Do US border patrols have immunity from prosecution?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 5:30 am

They do seem to keep killing people (by which I mean Mexicans) in extraordinary circumstances and getting away with it. Are we meant to say oh well, never mind, they were only Mexicans? Or can they shoot US citizens with the same impunity too?A grainy mobile phone video has cast doubt on a US border patrol agent's claim that he shot dead a 14-year-old Mexican boy after he was threatened by a group of illegal immigrants [...] US authorities say the agent was acting in self-defence as he sought to repel a group of would-be migrants hurling rocks.

The video, taken from a nearby pedestrian bridge shows three people running from the US bank of the river, towards Mexico, chased by border patrol agents. One of them is caught by an agent who drags him along the ground, keeping one arm outstretched towards Mexico with what looks like a gun in his hand. The sound of shots follows and a voice is heard shouting: "He's hit him, the idiot, he's hit him." Another voice adds: "It's because they are throwing stones."

The video contradicts an account by FBI spokeswoman Andrea Simmons who previously said: "This agent, who had the second subject detained on the ground, gave verbal commands to the remaining subjects to stop and retreat. However, the subjects surrounded the agent and continued to throw rocks at him. The agent then fired his service weapon several times, striking one subject who later died."

Mexico-US tensions rise as video emerges of boy just before being shot | World news | The Guardian

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:35 am

If all that was crossing our borders were poor peons just looking to make a better life for their families, as the press often suggests, we could afford to be kind and gentle with illegals. But, we've seen some of the pure crap that flows over the border, and the crime and violence. It's a war zone, make no mistake.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:03 am

hoppy;1315206 wrote: If all that was crossing our borders were poor peons just looking to make a better life for their families, as the press often suggests, we could afford to be kind and gentle with illegals. But, we've seen some of the pure crap that flows over the border, and the crime and violence. It's a war zone, make no mistake.

And this 14 year old was pure crap, was he? As far as I can see he wasn't ever in the USA, nor intending to go there, despite all the attempted press implication that he was a fugitive refusing orders from a law officer.

And the statement was accurate, in your opinion? "This agent, who had the second subject detained on the ground, gave verbal commands to the remaining subjects to stop and retreat. However, the subjects surrounded the agent and continued to throw rocks at him. The agent then fired his service weapon several times, striking one subject who later died"? Regardless of the video showing otherwise, that the agent fired across the border and was never surrounded in the first place?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:42 am

Where's the video?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:43 am

flopstock;1315214 wrote: Where's the video?

Is it not being played at the top of every hour on your outraged news channels? What a surprise.

I've no idea where it is, I've not seen it either.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:51 am

YouTube - Footage of Mexican teen shot by US border patrol released

I think this is it. I couldn't tell what the heck happened.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:53 am

YZGI;1315221 wrote: I think this is it. I couldn't tell what the heck happened.My computer has insufficient oomph to run a flash player but I'll take your word for it.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:18 am

This is some of what goes on there. Take a vacation, spend a month on that border sometime. Then judge us.

With Mexican Troops Regularly Crossing the Border and Bounties on Border Patrol Officers' Heads, It's Clear Who the Extremists Really Are

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:26 am

hoppy;1315226 wrote: This is some of what goes on there. Take a vacation, spend a month on that border sometime. Then judge us.

So, do US border patrols have immunity from prosecution? When was the last time one came up in court as a result of killing anybody?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:33 am

spot;1315229 wrote: So, do US border patrols have immunity from prosecution? When was the last time one came up in court as a result of killing anybody?
No they don't Spot.

Border Patrol Agents Convicted - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:51 am

YZGI;1315230 wrote: [quote=spot]So, do US border patrols have immunity from prosecution? When was the last time one came up in court as a result of killing anybody?No they don't Spot.[/QUOTE]Thank goodness for that. I thought maybe they were in the same position as the gentlemen involved at the Danziger Bridge Massacre five years ago. Perhaps the gung-ho officer in El Paso might find himself investigated. Maybe even Andrea Simmons might have her knuckles rapped in private for sheer utter stupidity in the face of bad news.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:20 am

Balazo de agente a joven en video - Videos de Primer Impacto - Univision.com

from what little i see here it looks like the guy was being attacked from the direct right, the upper right and the top of the screen. if one of them had fired a shot and hit the suspect in custody, we'd be hearing about how careless he was.

I think it's sad that a 14 or 15 year old is dead. I also think it is sad that they view the BP as sport to be attacked. I would much rather it had been a drug lord. But i don't see this guy setting up and taking aim at anyone. if anything, he is jarred by the suspect.

