Border agent faces trial

Hi There!  Here we go again, unfortunately.   Another Border agent faces a court trial, after the Government of Mexico intervenes.  The Following Recent News Article is from World-Net-Daily:

 INVASION USA
Border agent faces trial after Mexico intervenes
Defense attorney asks detective if case run by sheriff or consulate

---

Posted: August 8, 2007
5:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

An Arizona judge ordered a U.S. Border Patrol agent to be tried on charges of second-degree murder for the death of an illegal alien who allegedly threatened him with a rock, after the Mexican consulate in Washington investigated and consular officials discussed the case with witnesses.

WND has reported similar allegations of Mexican government intervention against U.S. law enforcement officers, including the cases of border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez.

In the newest case, agent Nicholas Corbett has been ordered to be tried on charges of second-degree murder for the death Jan. 12 of Francisco Dominguez-Rivera, who crossed the border illegally in an Arizona desert area between Naco and Douglas.

(Story continues below)

 

Justice of the Peace David Morales of Cochise County said there was no support for first-degree murder, however, and dismissed the charge.

According to the Arizona Daily Star, defense attorneys questioned the decision by the sheriff's office not to separate the witnesses. They also alleged the Mexican government tried to influence the testimonies of the witnesses by giving them food, clothes and lodging, as well as arranging for visas to be in the U.S.

At one point, defense attorney Dan Santander asked sheriff's Det. Wendy Adney: "Who was in charge of this investigation? The Cochise County sheriff's or the Mexican consulate?"

But she said the decision to let consular officials speak with the witnesses was appropriate.

In the case against Ramos and Compean, a jury convicted the border agents last year of violating federal gun laws and covering up the shooting of a drug smuggler as he fled back to Mexico after driving across the border with more than 700 pounds of marijuana.

As WND reported, no criminal investigation of the agents began until after the Mexican consulate complained the agents violated the smuggler's civil rights by shooting him without warrant.

Hernandez was convicted of violating the civil rights of two illegal aliens and sent to prison after the Mexican consulate wrote demanding the prosecution. An investigation by the Texas Rangers had concluded Hernandez did nothing wrong in discharging his weapon at the fleeing van.

 

In his case, two illegal aliens were injured when he fired at the van's tires as the illegals escaped from a routine traffic stop, attempting to run over the officer as they drove away.

In all three cases, no prosecutions of the officers were contemplated until the Mexican Consulate intervened, demanding protection of the civil rights of nationals in the U.S. illegally.

Additionally, the prosecution in all three cases is relying on testimony of illegal immigrant witnesses who may have been coached by Mexican Consulate officials.

A Reuters report noted the Corbett case "drew criticism from Mexico."

"Following the killing, Mexico's Foreign Ministry complained of 'disproportionate violence' and instructed the Mexican Embassy in Washington to investigate the circumstances," the report said.

As WND reported, U.S. investigators from the Border Patrol were in the process of interviewing six illegal immigrants who were witnesses to the Corbett case when officials from the Mexican Consul's Office arrived at the Naco Border Patrol Station.

The Mexican consul demanded to speak with the witnesses, and Darcy Olmos, the patrol agent in charge at the Naco station, interrupted the U.S. investigation so the Mexican consul could interview the witnesses first.

The decision by Olmos has led to charges the Mexican consul was able to coach the three witnesses prior to the witnesses giving statements to the U.S. investigators.

 

Here is the link to this News Article:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57063

 

The horrible and very unfortunate situation that has happened to wrongly imprison former Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean has already damaged and ruined the moral of most of the rest of the Border Patrol agents trying to protect and defend our Country.  This will very likely unfortunately, damaged and ruined the moral of nearly all of the rest of the Border Patrol agents even more.

 

   - Edited to add in two more words.

She didn't answer a direct question that was put forth to her. Who was in charge, The Mexican Consulate or The Cochise County Sherriff's Office?

According to the Arizona Daily Star, defense attorneys questioned the decision by the sheriff's office not to separate the witnesses. They also alleged the Mexican government tried to influence the testimonies of the witnesses by giving them food, clothes and lodging, as well as arranging for visas to be in the U.S.

Additionally, the prosecution in all three cases is relying on testimony of illegal immigrant witnesses who may have been coached by Mexican Consulate officials.

A Reuters report noted the Corbett case "drew criticism from Mexico."

"Following the killing, Mexico's Foreign Ministry complained of 'disproportionate violence' and instructed the Mexican Embassy in Washington to investigate the circumstances," the report said.

Therin lies the problem once again. Hmmmmm...Has Steve Elliott seen this?

