by Jason George
FABENS, Texas -- With its pecan groves and dusty cotton fields, the calm surrounding this stretch of the U.S.-Mexican border belies its role in one of the country's fiercest immigration dramas, one that has led to congressional hearings, impassioned protests and outrage from conservative media.
It all began three years ago, when U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos and Jose Compean chased a van driven by Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, a Mexican national. Davila ditched the van about 100 yards from the border and sprinted across the Rio Grande toward Mexico, but not before Compean fired his gun at him and missed, and Ramos hit Davila with a single shot that sliced his buttocks and urethra.
As Davila disappeared across the border, agents found nearly 800 pounds of marijuana in the van he was driving.
On other points, the narrative diverges: Ramos and Compean say they fired their weapons only because they believed Davila had flashed a gun at them, and they insist they informed their supervisor about the shooting.
Other agents disputed this claim during a federal trial, saying Ramos and Compean shot an unarmed man from behind, tried to cover it up and failed to report it properly. A jury in El Paso convicted the two agents of assault, obstruction of justice and civil rights violations, and each received lengthy federal prison sentences: 11 years for Ramos, 12 for Compean.
Conservative cause
Even before the trial began, conservative media took up the cause, portraying Ramos and Compean as martyrs to an immigration policy out of control. Ann Coulter wrote about the incident, and talk radio has filled hours with the subject. CNN's Lou Dobbs has featured the story, calling the agents' imprisonment an "outrage" and "warrantless."
And as can be expected in a presidential campaign season in which immigration is a hotly discussed issue, several candidates have weighed in.
Mitt Romney, who issued no pardons as governor of Massachusetts, told conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham that "if there is prosecutorial indiscretion" in this case -- and he suspects there is -- "these cases deserve a very careful look and potentially a pardon."
At a "Meet Mike Huckabee" event last month in Iowa, the former Arkansas governor said, "Of course I would review their case," adding that he hoped the agents would be back home by Valentine's Day 2009, just after a new president takes office.
Republican Reps. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Duncan Hunter of California, both presidential candidates until recently, have each introduced legislation either asking President Bush to pardon the men or proposing a congressional pardon, which would be unprecedented.
Bush has so far declined to pardon Ramos and Compean, with spokeswoman Dana Perino noting that the men's case is on appeal. Neither has applied for a pardon, which requires admitting guilt.
"He will not sign that paperwork," said Monica Ramos, Ignacio's wife. "He's not going to beg for a pardon."
Democrats, too, have gotten in on the debate.
Last summer, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California held hearings on the case, saying the agents' sentences were too harsh and their case should be reviewed. Democratic Rep. Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts recently introduced a resolution in the House calling on Bush to commute the agents' sentences to time served. The bill has bipartisan support with 75 co-sponsors.
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have not commented on the case.
Johnny Sutton, the U.S. attorney who prosecuted, said that Ramos and Compean are far from heroes and that the conservative media gloss over many of the facts, forgetting that a jury unanimously convicted them.
"They shot 15 times at an unarmed man who was running away from them and posed no threat," Sutton said in a statement. "They lied about what happened, covered up the shooting, conspired to destroy evidence and then proceeded to write up and file a false report."
$5 million claim
Davila, the man who was shot, got immunity for the drugs in his van in exchange for testifying against the agents, but he is now in a west Texas jail on unrelated smuggling charges. He has pleaded not guilty and has filed a $5 million claim against the Border Patrol for violating his civil rights in the shooting.
In a recent visit to the site of the shooting -- a dusty, desolate patch just outside Fabens, population 8,000 -- Joe Loya, Ramos' father-in-law, kicked the dirt and disagreed with Sutton's characterization.
"It's nothing but lies, lies, lies," Loya said. "This place makes me so angry."
In the distance, four Border Patrol agents watched Loya from their trucks with binoculars as they scanned the border about 100 yards away.
"Supervisors don't like to see us out here," he said, staring back at the men. "Too bad."
Comments
I bet i is, but the wont say nothing about what TR host like Mike savage spout. I can’t fight so I talk ####
Posted by: rawdawgbuffalo | February 3, 2008 11:33 AM
This is such a travesty its hard to imagine that its happening in America.
We have a divided country that can not agree on much. We have a President
that does not have any GUTS! The President if he had any guts should have pardoned these poor guards long ago.The border needs to be sealed and the border guards need to be released from prison. And the district attorney that put them in prison should be disbarred.
Posted by: Paul Jaeger | February 3, 2008 11:59 AM
Yes, by all means, lets give the police the absolute right to be judge, jury, and executioner. Let's be done with the pretense of the rule of law. Let the police state begin.
Posted by: Lou Demogogue | February 3, 2008 1:13 PM
Question for anyone:
Did the US government allocated more funds to patrol, (hire unlimited agents, add more technology) for the Canadian-US border than were allocated for the Mexican-US border? I think I read this in the Patriot Act (2.4 Title IV) It looks as though the disparity was allowed to stand-and not updated- by Bush-from a previous law. There is more $$$ for technology on the US-Canadian border. And, the Canadian-US border covers more area. Why not the same $$$, or more, for the US-Mexican border? If we revised the Patriot Act to have, at the least, matching funds for both borders, it would help things. The politicians seem to be playing stupid. It is not difficult to fix things if they wanted to. The number of illegals from the south is by design. Time to defend the south as well as we are "defending" the north. BTW, I do not hear of many Canadians wanting to enter America illegally.