I think they need to boycott America. We will either become convinced of our need to open the borders, or they will have to become self reliant and entertain themselves at home.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:22 am

spot;1315232 wrote: Thank goodness for that. I thought maybe they were in the same position as the gentlemen involved at the Danziger Bridge Massacre five years ago. Perhaps the gung-ho officer in El Paso might find himself investigated. Maybe even Andrea Simmons might have her knuckles rapped in private for sheer utter stupidity in the face of bad news.
That was ridiculous. Police here as everywhere have become more like a military unit. They are not protecting and serving the people as they're supposed too, they are trying to see how many they can arrest, jail and fine almost like a mercenary business.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:08 am

Looks to me like the person being detained bumped the agent while he had his finger on the trigger while holding the gun fixated on the unfortunate individual.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:10 am

YZGI;1315239 wrote: That was ridiculous. Police here as everywhere have become more like a military unit. They are not protecting and serving the people as they're supposed too, they are trying to see how many they can arrest, jail and fine almost like a mercenary business.

They have to meet their quota as defined by crime statistics/officer ratio. Racial profiling is by far the greatest effect of it.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:12 am

The real question is if the agent accidentally discharged his firearm with absolutely no intention to fire his weapon should he be charged with anything? If so perhaps by an international court?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:34 am

K.Snyder;1315255 wrote: The real question is if the agent accidentally discharged his firearm with absolutely no intention to fire his weapon should he be charged with anything? If so perhaps by an international court?

International court? Now you're talkin like a U.N. hugger, boy.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:38 am

hoppy;1315257 wrote: International court? Now you're talkin like a U.N. hugger, boy.

Perhaps Kevin means a court in Mexico, that being where the death occurred.

The US has always had the option of leaving the UN any time it liked, you know. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:40 am

spot;1315259 wrote: Perhaps Kevin means a court in Mexico, that being where the death occurred.

The US has always had the option of leaving the UN any time it liked, you know. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

A lot of Americans feel sooner would be better.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:42 am

hoppy;1315260 wrote: A lot of Americans feel sooner would be better.

Go for it, big boy. Bluster's just bluster but actually leaving would be an event.

Did "the subjects" surround the agent and continue to throw rocks at him, Kevin? And how many times did he "accidentally because he was nudged" fire his weapon?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:25 am

Go for it, big boy. Bluster's just bluster but actually leaving would be an event.

:p

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:21 pm

hoppy;1315257 wrote: International court? Now you're talkin like a U.N. hugger, boy.:(You're speaking before your brain has time to catch up with your lips "hoppy"

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:36 pm

spot;1315261 wrote: Did "the subjects" surround the agent and continue to throw rocks at him, Kevin? And how many times did he "accidentally because he was nudged" fire his weapon?

http://www.univision.com/content/videop ... id=2432212

Ok, at 1:13 the person circled blatantly raises his arm in a manner that suggests he had a gun. No one can throw rocks in this way with the exception of Bruce Lee and seeing as how Bruce is no longer with us then rocks, in my mind(No jokes please it's late! :wah:) were not of an issue, IMO.

What's next is suggesting that having the firearm(s) is what provoked the outcome of this incident that could have been avoided otherwise. The argument's fine with me because regardless of what some or many might think I'm actually a nice guy when it comes down to it.

So bring up the numbers associated with "illegal immigrants" possessing firearms during border confrontations and then the answer can be given as to whether it's innately necessary for those agents to carry guns.

Tasers in my mind is acceptable although most might be a bit shocked by that...

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 2:52 am

I mentioned earlier my computer has insufficient processor power to play videos. I'm still wondering whether, as Andrea claimed, the agent fired more than one shot, and if he did then how you can think several shots resulted from his being nudged as opposed to it being a deliberate choice.

Here's the latest news update, anyway:Prosecutors in the Mexican border state of Chihuahua have concluded Hernandez's death was an intentional homicide and charges should be filed against the perpetrator, said Alejandro Parientes, the regional state deputy attorney general. However, state authorities have turned the case over to the federal prosecutors for further investigation and a final decision. The federal Attorney General's Office said there would be no public comment while the investigation continues.