---

I wonder about something.  Would it be preferable if we just dump the whole of the states' justice systems and the federal justice systems when a Border Agent is involved and have a trial by public opinion?  Or should we only allow Border Agents to serve on juries when a Border Agent is indicted?  Should all jury deliberations first be filtered through FireSociety's forums before a jury is allowed to vote for conviction or acquittal?  Should all Border Agents who face any charges be advised that if they are convicted they will have a Presidential commutation or pardon awaiting presentation to the Court if they are convicted?  Or should all Border Agents be exempt from prosecution and if not should they be given immunity from prosecution?

If the morale (not moral) of the Border Agents is suffering to the degree that I'm reading it is then why are they not quitting the job in mass? 

I know it's not a popular thought but I don't understand this rush to throw out the baby with the bath water.  And by that I mean bypassing the judicial in favor of popular sentiment. 

As a side, I wonder if it has escaped everyone else's attention that here in Texas an American born citizen was arrested and deported to Mexico.  He is mentally retarded and was totally lost in Mexico and his relatives searched for him for weeks before finding him roaming about in Mexico.  His crime?  He was of Mexican descent and somehow couldn't defend himself at questioning as to whether or not he was an illegal immigrant.   What's wrong with that picture? 

---

I don't know about that Bw but I do consider taking caution here as he has been processed for 2nd. Degree Murder. We can only wait until the  pre-trial, if there is in fact that option there 1st., and then move on to trial and then we can only see if there will be a plea, or a full blown trial. We can't jump the gun on this one. I don't know what the Laws are in Arizona. Do you? I know what the Laws are here in Florida, so I can only watch and also seek what the Laws are there in Arizona are. My Brother in Law out there is a Criminal Defense Attorney and I am sure he can tell me all about it. He also has an Investigation Firm connected to his Firm up in Austin. Also, I don't know what the facts are and can only go by what the Document states as of right now. But then again, I am talking about Texas and I don't know what his credentials are in Arizona. I will have to call him. I don't think he has the right to Practice in Arizona, although I am not sure.

---

(CM) Deerhunter said: I don't know about that Bw but I do consider taking caution here as he has been processed for 2nd. Degree Murder. We can only wait until the  pre-trial, if there is in fact that option there 1st., and then move on to trial and then we can only see if there will be a plea, or a full blown trial. We can't jump the gun on this one. I don't know what the Laws are in Arizona. Do you? I know what the Laws are here in Florida, so I can only watch and also seek what the Laws are there in Arizona are. My Brother in Law out there is a Criminal Defense Attorney and I am sure he can tell me all about it. He also has an Investigation Firm connected to his Firm up in Austin. Also, I don't know what the facts are and can only go by what the Document states as of right now. But then again, I am talking about Texas and I don't know what his credentials are in Arizona. I will have to call him. I don't think he has the right to Practice in Arizona, although I am not sure.

 

What??????????

---

What, what???????

---

What were you trying to say to me, if anything?, in response to my post.

---

I was trying to tell you that I don't know what the Laws in Arizona are. I asked if you knew what the laws were there? I would have to seek one of my brother in laws out that live's in Texas and I wasn't sure if he had the right to practice in Arizona. He lives in Texas up in Austin. He has a law firm. Didn't this take place in Arizona from what I read? Re read what I wrote please.

---

Deerhunter, you must be very tired or you simply didn't read what I wrote or your response was not intended for me.  It's all very interesting about your brother-in-law and a private investigator agency and everything but not a word of it addressed a single issue I raised.  But no problem.  And never mind, I'll take it  that your post was intended for someone else or you were just talking to yourself.

---

You responded to me lol. No, I am not tired, but I am getting there. Good night.

---

bwwhaley said:

I wonder about something.  Would it be preferable if we just dump the whole of the states' justice systems and the federal justice systems when a Border Agent is involved and have a trial by public opinion?  Or should we only allow Border Agents to serve on juries when a Border Agent is indicted?  Should all jury deliberations first be filtered through FireSociety's forums before a jury is allowed to vote for conviction or acquittal?  Should all Border Agents who face any charges be advised that if they are convicted they will have a Presidential commutation or pardon awaiting presentation to the Court if they are convicted?  Or should all Border Agents be exempt from prosecution and if not should they be given immunity from prosecution?

If the morale (not moral) of the Border Agents is suffering to the degree that I'm reading it is then why are they not quitting the job in mass? 

I know it's not a popular thought but I don't understand this rush to throw out the baby with the bath water.  And by that I mean bypassing the judicial in favor of popular sentiment. 

