Border Agents' ACCUSER caught With 2nd load of Pot

wilthrill · 11-16-2007, 01:37 PM

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=58727

For those who haven't been following this case. Two of our border patrol agents are serving TEN YEAR prison terms for shooting an illegal alien drug dealer who was trying to smuggle 800 pounds of pot into the US. The drug dealer fled to Mexico. The Bush administration (led by Bush Buddy #1, US District Attorney Johnny Sutton) found the drug dealer, paid for his medical treatment and gave him immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony against the agents. Without his testimony they had NO CASE. Part of the immunity agreement was that he could enter the US freely but he was not to break the law. AFTER the agreement and BEFORE the trial he was caught a 2nd time trying to smuggle 750 pounds of pot into the country.

Now normally that would break the immunity agreement. INSTEAD Sutton got an order sealing ALL info from the 2nd smuggling event and then WENT AHEAD with his prosecution of the agents and WITH this two-time loser TESTIFYING!!!

THE DEFENSE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT THE 2ND OFFENSE TO THE JURY OR ANYONE ELSE UNDER THE THREAT OF JAIL TIME!!!

OK, for those who don't play a lawyer on TV a few rules of evidence:

Usually a DEFENDANT'S prior bad acts are not allowed into evidence. It is felt that they are too prejudicial and the jury will wrongfully convict if they come into evidence. This is not so with a WITNESS who himself is not on trial. The rules of evidence SPECIFICALLY provide that prior bad acts DO COME INTO EVIDENCE (the jury gets to hear them) when one is trying to IMPEACH a witness who is not a defendant.

Here, Sutton's WHOLE case was based upon the CREDIBILITY of the drug dealer witness. The drug dealer witness was NOT on trial. And yet the DEFENDANTS, (whose whole case rested on IMPEACHING the drug dealer witness) were not allowed to TELL THE FUCKING TRUTH (aka IMPEACH) about their SOLE accuser!!!

I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. YOU PEOPLE WHO WANT TO IMPEACH BUSH NEED TO START LOOKING INTO THIS!!!!

Lerxstcat · 11-21-2007, 05:58 PM

It's too bad they didn't shoot him in the head instead of the ass. Would have saved a lot of trouble.

PITBOSS · 11-22-2007, 10:41 AM

True, then our gov't would have awarded his family with millions and automatic citizenship. The agents would have been rewarded for the ass shot in any other country.

Lerxstcat · 12-07-2007, 05:06 AM

The government is now admitting that he lied in the stand with their knowledge - the government suborned perjury to get the conviction in other words. He portrayed himself as a "mule" someone who'd been hired to make a one-time run, wheras he is a habitual smuggler who probably WAS armed.

Thus my thought that they should have shot him dead. Then they would probably have recovered the weapon.

The only thing these agents did wrong was to not report the shooting, probably because they knew they'd get railroaded.

wilthrill · 12-07-2007, 09:05 AM

Lerxtcat, the gov't specifically Johnny Sutton put the DRUG DEALER on the stand and represented to the JURY that he was an "ex-offender who was just trying to take some money to his sick mother" when in fact Sutton KNEW he was a CURRENT OFFENDER who just a month or so previously had been caught with a SECOND load of pot coming across the border.

Furthermore NOW Johnny Sutton is REFUSING to testify before congress.
http://www.helium.com/tm/486203/rece...representative

Couple that with the fact that Homeland Security is STILL refusing to hand over documents related to the case and now congress if having to file a Freedom of Information Act request to attempt to get the docs.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53948

You know back when this case first gained attention several members questioned Homeland Security on it. They were told, "we've got all kinds of evidence even some statements made by the agents that contradict their current stories. Just wait until after the trial and we'll give it to you." Well after the trial Homeland Security was called before Congress and asked about this evidence they had spoken of earlier. The Homeland Security officials admitted to Congress that they had LIED to Congress and had no such statements.

The trial transcript of this case was sealed.

Homeland Security won't release any docs concerning the case.

And the lead prosecutor Johnny Sutton has refused to testify.