Parientes said his investigation concluded the agent fired his weapon from the U.S. side of the border, but because Hernandez died on the Mexican side, Mexican courts have jurisdiction. "The homicide had its consequences in Mexican territory," Parientes said. "What I can say is that we have enough evidence to file homicide charges in a Mexican court."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD9G9B7B80

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 11:48 pm

spot;1315360 wrote: I mentioned earlier my computer has insufficient processor power to play videos. I'm still wondering whether, as Andrea claimed, the agent fired more than one shot, and if he did then how you can think several shots resulted from his being nudged as opposed to it being a deliberate choice.

Here's the latest news update, anyway:

Prosecutors in the Mexican border state of Chihuahua have concluded Hernandez's death was an intentional homicide and charges should be filed against the perpetrator, said Alejandro Parientes, the regional state deputy attorney general. However, state authorities have turned the case over to the federal prosecutors for further investigation and a final decision. The federal Attorney General's Office said there would be no public comment while the investigation continues.

Parientes said his investigation concluded the agent fired his weapon from the U.S. side of the border, but because Hernandez died on the Mexican side, Mexican courts have jurisdiction. "The homicide had its consequences in Mexican territory," Parientes said. "What I can say is that we have enough evidence to file homicide charges in a Mexican court."

The Associated Press: FBI opens civil rights probe into border shooting

It's all politics now.

The video I watched only had one flash that I saw. Entirely possible there were more and I just missed it. Probably would be a good idea if less were said by press officers who really can't have a clue that early on. That guy doesn't look like he's doing much voluntary detaining on the ground either. Looks to me like the one kid stumbled while getting pulled away and in the process stumbled into the officer, whose gun goes off.

IMO, if this guy was looking to shoot someone, he had plenty of earlier opportunities, at least from what I'm seeing.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:33 pm

"The homicide had its consequences in Mexican territory," Parientes said. "What I can say is that we have enough evidence to file homicide charges in a Mexican court." is an obviously biased statement altogether. I wouldn't dare suggest both sides aren't placing biased statements in their rhetoric therefore everything at this point is speculation and should be treated as such.

The circled individual(the person shot and killed) blatantly raises his left arm outstretched horizontally in the direction of the agent while steadily walking toward him. At the same time the person being detained by the agent was stumbling around the agents feet while the agent's gun was fixated in the direction of the aforementioned person.

These are facts.

Post by **spot** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:48 pm

Does anyone know what happened to the shooter? Was he suspended from duty? Sacked? Did an investigation reach any conclusion? Is he in a Mexican jail awaiting trial?

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:47 am

spot;1333109 wrote: Does anyone know what happened to the shooter? Was he suspended from duty? Sacked? Did an investigation reach any conclusion? Is he in a Mexican jail awaiting trial?

If he's ever been in a Mexican jail from the time of this incident then I certainly know what happened to him without looking it up

Post by **spot** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:56 am

K.Snyder;1333125 wrote: If he's ever been in a Mexican jail from the time of this incident then I certainly know what happened to him without looking it up

How would it have differed if he'd been in a US jail for the same period?

And what, in fact, has actually happened since the shooting?

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:56 pm

spot;1333147 wrote: How would it have differed if he'd been in a US jail for the same period?Because people still resent others for the color of their skin. He'd have the safety net of joining his ethnic group in prison in America whereas in Mexico he'd not have that "privilege".

spot;1333147 wrote:

And what, in fact, has actually happened since the shooting?I'm not as sure atm but will look in to it more when I come home from work...

Post by **spot** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:17 pm

K.Snyder;1333196 wrote: Because people still resent others for the color of their skin. He'd have the safety net of joining his ethnic group in prison in America whereas in Mexico he'd not have that "privilege". I suspect there are deeper divides in jail than mere color. Like, for example, being a US law enforcement officer who lethally fired three rounds across a national border into a Mexican bystander.

He might be safer in a Mexican jail, the staff might take their duty of care more seriously than their US counterparts do. Let's face it, they certainly couldn't take them less seriously.

ZAP · Post by **ZAP** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:23 pm

I watched the video and couldn't tell what had happened either.

spot;1333197 wrote: I suspect there are deeper divides in jail than mere color. Like, for example, being a US law enforcement officer who lethally fired three rounds across a national border into a Mexican bystander.

He might be safer in a Mexican jail, the staff might take their duty of care more seriously than their US counterparts do. Let's face it, they certainly couldn't take them less seriously.

No, I doubt that Spot. I live very close to Mexicali and have friends who live there. I have friends in law enforcement. We have 3 prisons in our 100 sq. mile county in the U.S., which are clean and well maintained. The prisoners have regular meals. If you asked anyone who has ever been in Mexicali or knows people who live there, they would tell you, you NEVER want to land in a jail or prison in Mexico!

