents got a fair trial.
But that's not true; they didn't get a fair trial. They were convicted because the Justice Department sent investigators into Mexico, tracked down the drug smuggler, and gave him immunity from all prosecution for his drug smuggling crimes if he would please come back and testify against Ramos and Compean.
It was massively unfair to give immunity to an illegal alien narcotics trafficker while destroying the lives and families of two Border Patrol agents who risked their lives to stop him. Ramos and Compean were convicted mainly on the testimony of the immunity-sheltered drug smuggler, whose integrity should have been called into question, but Ramos and Compean were forbidden to do that during the trial.
The prosecutor even tried to get Ramos and Compean convicted of attempted murder! The jury acquitted them of that outlandish charge, but the government still asked for a sentence of 20 years for the other counts on which they were convicted.
How did the prosecution go from an administrative violation for failing to report a firearm discharge, with the penalty of perhaps a 5-day suspension, to prosecution for intent to commit murder?
After the trial, two jurors gave sworn statements that they had been pressured to render a guilty verdict and did not understand that a hung jury was possible.
A major argument used by the prosecution during the trial was that our government has a policy forbidding agents from chasing suspected drug smugglers without first getting permission from supervisors. That sounds like a no-arrest policy; by the time an agent gets permission, a smuggler can be out of sight and safely back over the border.
There were a couple of factual discrepancies between the smuggler's story and the agents' testimony, but the government chose to believe the immunity-motivated repeat drug smuggler rather than Border Patrol agents with clean records. Ramos was nominated for Border Patrol Agent of the year in 2005, and Compean served honorably in the U.S. Navy before joining the Border Patrol.
The Bush Administration tidied up Aldrete's wound at a U.S. hospital at our expense and opened the way for him to sue the U.S. government for $5 million for violating his civil rights, which he is now doing.
This case exposes the misplaced priorities of the Bush Administration. The case also reminds us that our Border Patrol agents are in daily danger from hardened criminals.
The Department of Homeland Security issued this Officer Safety Alert on December 21, 2005: "Unidentified Mexican alien smugglers . . . have agreed that the best way to deal with U.S. Border Patrol agents is to hire a group of contract killers." The alert cautions that, to perform the killings, the smugglers intend to use the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) street gang, known for its unspeakable atrocities and torture.
T.J. Bonner, national Border Patrol Council, said: "There is a palpable sense of outrage and betrayal. Here, you have five convicted drug dealers being pardoned, and two border patrol agents, who were doing their job, fighting the war on drugs on the front lines, and they're going to prison."
This case is a test of George Bush's character, compassion, and concern for drugs coming across our border. He can't duck responsibility: the prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, and the judge, Kathleen Cardone, are both Bush appointees.
Call the White House Opinion Line: 202-456-1111.
Further Reading:
Imprisoned border agent beaten by fellow inmates, Jerome Corsi, Feb. 6, 2007
The two border agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who are now in prison serving 11- and 12-year sentences, while a Mexican drug peddler goes free with U.S.-granted immunity, were prosecuted under the wrong statute -- a law that was intended to increase the sentence for violent criminals. Read all about it, including a revealing interview with the prosecutor at: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53873
White House invites review of Compean, Ramos cases, WorldNetDaily.com, Jan. 13, 2007
White House Press Briefing by Tony Snow, WhiteHouse.gov, Jan. 12, 2007
People of the Year: Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, FrontPageMag.com, Jan. 1, 2007
Lawmakers urge Bush to pardon 2 border agents, The Washington Times, Dec. 8, 2007
Let's Prosecute Drug Smugglers, Not Border Guards
by Phyllis Schlafly
February 21, 2007
With mounting bipartisan criticism from Republican Congressmen and Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Department of Justice has stepped up an unprecedented public relations campaign to defend its prosecution of Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, now serving 11- and 12-year prison terms. But new facts keep emerging to prove that this prosecution was a gross injustice.
