Bush Was Right to Show Mercy on Ramos and Compean
Even though it seems obvious that the former Border Patrol agents are guilty as sin.
George W. Bush did precisely the right thing by commuting the prison sentences of former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean.
It’s not that the two men aren’t guilty. They are. From everything I’ve read about the case, and the interviews I’ve conducted with U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton whose office prosecuted the case, it seems obvious that they’re guilty as sin. These former law enforcement officers were justly tried and convicted of shooting an unarmed Mexican drug smuggler while patrolling the U.S.-Mexican border and lying about it. For their sins and indiscretions, Ramos received 11 years while Compean got 12 years. Most of that sentence was the result of mandatory sentencing laws for crimes in which a firearm was discharged — the very sorts of laws written and approved by some of the same Republican lawmakers who all of a sudden found religion and demanded a full pardon for Ramos and Compean.
Bush refused to grant a pardon because, according to his spokesman, the president was also convinced of the former agents’ guilt. Bush thought they should “have to carry the burden of being convicted felons and the shame of violating their oaths for the rest of their lives.” And yet, the spokesman said, Bush also felt that “they and their families have suffered enough for their crimes.” So he commuted their sentences. Now both men are due to be released on March 20, although authorities are leaving open the possibility that the former agents could be released early for good behavior.
About this, neither the far right nor the far left is totally pleased. That’s a good sign for Bush. You can usually tell you’re on the right path in politics when you’re taking shots from the extremes. Those on the far right consider Ramos and Compean heroes who got railroaded into prison by an administration that was taking its marching orders from the Mexican government, and so they deserved a full pardon. Those on the far left see the pair as unrepentant lawbreakers who played judge, jury, and executioner with a drug smuggler, and so they deserved to serve out their full sentences without mercy.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the editorial board of the San Diego Union Tribune, a nationally syndicated columnist, a frequent lecturer, and a regular contributor to CNN.com.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
26 Comments
1. Marc Malone:Compromise is not necessarily right. Bush was never big on mercy. I mean, he IS a Texan. He should have pardoned them. His failure to do so means that, in the future, border agents are gonna just turn a blind eye to a lot of things, rather than risk going to jail.
You’re beating a dead horse, here, anyway. This was addressed very recently and very thoroughly in another article. People have already decided where they stand on this. Oh, and I don’t find the D.A. a credible unbiased source.
Jan 25, 2009 - 12:52 am 2. Pat Patterson:But then again BP agents didn’t rally to their side, most of the witnesses for the prosecution were agents and the first public query into the shooting was instigated at another border crossing station because they were ashamed of what happened. But basically the argument gravitates those who rely on opinion and those who actually are familiar with the transcript of the trial and the two appeals.
Jan 25, 2009 - 2:18 am 3. bill:I have to agree with Pat Patterson (2). I salute the commutation of the BP agents’ sentence because the guy they shot was such an irredeemable dirtbag. However, saying they did nothing wrong sets a very dangerous precedent. It simply cannot be open season on the human race just because your job is stressful.
Jan 25, 2009 - 6:02 am 4. gburg:So why, exactly, was Bush right for commuting their sentences? Because their stories were hijacked by politicians and there was news coverage of the event?
Jan 25, 2009 - 7:20 am 5. Cienfuegos:Caramba. So does this signify that as a private citizen, if I discharge my firearm without my life, limb or property being threatened, and shoot some unidentified guy on a dark road, that whoever is president is going to commute my sentence?
Or am I going away for a long time?
The reason these men got off is because they’re cops.
Jan 25, 2009 - 9:05 am 6. Ride Fast:Mandatory minimum sentences for “having” a firearm during the commission of a crime are just wrong. If someone uses a firearm to cause harm, fine, throw the book at them. Just having a piece of hardware in the trunk of your car when you got busted for unpaid traffic tickets is silly.
Yeah, I know, these guys shot someone. If they had shot someone with an arrow, their sentences would have been less. Doesn’t make sense to me.
Jan 25, 2009 - 11:08 am 7. Frank:Wow Ruben. Hell must have frozen over, because I completely agree with you.
Jan 25, 2009 - 12:39 pm 8. Pat Patterson:No, their sentences could have been the same, as Tennessee v Garner, because the decision that limited when police could use deadly force only refers to deadly force. Not a particular instrument to use in that action. It simply says that the officer must show that his life was in danger or someone else’s was and the had to be imminent not what someone thought could happen in a hypothetical future.
And if the reference to carrying a weapon by Davila then we’ll never know because R&C tampered with the crime scene making everything inadmissable. By Davila escaping no one knows if he had a gun because no one credible saw him with one and the van was also empty of a gun.
