Report: Bush commutes prison sentences of two Border Patrol agents

[Scurrilous]

Source: Associated Press

<snip>

"President Bush has commuted the prison sentences of two Border Patrol agents who were convicted of shooting a Mexican drug smuggler, AP reports. "Ramos and Compean are each serving sentences of more than 10 years for shooting an unarmed illegal immigrant as he was fleeing an abandoned marijuana load in 2005, then trying to cover it up," the wire service says."

Read more: http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/01/report-bush-com.html?csp=34

[sabra]

1. A gift to the freepers...

[underpants]

4. Indeed Ramos and Compean's actions were reviewed by former and current border agents

and they all completely agreed that they were totally outside of proper procedure.

Sept. 4, 2007 | Two years ago, in the Texas desert southeast of El Paso, two U.S. Border Patrol agents fired 15 bullets at a suspected drug dealer who was fleeing on foot toward the border. The man, a Mexican national, was hit once in the buttocks but made it across the Rio Grande. The agents who fired their weapons, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, were sentenced to more than a decade in prison for firing on an unarmed man and then trying to cover up the crime.

For the prosecutors and the jury, the shooting of Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila near Fabens, Texas, was a clearly unlawful use of force. But the conviction of Ramos and Compean was just the beginning of the agents' story. Within months, they had become the center of a dubious political crusade that would energize the furthest reaches of the right, dominate one of CNN's most popular news programs, and persuade a quarter of the U.S. House of Representatives -- and one prominent Democratic senator -- to reject the findings of a federal court.

With the help of reporters and activists promoting -- and embellishing -- the defense's version of the case, the two convicted agents were transformed into martyrs for the battle against illegal immigration. Instead of rogue officers who shot a fleeing, unarmed suspect and then lied about it, they became stand-up cops who were forced to shoot an armed drug dealer and then sent to prison by a legal system run amok. After they went to prison in January 2007, they even became the tragic heroes of a country song called "Ramos and Compean."
...

At that point, according to trial testimony, Compean tried to hit Aldrete-Davila with the butt of his shotgun, missed, and fell into the 11-foot-deep ditch. Aldrete-Davila took off running. Compean climbed out of the ditch, shot at him 14 times and missed. Ramos, who had watched Compean fall, then fired once. The bullet entered Aldrete-Davila's left buttock, severed his urethra and came to rest in his right thigh. He fell down, but got back up, escaping across the Rio Grande into Mexico. The two agents then covered up the incident. Compean hid some of the shell casings and asked a third agent returning to the scene later that day to dispose of the rest. Neither Ramos nor Compean ever reported the shooting. They were arrested a month later, and then only because America's border with Mexico is like a very long and skinny small town. Aldrete-Davila's mother is friends with the mother-in-law of Rene Sanchez, a Border Patrol agent in Arizona. After hearing about the incident from his mother-in-law, Sanchez sent a report to the Department of Homeland Security in Washington, which then dispatched a special agent to Texas to investigate.

At trial in the federal courthouse in El Paso, Border Patrol agents from the Fabens station took the stand to testify against Ramos and Compean. Fellow agents, including one who had observed the shooting, contradicted Compean's story about where he was and how he was positioned when he fired his weapon. The agent who had helped Compean hide shell casings admitted it under oath. Prosecutors showed that Compean had repeatedly changed his story about the shooting and that it didn't match Ramos' account. They were also able to show that although Compean had discussed the shooting with other agents after it happened, it wasn't until his arrest that he began claiming that Aldrete-Davila had had a gun.
...
The story that Ramos and Compean's supporters constructed was essentially unchallenged by the mainstream media -- because the mainstream media wasn't paying attention. When traditional news outlets did cover Ramos and Compean, it was to comment on the right's fascination with the case, but not to examine or debunk the right's reporting.
...
Some members of Congress freely acknowledge that their information on the case comes from Dobbs and the others.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/04/ramos_compean/index.html

[Rebubula]

12. Commutation

This is not a pardon and it should not have been. They deserved to be convicted of falsifying evidence and statements. They did not, however, deserve 11 and 12 year prison sentences.

I have no problem with this commutation. Working the border is a tough job and sometimes shit happens. The little bastard that got shot seemed to get a free pass in the whole deal.

There are no winners in this.

[lapfog_1]

20. They deserved life in prison without the possibility of parole.

We do not shoot down unarmed people. Even a suspected drug dealer.