As a side, I wonder if it has escaped everyone else's attention that here in Texas an American born citizen was arrested and deported to Mexico.  He is mentally retarded and was totally lost in Mexico and his relatives searched for him for weeks before finding him roaming about in Mexico.  His crime?  He was of Mexican descent and somehow couldn't defend himself at questioning as to whether or not he was an illegal immigrant.   What's wrong with that picture? 

 

Hi!  I do think that Border Patrol agent Corbett  has a lot better chance getting a fair trial since he is Not in the District and under the jurisdiction of U.S.  Attorney Johnny Sutton in Texas.  The now wrongly imprison Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean sure did Not get and receive a fair trial.  What bothers me the most about this case is the Government of Mexico was very likely involved in getting these charges brought against this Border Patrol agent, and the government of Mexico was very likely involved with charges getting brought against the Sheriff Texas Deputy in Texas, who while defending himself fired four shots out at two of the tires of the van that tried to run over his feet.  Please Check Out and See:  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54379

  I am not saying that Border Patrol agent Corbett is totally innocent in this situation that happened with him and that illegal immigrant, and it is very unfortunate at what happened to this illegal immigrant in this situation,  however I do very, very  strongly disagree with the second degree murder charge that is being brought against him.  If they are going to charge him down in Southern Arizona,  then charge him with  absolutely nothing more than manslaughter.  They need to entirely throw out the second degree murder charge entirely.   And I am very worried about the moral even going lower for most of the Border Patrol agents because of what unjustly happened to former Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean.   The office of Attorney Johnny Sutton very much maliciously and very, very way over-zealously charged and Prosecuted former Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean.  And they in Southern Arizona, are now very way over-zealously charging Border Patrol agent Corbett, now in Southern Arizona.

(CM) Deerhunter said: I don't know about that Bw but I do consider taking caution here as he has been processed for 2nd. Degree Murder. We can only wait until the  pre-trial, if there is in fact that option there 1st., and then move on to trial and then we can only see if there will be a plea, or a full blown trial. We can't jump the gun on this one. I don't know what the Laws are in Arizona. Do you? I know what the Laws are here in Florida, so I can only watch and also seek what the Laws are there in Arizona are. My Brother in Law out there is a Criminal Defense Attorney and I am sure he can tell me all about it. He also has an Investigation Firm connected to his Firm up in Austin. Also, I don't know what the facts are and can only go by what the Document states as of right now. But then again, I am talking about Texas and I don't know what his credentials are in Arizona. I will have to call him. I don't think he has the right to Practice in Arizona, although I am not sure.

 

Hi! I hope that this helps: 

Second Degree Murder:

Whether in the Phoenix area, or anywhere in Arizona, per ARS §13-1104 "Second Degree Murder" occurs if without premeditation a person "intentionally" causes the death of another person or, "knowing" that his conduct will cause the death or serious physical injury, such person does cause the death of another person; or under the circumstances manifesting "extreme indifference to human life", such person "recklessly" engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person. In the Vehicular Crime setting, Second Degree Murder is normally not charged. In order for it to be charged, there must be a showing of "extreme indifference" to human life. This could include drag racing through traffic on the freeway, traveling the wrong way on a freeway while fleeing from police, road rage, or other things of this nature.

Click Here, If Your Case Involves an Automobile, to go to the Vehicular Crimes / Second Degree Murder.

Possible Punishment

The range of punishment for first offense Second Degree Murder is ten (10) years minimum in prison; sixteen (16) years presumptive in prison; and twenty-two (22) maximum in prison. This is "day-for-day" prison time (i.e., no early release or "time off for good behavior").

( http://www.dmcantor.com/arizona-law/Second%20Degree%20Murder/?ID=52 )

 

Manslaughter:

Whether in the Phoenix area or anywhere in Arizona, per ARS §13-1103 "Manslaughter" normally involves a death with one of the two following elements present: 1) "recklessly" causing the death of another; or 2) "intentionally" or "knowingly" killing a person in the heat of passion or upon a sudden quarrel resulting from adequate provocation from the victim.

To "recklessly" cause the death of another, means that the person was unaware of and consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result would occur, or that the circumstances existed. The risks must be of such a nature and degree that disregard of such risks constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. This is normally what the Prosecutor will look to when deciding whether to charge somebody with a Vehicular Manslaughter. Also, people are sometimes charged if they are recklessly handling a firearm which accidentally discharges and kills someone, or if they have left a newborn baby unattended in a bathtub. The key elements are "substantial and unjustifiable risk" and "gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation".