CNN judicial expert Jeffrey Toobin described it as "one of the most unusual prosecutions I've ever seen ... I am baffled why this case was brought." So am I.
The government prosecuted Ramos and Compean criminally for acts that called only for an administrative reprimand, based the case on the testimony of an admitted drug smuggler brought back from Mexico and induced to testify by a grant of immunity, withheld crucial evidence from the jury, used the wrong law (that carries a mandatory additional 10-year sentence), and now won't release the transcript of the trial without which the border guards cannot appeal.
The smuggler's reward for his testimony was immunity, U.S. medical treatment, and a government-issued border pass.
Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now admits that its official lied to Congressmen in claiming that Ramos and Compean had confessed, lied, destroyed evidence, and said they did not believe the smuggler was a threat. No evidence ever existed for those damaging accusations.
The government denied their freedom pending appeal and put Ramos in a prison where five criminal illegal aliens took their opportunity to severely beat him up and kick him with their steel-tipped shoes. No prison guards defended him from this attack.
Prosecutor Johnny Sutton claims that Ramos shot an unarmed drug smuggler in his rear end as he was running away. But the ballistics report did not prove that the bullet came from Ramos' gun, and the medical report showed that the bullet entered the smuggler's buttock on his side at an angle consistent with Ramos's contention that the smuggler was turning around with what looked like a weapon in his hand.
Ramos and Compean didn't believe they wounded the smuggler because he kept running and escaped across the border into a waiting vehicle. The doctor's description of the trajectory of the bullet he removed from the smuggler's body casts doubt on the whole assumption that his wound came from shots fired by the border guards.
Sutton claims that Ramos and Compean were prosecuted because they "lied" and covered up their actions. The alleged lie was that they gave an incomplete report of their confrontation with the smuggler on Feb. 17, 2005.
But a recently released DHS memo dated May 15, 2005 shows that the two border guards did give a prompt, complete oral report to their supervisors, who actually were present at the Feb. 17, 2005 event. The supervisors decided not to make a written report.
Failing to make a written report isn't a crime anyway. It is merely a violation of a DHS memo stating that the penalty is merely internal disciplinary action, which is not criminal prosecution.
The big question is, why didn't the government prosecute the drug smuggler and give immunity to the border guards (who had good service records), instead of vice versa? The smuggler admitted his illegal-drug project to a Border Patrol agent before Sutton gave him immunity, and the prosecutor did not bother to investigate this drug smuggling by checking the cell phone left in the smuggler's van, or by ordering a fingerprint search of the van until a month after it entered the U.S., and even then didn't have it done by the FBI.
A few days before the Ramos-Compean trial began on Oct. 17, 2005, the same drug smuggler was caught bringing in a second van loaded with nearly 1,000 pounds of illegal drugs, but he was not arrested so as not to interfere with his role as star witness against the border guards. To preserve the smuggler's credibility, Judge Kathleen Cardone sealed the record about the second van so it could not be mentioned at the trial, and she put the families of the defendants under a gag order not to discuss it.
The judge also kept from the jury the smuggler's confession that he and his friends had considered a "hunting party" to go shoot some U.S. Border Patrol agents.
The failure to release a transcript of the trial one year after the trial took place is an outrage that prevents Ramos and Compean from starting their appeal. Nor has any hearing been scheduled on the assertion by three jurors that they were coerced by the jury foreman to vote for a guilty verdict.
The longer President Bush waits to remedy this injustice perpetrated by his two appointees, prosecutor Sutton and Judge Cardone, the more he convinces the public that the answer to our bafflement about this prosecution is that the Bush Administration policy is to intimidate the Border Patrol from stopping the entry of illegal aliens and illegal drugs.