[Raskolnik]

24. I'm glad you aren't in charge of sentencing.

Lock 'em up and throw away the key, right?

[lapfog_1]

28. In this particular instance, yes.

They tried to murder the guy. The police in our country have gone too far in becoming judge, jury and executioner. Witness the New Years Eve shooting at the BART station. That guy was on the ground, hands behind his back in handcuffs, the office stood up, pulled his gun and killed him.

Commuting the sentence of these two Border Patrol officers sends the wrong message. It says "Hey, so long as you shoot people we don't want here, you will be given a pass, never mind the lies told and the attempt to cover up".

We needed to make an example of these two.

Unfair? Probably, but then so was throwing Martha Stewart in jail. The judge did it to make an example of her.

[Raskolnik]

32. So you admit that it would be unfair, but you are still in favor of a life sentence?

I'm not sure how you square those two concepts in your own head, but I guess its easier when you're talking about symbols and not human beings.

[lapfog_1]

36. You think justice is "fair"?

Fair is the sentence they received. 10 years. Not too much time for attempted murder and the cover up.

We, as a society, cannot tolerate such behavior from our police. Because they ARE symbols, as you put it.

They have to be "by the book" all the time. It's their job. They start doing vigilante stuff and then LYING about it and they crossed a line. These guys were embarrassed that they couldn't arrest this guy, he was escaping back into Mexico. They let their emotions about the situation control their actions, hence the lies and the attempt to cover it up.

[Raskolnik]

37. Which is it? Did they deserve around a decade for the crime, or a life sentence?

That's a pretty big difference, no?

[lapfog_1]

39. As symbols and as a message to our police force

that they are NOT to take the law into their own hands, life would have been the "unfair" but correct sentence.

As two assholes who happen to be border patrol, 10 years was fair.

If YOU lie to federal investigators about your TAXES, you will get 10 years for it.

You aren't trying to now make the case that they did nothing wrong in lying about the shooting and the attempted cover up, are you?

[Raskolnik]

40. I prefer to see people as people, not as "symbols" when talking about their lives.

One of the reasons the prisons are overflowing is because there are a lot of people like you that think its more important to send a message with a sentence than to tailor it to the facts of the case.

[lapfog_1]

42. When it comes to our civic leaders

elected officials, police force, people in the public trust, justice has always sided with treating them as symbols. And there is a reason for it. Sorry you can't see that. "But to them that much is given, much is expected."

But I guess the one thing we agree on is that commuting the sentence was manifestly a miscarriage of justice.

You do agree with that, right?

[Raskolnik]

43. No, I absolutely do not see the commutation as a miscarriage of justice.

I think the convictions were correct, and the sentences were too lengthy given the facts of the case. If they had spent another year or two in prison, it probably wouldn't have been a tragedy, but I do not disagree with commuting the sentence now.

[lapfog_1]

47. What IS the proper sentence for lying to federal investigators

in your opinion? How about the attempted cover up of a police involved shooting?

Or simply shooting suspects in the back (given NO evidence that they were armed)?

Do you ever protest the war or support labor strikes? What will be your take on the matter when YOU are the victim of brutal police action and the follow up trial (of YOU, not them) when they lie about what YOU did.

We are close to having a police state in this country. By commuting this sentence, we enable that just a little bit more.

[Raskolnik]

49. Oh, please. What will be your take on the matter when the criminal justice system

criminal justice system that needs to make an example of YOU? This is a two-way street. I don't like it when a drug dealer is given an excessive sentence to serve as an example, and I don't like it when border patrol agents are given excessive sentences to serve as examples.

No one is trying to excuse the actions of the agents, so knock of the righteous indignation. From what I know, these men deserved to be convicted and do some time for their crimes.

I think these agents should probably have gotten somewhere in the range of four to six years. I think that would have been reasonable.


edit typo on last sentence

[lapfog_1]

51. I am not a police officer nor elected official nor a rich or famous person.

What would making an "example" out of me be worth? It's not an example unless it's a story worthy of publishing far and wide.

Examples can only be made of someone who has, by their position, been given much (trust, authority, riches).

These two guys choose to be Border Patrol. They swore an oath. They went to basic training, probably in the same school my nephew went to. They knew better. They knew what they had done was wrong. They tried to cover it up.

Yes, we needed to make an example out of them.

10 years is what you or I would get for such a cover up. They deserved more BECAUSE they swore an oath and wore a badge, not less.

