Conviction of Border Patrol agents riles their union chief

August 16, 2006

Two U.S. Border Patrol agents are facing sentences of 20 years in prison for shooting doing their jobs, i.e., shooting a drug-smuggling suspect in the buttocks. But the head of their union, the National Border Patrol Council, says they should get a new trial because they are "victims of prosecutorial misconduct," including an unjust grant of immunity.

Council President T.J. Bonner said evidence that would have exonerated the two was withheld during the March trial of Senior Agents Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos and Jose A. Compean. Bonner noted that the agents followed long-established Border Patrol policies in the incident that led to the charges

Bonner said the suspect fled into Mexico after the shooting but later was given immunity on drug-smuggling charges in order to testify against the agents.

Bonner said, "I am outraged and at a loss to explain why there were so many irregularities in this case. The only thing that is clear is that the prosecutors pointed their guns at the wrong guys, the good guys, and they let the bad guy walk. Now they want to send these agents to prison for doing their job.

"That offends me, and I believe most Americans would agree," he said.

Two of the 12 jurors who convicted the agents told a local newspaper that they were pressured by prosecutors to return guilty verdicts and that other jurors sought a quick verdict because spring break was a week away and they wanted to avoid a long deliberation.

The “victim,” Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila was wounded as he ran from the agents along the Rio Grande near El Paso, Texas. The agents said he pointed what appeared to be a gun at them as they tried to apprehend him. More than 800 pounds of marijuana, worth $1 million, was found in the van he abandoned at the edge of the Rio Grande

Aldrete-Davila was spotted in his van near the Rio Grande on February 17, Ramos gave chase while Compean circled around to head off the suspect. When Aldrete-Davila jumped out of the van and ran south to the river, he was confronted by Compean, who was thrown to the ground as the two men fought. Ramos said he saw Compean on the ground and chased Aldrete-Davila to the river, where the suspect suddenly turned toward him, pointing what looked like a gun.

"I shot, but I didn't think he was hit because he kept running into the brush and then disappeared into it," Ramos said. "Later, we all watched as he jumped into a van waiting for him. He seemed fine. It didn't look like he had been hit at all."

Bonner said that two weeks later, Aldrete-Davila called a Border Patrol agent in Arizona to say he was "forming a hunting party" to track down and shoot some agents for revenge. Bonner said the agent, who lived in Mexico and knew Aldrete-Davila before immigrating to the United States and becoming a citizen, advised against the plan and said he would report the incident to the Department of Homeland Security.

An investigator from the Office of Inspector General tracked down Aldrete-Davila in Mexico, where he was offered immunity in exchange for testimony. Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Kanof, who prosecuted the case, was not available yesterday for comment. During the trial, she argued it was a violation of Border Patrol policy for agents to pursue fleeing suspects.

A federal jury in El Paso convicted Ramos, 37, and Compean, 28, in March of causing serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence and a civil rights violation.

Aldrete-Davila is now suing the U.S. government for $5 million, saying his civil rights were violated.

Bonner, a 28-year Border Patrol veteran, said his organization represents all 10,000 of the agency's nonsupervisory agents, and opposes efforts underway in California by Friends of the Border Patrol and Grassfire.org to petition President Bush for a pardon. He says that would suggest the agents did something wrong. He said the NBPC "is confident the agents will be exonerated at a fair trial."

Border Patrol officials have declined to comment on the case, citing pending litigation.