Feds admit smuggler lied in Ramos-Compean case - World Net Daily
December 3rd, 2007Today in New Orleans, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case for releasing Ramos and Compean pending their new trial. The Justice Department has repeatedly DENIED this to our former Border Agents.
Word is - Johnny Sutton was RENOUNCED by the judges. Some in court descriptions to follow below.
Finally a court of law is seeing the blatant INJUSTICE perpetrated against Ramos and Compean and I predict they will be home with their families by spring. I further predict that Johnny Sutton will probably quietly resign when they are released, before the beginning of their new trial, where we can only hope the real truth will be told. Without a credible witness, I don’t know how they can even HAVE a trial and as a result it should be THROWN OUT. Next - Ramos and Compean get to make MILLIONS of dollars to tell their story.
Read the full article here at World Net Daily.
The U.S. government admitted today in federal court that the prosecution’s star witness in the criminal trial of Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean – confessed drug dealer Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila – lied under oath.
No! You can’t be saying a career drug smuggler *lied* under oath! Oh my God what is the world coming to!
“He told some lies on the stand,” Mark Stelmach, the assistant U.S. attorney representing prosecutor U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton said under questioning by a three-judge 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel in New Orleans.
Ramos and Compean are appealing prison sentences of 11- and 12-years respectively for a 2005 incident in which they fired on Aldrete-Davila as he fled back into Mexico after smuggling 750 pounds of marijuana into the U.S. near Fabens, Texas.
“Today the justice system worked the way it is supposed to,” Tara Setmayer, communications director for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., told WND immediately following the hearing.
Setmeyer, who attended the hearing, said, “I feel cautiously optimistic the judges will make a ruling quickly.”
“Based on the nature of the questions from the judges, it seems as though the government made their own bed and now they have to lie in it,” she said.
According to Setmayer, Judge Patrick Errol Higginbotham questioned Stelmach closely about why the prosecution had sought to seal from the jury information about a second smuggling attempt by Aldrete-Davila after Sutton’s office gave him immunity and a border pass.
Higginbotham rebuked Stelmach’s suggestion that Aldrete-Davila’s drug history prior to the Feb. 17, 2005, incident with the border agents was not relevant to the trial. The judge argued the second load was relevant because it showed Aldrete-Davila had a brazen disregard for the law, a key factor in evaluating his testimony for the prosecution.
“It defies common sense in the street world,” Higginbotham told Stelmach, “to believe Aldrete-Davila was a poor mule, as he represented at trial, instead of an actual player in the world of the drug cartels.”
As WND reported, the defense lawyers in the appellate briefs filed for Ramos and Compean had argued that the likelihood Aldrete-Davila was carrying a firearm was greatly increased if he was a major player for the drug cartels.
Aldrete-Davila was the only witness who testified at trial that he was unarmed. Since he was not apprehended and frisked on the scene, it was his word at trial against the word of Ramos and Compean. The border agents both testified they saw Aldrete-Davila pointing a shiny object they believed was a gun as he ran away.
“Before the hearing today we were skeptical because we know the government is good at lying,” Joe Loya, father-in-law of Ramos, told WND in a telephone interview.
“Now we are optimistic justice will prevail,” he said. “The government had to admit today the prosecutors let Aldrete-Davila commit perjury at trial.”
The judges today questioned the government closely about the appropriateness of prosecuting Ramos and Compean under 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c), a law passed to require an additional 10-year minimum prison sentence, if felons in the act of committing crimes such as rape or burglary carry a weapon.
WND has reported the Ramos and Compean appellant briefs argued the law was never meant to be applied to law enforcement officers in the pursuit of their duties.
Judge E. Grady Jolly commented the “government overreached” in applying 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c) to Ramos and Compean.
From Joe Loya through Robin Hvidston - here is what he observed in the courtroom today:
Joe Loya reported the following from the 5th Circuit Courthouse, New Orleans, Ramos and Compean Hearing
Before three federal judges:
Ramos and Compean’s attorney was allowed to speak for one half hour, no interruptions
The prosecuting attorney was interrupted “every three minutes” by all three judges. “The attorney could barely complete sentences without the judges firing away at him.”
The judges were familiar, in depth, with the case
They grilled the prosecuting attorney relentlessly on the following:
Why did the government allow Davila to lie under oath
Why did the government grant this special immunity
Why did the government prosecute law enforcement officers use of a gun using a law designed for criminals
Why did the government seal information
Apparently, the judges were merciless on the prosecuting attorney
Johnny Sutton DASHED out of the courtroom - avoiding all reporters
Joe Loya said there will be coverage on Lou Dobbs, Fox 11 did interviews, as well as America’s Most Wanted
Ramos and Compean are political prisoners, and I hold El President Bush and Johnny “Satan” fully responsible. Sutton should now face charges of for lying in a court of law and withholding key evidence, and Bush should be impeached for not having the balls to (fill in the blank). I’m fed up with Bush kissing Mexico’s ass and I’m fed up with the entire border situation! This is a matter of national security. Our borders should have been locked down the day after 9/11. Lay heavy fines on all businesses that hire illegals and militarize the border now!