[Raskolnik]

53. Ok. We disagree.

[ChazII]

52. Agreed. n/t

[toopers]

56. Why do you prefer to believe a drug dealers version of what happened

verses believing the two border agents, and their supervisors?

[lapfog_1]

67. Have you read all the facts in this case?

including the independent investigation?

They tried to do a cover up. They lied to investigators. Even another BP officer on the scene contradicted their testimony, they also changed their story numerous times. And, to start with, they never reported the shooting!

Why would you believe anything they have to say?

Not to mention that the physical forensic evidence backs up what the drug dealer said and not what the two officers said.

Do you think they were wrongfully convicted?

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. For these guys, yes

They shot an unarmed man in the back. You bet they need to be in prison and never get out. This kind of 'law enforcement' we don't need.

[Rebubula]

26. OK...

...The dealer got shot in the ass...and then got a pass on his crimes. If he was killed, then maybe we could discuss this.

Moreover, there is no evidence in either direction whether the 'victim' was armed. I would guess that most drug smugglers are armed when they transport product across the border.

[lapfog_1]

33. No evidence in either direction?

no... he wasn't armed, you've been listening to Lou Dobbs too much.

You're extensive experience with drug smugglers leads you to believe that "most are armed" does it?

Most drug smugglers that cross from Mexico are either families driving their cars right through the checkpoint OR people moving drugs from one warehouse on the Mexican side to another on the American side through a tunnel. Guns? probably there might be guards at either warehouse (or sometimes residences), but the guys pushing the carts through the tunnels, not so much.

Shooting at someone 14 times while they are running from you, lying about it, trying to cover it up, deserves what, a medal?

[Raskolnik]

35. So an act must be deserving of either life in prison or a medal?

Is this really how you see the world?

[Rebubula]

41. And...

...your lengthy resume of Cross Border Drug Dealing comes from where??

I would bet that neither of us really knows about the drug smuggling world..so I will back off on my assumption.

I agree that these two need to be punished for lying about the situation (since no one of strong character was there, no one really knows what happened -- unless you believe a convicted criminal's statement), but do you really believe these two should be in prison for the rest of their lives??


Since you are being a dick about this (saying I have been listening to Dobbs is a dick maneuver) - I will be a grammar dick ------- You're = YOU ARE. The word that you wanted to use was 'Your'.

[lapfog_1]

44. Actually, I know a fair bit about it.

You see, I LIVE 60 miles from the Mexican border. I have one nephew that IS a border patrol agent (and he thinks these two idiots should have been left in jail) and another that is a deputy sheriff in the county. They both arrest drug smugglers routinely (and the deputy sheriff arrests even more meth makers than smugglers). So I get to hear all about both the border patrol and the drug smugglers.

If I want to visit the nearest "city" (Sierra Vista), I have to drive through a BP checkpoint, have my car sniffed by drug dogs, and sometimes have to tell the BP agents what I'm doing, where I'm going. This is ALL well inside the the US border. And we have illegals crossing our pasture and leaving their water bottles and trash on our property all the time.

But the rest of you "armchair" critics can sit back and decide what's what down here, I guess.

[KamaAina]

92. "Seemed to get a free pass in this whole deal"?!

Besides getting shot, you mean. :eyes:

[Romulox]

109. Getting shot is not a defense to drug dealing. nt

[Baby Snooks]

16. "Can't please all of the people all of the time..."

At least he didn't pardon them but one of the things that bothered quite a few, also overlooked by the media, was that Ramos had been arrested twice for domestic violence. Twice? That in itself was worth a life sentence to many who work with victims of domestic violence.

The media running the story indicate this is the last of the list so to speak but some doubt it and expect the last of the list may be buried in the news circus tomorrow.

The lack of a pardon does leave their conviction in place and so as felons they will not be able to serve in law enforcement. Two down, how many more to go?

[alarimer]

96. A person convicted of domestic abuse should not be in law enforcement.

I am not sure if he was convicted in those arrests but, if so, he should never be allowed to be a cop. Clearly the guy has issues if he beats his wife and shoots unarmed people in the back.