And from all this George W Bush says that he will not pardon or commute the sentences because "Johnny Sutton is an even-handed guy and a personal friend".

THIS IS IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT FOLKS!!!!

AT THE VERY LEAST BUSH'S PRESIDENTIAL POWER TO PARDON SHOULD BE STRIPPED FROM HIM BECAUSE HE WILL NEVER AGAIN COME UPON A CASE MORE DESERVING OF A PARDON SO WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW ROGUE FINANCIERS, PUERTO RICAN TERRORISTS AND PRESIDENTIAL BROTHERS TO GO FREE WHILE THOSE WHO DEFEND OUR BORDERS REMAIN IN PRISON??????

Mikael · 12-07-2007, 12:08 PM

The thing is, if these Border Patrol agents would have followed protocol in the first place-we wouldn't even be talking about this right now.

wilthrill · 12-07-2007, 02:11 PM

How do you know that Mikael?

Had they reported it they STILL probably would have been charged because they were charged with discharging a firearm NOT with failing to report it. Also if you look into the Hernandez case (sheriff shoots illegal who tries to RUN HIM OVER IN A VAN)the sheriff DID report it and Sutton went after him also!!!

http://www.amw.com/features/feature_...il.cfm?id=1408

Furthermore at least TWO of Ramos' and Campeon's supervisors were on the scene so one could make the argument that they didn't have to file a report (their policy required an ORAL report).

Also when you look at the penalty for failing to report (which though they were not charged with is the ONLY thing that Sutton could PROVE they did wrong) it was SUSPENSION not TEN FUCKING YEARS IN PRISON!

Some may wonder why I urge that President Bush be impeached for the actions of a US Attorney. I do so because it is BLATANTLY APPARENT that Sutton's actions were approved by if not instigated by BUSH and Homeland Security at the behest of the Mexican gov't.

You do not sentence border patrol agents to 10 year prison terms for failing to report.

You DO sentence them to ten year terms if you are trying to send a message to the Mexican gov't and other border patrol agents.

Bush was/is trying THROUGH ANY MEANS NECESSARY to FACILITATE illegal immigration into this country.

As to WHY, it probably has to do with his big CORPORATE FRIENDS who want the slave wage labor as well as the fact that Mexico is the 2nd largest supplier of OIL to the US.

But, in fact, WHY is irrelevant. Bush is supposed to be the top law enforcement agent in the nation. In this respect he is the top LAWBREAKER and should be impeached!!!!!

PITBOSS · 12-07-2007, 04:13 PM

At least AMW is bringing this out for the public to see how these criminals are being rewarded, and the officers disciplined for doing their jobs.

Mikael · 12-10-2007, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilthrill

How do you know that Mikael?

Had they reported it they STILL probably would have been charged because they were charged with discharging a firearm NOT with failing to report it. Also if you look into the Hernandez case (sheriff shoots illegal who tries to RUN HIM OVER IN A VAN)the sheriff DID report it and Sutton went after him also!!!

http://www.amw.com/features/feature_...il.cfm?id=1408

Furthermore at least TWO of Ramos' and Campeon's supervisors were on the scene so one could make the argument that they didn't have to file a report (their policy required an ORAL report).

Also when you look at the penalty for failing to report (which though they were not charged with is the ONLY thing that Sutton could PROVE they did wrong) it was SUSPENSION not TEN FUCKING YEARS IN PRISON!

Some may wonder why I urge that President Bush be impeached for the actions of a US Attorney. I do so because it is BLATANTLY APPARENT that Sutton's actions were approved by if not instigated by BUSH and Homeland Security at the behest of the Mexican gov't.

You do not sentence border patrol agents to 10 year prison terms for failing to report.

You DO sentence them to ten year terms if you are trying to send a message to the Mexican gov't and other border patrol agents.

Bush was/is trying THROUGH ANY MEANS NECESSARY to FACILITATE illegal immigration into this country.

As to WHY, it probably has to do with his big CORPORATE FRIENDS who want the slave wage labor as well as the fact that Mexico is the 2nd largest supplier of OIL to the US.