Further reading: Immigration
We Need Compassion For Our Border Guards
Eagle Forum • PO Box 618 • Alton, IL 62002 • phone: 618-462-5415 • fax: 618-462-8909 • eagle@eagleforum.org
Open Letter To President Bush
by Phyllis Schlafly
April 4, 2007
To: President George W. Bush, The White House, Washington, DC 20500, Dear Mr. President:
I am glad to see that you fired some U.S. Attorneys. But you missed one: U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean instead of a professional drug smuggler, and who prosecuted Texas Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez instead of a professional people smuggler.
Yes, you have the presidential prerogative to hire and fire U.S. Attorneys for any reason or for no reason. Any prosecutor has large discretion in whether to bring a case to trial or not, and the public has the right to know why he made that decision.
So much has come out since the Ramos and Compean trial which proves that the decision to criminally prosecute them was a gross miscarriage of justice. Their alleged violation, if true, deserved, at most, an administrative reprimand.
Ramos and Compean did not get a fair trial, and that's a terrible blot on your administration. It's hard to say which was more shocking: the withholding of exculpatory evidence or giving a professional drug smuggler immunity and other goodies to be the star witness against them and withholding evidence that would have discredited his credibility.
Keeping Ramos and Compean in solitary confinement instead of letting them go home pending their appeal shows a maliciousness that is unworthy of your administration.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our Border Guards are not permitted to use force against fleeing illegal aliens, but should allow them to flee across the border with impunity? If so, you should change the rules of engagement.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our border guards, in the act of apprehending a smuggler, may not use their weapons unless they first get permission from headquarters, and that they must assume that drug smugglers are not armed? If so, you should change the rules of engagement to protect our border guys who are risking their lives every day to protect us.
It's not enough to grant a pardon to Ramos and Compean. I hope you will publicly admit that they never should have been prosecuted for using their weapons in the course of doing their dangerous jobs.
I hope your administration will instruct U.S. Attorney Sutton to ask the court, first, that they be freed pending their appeals (so they won't be beaten up again by the criminal illegal aliens housed in the same prison), and second, that Sutton should ask the judge to vacate the convictions on the basis of prosecutorial illegalities in the first trial.
It's become pretty clear that the Ramos-Compean prosecution is not an anomaly but is part of a policy pattern. In the district adjacent to Johnny Sutton's, Border Patrol agent David Sipe was convicted in 2001 for using excessive force against an illegal alien coyote.
The U.S. prosecutor gave immunity to the Mexican criminal in exchange for his testimony and also withheld exculpatory evidence from Sipe. Because of this prosecutorial misconduct, the district court granted Sipe's motion for new trial, but incredibly, the U.S. prosecutor appealed that decision.
The Fifth Circuit upheld the order for a new trial and, instead of dropping the case, the U.S. Attorney forced Sipe to stand trial again. He was finally acquitted on Jan. 26, 2007.
Sipe is now free, after losing seven years of his life and all his savings, while the illegal alien coyote bought a ranch in Mexico with the $80,000 payoff he was given by the U.S. government.
Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez of Edwards County, Texas, was prosecuted by Johnny Sutton for a 2005 incident in which Hernandez allegedly used excessive force against a fleeing carload of illegal aliens. He was convicted on Dec. 1, 2006.
Sutton requested a prison term of seven years, but fortunately the judge sentenced him to only one year. Maybe that was a rebuke to Sutton.
We want to know if these unjust prosecutions were demanded by the Mexican government. You should make public the messages between your Justice Department and Mexico in regard to these cases.
We simply can't have a national policy of intimidating our border guards from arresting drug smugglers -- or even defending themselves against smugglers (who should be presumed to be armed and dangerous). We don't want Ramos and Compean to be the hallmark of your administration's border policy.
Respectfully, Phyllis Schlafly
Further reading: Immigration
Eagle Forum • PO Box 618 • Alton, IL 62002 • phone: 618-462-5415 • fax: 618-462-8909 • eagle@eagleforum.org
Presented by Bill Haymin, 2007
Print
Email
