Aldrete-Davila arrested in El Paso for 2005 Drug Offenses
[Guest post by DRJ]
Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, the drug smuggler shot by Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos in February 2005, was arrested this morning at an El Paso border checkpoint on September and October 2005 drug charges:
“Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, the drug smuggler who was shot in the buttocks by El Paso Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean in 2005, was arrested on drug charges at the Zaragoza Bridge this morning, officials with the U.S. Attorney’s office said.
Aldrete was arrested by agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General on a sealed indictment charging him with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana, and with possession with intent to distribute marijuana in September and October 2005.
These alleged drug-related incidents occurred after Aldrete was shot in February 2005 near Fabens and after he was given immunity to testify against Ramos.”
From Johnny Sutton’s press release:
“United States Attorney Johnny Sutton announced today that twenty-seven-year-old Osvaldo Aldrete Davila was arrested today at the Ysleta Port of Entry in El Paso, Texas. Aldrete was indicted on October 17, 2007, by an El Paso federal grand jury on two counts of possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance, one count of conspiracy to import a controlled substance and one count of conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with intent to distribute. His initial appearance is set for tomorrow at 2:30 p.m. (MST) before United States Magistrate Judge Richard Mesa.
According to the indictment, beginning on or about June 1, 2005, through November 30, 2005, Aldrete and his co-defendant Cipriano Ortiz Hernandez conspired to import and to possess with the intent to distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana. Additionally, on September 24, 2005, and then again on October 22 and 23, 2005, Aldrete-Davila did possess with the intent to distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana.”
Aldrete-Davila’s first court appearance will be tomorrow at 2:30 P.M. MST in El Paso.
H/T: Jay Curtis.
– DRJ
The big shots were there waiting for him like he had an appointment to meet them there. They seem to make a point not to mention whether Davila was coming or going but I suspect he was entering the US since why would he go to the crossing to meet with the big shots if he was already in the US?
The premise for the get together may have been related to the Margarita Crispin court date today.
Here is Sutton’s statements today. Just as a predicted yesterday, they will be claiming that Davila wasn’t arrested because they were investigating him for two years. They had him on a 5-40 sentence charge in Feb 05 then they caught him on another 5-40 in Oct 05. Now they say they found a bunch more crimes and say he can serve…5-40. Will there be a count for each one? I doubt it. So why the longest investigation of a drug mule in US history?
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Aldrete_arrest_sutton_statement.pdf
Comment by j curtis — 11/15/2007 @ 7:38 pm
So what do we know for sure now that we only had a strong hunch about previously?
They allowed Davila to testify that he was just some poor guy who agreed to deliver something ( not knowing what it was ) just one time because he had some bills that he desperately needed to pay. Sutton needed to hide the evidence of his other smuggling involvemnt from the jury. The October incident should have nulified the immunity agreement and they wouldn’t have had a case against Ramos and Compean.
DHS also wanted to cover this up because Davila was using a special DHS border pass to smuggle drugs into the US in September and October of 2005. We still need to learn who his custodian was during these visits.
We now no for a fact that Davila brought the drugs to a US contact that should have been in jail but Johnny Sutton failed to prosecute the guy after he was busted with a thousand pounds of dope at the same house in March 2004.
They weren’t only committing gross prosecutorial misconduct to hide evidence from a jury for the purpose of getting a conviction against Ramos and Compean, they were trying to save their own careers by covering up personal and departmental scandal.
Comment by j curtis — 11/15/2007 @ 8:22 pm
j curtis,
This is just an indictment and it can’t be used as proof of anything.
Comment by DRJ — 11/15/2007 @ 9:01 pm
Here is what they might do:
Cipriano Ortiz agreed to a plea bargain. We will soon find out that Ortiz will have gotten a sweetheart deal for giving them information about Davila. They didn’t need anything from Ortiz about Davila because they found Davila’s van at the scene. They wanted to avoid the trial because of the information that would have came out at the trial that would have ruined Sutton and embarrassed the DHS and even higher-ups.
Davila will be given the same kind of sweetheart deal because they will say that he spilled the beans on Margarita Crispin. This will also be nonsense because Crispin remained on the job up until just a couple of months ago. They would have been able to look at video at the border crossing back in Oct 05 to see which agent let him in with a van full of dope.
There will not be a Davila trial. You can bet that the Bush people will not allow that to happen.
Those are my predictions, we’ll see if any of it comes true.