Jan 25, 2009 - 1:15 pm 9. Cybergeezer:Seems to be the season for forgiveness; The Hip-Hop Change Administration is in the process of forgiving the guests at Gitmo. “His Emptiness” is waving his magic wand to perform supernatural phenomenon, all to the awe of the Dumocrats.
Jan 25, 2009 - 1:18 pm 10. Bugs:I disagree with Mr. Navarrette on most things immigration-related, but in this case I have to make an exception. I don’t pretend Bush possessed the “wisdom of Solomon.” In this instance, however, I think he exhibited something along the same lines. Justice (like politics) doesn’t always have to be an all-or-nothing affair.
Jan 25, 2009 - 2:36 pm 11. zeezil:“Even though it seems obvious that the former Border Patrol agents are guilty as sin.”
—————————————————————————
Spoken like a true reconquista, Ruben.
Jan 25, 2009 - 3:26 pm 12. Gozer the Carpathian:Guilty of some of the charges yes, but I doubt it’s anywhere near as clean cut as it was made out to be by those who had it in for Ramos and Compean. Personally I’m qutie satisfied by Bush’s choice not to pardon them but to only commute their sentence.
Their families also wanted it this way so they can continue the legal fight and “earn” their innocence back as it were.
Jan 25, 2009 - 4:06 pm 13. Lynn:Well, alls well that ends well. The Drug dealer is in a jail cell on a big drug smuggling charge and the agents sentences were commuted. Bush did the right thing.
Jan 25, 2009 - 4:38 pm 14. Grumpyoffar:With just a little tweeking of the law, all this could have been prevented. The law should read. “Run from the law and you can expect to be shot.” Go ahead….make my day!
Jan 25, 2009 - 5:42 pm 15. Ran:“From everything I’ve read about the case, and the interviews I’ve conducted with U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton whose office prosecuted the case, it seems obvious that they’re guilty as sin.”
Keep reading, Mr. Navarrette. Mr. Sutton had abused his authority and apparently outright lied about the evidence, according to the data I’ve read. This case smacks of Duke Lacrosse style mendacity. Canning the Dealer isn’t going to satisfy justice… Though, who knows? Once the dust settles, perhaps Sutton’s sentence, too, will be commuted.
Jan 25, 2009 - 6:26 pm 16. Eric:Personally I think they should have killed the POS and every other person who steps across our border with drugs on them. Keeping criminals alive causes the same type of problem we now have in Gitmo by not killing every single enemy we come across. Take NO prisoners.
Jan 25, 2009 - 8:29 pm 17. Mrs. Rodriguez:These two men are not guilty as sin. To believe that the drug dealer was unarmed, and that Ramos and Compean were lying, is to believe the criminal’s testimony. The only mistake these border patrol agents made was they didn’t shoot him dead.
Jan 25, 2009 - 8:43 pm 18. Pat Patterson:So the testimony of the other two witnesses, both BP agents doesn’t count? The only mistake they made was to shoot and then lie about it as the court transcript and the testimony of the other two agents are very clear? They couldn’t convince a jury, a judge and two appelate courts.
It’s certainly not a matter of believing Davila was unarmed because neither agent made that claim until after their signed shooting reports and their depositions were taken. Why not say immediately that they thoght he was armed and not some 90 days later.
Jan 26, 2009 - 12:33 am 19. zeezil:I find it quite telling of those who accept the testimony of a Mexican cartel drug runner illegal alien over two Border Patrol agents. That tells me one of two things…they have an agenda or they lack character…possibly both.
Jan 26, 2009 - 11:41 am 20. Pat Patterson:Or perhaps they can read and are not gullible enough to believe unsourced rumors? Are you ignoring the testimony of the other two agents who witnessed the shooting are is that simply not amenable to believing that only Davila testified. Agent Juarez winessesed the entire incident and testified against the other agents. Another agent, Vasquez, arrived immediately after the shooting and was ordered by Compean to find 5 missing casings. Vasquez did so though in his depostion and at the trial knew that at that point he was participating in the coverup of a possible crime. And if you don’t think that is factual than find something more reliable then impugning the motives of anybody you disagree with.