[jaysunb]

29. Does Lou Dobbs know all this ?

or is he just full of shit ? :evilfrown:

[ColbertWatcher]

Anyone who gets information from Lou Dobbs shoujld get shot in the butt. n/t

[underpants]

74. AND Corsi

That should have been a red flag

[onehandle]

10. Yep. Freeps are celebrating in many threads at this moment. nt

[PSPS]

2. The first of many undeserved pardons, I'm sure

For a more balanced background on this case, wildly distorted by most media, start by reading this:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2003576246&slug=border17&date=20070217

[davepc]

3. They weren't pardoned. They're still convicted felons.

And the still have all the baggage that being a convicted felon comes with.

[Piewhacket]

6. cold blooded murder by officers, but the true animal is the one who pardoned them.

[RantinRavin]

7. The guy didn't die and there is no pardon

In fact, the man they shot has been convicted of transporting large sums of drugs into this country.

[Piewhacket]

108. Ok then, attempted murder. Its actually a pardon.

[sailor65]

8. Murder?

You do realize nobody died, right? A drug smuggler got shot in the ass.

[davepc]

9. Uhm, they didn't kill anybody. And once again...a commutation is not a pardon.

[Raskolnik]

17. It's clear your opinion is based on a firm grasp of the facts. n/t

[Piewhacket]

104. Facts have been deemed irrelevant. Don't you read your email?

[Raskolnik]

106. You know, wilfull ignorance is nothing to be proud of.

[Piewhacket]

107. Nor humourless stupidity. Yet here you are.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

84. It really helps if you know the facts before you post, good lesson for you.

[NYC Liberal]

14. Minus, of course, the real punishment - 10 years in prison

Which they now don't have to serve.

[underpants]

5. This is a very clear example of the RW noise machine in action

See post #4 Salon article too

[cali]

15. this is NOT a pardon. How hard is that to grasp

and their prison terms were too harsh.

[lapfog_1]

21. They shoot an unarmed man...

clearly with the intent to kill him. They lie about it and try to cover it up.

What was "too harsh" about that?

If that had been a civilian doing that and not border patrol, 10 years would have been a gift.

[Rebubula]

27. Actually...

...this is the last of the pardons - at least from what I hear.

This was Bush's last shot...thank goodness.

[bluesmail]

11. If this is the start, I wonder who will be the finish pardon?

(darth) :wow:

[Mudoria]

13. I guess even Bush gets something right once in a great while n/t

[Gman]

18. Over at FR the celebration is in full swing:

To: mel; AgThorn; autumnraine

While I am a believer that “Justice delayed is justice denied,” I am very well pleased that this reidculous blyte against our nation has ended. How do we ask law enforcement agents or military to put their lives on the line when we do this to them?

11 posted on Monday, January 19, 2009 12:49:13 PM by DBCJR (What would you expect?)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies | Report Abuse>

[Joe Bacon]

19. WHO'S NEXT?

We're wondering when everyone else gets pardoned!

[John Kerry VonErich]

22. Bush commutes sentences of former US border agents

Source: BreitBart/AP

Bush commutes sentences of former US border agents
Jan 19 01:09 PM US/Eastern
By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - In his final acts of clemency, President George W. Bush on Monday commuted the prison sentences of two former U.S. Border Patrol agents whose convictions for shooting a Mexican drug dealer ignited fierce debate about illegal immigration.
Bush's decision to commute the sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who tried to cover up the shooting, was welcomed by both Republican and Democratic members of Congress. They had long argued that the agents were merely doing their jobs, defending the American border against criminals. They also maintained that the more than 10-year prison sentences the pair was given were too harsh.

Rancor over their convictions, sentencing and firings has simmered ever since the shooting occurred in 2005.

Ramos and Compean became a rallying point among conservatives and on talk shows where their supporters called them heroes. Nearly the entire bipartisan congressional delegation from Texas and other lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle pleaded with Bush to grant them clemency.

Read more: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95QC5OO0&show_article=1

[grannie4peace]

23. that's not bad....

i heard about those guys

[Hulk]

30. Shot....or killed? I'm hoping the former.

Wonder if he will commute cheney's crime for shooting his buddy in the face? Such a sham!

[Metta]

25. from one criminal to another.

Happy karma, guys.

[ro1942]

31. thanks for welcome awhile back

Yea let's just leave it up the police,who ever they want to shoot. How about the laws don't they count.

[Raskolnik]

34. Is anyone here suggesting the police be allowed to shoot "who ever they want to shoot?"

Perhaps I missed it.

