• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. attorney

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,870
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
That traitorous rat who aided illegal scum and throw sheriffs deputies and border agents in jail will no longer be able to do the same thing again.


Sutton resigns as U.S. attorney
The San Antonio federal prosecutor at the center of a politically charged case against two Border Patrol agents convicted of covering up their role in the shooting of a drug smuggler resigned Thursday.

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton submitted his letter of resignation to President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, said Shana Jones, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western Judicial District of Texas.

Sutton’s resignation was voluntary, Jones said, and his future plans were not immediately disclosed. He was not available for comment.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

Is everything ok? You seem to have gotten chewing gum in your space bar or something.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

Is everything ok? You seem to have gotten chewing gum in your space bar or something.
Only so many letters and spaces are allowed in the title. So I cut corners in order to fit in a title I wanted.
 
Last edited:
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

This is good news, Ramos and Compean shouldve never been in prison in the first place.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

The guy should not be practicing law.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

The guy should not be practicing law.
Looks like he never was, really.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

How is he a traitor?
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

You wrote: "How is he a traitor?"

So, what you are saying, is you are the product of the public school system ???
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

How is he a traitor?

Relentlessly pursure the prosecution of the two Border Patrol agents while ignoring many of the facts of the case. And later for sealing information pertinent to the case on two separate occasion from the local sheriff's department when Davila's name reappeared during a separate case and granting Davila total immunity.

The facts of the case:

With Ramos and Compean in hot pursuit of this drug smuggler, Davila was forced to ditch his van loaded with 743 lbs of marijuana. In attempting to escape, Davila assaulted and cut BP agent Jose Alonso Compean and left him on the ground bleeding. While Compean was chasing Davila on foot, Ramos had been trying to outflank Davila to cut off his escape into Mexico.

Hearing gun shots and calls for help from his fellow agent, Ramos raced to the scene and found Compean on the ground bleeding. He saw Davila racing towards the Rio Grande, about to cross into Mexico and escape.

Agent Ramos began to chase after the smuggler who had just assaulted his fellow officer. Then the smuggler turned and pointed something at Ramos that he believed was a gun. The time was approximately 1:15pm. It was broad daylight. Ramos, fearing for his life and believing that Davila had already been shooting at his fellow officer, took a single shot at the smuggler. At this time, nobody knew that the smuggler had been wounded.

The smuggler turned back towards the border and kept running. He disappeared into the tall, thick brush along the river. Later, Davila was spotted running across the dry river bed and jumping into a waiting vehicle with two other suspects. This was witnessed by four Border Patrol agents, documenting that Davila was not some “innocent” illegal alien, but a bona fide drug smuggling operation. The three smugglers took off and the agents walked back to the abandoned van where they discovered the 743 pounds of marijuana.

BP supervisor, Jonathan Richards, who had arrived on the scene, was very angry that the smuggler had gotten away. Richards ordered everyone to report to the station. He also told them to load the 743 lbs of marijuana onto their vehicles and take it to the station.
Richards never went across the canal to investigate the assault or to check on agent Compean. Ramos and another agent, named Yrigoyen later testified they told Richards that Compean had been assaulted. At the station, another agent, Mendez, stated that Compean had cuts on his face and hand. He said this in the presence of Supervisor Richards. This is significant because Richards denied having any knowledge of Compean’s injuries.

The BP supervisor lied on the witness stand, testifying that no one told him Compean had been assaulted, which is his excuse for never notifying the F.B.I. of this fact. The truth is that he offered Compean medical attention and had asked Compean several times if he was OK. The physical evidence was apparent as Compean was cut and covered with dirt. Richard's failure to notify the F.B.I. of the assault is the reason why the case was never investigated.

Because of the supervisor’s actions, none of the agent's filled out firearms discharge reports. This administrative policy violation calls for a five day suspension without pay. After checking again on Compean’s condition and asking him if he wanted to file assault charges, according to testimony, Richards then made a statement saying, “If we call the F.B.I. we are going to be here all night doing paperwork. We will never know who the person was that assaulted you although we've got the van and the marijuana." After than, everyone went back to work.

Lazy supervisor that probably might have lost his job over a lack of procedure? Sure. Painting the two BP agents as racist (they're both of Mexican decent) out of control agents who just wanted to kill Mexicans. Completely of his rocker. Paying the illegal alien $5 million for "abuse of his civil rights"? Completely insane.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

I'm glad these guys are out but that is just not good enough. I always thought that they should have maybe had some administrative wrist slapping at best.