Posted by: Vivian | February 3, 2008 1:13 PM
Vivian,
Canadians may not enter the U.S. illegally, but they are plenty happy to work here illegally once they get here.
P.S. What's the difference between a kayak and a Canadian?
Kayak's tip.
Posted by: Doug Zook | February 3, 2008 1:53 PM
A pardon?? Are you crazy??
If an unarmed man, whether or not he is doing something illegal, is shot at and wounded by any law enforecment officer in this country, he is at least fired and loses his benefits. Attempt to cover it up, and you have obstruction of justice. That means jail time, folks!
Do I feel bad for the drug smuggler who got shot? Not a chance. Do I feel bad for the two border agents who acted like Wyatt Earp? No way! They broke the law, and should pay for what they did...end of discussion.
Posted by: Bruce Berman | February 3, 2008 6:12 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: Paul Jaeger | February 3, 2008 11:59 AM
Mr. Jaeger,
You are wrong. The law is very clear that deadly force by police is justified only to prevent an imminent threat of serious injury or death to themselves or innocent third parties. The guy they shot posed no threat of harm whatsoever. He displayed no weapon because, indeed, he had no weapon and he made no threatening gestures. They shot him while he was running away from them. Plainly, there was no justification for the shooting.
If there was justification for this shooting, then the F.B.I. were also justified in shooting into Randy Weaver’s cabin at Ruby Ridge at a fleeing suspect. Well, guess what, Congress and the Courts have given the thumbs down on that one too.
The District Attorney or U.S. Attorney had probable cause to believe a crime had been committed because they assaulted the man with deadly weapons without any apparent, lawful justification. Furthermore, the jury convicted the two, meaning they heard and rejected any defense the Border Agents presented at trial. So, not only do you appear ready to overthrow the rule of law regarding the proper use of deadly force, you would also seek to punish government officials for doing their job properly, and to overthrow the system of jury trial that we hold dear in this country; that is, you and Lou Dobbs, and Ann Coulter.
And why would you want to do all of this? Just so we could protect our border? No. I don’t think so. Those who protect our border, just like every other law enforcement officer, must obey all the laws they are entrusted to enforce – including the laws regarding the proper use of deadly force. This, by the way, is exactly why the President has declined to pardon those Border Agents. In this, one of his few good decisions, I agree.
Posted by: John W. | February 3, 2008 6:22 PM
Let me remind you folks... WE are a nation of laws. If you don't believe me, just ask Sean Hannity.
I mean - what part of ILLEGAL don't you people get? It is ILLEGAL to lie and cover up your crimes - no matter how despicable the perp is.
But AMNESTY is a four letter word. No - actually, it's another word for PARDON. If we can't talk about amnesty for children who were brought here and grew up here, then don't even utter a syllable about these so-called heros. They are CRIMINALS. And this is a NATION OF LAWS... or is it?
Posted by: Beth | February 3, 2008 9:00 PM
What I want to know is who mad the decision to give and ILLEGAL alien AMNESTY? AMNESTY is a 7 letter word.
Posted by: wow | February 4, 2008 7:27 AM
Thier only mistake here was they didn't kill this drug smuggler.
If he would have made it thru his product could have caused untold suffering here in the US. Yeah Yeah I know "it's only mary jane" BUT
No talk of THAT suffering.
Again should have killed him and let the real coyotes get the rest
Posted by: Bob | February 4, 2008 9:44 AM
The REAL shame is that these two guys and folks like them have been entrusted to secure our borders... people who are willing to lie and cover up.
"Scratch a liar, catch a thief..." Many of them ARE the problem on the border. The ones who are willing to lie are willing to be bribed by the "real coyotes".
They are part of the problem - not part of the solution.
Posted by: Beth | February 4, 2008 8:29 PM
So let me see if i got this right. Whats the difference between stealing national secerts, and the smuggling of drugs into this country. Both crimes are an act of war against the American people. Both crimes could bring the down fall of the american way of life.Both crimes are set to destory our society. Yet both crimes do nt have the same punishment, ie the death sentence.Yet some people want to embrace this smuggler, and a civil court may allow this criminal to walk away with american dollars. I have been a police officer for 23 years in San Francisco, and i have seen how low an attorney will go...
I have a hard time with the way they think. Then on the other hand, the Border Patrol does not have keep high enough professional standards, That would protect its officers with comon sense policies, Thatis hard to understand.
If the rank and file really belive these two agents are innocent, then
Why has not every Border Patrol agent walked off the job. Why would you go to work every day, knowing your agency will leave you to the lawyers, is beyond me.
Knowing the polices that you are asked to enforce are putting you and this country at risk.
Posted by: brian d | February 17, 2008 8:15 PM