Or this link is better.

http://revcom.us/a/145/mexico_prison-en.html

SAVE A LIFE - Foreign Prisoners Support Service

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 16, 2010 1:29 am

I was writing of prisoner safety, Zap, not prisoner comfort. You're suggesting that US prisons are safe environments for inmates? Because they certainly ought to be.

ZAP · Post by **ZAP** » Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:31 pm

spot;1333248 wrote: I was writing of prisoner safety, Zap, not prisoner comfort. You're suggesting that US prisons are safe environments for inmates? Because they certainly ought to be.
Yes, I suppose my post was slanted toward the amenities of prison life in the U.S as compared to those in Mexico. But no, I cannot imagine that any prison is a safe environment for inmates. The shooter in this article is in a bad spot should he go to prison, wherever it might be, because of the nature of the crime.

I found an interesting article about prison life in Mexico and one on the Mexican Mafia, which has many members in the U.S. prisons.

NPR : Americans in Mexican Prisons

Mexican Mafia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:38 am

Seeing as how World populations are defined as either "poor" or "rich" due to the other(Which some obviously believe that money is pooped in quite large proportions only to be disbursed to people willing to suck up to those with as many weapons, regardless of whether or not they're being controlled by a muppet string) then we obviously have to define the prison population as the same...

I know of one person that spoke of his friend randomly being placed in a Mexican prison. The unfortunate was stabbed to death within two months. Without trying to imply anything this does seem to point heavily in favor of American prisons being more safe. On the other hand if a certain percentage of people are held in American prisons beyond a crucial number then this would negate the relevance by shear probability.

On that, has anyone had more luck with this story coming to surface atm?

Post by **spot** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:09 am

K.Snyder;1333402 wrote: On that, has anyone had more luck with this story coming to surface atm?The killer was put on administrative duties for two days and then went back on patrol. An astonishing response, really. I'd call that immunity from prosecution.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15883524

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:10 am

Something that occurs to me going through this thread is that it is a good thing to check on the accountability of Law Enforcement/Security Forces every now and then. It sounds like the Border people are a bit out of control. This is not a problem limited to the US: we certainly get problems here from time to time. You might think that it's a good thing that the Border Patrols can get away with homicide/infanticide, but that sort of behaviour becomes cultural and spreads if left unchecked.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:01 am

Well for the sake of hypothetical scenarios(I know we all Love them) if the person was throwing rocks would this then be considered justifiable or is it generally accepted that the job title itself is enough to render any border patrol in America unjustified upon any action while on duty?

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:09 am

K.Snyder;1333436 wrote: Well for the sake of hypothetical scenarios(I know we all Love them) if the person was throwing rocks would this then be considered justifiable or is it generally accepted that the job title itself is enough to render any border patrol in America unjustified upon any action while on duty?

I suppose now is as good of a time as any to answer me own question...

I do know that I cannot guarantee I wouldn't shoot someone throwing rocks at me(I would in all likelihood attempt to scare them with a couple of shots in the air, unbeknownst to themselves).

On that I couldn't care less where anyone decided to live their lives. An ideal government is one in which the majority retains the power and one scared to open up borders is one that shows just how irrelevant the peoples' power is, or ignorance choose one.

Post by **spot** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:22 am

K.Snyder;1333436 wrote: Well for the sake of hypothetical scenarios(I know we all Love them) if the person was throwing rocks would this then be considered justifiable or is it generally accepted that the job title itself is enough to render any border patrol in America unjustified upon any action while on duty?Anyone fearing for their life as a result of stones being thrown at them has a legal right to self-defence, so long as that self-defence is the minimum required to remove the threat. If retreat is an option then attacking is an offense. If shielding is an option then attacking is an offense. Attacking to a greater extent than is needed for defense is an offense.

The other consideration is a police officer attempting to make an arrest being allowed to exercise appropriate force. That's not applicable in this case, there's no such thing as a cross-border arrest, there's no jurisdiction. The officer can only have been acting as a private citizen.

The thing is that after killing someone it may or may not be that an adequate legal defence exists to a charge of murder, but the legal defence can only be tested in front of a jury in a court of law - possibly a grand jury, possibly at a trial. It certainly can't be decided by the police force concerned when the killer is a police officer. He should at the least have been suspended from duty until the circumstances had been examined by a grand jury and the officer exonerated. If an American were asked to describe any other society on earth where an event like this had taken place and the officer went back on duty three days later he'd describe it as a Police State which had no accountability before the law.

