http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54133

 

INVASION USA
Imprisoned border agent did report shooting
DHS memo shows Compean spoke to supervisor immediately after incident



  _____  

Posted: February 7, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
C 2007 WorldNetDaily.com 

WND has obtained a Department
<http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54134>  of
Homeland Security memo indicating Border Patrol agent Jose Compean made a
complete, in-person verbal report to his supervisor at the scene immediately
following the shooting incident for which he and colleague Ignacio Ramos are
now in prison. 

The May 15, 2005, report filed by DHS Special Agent Christopher Sanchez
documents a conversation between Compean and his supervisor that explains
the decision by all nine Border Patrol agents and supervisors on the scene
not to file written reports. 

As reported by WND yesterday, a DHS memo filed by Sanchez April 12, 2005,
shows seven agents and two supervisors were present at the Feb. 17, 2005
incident also decided not to file written reports. 

The April 12, 2005, DHS memo stated that all the agents present at the
incident were equally guilty for not filing a written report. 

(Story continues below) 

These memos directly contradict the repeated statements of the prosecutor,
U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, that agents Ramos and Compean filed false
reports about the incident. 

As far as WND can determine, no written reports were filed by any of the
Border Patrol agents or supervisors on the field. 

Moreover, the record of the May 15, 2005, memo indicates Compean was
truthful in reporting verbally to the most senior supervisor present at the
incident. 

Sanchez's memo of May 15, 2005, is a transcript of a hearing held by Compean
with El Paso Border Patrol Sector Chief Louis Barker. The hearing was held
at Compean's request in order to protest his proposed indefinite suspension
resulting from his March 18, 2005, arrest on criminal charges. 

The first part of the hearing was held April 7, 2005, before Compean's April
13, 2005, indictment. The second recording from the hearing is dated April
28, 2005. 

At the administrative hearing, Compean was accompanied by union
representative Robert Russell, a vice president of Local 1929, the El Paso
branch of the National Border Patrol Council. 

In the opening statement transcribed from the April 7, 2005, audio cassette,
Russell makes Barker aware that Compean had made a complete report on the
scene to Jonathan Richards, the more senior of the two supervisors present
at the incident. 

Russell's testimony references a wound Compean suffered on his hand, a gash
between the thumb and index finger, which he suffered when scuffling in the
ditch with the drug smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, who had abandoned his
vehicle and was attempting to escape back to Mexico on foot. Russell points
to this wound as evidence of aggravated assault committed on Compean by the
drug smuggler. 

Here is Russell's recorded testimony: 

Well, I mean, the base . the basis of this is basically . ummm . Mr. Compean
. an assault took place that day against one of our agents, and he did
defend himself, and the part of the assault is never mentioned in the
complaint or anywhere by OIG (Office of Inspector General) that they know
clearly how this did take place.

A few sentences later, Russell again references that what transpired at the
scene was observed by the agents and supervisors in the field and
subsequently fully known to the Border Patrol management at the station in
Fabens, Texas. 

Russell indicates that management at Fabens themselves chose not to make a
report about Compean's injury. Here is his testimony: 

Even management at the station in Fabens was fully aware of what had
transpired and for whatever reason nothing was ever generated . and once all
this comes forward, I mean, it's my belief even his attorneys' belief that
even once that does come forward and all that information is presented that
the charges will possibly be dropped . or dismissed . or he will be found
not guilty . based on that . what did transpire. 

Directly contradicting prosecutor Sutton's assertion that agents Ramos and
Compean filed false reports, the April 2005 administrative hearing reveals
Compean was forthcoming concerning the events of the incident. 

In the second cassette, Russell makes clear that the reluctance to do more
formal reporting after the incident came from supervisor Richards. 

But the fact of the matter is an assault did take place. Umm . Mr. Richards
did know about it. 