Comment by j curtis — 11/15/2007 @ 9:38 pm
Hey did ya hear about that Bonds guy that’s gittin indited cause he lied, or at least copped a “not knowingly” took some roids?
Gotta be more important to expend resources on jocks than real criminals, right?
Currently my vote goes to JC’s thoughts. This nation will expend another million $ on this piece of crap and let him back out on the streets of multiple countries.
Comment by TC — 11/16/2007 @ 12:16 am
Part of the problem in this case is that we have a Legal System and not a Justice System.
We have a guy here who we know to be a bad guy. Drug smuggler. He has every reason to lie when he is on the stand and nothing to gain by telling the truth. But we can’t say anything about what a bad guy he is. We can’t say anything about his other violations of his immunity deal. We can’t give the jury tools and information that they need to make a VALID judgment. Then we say “the defendants were judged by a jury of their peers and found guilty”.
Would the jury have made the same decision had they known that almost all of the BP agents testifying against the defendants were going to be fired because of the inconsistencies and lies in their statements and testimony? Would the jury have come back with the same conclusion if they had been made aware that Davila was under investigation for further drug smuggling while he was under this “hybrid” immunity deal?
Would the jury have given any credit to the statements that this was his first time and that he was only trying to feed his family?
Probably not. So a drug smuggler goes free. And does it again.
Now, I wonder if his testimony in the Ramos and Compean case will be questioned by Mr Sutton as possible perjury based on his latter actions and these further charges? Probably not but I think they should at least look into the “truthfulness” of his testimony which directly relates to his immunity from prosecution for the first drug load.
Comment by Jay Curtis — 11/16/2007 @ 8:17 am
Jay Curtis:
Assume that in Feb. 2005, it was Davila’s 100th time bringing marijuana across the border.
But, accept the facts as established in the trial that Compean and Ramos did not have any EVIDENCE that Davila had drugs in the van when he ran from them.
How is their shooting of a Hispanic male running south towards the border any more justified whether he was driving his first load — as he claimed — or his 100th load, as might have been the case?
Whether it was 1 or 100 has no bearing on the information Compean and Ramos knew when they drew their weapons and fired.
What purpose is there in having he jury hear that question other than to suggest that American jurors will acquit law enforcement agents of wrongfully shooting suspects, as long as we can figure out after-the-fact that the suspects were bad guys.
Comment by wls — 11/16/2007 @ 9:03 am
6
I think what needs to be determined is Sutton’s investigation of the October incident between the time of the incident and the beginning of the Ramos-Compean trial. That was 4 long months. He wouldn’t need longer than that to come to a conclusion about Davila’s involvement in that matter. Even if he honestly wasn’t able to conclude one way or the other in those four months, he had an obligation to delay the trial until he was able to determine whether or not the immunity agreement was still valid and if their “one time mule” claim was still valid. Davila’s van was at the stash house. Smoking gun.
Did Sutton vigorously pursue the truth in that incident or did he stonewall during those four months? This needs to be investigated but who would initiate the investigation? Not the president, not the Democrat congress or senate. Not DHS and surely not the West Texas US attorney.
How can Davila even be tried in El Paso? How can there not be a change of venue and this matter taken out of Sutton’s hands?
Comment by j curtis — 11/16/2007 @ 9:05 am
How is their shooting of a Hispanic male running south towards the border any more justified whether he was driving his first load — as he claimed — or his 100th load, as might have been the case?
It’s irrelevant…Davila had a gun. You will now say “the jury looked at the evidence and determined that Davila wasn’t armed” to which I will bring it back to square one by saying “They weren’t given all the information they needed to see to determine whether the smuggler was criminally minded enough to be carrying a weapon”
Obviously a poor one time mule who just needed to pay some bills and feed his family wouldn’t be carrying a weapon.
Comment by j curtis — 11/16/2007 @ 9:12 am
Jay Curtis — there is no evidence that Feb. 2005 WASN’T Davila’s first time.
And, whether he had a gun or not wasn’t the question — the question was whether Compean and Ramos saw something they perceived as a threat.
Their stories were contradictory, and they told many outright fabrications — not to mention failing to even report having discharged their weapons and then trying to hide the fact that they had — so their claim that they thought Davila had a gun was unbelievable.
The question is “what was in their minds” when they pulled their triggers. Their shooting is only justified, and thus not criminal, if they perceived a threat. They said they did, but they said so many other things that weren’t true — and they couldn’t even keep their story straight — that the jury disbelieved them.