But, in fact, WHY is irrelevant. Bush is supposed to be the top law enforcement agent in the nation. In this respect he is the top LAWBREAKER and should be impeached!!!!!

Good points, Wil.

wilthrill · 12-11-2007, 07:54 AM

Pitboss, who is AMW?

Grassfire.org is doing a good job keeping up with this case as is worldnetdaily.com.

11-16-2007, 01:37 PM	#1 (permalink)
wilthrill Band Whore Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 818 Rep Power: 45	Border Agents' ACCUSER caught With 2nd load of Pot http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=58727 For those who haven't been following this case. Two of our border patrol agents are serving TEN YEAR prison terms for shooting an illegal alien drug dealer who was trying to smuggle 800 pounds of pot into the US. The drug dealer fled to Mexico. The Bush administration (led by Bush Buddy #1, US District Attorney Johnny Sutton) found the drug dealer, paid for his medical treatment and gave him immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony against the agents. Without his testimony they had NO CASE. Part of the immunity agreement was that he could enter the US freely but he was not to break the law. AFTER the agreement and BEFORE the trial he was caught a 2nd time trying to smuggle 750 pounds of pot into the country. Now normally that would break the immunity agreement. INSTEAD Sutton got an order sealing ALL info from the 2nd smuggling event and then WENT AHEAD with his prosecution of the agents and WITH this two-time loser TESTIFYING!!! THE DEFENSE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT THE 2ND OFFENSE TO THE JURY OR ANYONE ELSE UNDER THE THREAT OF JAIL TIME!!! OK, for those who don't play a lawyer on TV a few rules of evidence: Usually a DEFENDANT'S prior bad acts are not allowed into evidence. It is felt that they are too prejudicial and the jury will wrongfully convict if they come into evidence. This is not so with a WITNESS who himself is not on trial. The rules of evidence SPECIFICALLY provide that prior bad acts DO COME INTO EVIDENCE (the jury gets to hear them) when one is trying to IMPEACH a witness who is not a defendant. Here, Sutton's WHOLE case was based upon the CREDIBILITY of the drug dealer witness. The drug dealer witness was NOT on trial. And yet the DEFENDANTS, (whose whole case rested on IMPEACHING the drug dealer witness) were not allowed to TELL THE FUCKING TRUTH (aka IMPEACH) about their SOLE accuser!!! I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. YOU PEOPLE WHO WANT TO IMPEACH BUSH NEED TO START LOOKING INTO THIS!!!!

12-07-2007, 12:08 PM	#6 (permalink)
Mikael Band Member Band Whore Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Down In a Hole Posts: 905 Rep Power: 44	The thing is, if these Border Patrol agents would have followed protocol in the first place-we wouldn't even be talking about this right now. __________________ I just saved a ton of money on car insurance by switching to no car insurance!!! www.myspace.com/13468360

11-21-2007, 05:58 PM	#2 (permalink)
Lerxstcat Band Whore Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 426 Rep Power: 23	It's too bad they didn't shoot him in the head instead of the ass. Would have saved a lot of trouble.

11-22-2007, 10:41 AM	#3 (permalink)
PITBOSS Band Whore Join Date: May 2005 Location: Grand Bay Age: 33 Posts: 290 Rep Power: 39	True, then our gov't would have awarded his family with millions and automatic citizenship. The agents would have been rewarded for the ass shot in any other country.

12-07-2007, 05:06 AM	#4 (permalink)
Lerxstcat Band Whore Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 426 Rep Power: 23	The government is now admitting that he lied in the stand with their knowledge - the government suborned perjury to get the conviction in other words. He portrayed himself as a "mule" someone who'd been hired to make a one-time run, wheras he is a habitual smuggler who probably WAS armed. Thus my thought that they should have shot him dead. Then they would probably have recovered the weapon. The only thing these agents did wrong was to not report the shooting, probably because they knew they'd get railroaded.