Umm . whether Mr. Compean . Mr. Compean said yes sir to this or whether he
was assaulted or not . doesn't negate Mr. Richards responsibility to take
some action from the facts that were presented to him as to what happened
out there. 

He was on the scene. He was told by another agent exactly what had happened
and it pretty much apparently stopped at that point. 

Russell argues Richards did not want to go through the trouble of filing
written paperwork. So rather than press the hand injury, which Compean felt
was minor, Compean gave in to Richards' pressure to forget about the hand
injury, obviating the only issue the supervisor felt might be needed to
document in writing. 

Station Chief Barker asked Compean why he didn't report the shooting.
Compean admitted that possibly a written report should have been filed, but
he and the other Border Patrol on the scene considered the incident
inconsequential. 

Compean testified: 

As .As I stated to . umm . to this earlier . I didn't . I just . I know it
was wrong for us not to reported it and I . if I would have thought that he
had been hit or anything like that had happened I would have . I didn't . I
just . I knew we were going to get in trouble because the way . the way it's
been at the station the last two . three years . uhh . I mean everything
always comes down to the alien. The agents are as soon as anything comes up
. it is always . always the agent's fault. The agents have always been
cleared but, with management, it's always been the agent's fault. We're the
ones that get in trouble. 

Compean continued to note that Aldrete-Davila escaped, and none of the
agents in the field thought he had been hit. All the agents and supervisors
in the field knew there had been a shooting and none of the agents or
supervisors filed any written reports. There was no "cover-up" of anything
that happened that day in the field, the documentation indicates. The only
defect was failure by all to file a written report, including the two
supervisors present. 

Compean emphasized that the failure to report the incident was considered
minor given the outcome: 

He (Aldrete-Davila) was already gone back south. I . really didn't . didn't
think he had been hit. The way I saw him walking back south he looked . he
looked fine to us and we just didn't . nothing was ever said as . as to
don't say anything keep your mouth shut nothing like that was ever . was
ever brought up either. We just . we just didn't bring it up. 

Compean's testimony emphasized supervisor Richards pressured him not to file
a written report: 

When we got back to the station it was the same thing he asked me and the
way . the way I . the way he . he asked me ... he made it seemed like he
wanted me to say no and that's why I said it. 

By denying he had been injured, Compean made it possible for Richards to
avoid the trouble of filing a written report on the incident. 

The issue about filing a written report, according to Compean's testimony,
turned on his willingness not to mention the assault. The decision not to
file a written report did not turn on wanting to hide the fact that shooting
had taken place. 

Moreover, Richards was well aware Compean had been injured in a scuffling
match with Aldrete-Davila on the levee, when he wrestled the drug smuggler
down. Compean did not even realize his hand had been cut until Richards
pointed it out to him at the levee. 

The Customs and Border Patrol manual mentions that the penalty for failure
to report the discharge of a firearm or use of a weapon as required by the
applicable firearms policy is a written reprimand, or at most a five-day
suspension for the first offense. The manual makes no mention of the
possibility of criminal punishment for failure to report the discharge of a
weapon. 

In a last, more belligerent section of the hearing, Barker charges, "There
was a shooting where somebody was shot and NOTHING WAS SAID!" The capital
letters were in the original transcript, probably reflecting Barker's
emphasis. 

Russell responds, according to the transcript: "That was an administrative
violation on his part by not reporting it to the agency, yes, but on the
same part the agency failed to act when it knew that an agent had been
assaulted." 

Then, Russell himself shouts out, "EMPLOYEES SAW IT," pointing out seven
Border Patrol agents besides Ramos and Compean, including two supervisors,
were at the scene. 

According to the transcript, the pressure on Compean not to file a written
report came from Richards, the senior supervisor on the field. 

Richards was applying pressure on Compean not to report the assault, because
that would have demanded paperwork. 

Moreover, according to the hearing transcript, there is no record Richards
ever mentioned to Compean the need to file a written report on the shooting.


  _____  

 

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to