Does anyone know if anyone is trying to expunge their records or get them reinstated. I'm sure the ACLU isn't interested at all. They want to make sure the enemies of the US get all the rights of law abiding citizens without any responsibility for their actions. An absolutely disgraceful organization, IMHO.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

These guys committed crimes and were justly prosecuted.

The facts of the case:
Really, those are the facts of the case?
:thinking


U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Western District of Texas
April 25, 2007​

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY JOHNNY SUTTON SETS THE RECORD STRAIGHT REGARDING THE PROSECUTION OF RAMOS AND COMPEAN​
Former Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were found guilty by a unanimous jury in a United States District Court after a trial that lasted more than two and a half weeks. The two agents were represented by four experienced and aggressive trial attorneys, all of whom vigorously challenged the Government’s evidence through argument and direct and cross examination. Both agents told their stories from the witness stand and had full opportunities to explain their version of events and to offer their own evidence. The jury heard all admissible evidence, including the defendants’ claims of self defense, but the jury did not find their stories credible.

...

Allegation: THE AGENTS WERE JUST DOING THEIR JOBS AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PROSECUTED
Response:
Securing our nation’s borders can be a tough and dangerous job. Often, Border Patrol agents find themselves in difficult and dangerous situations. The Border Patrol provides them with guns and the law allows them to defend themselves. The law allows for the use of deadly force when an agent reasonably fears imminent bodily injury or death. But, an agent is not permitted to shoot an unarmed suspect who is running away, regardless of whether the victim is illegally in this country or turns out to be a drug smuggler. In order to maintain the rule of law, federal prosecutors cannot look the other way when law enforcement officers shoot unarmed suspects who are running away, then destroy evidence, engage in a cover-up, and file official reports that are false.

There was no credible evidence that the agents were in a life-threatening situation or that Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, the Mexican alien, had a weapon that would justify the use of deadly force. In fact, Border Patrol Agent Oscar Juarez, who was at the scene, testified at trial that he did not draw his pistol because he did not believe that Aldrete posed a threat to his or Agent Compean’s safety. Vol. VIII, p. 173; Vol. IX, p. 22. He also testified that Aldrete’s hands were empty when Compean attempted to strike Aldrete with the butt of Compean’s shotgun. Vol. VIII, p. 176. By the time Agent Juarez saw Compean shooting, Aldrete was almost in Mexico. Vol. IX, p. 21-22. The crimes committed by these agents are felonies, not mere administrative oversights. This was not a simple case of discharge of a firearm that was not reported. The truth of this case is that Agents Ramos and Compean intentionally, and with the intent to kill, shot 15 times at an unarmed man who was running away from them and who posed no threat.

...

Allegation: ALDRETE HAD A GUN AND THE AGENTS ONLY FIRED IN SELF DEFENSE
Response:
The jury in this case evaluated the testimony from Border Patrol agents, including the defendants, whose testimony established that Aldrete did not have a gun in his hands when Compean had an opportunity to arrest him. Agent Juarez testified that Aldrete’s hands were visible and empty as Aldrete approached Compean. Vol. VIII, pp. 175-176; Vol. IX, p. 155. Ramos testified that he did not see anything in Aldrete’s hands as Aldrete moved through the ditch. Vol. XIII, p. 43. Compean testified that Aldrete’s hands were empty as he went through the ditch and later, that Aldrete had no weapon in his hands. Vol. XIII, pp. 154-155; Vol. XIV, pp. 66-68, 71-72. In his statement to investigators, Compean admitted that Aldrete had attempted to surrender with both hands open and in the air. In their sworn testimony, Agents Juarez and Compean both confirmed that Aldrete had his hands in the air, Vol. VIII, p. 175; Vol. IX, pp. 155-156; Vol. XIII, pp. 154-155; Vol. XIV, pp. 66-68, 71-72, in an apparent effort to surrender. Testimony also revealed that Agents Ramos and Compean never took cover nor did they ever warn the other agents to take cover. Vol. VIII, p. 176; Vol. X, pp. 168-169. This action contradicts their claims that they believed they were in danger. Had Agents Ramos and Compean truly believed Aldrete was a threat, they would not have abandoned him after the shooting, Vol. VII, pp. 122-125, and they would have warned their fellow agents who arrived at the scene to stay out of the open while an armed suspect was on the loose. Agent Compean testified that after the shooting, he picked up his spent casings and threw them into the drainage ditch. Vol. XIII, pp. 165-166; Vol. XIV, p. 157. He even admitted that he may have picked up Ramos’ casing. Vol. XIV, p. 158. He could not explain at trial why he did this. Vol. XIII, pp. 165-166; Vol. XIV, pp.156-158. Agent Arturo Vasquez testified that Compean actually removed the casings from the scene, showing them to Vasquez as Compean was returning to the Fabens Border Patrol Station. Vasquez Transcript, pp. 36-38. According to Vasquez, Compean showed him nine spent casings and calculated he was missing five more, based on the number of live rounds remaining in his magazine. Vasquez Transcript, pp. 37-38. If the agents had believed that the shooting was justified, they would have left the crime scene undisturbed and let the investigation absolve them. Their conduct established that the agents knew that Aldrete did not have a weapon and they knew he posed no threat to them as he fled. Immediately following the shooting, when Ramos encountered Agent Jose Luis Mendoza near the van, Ramos did not say he was in fear for his life or that he shot at anyone. Vol. X, p. 35. While Compean confessed to his fellow agents, David Jacquez and Vasquez, that he shot at the driver, he did not tell them that the driver had a gun, that he saw something shiny in the driver’s left hand, or that he or Ramos were ever in danger. Vol. X, pp. 69-70, 80; Vasquez Transcript, p. 35. Had Aldrete actually had a gun or a shiny object in his left hand, or had Aldrete truly posed a danger to either Ramos or Compean at any time, they would have broadcast to any and everyone that the driver had a gun.

...​
Continued below.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

Continued from above.

...

Allegation: AGENT COMPEAN WAS BLOODIED FROM A STRUGGLE WITH ALDRETE
Response:
Compean testified at trial that he had a cut to his hand and a cut to his chin. Vol XIII, p. 168. He told Agent Mendoza that he cut his chin when he slipped and fell trying to apprehend Aldrete. Vol. X, pp. 32- 33. Agent Jacquez noticed the cut between Compean’s thumb and finger, but did not consider the injury to be traumatic. Vol. X, p. 90. Compean cleaned up the cuts in the bathroom at the station. Vol. XI, p. 77. Compean twice told his supervisor that he had not been hit or assaulted by Aldrete. Vol. X, pp. 217; Vol. XI, p. 77. He also refused to fill out an injury report. Had Compean been assaulted he would have reported this to his supervisor. Vol. X, p. 217.


...

Allegation: THESE AGENTS DID NOT REPORT THE SHOOTING TO SUPERVISORS BECAUSE THE SUPERVISORS WERE ON THE SCENE OF THE SHOOTING
Response:
The evidence introduced at trial and credited by the jury demonstrated that no supervisors were on the scene during the shooting. Two supervisors arrived after the shooting. Vol. X, pp. 22-25. Field operations Supervisor Jonathan Richards arrived after the shooting, after all but two other agents were already on the scene. Vol. X, p. 209. Supervisor Robert Arnold arrived shortly after Richards. Vol. X, p. 216; Vol. XI, p. 72. Richards was not aware there had been a shooting, Vol. X, p. 225, and no one reported the shooting to him. Supervisor Richards testified that he first learned of the shooting when he was interviewed about the incident by the agent of the Inspector General in mid-March, about a month after the shooting. Vol. X, p. 239. Supervisor Arnold first learned of the shooting in mid-March, when he was told two agents were soon to be arrested for it. Vol. XI, p. 78. Ramos admitted that he knew Border Patrol policy required him to report a shooting within an hour. Vol. XIII, pp. 18-19. He had been a firearms instructor Vol. XIII, pp.19-20 and a member of the evidence recovery team responsible for investigating shootings. Vol. XIII, p. 84. Compean also knew he was required to report the shooting and he did not. Vol. XIV, pp.169-170. Compean admitted to Luis Barker, then the Chief of the El Paso Border Patrol Sector, that he knew he had to report the shooting and that he knew it was wrong for him and Ramos not to report the shooting. Vol. XI, p.167. Compean admitted to Barker that he knew that if he had reported the shooting, they would have gotten in trouble. Vol. XI, p.167.