12-07-2007, 09:05 AM	#5 (permalink)
wilthrill Band Whore Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 818 Rep Power: 45	Lerxtcat, the gov't specifically Johnny Sutton put the DRUG DEALER on the stand and represented to the JURY that he was an "ex-offender who was just trying to take some money to his sick mother" when in fact Sutton KNEW he was a CURRENT OFFENDER who just a month or so previously had been caught with a SECOND load of pot coming across the border. Furthermore NOW Johnny Sutton is REFUSING to testify before congress. http://www.helium.com/tm/486203/rece...representative Couple that with the fact that Homeland Security is STILL refusing to hand over documents related to the case and now congress if having to file a Freedom of Information Act request to attempt to get the docs. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53948 You know back when this case first gained attention several members questioned Homeland Security on it. They were told, "we've got all kinds of evidence even some statements made by the agents that contradict their current stories. Just wait until after the trial and we'll give it to you." Well after the trial Homeland Security was called before Congress and asked about this evidence they had spoken of earlier. The Homeland Security officials admitted to Congress that they had LIED to Congress and had no such statements. The trial transcript of this case was sealed. Homeland Security won't release any docs concerning the case. And the lead prosecutor Johnny Sutton has refused to testify. And from all this George W Bush says that he will not pardon or commute the sentences because "Johnny Sutton is an even-handed guy and a personal friend". THIS IS IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT FOLKS!!!! AT THE VERY LEAST BUSH'S PRESIDENTIAL POWER TO PARDON SHOULD BE STRIPPED FROM HIM BECAUSE HE WILL NEVER AGAIN COME UPON A CASE MORE DESERVING OF A PARDON SO WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW ROGUE FINANCIERS, PUERTO RICAN TERRORISTS AND PRESIDENTIAL BROTHERS TO GO FREE WHILE THOSE WHO DEFEND OUR BORDERS REMAIN IN PRISON??????

12-07-2007, 02:11 PM	#7 (permalink)
wilthrill Band Whore Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 818 Rep Power: 45	How do you know that Mikael? Had they reported it they STILL probably would have been charged because they were charged with discharging a firearm NOT with failing to report it. Also if you look into the Hernandez case (sheriff shoots illegal who tries to RUN HIM OVER IN A VAN)the sheriff DID report it and Sutton went after him also!!! http://www.amw.com/features/feature_...il.cfm?id=1408 Furthermore at least TWO of Ramos' and Campeon's supervisors were on the scene so one could make the argument that they didn't have to file a report (their policy required an ORAL report). Also when you look at the penalty for failing to report (which though they were not charged with is the ONLY thing that Sutton could PROVE they did wrong) it was SUSPENSION not TEN FUCKING YEARS IN PRISON! Some may wonder why I urge that President Bush be impeached for the actions of a US Attorney. I do so because it is BLATANTLY APPARENT that Sutton's actions were approved by if not instigated by BUSH and Homeland Security at the behest of the Mexican gov't. You do not sentence border patrol agents to 10 year prison terms for failing to report. You DO sentence them to ten year terms if you are trying to send a message to the Mexican gov't and other border patrol agents. Bush was/is trying THROUGH ANY MEANS NECESSARY to FACILITATE illegal immigration into this country. As to WHY, it probably has to do with his big CORPORATE FRIENDS who want the slave wage labor as well as the fact that Mexico is the 2nd largest supplier of OIL to the US. But, in fact, WHY is irrelevant. Bush is supposed to be the top law enforcement agent in the nation. In this respect he is the top LAWBREAKER and should be impeached!!!!!

12-07-2007, 04:13 PM	#8 (permalink)
PITBOSS Band Whore Join Date: May 2005 Location: Grand Bay Age: 33 Posts: 290 Rep Power: 39	At least AMW is bringing this out for the public to see how these criminals are being rewarded, and the officers disciplined for doing their jobs.

12-11-2007, 07:54 AM	#10 (permalink)
wilthrill Band Whore Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 818 Rep Power: 45	Pitboss, who is AMW? Grassfire.org is doing a good job keeping up with this case as is worldnetdaily.com.