Is it your contention that the lives of Compean and Ramos and their families would not have been at risk if the agents or their supervisors had made made a formal report of the weapons discharge?

“Nobody claimed OAD tackled Compean on the levee or anywhere else.”

I realize that. What I am saying is that Compean may have believed that OAD was going to do that as he continued to advance on Compean. Compean, may have believed the guy was capable of anything, heightening his reactivity to him.

Ramos and Compean would be dead if they had reported it.

Their names would have been on BPETS and Davila’s hunting party would have went after them.

Americans don’t like it when Bush’s beloved Mexican drug cartels assassinate border patrol agents. Last I checked.

So your theory is: Ramos and Compean knew of a conspiracy between corrupt BP agents and drug smugglers, and believed that shooting at a low-level “mule” involved in smuggling a few thousand dollars of pot would be a death sentence for them. So rather than exposing the vast Bushitler conspiracy which they supposedly had full knowledge of, they consciously decided to commit felonies by covering up the evidence that they had discharged their weapons lawfully? And similarly, during the trial, they must have decided that 10+ years behind bars was a better alternative to blowing the lid off this conspiracy.

Apart from wondering why no evidence of this was presented in court, I have to wonder then – why did they confront OAD at all?

None of this makes any sense unless Ramos and Compean, all the other agents who testified, and the prosecutors too, were also parties to the conspiracy. In fact, *you* may be only one who isn’t…

Would it also be plausible to believe that Aldrete-Davila would have done anything to get away? He admitted in testimony that he didn’t think that the ROE would allow the BP agents to shoot him as he was trying to get away–which makes me believe that he was willing to keep advancing on Compean even in the face of a shotgun. He fights Compean when tackled. Why wouldn’t he be willing pull a gun to prevent or deter the agents from continuing after him?

According to Compean’s own testimony, the alleged gun appeared in OAD’s hand when he was already far away and had essentially made good his escape. Similarly, Ramos claimed that he had time to get off only a single shot before OAD disappeared into the riverside brush. Neither of the agents, according to their own testimony, were attempting to chase OAD at that point, so it seems to me that stopping to turn around and take a potshot at agents that were no longer pursuing him would have made his escape less likely, and exposed him to greater risk. OAD had seen Ramos and knew there were other agents nearby. Stopping to start a gunbattle with multiple BP agents when you are almost to the river and they haven’t shot at you yet (according to Compean’s story – according to OAD, Compean was already shooting as he fled across the open area leading to the river) doesn’t make much sense.

OAD’s testimony that he believed the agents wouldn’t use lethal force on him rings true, but that would certainly cease to be the case if he started shooting at them.

Actually, OAD denied there was any wrestling match, and we only have Compean’s word that it occurred. The prosecution poked some holes in his description of it – he claimed they tumbled down the rocky slope of the levee, but he suffered none of the cuts or torn clothing that one would have expected. Also, Juarez testified that he saw the upper half of Compean’s body near the top of the levee, firing at OAD, while Compean claimed the shooting started only after they had rolled down the slope, where there is no way Juarez could have seen any part of him while he was firing.

More importantly, isn’t it reasonable that Compean might have believed Aldrete-Davila was willing to do anything to get away– from tackling Compean on the levee, fighting Compean when he was grabbed– to pointing a gun and shooting Compean to prevent him from continuing to pursue?

Nobody claimed OAD tackled Compean on the levee or anywhere else. Compean testified that as soon as he stumbled at the edge of the ditch, OAD shuffled to the side to put distance between them so he could go around. The alleged melee near the levee is problematic for the reasons mentioned above. And Compean was not in pursuit when he claims OAD turned and revealed a gun.

As for Aldrete-Davila falling down–the agents may not have seen that–if he did, indeed, fall from a bullet. The brush out there was probably waist-high (I’ve seen the brush in that part of the country) and for all they knew the guy was crouching and hiding or running low to the ground until they saw him emerge into the fields on the way to the road where the van that picked him up was located.

That is not the most problematic part of the agents’ story, but it hinges on other elements that do not seem consistent or credible to me. That said, it is hard to believe that many law enforcement officers in that situation, knowing that backup was arriving, and believing that a suspect just involved in a shoot-out might be nearby with a gun, would have just walked away without investigating further.

My point was that people in general, and juries in particular, don’t like cover ups.

Comment by DRJ

Naturally, if they don’t understand why something has been covered up.

There are often good reasons to cover something up. Sometimes there are malicious cover ups masquerading as legitimate cover ups; such as the motion in limine in this case.

I think we’ll be learning of many cover ups having happened in this case. The one that has gotten all the attention, the incident report, is the one that reasonable people will empathize with.

The government could argue:

“Well, sure the agents and their families would be dead if they had reported the incident, but they had no way of knowing that at the time”.

Even Tony Snow would refuse to go out and say that and I don’t think Johnny Sutton will be giving anymore interviews.

I haven’t decided yet what I think about this case (probably because I’m so far behind everyone else in reading the transcripts!), so I wasn’t trying to make a point about what should have happened. My point was that people in general, and juries in particular, don’t like cover ups.

It helps me to discuss all viewpoints because I’m trying to keep both sides in mind as I summarize the transcript. I understand your point and I think there is a related point that occasionally surfaces in these transcripts.

Specifically, Juarez and Vasquez both stated they were the junior guys and not in a position to question or second-guess what Ramos and Compean did. It reminds me of the military, and I think there are many parallels between law enforcement and the military. I think your view is consistent with this, too.

I haven’t read everything and I know many of you have, but I agree that the agents’ failure to report was a problem. It smacks of a cover-up. Americans are a forgiving people but they don’t like cover-ups.

Comment by DRJ

Ramos and Compean would be dead if they had reported it.

Their names would have been on BPETS and Davila’s hunting party would have went after them.

Americans don’t like it when Bush’s beloved Mexican drug cartels assassinate border patrol agents. Last I checked.

Would it also be plausible to believe that Aldrete-Davila would have done anything to get away? He admitted in testimony that he didn’t think that the ROE would allow the BP agents to shoot him as he was trying to get away–which makes me believe that he was willing to keep advancing on Compean even in the face of a shotgun. He fights Compean when tackled. Why wouldn’t he be willing pull a gun to prevent or deter the agents from continuing after him?

More importantly, isn’t it reasonable that Compean might have believed Aldrete-Davila was willing to do anything to get away– from tackling Compean on the levee, fighting Compean when he was grabbed– to pointing a gun and shooting Compean to prevent him from continuing to pursue?

As for Aldrete-Davila falling down–the agents may not have seen that–if he did, indeed, fall from a bullet. The brush out there was probably waist-high (I’ve seen the brush in that part of the country) and for all they knew the guy was crouching and hiding or running low to the ground until they saw him emerge into the fields on the way to the road where the van that picked him up was located.

Right, concerning the departure for behavior of the victim, that’s what I was wondering about.

One possibility: it was far more obvious to Compean that the OAD was trying to elude, rather than harm, him. When Compean had stumbled and dropped his shotgun while trying to knock OAD back into the ditch, there was an opportunity to shoot him or otherwise attack him, but OAD instead took advantage of the fall to run around him. Later, when Compean tackled him, OAD managed to escape the grapple while Compean was still on the ground. Again, he did nothing threatening, but bolted south again.

Ramos, OTOH, only saw OAD climbing up the ditch toward his colleague, and later (allegedly) saw Compean on the ground after Ramos had crossed and climbed out of the ditch himself.

So between the two of them, the judge may have determined that Ramos had better reason to believe OAD was a threat, having not seen that he twice took advantage of Compean’s falls to flee.