Allegation: THESE AGENTS DID NOT REPORT THE SHOOTING BECAUSE BORDER PATROL POLICY PROHIBITS THEM FROM DOING SO
Response:
Border Patrol policy requires that a Border Patrol agent who fires his or her weapon anytime (on or off duty), must notify their supervisor within an hour. Further, Border Patrol policy requires that all who participated in or observed the shooting shall report it to their supervisor. Testimony of several agents and supervisors as well as the transcript of the radio transmissions, indicate that no supervisor was on scene at the time of the shooting. Yet, neither Ramos nor Compean reported the shooting of Aldrete as required by Border Patrol policy. Ramos’ assertion that supervisors already knew about the shooting, or that someone else had reported it, is inaccurate, unsupported by the evidence, and did not excuse their obligation to report within an hour. Additionally, Compean proceeded to write the I-44 report (the Report of Apprehension or Seizure) concerning the incident, with input from Ramos. The report made no reference to several key events that afternoon, including Compean's encounter with Aldrete on foot in the ditch, his having pointed the shotgun at Aldrete, the ensuing foot chase as Aldrete fled, and the firing of shots at Aldrete. The claim that Border Patrol policy does not require the reporting of a shooting in the I-44 is specious. To protect agents involved in shootings from self-incrimination, the Border Patrol practice allows for an agent other than the one involved in the shooting to write the I-44. The I-44 still must include all significant information about the events being reported. That includes the fact that shots were fired. By undertaking to write the I-44, Compean was required to write a truthful report, not a report that contained material omissions amounting to falsehoods. Indeed, in the context of Border Patrol practices and policy, by undertaking to write the I-44, Compean was intentionally creating the impression that there was no shooting. And by omitting the relevant facts, with the aid of Ramos, they submitted and caused to be submitted a false report.

...

Allegation: THE GOVERNMENT WITHHELD CRUCIAL EVIDENCE FROM THE JURY
Response:
The prosecution did not withhold any admissible evidence from the jury. The prosecution provided the defense an opportunity to see the government’s evidence before trial. This is standard operating procedure. The trial judge ruled on a number of evidentiary issues during trial, and excluded evidence that was not relevant or admissible under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence, which govern all federal trials. Those rulings are subject to review on appeal by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. This procedure is what distinguishes a trial at law from a street fight or free-for-all. Deciding guilt or innocence according to established rules is what makes this a civilized country.

...​
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Setting the Record Straight 4-25 2007.pdf
Links to trial transcripts to verify.

I think the facts speak for themselves.
These guys were wrong and committed crimes.
So Sutton isn't a traitor, a rat, or anything other than a prosecutor who was doing his job.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

I guess the evidence (trial testimony) had the final word.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

I guess the evidence (trial testimony) had the final word.

Unless those court transcripts reveal that the person testifying against the border agents isn't an illegal alien drug smuggler and that Sutton gave him clemency or some sort leniency to testify against two border guards it still does not change the fact Sutton is a traitorous rat and that the two border guards were wrongfully convicted. Nor does it change what the border guards said. Most people with any common sense will still refuse to take the word of an illegal alien drug smuggling criminal.
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

Unless those court transcripts reveal that the person testifying against the border agents isn't an illegal alien drug smuggler and that Sutton gave him clemency or some sort leniency to testify against two border guards it still does not change the fact Sutton is a traitorous rat and that the two border guards were wrongfully convicted. Nor does it change what the border guards said. Most people with any common sense will still refuse to take the word of an illegal alien drug smuggling criminal.

what part of
Former Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were found guilty by a unanimous jury in a United States District Court ...
do you not understand?
[emphasis of unanimous added by bubba so that it would not again be missed]
 
Re: RatTraitorSutton who imprisoned BorderGuards & SheriffDeputy resigns as U.S. atto

Unless ... it still does not change the fact Sutton is a traitorous rat ...
Fact?
Ha, ha, ha... ha!
That isn't a fact, but an opinion.
An opinion that has no bearing on the reality of the situation.

These are the facts.
The Boarder Agents were wrong and were found guilty of committed crimes.




... and that the two border guards were wrongfully convicted.
No they weren't.
The transcripts are available. Why don't you read them.




Nor does it change what the border guards said.
Like I said: The transcripts are available.
What they said convicted them.




Most people with any common sense will still refuse to take the word of an illegal alien drug smuggling criminal.
You are mistaken.
 
Back
Top Bottom