[lapfog_1]

38. That's the message being sent.

If you are a border patrol agent, and some piece of shit mexican gets away from you, it's OK to just shoot them in the back. Never mind about if they were armed or not, never mind if you THINK they are drug smugglers or simply a guy looking to make some money in the US. Shoot them if they get away and try to return to Mexico. Shoot them even if they are NOT on US soil anymore.

In the freeper/Dobbs world, they only thing these two officers did wrong was lie about the shooting and the cover up.

[superconnected]

45. Bush is friends to murderers and thieves, less than 24 hrs left of his presidency

[bluesmail]

46. I just read on RawStory that NBC news was told don't expect any more pardons.

[aquart]

48. That would assume theBush WH tells the truth.

And I have no reason to assume that. None.

[Scurrilous]

50. Don't expect more Bush pardons, NBC News told

"As soon as Monday's news broke that President George W. Bush had commuted the prison sentences of two former Border Patrol agents, NBC's John Yang reported that NBC News had been told not to expect any more pardons or commutations from President Bush before President-elect Obama takes office.

"We have been told to expect one final wave or one final list, clemency list, from the president which we've now gotten," Yang said on MSNBC. "We were also told it would not come on inauguration day. They would not do it in the last-minute fashion that President Clinton did. We're told that this is it. These are the only two names on the list today. We're told to expect nothing more over the next 24 hours."

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/NBC_told_to_expect_to_no_0119.html

[proud2BlibKansan]

54. One last despicable act

Leave it to Bush. Freeing violent criminals.

[Raskolnik]

57. Really? What violent criminals did he pardon? n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

59. Read the OP

The information you seek is there.

[Raskolnik]

61. I did. This OP is about commutations, not pardons.

Did you read the OP?

[proud2BlibKansan]

62. Did you read my post

Sheesh

[Raskolnik]

63. I see that you edited your post without any acknowledgement that you were doing so.

That's very intellectually honest of you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

64. I edited before I read your reply

That's not intellectually dishonest. It's changing it so it is accurate. Simple mistake even a reporter on TV made. He said pardon, I typed pardon then I saw it was not a pardon. So I edited. But if you want to start a flame war over it, knock yourself out.

[Raskolnik]

65. Sure you did. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

66. I did.

[lapfog_1]

68. Technically, a commutation is a pardon

A commutation, when issued by a president, is a lesser but included power of pardon, as is clemency.

Specifically:

Christopher Schroeder, Duke University law and public policy professor

"Commutations have always been a lesser included authority under president's power to pardon. Section II of Article II of the Constitution says the president has the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States. It does not mention commutations specifically, but they come under the pardon power."

So, technically, a commutation is a pardon (just not a full pardon).

[Raskolnik]

71. You are very much mistaken.

Simply because the power to commute is a lesser included authority under a president's power to pardon, it does not follow "commutation is a pardon."

Pardons and commutations are distinct legal concepts that carry distinct legal effects. Just ask Ramos & Compean next time they apply for a job, the next time they want to vote, and the next time they want to own a firearm.

[lapfog_1]

75. I think I'll defer to actual law professors on the topic

and not to the uniformed, you for example.

The Constitution does not provide for a specific power of commutation of sentence. It does provide for "pardons".

The reporter was being technically accurate (even if YOU don't like it).

I already stated that a commutation was not a full pardon, however, it IS a form of pardon.

Edit to add...

You have heard of the term "full pardon" right?

If commuting a sentence is NOT a pardon, why is there the term "full pardon"? What would a non full pardon be, in your world?

[Raskolnik]

77. You've misunderstood your own source. n/t

[lapfog_1]

83. No, I quoted my source.

I'll let the quote stand as it is.

And, again, what is a non full pardon?

Commutation is simply the FORM that the pardon takes. It describes what happens to the sentence. Instead of commutation, one could simply say "sentence reduced to time served". But the action that grants that sentence reduction is the Presidential Power of a PARDON.

You don't have a argument to make. You are wrong.

[Raskolnik]

86. No, commutation is NOT just another form of pardon.

Trust me...if you go and ask a crimlaw or conlaw professor, they will tell you that a commuation is not just another form of pardon. A pardon nullifies the original conviction. A commutation is a form of reprieve which lessens, but does not eliminate, the punishment for the offense. The authority for both is found under Article II, Section 2 of the constitution. You don't have to believe me...go and look for yourself.

If it helps, the NY Times explained a little re: the Scooter Libbey commutation: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/washington/03commute.html

[lapfog_1]

90. I didn't need to ask someone.

I simply found one that seems to be an expert on the subject.

