National Day of Prayer For Ramos & Compean
From: Steve Elliott
President, Grassfire.org Alliance
We've just been told that Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) is set to announce a National Day of Prayer for imprisoned border agents Nacho Ramos and Jose Compean on May 11. Both remain in solitary confinement as they await a decision on their appeal that was heard in December of last year! Rep. Rohrabacher, a true champion in the ongoing battle to free Ramos and Compean, will make the official announcement during a press event on Monday, May 5, at 1:30 PST at the LAPD Police Officer's Memorial, Ahmanson Recruit Training Facility.
Joining the Congressman will be numerous guests including Monica Ramos, TJ Bonner, the National Border Patrol Council President, Chris Burgard, documentary filmmaker of "Border" and others. Says Rohrabacher...
I ask that on Sunday, May 11th, the American people join me in a National Day of prayer for not only Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean and their families, but for all the men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line to protect our communities everyday. In addition to being Mother’s Day, it also marks the beginning of National Police Week. The Ramos and Compean prosecution already represents one of the greatest miscarriages of justice I've ever seen, and if their case isn’t overturned, every law enforcement officer will be put on notice that if they use their weapon, they could face 10 years in prison.
Please join with Grassfire by remembering Ramos and Compean, and their families in your thoughts and prayers on this special day. Thanks for standing with Grassfire.
Steve
You can sign a petition calling for the freedom of Ramos & Compean by clicking here...
Grassfire Petition
If you wish, you can write to Nacho and Jose...
Ignacio Ramos #58079-180
FCI Phoenix
Federal Correctional Institution
37910 N. 45th Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85086
Jose Compean #58080180
FCI Elkton
P.O. Box 10
Lisbon, OH 44432
posted by Hawkeye® -- Saturday, May 03, 2008
10 Comments
10 Comments:
Hmm. Found guilty by a jury of his peers and sentenced accordingly. I thought you were lot were big on the rule of law and lots of jail time for wrongdoers – or was I mistaken?
Cheers
Elroy
That's, er, THEIR peers. Sorry. What's my fine?
Elroy,
See HERE...
The border guards and decorated defenders of our nation are still sitting in jail for shooting a drug smuggler that was running from a van with 700 pounds of drugs in it. The smuggler was a repeat offender, a drug smuggler and an illegal Mexican immigrant trying to drive drugs into the United States. The agents are both hispanic and decorated heros.
It was hardly a "fair trial". The U.S. Justice Department sent federal agents into Mexico, who tracked down the escaped drug smuggler and gave him total immunity from prosecution for coming back into the United States to testify against Ramos and Compean, which he was glad to do. He was also treated for his flesh wound in a U. S. Hospital. Emboldened by these indulgences, he sued the U. S. Government for violating his civil rights. As if an illegal border invader has civil rights in the country whose laws he is flaunting.
This trial was rigged. The Prosecutor even attempted to level a charge of attempted murder against the patrolmen, of which the Jury rightly acquitted them. Their only real offense was failing to report the firing of weapons, a much lesser charge. They were still sentenced to a major portion of their lives in prison, because they (the Prosecution) believed an obvious criminal, under immunity from prosecution, rather than these two honorable servants of their country.
And now, an ethics complaint is being launched with the Texas Bar Association seeking an investigation into U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton for "willfullly misleading" statements in the case against the two Border Patrol agents.
Cheers
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tales of extenuating circumstances abound in the judicial system Hawkeye, and the are routinely ignored by the law 'n' order Right.
All this stuff about what the guy was up to are immaterial as the law is only interested in one thing – the case. Did they shoot an unarmed man 15 times and then cover it up? If the answer is 'Yes' then the law states that sanctions must apply. Your arguments are merely appeals to emotion that have no place in a court – good job you're not a lawyer!
You have to remember, Hawkeye, that marijuana smuggling is not a capital crime; it is not an offence punishable by death, and it is not up to border guards to indiscriminately inflict summary justice. That's why civilized countries have courts, judges and all the rest – no one is allowed to take the law into their own hands.