Comment by WLS — 11/16/2007 @ 11:07 am
We know very little about Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila’s drug experience because the trial court limited the questions he could be asked on that subject. Maybe the jury wouldn’t have believed OAD if his testimony on that issue had been challenged.
In any event, OAD was apparently arraigned this morning in El Paso. Today’s article also reports that Cipriano Ortiz “pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with intent to distribute in August and is scheduled to be sentenced in February.” Thus, it seems the evidence against OAD will include the testimony of an admitted drug smuggler. Ironic, isn’t it?
Comment by DRJ — 11/16/2007 @ 12:32 pm
Even if there is a Ramos-Compean retrial, the judge would still have to limit that type of testimony. You can’t force OAD to incriminate himself and most judges won’t let a witness take the Fifth in front of a jury.
I suppose there’s emotional satisfaction in watching OAD get his just desserts, but I don’t think it’s going to help Ramos-Compean that much.
Comment by lc — 11/16/2007 @ 1:24 pm
7
How is their shooting of a Hispanic male running south towards the border any more justified whether he was driving his first load — as he claimed — or his 100th load, as might have been the case?
We have only Davila’s word for it that he was unarmed. If he did, in fact, have a gun, then the shooting would have been called a good shoot and not the crime it has been labeled. By keeping his other misdeads from the jury, you give added value to his testimony.
Also the questions that I did not articulate very well have to do with Sutton, the prosecution team and what they knew about Davila that they learned before the R & C trial. Since they knew before the trial that he was implicated in further drug smuggling, did they learn anything that would have indicated to them that his testimony was likely to be false? If yes, why would they have continued with the trial? Isn’t there an ethical problem with prosecuting someone using testimony that is likely not true?
And the fact that he was Hispanic and running south has no more bearing than if he had been Blue and running north in my mind. I don’t see where ethnicity even came into play with this case.
Comment by Jay Curtis — 11/16/2007 @ 3:01 pm
lc,
I don’t see how it would incriminate OAD to testify about the details of the load he carried on the day he was shot because he was given immunity for anything he admitted he did that day. He admitted he was smuggling drugs and he should have to answer questions about those details. I think the trial court’s limitations on what defense counsel could ask are a valid issue on appeal.
Comment by DRJ — 11/16/2007 @ 3:07 pm
Well, I wasn’t talking about that day. He admitted he was carrying drugs that day. I thought the defense wanted to ask questions about other loads on other days.
Comment by lc — 11/16/2007 @ 5:01 pm
You’re right, lc, they did and that issue was addressed in the sealed transcript. However, they also wanted to ask more questions about the drug load OAD carried that day. I was thinking about the latter and you were thinking about the former. Thanks for pointing that out.
Comment by DRJ — 11/16/2007 @ 5:15 pm
Why has no one mentioned the rules of engagement between the Border Patrol and the illegals? The “good” illegals who are just here for jobs, will shrug their shoulders, stay where they are, and comply with the Border Patrols directions. The ones who run have warrants out on them, drugs or guns in their possession,or have been deported before, and the runners are the ones the BP know they need to stop.
Davila raised his hands momentarily and then kept advancing in a menacing manner, he did not stop when ordered to, and took off running as soon as he was out of the ditch.
Comment by Blenda Rappaport — 11/16/2007 @ 5:49 pm
Glen Beck ran a completely tasteless piece this morning on his radio show.
They started with a “Breaking News” announcement, teasing the Compean and Ramos story, with his basic “first two political prisoners” crap.
Then he had some communication “difficulties” with one of his sidekicks who was trying to “confirm” a Thanksgiving WH annoucement of long-awaited pardons.
Then, after about5 minutes of trying to stifle laughter themselves, the “confusion” was cleared up with the explanation that the “pardons” by Pres. Bush in question were of two turkeys brought to the WH for Thanksgiving — and that Compean and Ramos would remain in prison, but with Administration assurances that they wouldn’t be killed or eaten for one day — maybe only brutalized in their cells.
A new low.
This guy’s schtick has really run its course. He’s the Olbermann of the right wing — not even worthy of being considered any further
Comment by WLS — 11/21/2007 @ 6:41 pm
I have reluctantly come to much the same conclusion myself, WLS.
Comment by Christoph — 11/21/2007 @ 7:02 pm