So... if a commutation (not commuation, whatever that is) is NOT a pardon, how does a President have the power to grant one? Please read the Constitution and find where it grants the President the power to commute.

You can't because it isn't there.

[Raskolnik]

101. I can lead you to water, but I can't make you understand that it's wet.

You're simply wrong about this, as the material I provided demonstrates, the text of the constitution demonstrates, and your own expert demonstrates.

Rather than cutting & pasting quotes from experts you don't quite understand, you'd be much better off actually asking someone who teaches criminal law class to explain the difference between a commutation and a pardon to you.

[lapfog_1]

102. You linked to a newspaper article... which is not accessible unless you sign up.

I choose to not sign up.

The Title of the article that you linked to is "Commutation does not equal Full Pardon".

Which is correct, and something that I've stated over and over.

What you fail to understand is that the Constitution (you know, that little document that sort of supersedes all rules and laws and such), does not grant the President the right to commute sentences, only the right to pardon someone, and a full pardon means that the conviction never happened, a partial pardon can mean commutation of sentence or even a reduction of sentence.

The person writing the story was correct, these two BP officers received a pardon today, just not a full pardon. Hence the term FULL pardon. Implies that there IS something other than a FULL Pardon, like a partial pardon.

You jumped all over another poster for using the term pardon (I guess to demonstrate how wrong they are or something), and you were wrong to do so. They did receive a Presidential Pardon, just not a full one.

And the source for my facts I stated, a law professor and constitutional scholar, who stated the actual article from the Constitution for his evidence.

Again, I challenge you to simply find an online form of the constitution and provide me a quote where it gives the President the right to "Commute" a sentence. You can't because it's not there. The right to provide a "pardon" is there. And that's what was used to commute the sentence of these two people. The power of a Presidential Pardon.

Period.

As always, people wrong on the facts of a case like the one of these two "fine" Border Patrol agents are usually wrong about things like the constitution and the law. They always make things up out of thin air and state it as if it must be true. And they never expect to get called on it.

[Raskolnik]

103. You haven't even bothered to read the actual constitution, have you?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section2

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

A commutation is a form of reprieve. It is not a lesser form of pardon. A pardon (whether "full" or "conditional") nullifies the original conviction. A commutation reduces some of the punishment for the offense. Both may be "conditional," but they are distinct legal concepts that are not merely different points along the same line.

You are have no basis other than your own imagination to make the distinction between a "full" pardon and your own invention of the "partial" pardon. The two kinds of pardon are "full" and "conditional." A commutation is neither a "full pardon" nor a "conditional pardon." When you say things like "a full pardon means that the conviction never happened, a partial pardon can mean commutation of sentence or even a reduction of sentence," you are pulling it directly from your behind with nothing to base it upon than just the desire to refrain from admitting you were mistaken.


If you are interested in actually learning about this, but don't want to crack a book, I suggest: http://www.slate.com/id/1006754/

or even : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutation_of_sentence

Seriously, you need to give this up now. You got yourself committed to an argument you are just dead wrong about, and now is the time to bow out gracefully. If you must have the last word, feel free to do so now because I'm going to bed. I would ask that before you post, you actually take ten minutes to *read* about the subject, not just cutting & pasting quotes from a google search.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

85. But then you acted like you didn't ever write pardon.

That's where the dishonesty comes in.

David

[proud2BlibKansan]

87. What the fuck are you talking about?

I didn't realize editing a post was a crime here on DU.

Gawd, this place sucks some days.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

88. Acting like you didn't as you did in post #62 was being dishonest.

[proud2BlibKansan]

89. So call my mom

Or there is always that alert thing. :eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

91. That will suffice as an admission of guilt, thanks.

[proud2BlibKansan]

93. Your concern is duly noted

[NaturalHigh]

58. I'm glad their sentences were commuted.

Ten years in prison was a ridiculous sentence to begin with.

[proud2BlibKansan]

60. So do you believe cops should be allowed to shoot people in the back

and cover up the evidence?

[lapfog_1]

69. Apparently, a number of DUers agree.

Probably they also believe that the BART cop should not be tried for murder either.

Makes me wonder.

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. Yeah me too

Some people get so caught up in this immigration stuff they lose their ability to reason.

[lapfog_1]

73. But I'm damn sure they haven't had to deal with it on a personal

level.