And do you not think that those armed by the state and trusted to act as representatives of the law should be held to a higher standard? Or should the law not apply to them? Or should everyone be equal?
I don't mean to sound bloodless and cruel over this, I am merely applying the standards that the Right demand in every other case.
Personally, I think the judicial system is in crisis in both your country and mine – there are way too many people in jail for minor offences, and justice is becoming a commodity available only to the rich.
Jail doesn't work. It brutalizes people and guarantees recidivism, costs billion and it certainly doesn't seem to work as a deterrent. Sure, some people need to isolated from the wider community, but the best way to empt the jails is to remove the reasons they wind up there.
But the point is, Hawkeye, that your concerns for Ramos and Compean will just sound hypocritical unless you are wiling to extend your consideration for extenuating circumstances to the rest of the incarcerated.
Elroy,
Are you feeling OK? Two posts submitted and deleted in less than 10 minutes. You must be unsure of yourself or something. Get a grip man.
(:D) Cheers
Elroy,
Ahh! There you are. Gonna keep this one around for a few minutes so I can respond? Or are you going to keep me in suspense?
(:D) Will answer shortly...
Elroy,
Now for a response...
First of all, if these guys shot an unarmed man 15 times and they only hit him once in the buttock, then they should be sacked for incompetence. Or at the very least, they should be sent back to the shooting range for a refresher course.
Did they try to cover it up? Yes. That was a mistake. They should have admitted that they were shooting at a criminal who was resisting arrest and fleeing the scene of a crime. But do their actions deserve a sentence of 11 or 12 years? C'mon! Admitted terrorists are getting that or less!
In November 2007, the Danish high court convicted three persons for planning a terrorist attack in Denmark. The investigation showed that the men procured fertiliser and chemicals which could be used for producing peroxide-based primary explosives. Members of the group gathered large amounts of information on the Internet regarding the manufacturing of explosives and bombs. Two of the accused were sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment, while the third received a four-year sentence.
In Belgium, a network of intermediaries for al-Qaeda was successfully prosecuted in 2007. The prosecutors made use of a judicial decision in Italy: in 2007, the Italian supreme court held that the impact of individual terrorist actions needs to be seen in the wider criminal plan of a terrorist organisation. Sentences in Italy amounted to nine and six years; in Belgium, the five individuals were sentenced to up to ten years in early 2008.
Why heck! Even Jemaah Islamiyah leaders Abu Dujana and Zarkasih, said to be responsible for the Bali night club bombings, were sentenced to only 15 years in jail! Is there any moral equivalence here? Hmmmm. Let me see... Al-Qaeda, Bali bombings, hundreds dead... compared to one dirt bag criminal shot in the butt (probably by accident). Yep! They're equal... NOT!
See my next article on how these two heroes got "Nifong"-ed.
Cheers
Oh Hawkeye, you funny old thing! Talk about comparing Apples and Mangos!
The countries you quote are European, countries with a somewhat more enlightened and lenient approach to sentencing than the USA, an approach that conservatives are usually lambasting from the highest tree!
The thing is, sentencing in the USA is harsh because conservatives are constantly campaigning for whatever public office on a law 'n' order ticket, thus upping the ante on how long people spend in the jug. Mandatory sentencing etc, all these policies mount up because you and your ilk voted for them. Be careful what you wish for indeed.
So it doesn't matter what I think is proper – what I am saying is they are paying the price for policies you, as a conservative, voted for.
But having said that, I don't know what the sentencing guidelines are for the offences they committed – did the judge overdo it? Or was he within prescribed limits? These are important questions if we are to understand properly what happened.
And for what it's worth, the Bali Bombers, the guys that actually did it, are on death row.
Cheers
Elroy
PS – I apologise for the deletions; I did it because there were glaring errors and because I just discovered I could.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home