Post by **spot** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:47 am

I notice that the US Government does, itself, have film of the shooting which would, if made public, clear up the question of what actually happened.

A lawsuit has now been filed in U.S. District Court in El Paso by the parents of the dead 15 year old naming the Department of Homeland Security, The U.S. Border Patrol, the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and an "unnamed agent" of the U.S. Border Patrol as defendants, simply in an attempt to gain access to the border camera video and "see it and get a better look at it".

Governments are at their most detestable when they hold secrets for their own convenience. Government employees are at their most despicable when they choose to raise legal barriers at the expense of truth.

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 11:26 am

I was pondering some theories on why the US might refuse to co-operate on the grounds that people on American soil can't be subjected to prosecution in another country. Whether or not the US looks into the matter in a way that answers questions and satisfies expectations of outsiders will either lend to their credibility as a moral leader or take away from it.

Post by **spot** » Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:31 am

The case attempting to gather more information has been dismissed.

Suit dismissed in shooting death of Juárez boy by Border Patrol agent - El Paso Times

"The ruling basically says that because the boy was shot in Mexico, there are no statutes that would apply in suing the U.S. government". Somewhat tortuous, that. It's common ground that the boy was stood on Mexican territory when he was shot by someone stood in the USA, and here's a US court saying it has no jurisdiction? Justice is thin gruel in America. The killer can't be prosecuted in Mexico because he can't be extradited there to stand trial.

The boy wasn't shot in Mexico at all, he was in Mexico when he was shot.

Post by **spot** » Thu May 03, 2012 2:19 am

And, after rather a long time, the news has been slipped out that yes, US border patrols do have immunity from prosecution.Citing insufficient evidence, U.S. federal authorities opted not to prosecute a Customs and Border Protection officer in the fatal 2010 shooting of 15-year-old Sergio Hernandez-Guereca in a spillway on the Rio Grande river along the U.S.-Mexico border near El Paso, TX.

[...] Hearing the news on April 27, the Mexican government issued a statement saying it "profoundly regrets and expresses its strong opposition to the decision.” It issued a diplomatic protest to the U.S. government and noted the decision didn’t mean the case against the Border Patrol agent is over in Mexican courts, nor that the civil actions taken by the victim’s relatives in U.S. courts have expired.

U.S. authorities won

No surprise there, then.

Post by **spot** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:34 am

The US Supreme Court is setting this aside until the newbie arrives and breaks the 4:4 deadlock. I'm pleased it's not just been set to one side and forgotten, the killing is still a national disgrace.

US officials chose not to prosecute agent Jesus Mesa Jr in the killing of the Mexican teenager, and the Obama administration refused a request to extradite him so that he could face criminal charges in Mexico.

The Trump administration, like its predecessor, is arguing that the location of the teenager’s death, in Mexico, should be the end of the story.

Deputy solicitor general Edwin Kneedler told the court that even if the victim had been American and all the other circumstances had been the same, the lawsuit should be thrown out.

But Kneedler and Mesa’s lawyer both acknowledged that someone killed by an agent on the US side of the culvert could sue. “That doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, does it? To distinguish these two victims? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/fe ... reme-court

It's rather like all these US gunships and B2s killing civilians abroad. If they did it on Homeland soil they'd be held to account, but foreigners? Who cares.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:15 am

spot;1315196 wrote: They do seem to keep killing people

Seven years ago. How many killed since?

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:28 am

spot;1392819 wrote: And, after rather a long time, the news has been slipped out that yes, US border patrols do have immunity from prosecution.Citing insufficient evidence,

We are a nation of laws, not mob rule. Not sorry if that offends anyone.

Post by **spot** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:31 am

tude dog;1507005 wrote: Seven years ago. How many killed since?

Who counts? Do you think statistics are published by any US agency relating to deaths or killings on the US-Mexico border?

Your Federal government is shamefully bad at gathering or publishing national social statistics.

In very similar circumstances, someone famously bragged that "we don't do body counts". On one side there's ethical behavior, and on the other side there's Americans in uniforms.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:48 pm

spot;1507007 wrote: Who counts? Do you think statistics are published by any US agency relating to deaths or killings on the US-Mexico border?

Yes, I do. In fact, I would expect it to be done in more than abundance.

spot;1507007 wrote: Your Federal government is shamefully bad at gathering or publishing national social statistics.

I don't even know what that means.

spot;1507007 wrote: In very similar circumstances, someone famously bragged that "we don't do body counts".

Really?