Just two days ago, a family (man, wife, and 10 year old boy) were dumped and robbed by their coyote in a wash not to far from where I live. The man speaks a little English (better than I speak Spanish). He is on his way to his cousin's in XXX city where he will have a job washing dishes. He was to be taken all the way to XXX and paid the coyote $2500 US for the trip. Instead, he is beaten and robbed within 40 miles of the Mexican border. It's been very cold here (for Southern Arizona) and night time temps are down in the mid 30's. His 10 year old boy is now very sick. I found them sleeping in my van two days ago (I left it unlocked). They didn't steal anything or disturb anything. The man had stitched $100 into his belt in case something like this happened. He offered it to me to let them sleep in my van until his relative could show up and drive them to XXX.

I have no idea what to do. I didn't take their money. I found some people who live nearby who have more space than me so their son could sleep in a bed and the couple on the couch. Gave them some warm food. Allowed them to use my phone to call their relative. I'm not in favor of illegals entering the country. And given the state of things here, I don't know why they WANT to come here. The man said that they lived in a 1 room shack in Mexico... that a year ago he had covered all of the windows with wood and sheet metal because they were afraid of stray bullets from the gangs in Mexico. His wife and child never left the shack and he had been robbed many times by extortionists and gangs while traveling to/from his job as a mechanic. So I guess as bad as things are here, things are getting much worse in Mexico. One year ago I would go to our border town to get dental work done (good dentist, 1/4 of the price of US dentists). But now I wouldn't go there on a bet, even though the dentists office is 3 blocks inside the border.

I don't know what the right answer is for immigration. Should I have called INS and turned them in? Just to be deported back to Mexico with no money and no hope.

I couldn't do it. I hope they are OK and living with their relative now.

I have one nephew who is a deputy sheriff and another who is in the Border Patrol. I suspect that I've broken some law or another by letting them stay the night here and giving them some food. I don't care. A police state is not the answer.

I refuse to be a "criminal" by helping some very poor people find a warm place to sleep and some food to eat. Even though I am now very poor (by US standards) myself.

Shooting people crossing the border, even when suspected of being drug smugglers, is not the answer.

[proud2BlibKansan]

76. You did the right thing

I would have done the same.

I teach the children. And I just can't tolerate any human beings being treated as if they were animals. Or worse. We need to solve this problem without demonizing the immigrants. They are victims just like the American workers losing their jobs.

[NaturalHigh]

97. Given the situation...

I will side with the Border Patrol agents rather than the drug dealer, and I won't apologize for my opinion or waste time justifying it.

[L. Coyote]

72. Parading this one out first, to lay cover for the bad ones to come?

[Raskolnik]

78. When are those going to happen? n/t

[New_England_Patriot]

79. Bush commutes sentences of former Border Patrol agents

Source: CNN

On his final full day in office, President Bush issued commutations for two former U.S. Border Patrol agents convicted in 2006 of shooting and wounding an unarmed illegal immigrant -- suspected of drug smuggling at the time -- and then covering it up.

The prison sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Joe Compean will now end March 20.

Ramos had received an 11-year prison sentence; Compean had received a 12-year sentence.

"The president has reviewed the circumstances of this case as a whole and the conditions of confinement and believes the sentences they received are too harsh and that they, and their families, have suffered enough for their crimes," a senior administration official said.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/19/bush.commute/index.html?iref=topnews

---

Dah, oops. Already posted: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3697110&mesg_id=3697110

[Jefferson23]

80. This will make Lou Dobbs happy, lol.

[foxglove1]

82. This will make me and the hubby happy, too

The facts of this case screamed out injustice. I am SO happy!

[sasquatch]

81. I think they should've been pardoned outright

I believe the US attorney was in on the drug smuggling racket.

[Nye Bevan]

94. 12 years for shooting a drug dealer in the ass? And the guy didn't even die?

I'm not going to argue with this decision.

[Ilsa]

98. I really don't have a problem with it either. I'm glad R&C are going to

be released. Being a Border Agent in Texas is tough work.

[Raine]

99. Neither am I

for a change I think chimp did the correct thing.

[rangersmith82]

100. Yep

They messed up, but they didn't deserve 10yrs in Jail over some dirt bag drug dealer.

He took a bullet in the ass for being a bad guy.

Lessoned learned by both parties(BP Agents and Drug dealer).

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blue_Tires]

105. if the roles were reversed

and i shot and wounded a cop, would a 10-year sentence really shock anyone?