column5 62 Posted February 19, 2009 Not sure where this proceeding should go at this point. Buried perhaps...... Bah, its just some friendly debate. Debates should be heated else they aren't worth having. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Typhoid 231 Posted February 19, 2009 Bah, its just some friendly debate. Debates should be heated else they aren't worth having. couldn't agree more, my friend. but by proceedings, I meant the actual legal proceedings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roopod 0 Posted February 19, 2009 the prosecution focused on the wrong charges. In that, we agree. no matter what you might say about how screwed up the prosecution was - Make an example of Compean and Ramos, that is what this was all about, period. Border Patrol agents fired for changing testimonies 2 agents face dismissal, 1 resigns – all 3 given immunity despite altering accounts Story: --HERE-- There wasn't any sense of equal justice done here, and I find it suspect that there is an unequal standard for some and not others as was the case in this instance. This is the whole point that these two eventually had their sentances commuted by the very same president that had sent his dog after them. If you don't want to read the writing on the wall then it only reflects on your own character. Some would rather go by the book then ever have to rely on a little common sense. If you don't think something don't stink then you've missed something even bigger then that little one you can't get your focus off of. Which we will just leave it up to a difference of opinions. Fine by me and thanks for everyones input on that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Jarhead1 27 Posted February 19, 2009 Honestly, Typhoid, I agree with ur point that the officers messed up, like what was stated above, if the cops knew they were in the right when they shot the drugrunner, WHY did they get rid of the empty brass? If u know without a shadow of doubt ur doing right, there is NO reason whatsoever to do what they did. Hands down, they knew they screwed the pooch, and thats why they did what they did. As for the trial, I also agree that military and law enforcement should be held to a higher standard, because we both take oaths to preserve, protect, and defend. Am I authorized in the streets of Ramadi Iraq to just shoot someone for the hell of it? Hell no. Would it be my ass? Yes, as it shoud be. I do agree with Column5 that they have the right to a speedy and fair trial, by jury of their peers. If the prosecution screws up, well, then thats their fault because they should have prepared the case better. It is seriously messed up world we live in when guilty sometimes can go free from a technicality or a messed up case by prosecuting officials. But, thats just my two cents. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Jug 99 Posted February 19, 2009 Honestly, Typhoid, I agree with ur point that the officers messed up, like what was stated above, if the cops knew they were in the right when they shot the drugrunner, WHY did they get rid of the empty brass? If u know without a shadow of doubt ur doing right, there is NO reason whatsoever to do what they did. Hands down, they knew they screwed the pooch, and thats why they did what they did. As for the trial, I also agree that military and law enforcement should be held to a higher standard, because we both take oaths to preserve, protect, and defend. Am I authorized in the streets of Ramadi Iraq to just shoot someone for the hell of it? Hell no. Would it be my ass? Yes, as it shoud be. I do agree with Column5 that they have the right to a speedy and fair trial, by jury of their peers. If the prosecution screws up, well, then thats their fault because they should have prepared the case better. It is seriously messed up world we live in when guilty sometimes can go free from a technicality or a messed up case by prosecuting officials. But, thats just my two cents. I'm with you, Jarhead. Well said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
herman01 0 Posted February 19, 2009 I think typhoid has the correct ethical understanding of rule of law on this issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted February 20, 2009 My brain hurts!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
column5 62 Posted February 20, 2009 I think typhoid has the correct ethical understanding of rule of law on this issue. If by "rule of law" you mean that its ok to overlook numerous irregularities and inconsistencies in a trial as long as you get the result you want. And if by "rule of law" you mean that its ok to convict a person for offenses that they are not actually charged with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roopod 0 Posted February 20, 2009 (edited) By "Rule of Law" is exactly what happened in Germany between 1933-1945. Everything was put into law and made legal before it was implemented. Therefore every German citizen could say that it was the "law" they were merely obeying. I know they were big on "oaths" too. By the legal manipulation of the law I can assure everybody they can be made to perjure themselves in a court of law and therefore seen to violate their oaths. They were known as Kangaroo courts and they seem to have made a come back these days. I can make anyone of you lie without you even knowing it. Everyone lies, don't they? The whole point to you legalists is the impropriety used to railroad these guys up the flagpole so as to protect Mexican consulars drug runners. Immunities given for testimony for drug traffickers as well as their supervisors after they too had changed their stories several times isn't what I call justice. If you want to believe everything Sutton said then there isn't any further use in trying to reason with you. The mantra that someone lied and an oath was violated rings hollow to anyone who has already walked the walk of being on the line with unrealistic expectations. Zero defect is a myth only upheld by those who don't live on the pointy tip of the spear but relish behind it in the shaft. P.S. Which is why I'm saying Ramos and Compean got shafted! Edited February 20, 2009 by Roopod Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Typhoid 231 Posted February 20, 2009 "The mantra that someone lied and an oath was violated rings hollow to anyone who has already walked the walk of being on the line with unrealistic expectations. " you don't think I've been out there? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roopod 0 Posted February 20, 2009 I'm speaking of my own experiences, of being out there, and not anyone elses. I'm talking from the perspective that these guys were used as political pawns which I believe is an accurate one from what I've read. This is why it's about damn time! The only thing these guys were guilty of was having supervisors who stabbed them in the back. Finally, I'm talking about this article: --HERE-- as one example that supports everything I've said here. I've seen people railroaded for someone elses agenda while being out there. If anyone thinks I'm talking to them then they got it wrong. That's all I got to say about that... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roopod 0 Posted February 20, 2009 (edited) "The mantra that someone lied and an oath was violated rings hollow to anyone who has already walked the walk of being on the line with unrealistic expectations. " you don't think I've been out there? Actually I know you've been out there and I appreciate your opinion. You provide me with an excellent sounding board. What I'm trying to tell you is that you motivate me! So thanks. "When everyone is thinking the same, no one is thinking." -John Wooden Edited February 20, 2009 by Roopod Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Typhoid 231 Posted February 20, 2009 Actually I know you've been out there and I appreciate your opinion. You provide me with an excellent sounding board. What I'm trying to tell you is that you motivate me! So thanks. "When everyone is thinking the same, no one is thinking." -John Wooden ah! glad to be of service! and you and C5 do raise very good points about the trial. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