Click Here... If your case involves an auto, go to the Vehicular Crimes/Second Degree Murder Section

Possible Punishment

If the Manslaughter occurs and there was no deadly weapon or dangerous instrument involved, then the range of punishment on a first offense is anywhere from probation with zero (0) days in jail to one (1) year in jail; or prison from three (3) years to twelve and one half (12.5) of incarceration. If the person has one (1) allegeable historical prior conviction, then the "prison only" range is four and one half (4.5) years to twenty-three and one quarter (23.25) years in prison. If the person has two (2) allegeable historical prior convictions, then the "prison only" range is ten and one half (10.5) years to thirty-five (35) years of incarceration.

If there was a dangerous instrument or deadly weapon involved, now the first offense minimum is seven (7) years in prison; the presumptive is ten and one half (10.5) years in prison; and the maximum is twenty-one (21) years in prison. If a person has one (1) allegeable historical prior dangerous felony conviction, then the range of "prison only" range is fourteen (14) years minimum; fifteen and three quarters (15.75) years presumptive; and twenty-eight (28) years maximum of incarceration. If the person has two (2) allegeable historical prior dangerous felony convictions, then the "prison only" mandatory minimum punishment is twenty-one (21) years; the presumptive is twenty-eight (28) years; and the maximum is thirty-five (35) years of incarceration.

( http://www.dmcantor.com/arizona-law/Manslaughter/?ID=53 )

The video I saw of this incident clearly shows the illegals throwing objects at the agent while the one that was eventually shot came up from the side and had his arm back like one would if they were going to throw something. Loss of life is never a good thing but I am not sure what the government of mexico thinks the agent should have done. .....allow himself to be hit, possible knocked out then have his gun taken away ?

Hopefully he will receive a fair trial

I really don't care what Mexico has to say. One thing for sure as I was trying to respond to you last night as I was interupted. I am not an attorney. It seems from my point of view that he definitley has a case, however, it looks like it might be another railroad job. I can't say that to be fact. I sure hope he has an attorney and that they can come to an agreement that will disolve The Mexican Consulate. We can only hope and pray that there is sufficient evidence that will strike his charges down. Have you contacted Steve Elliott on this so as word can get out further? Let me know what you come up with on this. I will be looking forward to hearing from you Brack. My best wishes go out to you, him and his family.

---

That fellow just needs a good attorney to represent him.  He sure doesn't need to be listening to any jail house lawyers.  Always go for the best money can buy. 

Freedom isn't cheap. Good lawyering comes at a premium but when your liberty is at stake get the best and don't settle for less.

---

Why exactly is the Mexican government able to persuade our officials to  file charges in the first place?  If an internal investigation clears the agent then thats it end of discussion, or at least it should be. Can anyone explain to me why our government is catering to Mexico?

 

lmgt80 said:

Why exactly is the Mexican government able to persuade our officials to  file charges in the first place?  If an internal investigation clears the agent then thats it end of discussion, or at least it should be. Can anyone explain to me why our government is catering to Mexico?

 

 

Well, maybe it should be but it's not.  Internal investigations can lead to firings.  Prosecutors and Grand Juries lead to formal charges. Internal investigations amongst good old boy law enforcement agencies could easily lead to corruption we don't need or want. 

---

So what your telling me is that we should trust illegal immigrant testimony over our local authority investigation.  Come on are you serious?  Mexico is a corrupt government from the top down but yet they question the actions of an american officer and our government turns and indicts.  I can't fathom what our government has to gain by this.  The only thing i can come up with is it's a horribly misguided attempt to win hispanic votes. 

lmgt80 said: So what your telling me is that we should trust illegal immigrant testimony over our local authority investigation.  Come on are you serious?  Mexico is a corrupt government from the top down but yet they question the actions of an american officer and our government turns and indicts.  I can't fathom what our government has to gain by this.  The only thing i can come up with is it's a horribly misguided attempt to win hispanic votes. 

 

I not telling you any such thing.  But yes, I am serious.  I'm just saying that I know an internal investigation isn't necessarily the end of an incident, especially when a shooting or killing is involved. 

---

lmgt80, in all due respect, and as you see, Bww and I don't agree on too much although, if given a chance we might. In regards to the past 2 posts, he was simply stating fact. He said nothing about, what I would call, pandering to the illegal immigrant testimony. That's a whole other issue. I'd like to see this thread continue, however, I think Brack saw what was happening, and I can only hope he comes back and helps on this cause. We need to get it out everywhere. Like Avery said, he needs a good attorney, not a jailhouse wannabe lawyer.

---