Jan 26, 2009 - 3:15 pm 21. Americanwoman:Ruben Navarrette, if I may be so bold as to opine…has a general problem with those U.S. citizens who dare to remind him that there actually ARE immigration laws which are being ignored from the top down. His now predictably tainted journalistic attempts have emblazened him as a “raza-rouser” for years. He is boring. He never investigated this case any more than he had to, in order to write the left-wing blather for which he is known. Thank God Compean and Ramos soon will be free…a circumstance that our boy Rube never thought he would have to address. These guys will need time to heal…to regroup and recoup. Two bogus years in “protective” solitary confinement is tantamount to the TORTURE that so frightens libs. Eventually, I hope they take their cases back to court. The felony counts left in place by the former president should be removed from their records. Bush is a coward who has no idea what REALLY happened out there in the desert (or did he?). Oh! I forgot! Aldrete-Davila, the scum-bag STAR-WITNESS, SWEARS HE WAS JUST AN INNOCENT DRUG SMUGGLER, TRYING TO SCRAPE TOGETHER A LITTLE CASH FOR HIS GRAVELY ILL MOTHER…NO GUN…NO FORMER DELIVERIES…and of course, he wasn’t running SOUTH like a bat out of hell, either, when he turned and pointed that gum wrapper (?) at our border guards! Nacho Ramos could have killed the s.o.b., as he is a first-class marksman. I say, “Too bad he didn’t.” The other major witness, dirty BP agent, Rene Sanchez, was an in-law of Davila’s! And what about the BP Supervisors who were immediately on-scene? They sure know the truth. It’s a totally sketchy scenario. I suggest to all interested parties who would like to know the TRUTH, that they look into this case. It was a set-up from DAY ONE. NOTE: There’s more than ONE RECONQUISTA SUPPORTER on this blog. Is it any wonder that WE, THE PEOPLE are fed up with the wide-open borders and ports of America???
Jan 26, 2009 - 3:25 pm 22. jerry:God help us now that the Obamarama regime is in place.
I don’t know what the problem is here. The border should be closed up tight, and anyone who crosses should be shot. If we need the workers we should let them come though the regular ports of entry. It is shamful to have people we need have to sneak into the country over rivers and under fences. Anyone that does do this should be concidered a drug smuggler, a terrorist, or worse.
Jan 26, 2009 - 4:18 pm 23. Pat Patterson:Rene Sanchez is a BP agent in Arizona and it was his mother-in-law that Davilia’s mother called to complain about the shooting. This Sanchez acting on hearsay evidence, which is inadmissable in court, learned of the unreported incident. The Department of Homeland Security and the Inspector General’s Office sent FBI Special Agent Christopher Sanchez to investigate who only knew for sure the day and location of the, at that time rumored, shooting. Sanchez in his testimony revealed that he thought the report was bogus as many of the shooting claims along the border were until he began interviewing the other BP agents.
The claim that both agents were placed in solitary confinement again is contradicted by the facts. Normal policy of the BOP is to isolate those prisoners if they are in danger. But the two ex-agents were both asked and had to sign written releases. Compean asked to be segregated while Ramos did not. But after a while Ramos did not feel safe and asked in writing to be housed apart from the general prison population.
This is tedious, there were two other witnesses, both BP agents who saw the shooting so Davila was indeed important but he certainly was not the star witness. That was Agents Vasquez and Juarez while the other witness who testified was also an agent Jose Mendoza testified later that he was shown the casings and Ramos admitted that he had “…probably” shot the smuggler. And yet the two agents still did not file a shooting or an incident report which they were required to do. It’s only “sketchy” if you believe in the tooth fairy and don’t take a minimum of time to actually check the court case or the appelate cases.
As to the attempt at humor perhaps this quote from Compean might help. “My intent was to kill the alien becuase I thought he had a gun, but I never really saw for certain that he had a gun.” Which Compean now claimed after 30 days since the shooting after denying the shooting had even taken place. Soon after this Ramos tried to deny the bullet came from his gun but forgot that it had been held for safe keeping in Davila’s butt. Which was one of the reasons that the US Attorney had to make the immunity agreement with Davila as he could not be extradited.
Jan 26, 2009 - 5:50 pm 24. zeezil:The government is upside down when illegal immigration is not only tolerated but facilitated and token efforts at enforcement is done to throw a bone to American patriots that insist laws be enforced. Then, when two Border patrol agents actually take active steps to thwart an illegal alien drug runner invader, they get prosecuted.
Jan 27, 2009 - 6:17 am 25. Pat Patterson:zeezil-Can you add anything factual to the mix other than you think that the border should be declared a free fire zone except for all those UTEP students drinking in Juarez? Active steps? Do you mean like shooting someone in the back?
Jan 27, 2009 - 1:13 pm 26. c.gray:I don’t know what the problem is here.
The _problem_ is that two cops shot a fleeing suspect in the back and left him to die in the desert, failed to report the shooting to their supervisor and took steps to cover up the fact a shooting had taken place, then encouraged their fellow officers to lie about the incident and assist in a coverup.
The two effectively ADMITTED all of this to investigators before they were charged.
The two are a disgrace. But not as large a disgrace as the people who keep trying to hold these men up as victims of some sort of politically motivated conspiracy, or the President who pandered to the anti-immigrant fanatics who’ve made them a cause.
Jan 29, 2009 - 8:27 am