S
sky dancer
Guest
Why do you discount the doctor's testimony that says the bullet entered and exited consistant with someone who was turning around as if to aim something (a weapon) behind him and instead trust the smuggler's testimony that he was unarmed? How could you believe a guy smuggling 800 pounds of marijuana was unarmed?
There is no evidence that the smuggler was unarmed with the exception of his testimony. In fact the physcial evidence, the doctor's testimony was based on shows the smuggler was most likely pointing a gun at them as he was running.
Again, if you read the transcripts, why do you discount the doctor's testimony?
What makes you think I discount the doctor's testimony? There was quite a bit of testimony and evidence. Apparently the preponderance of evidence was to find Ramos and Compean guilty.
This is the way it is. Juries make decisions based on evidence. You claim the smuggler had a gun, and the evidence does not show that. Your evidence is what I would call 'faith based'. You have faith in cops. Just because they are LE, you think somehow they would not lie or be dishonest. Clearly, the evidence shows the agents to have been deliberately deceptive about this shooting incident and to work hard to cover up the evidence.
I grant you, it is possible the smuggler had a gun, but it is NOT the jury's fault that they found Ramos and Compean guilty. NO GUN BELONGING TO THE SMUGGLER WAS FOUND. These two keystone cops screwed up royally and didn't get Davila when they should have. Evidence that may have helped them did not exist, largely because of their own poor behavior at the scene.
This was a bad shoot. Ramos and Compean tried to cover it up. The Justice Department was unable to look the other way.
Last edited by a moderator: