Mexican Officials Point Rifles and threaten U.S. Border Agents

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
G'night, Jiro. This is quickly becoming another battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. Boring.
Click to expand...

:wave:
 
Law enforcement officers...of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person. (Emphasis added)

A commentary accompanying the policy explains key words and concepts and provides some guidance for interpretation. For example, it emphasizes that "as a matter of principle, the Department of Justice deliberately did not formulate this policy to authorize force up to the constitutional or other legal limits."

The difference between the policy and the law is most significant with respect to fleeing felons. In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), the Supreme Court held that the fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution permits the use of deadly force when necessary to prevent the escape of a felony suspect when there is probable cause to believe the suspect has committed a crime "involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm." The policy requires the additional factor of probable cause to believe that the suspect's escape would pose an imminent danger to the officers or others.
Click to expand...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_n4_v65/ai_18555062/

Perhaps a review of whom the criminal really is? Okaaaaay ..........:roll:


The video showed an imminent threat. It showed an attempt to flee, it also showed at least two individuals throwing rocks at the Border Patrol Agent as well as a person speaking Spanish that said "they" are throwing rocks. That could certainly mean more than two individuals not shown on the video who were throwing rocks.

1. Assaulting a Federal Employee (doesn't matter if Post Office Employee or Census Bureau or even a Border Patrol Agent) is an automatic felony.

2. The law makes it permissible to use deadly force.


As tragic as this incident was, it was really stupid for the kids to be throwing rocks at a Federal Employee.
 
Steinhauer said:
FBI training on the new federal deadly force policy | FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,The | Find Articles at BNET

Perhaps a review of whom the criminal really is? Okaaaaay ..........:roll:


The video showed an imminent threat. It showed an attempt to flee, it also showed at least two individuals throwing rocks at the Border Patrol Agent as well as a person speaking Spanish that said "they" are throwing rocks. That could certainly mean more than two individuals not shown on the video who were throwing rocks.

1. Assaulting a Federal Employee (doesn't matter if Post Office Employee or Census Bureau or even a Border Patrol Agent) is an automatic felony.

2. The law makes it permissible to use deadly force.


As tragic as this incident was, it was really stupid for the kids to be throwing rocks at a Federal Employee.
Click to expand...

do you think the public would hail this federal agent as a hero for killing a kid who was throwing a rock?

Can you show me any public support for this federal agent? Although I recognize that our Border Patrol agents are working harder than anybody else to protect our borders but he certainly does not have my sympathy nor support.
 
Jiro said:
do you think the public would hail this federal agent as a hero for killing a kid who was throwing a rock?

Can you show me any public support for this federal agent? Although I recognize that our Border Patrol agents are working harder than anybody else to protect our borders but he certainly does not have my sympathy nor support.
Click to expand...

Can you show me a law that says a Federal Employee cannot defend themself?

What about a law that permits assault on Federal Employees?
 
Jiro said:
do you think the public would hail this federal agent as a hero for killing a kid who was throwing a rock?

Can you show me any public support for this federal agent? Although I recognize that our Border Patrol agents are working harder than anybody else to protect our borders but he certainly does not have my sympathy nor support.
Click to expand...

Can you show me a law that says a Federal Employee cannot defend themself?

What about a law that permits assault on Federal Employees?

speaking of which ..... double standards?


Mexican military copter over U.S. neighborhood

just a few more questions then I will leave this alone.

Can you show me a U.S. law that allows illegal entry into the United States?

Can you show me any evidence that a hurled rock can cause bodily harm? (because I can).

Is it a bright thing to do to assault a Federal Employee or is it a crime?

Is throwing a rock at a Federal Employee (with intent to do bodily injury) a misdemeanor, or a felony?
 
Steinhauer said:
I will take that as a no. :cool2:
Click to expand...

that's fine if you want to think that way. I'm not responsible for spoon-feeding you. I guess I take it that you believe darkdog is saying no too.
 
What I am saying is Corbett was acquitted of all charges in a Federal Court and you neglected to mention that (how convenient):

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olkGNhgGWjc]YouTube - Border Shooting- The Sierra Vista Herald[/ame]
 
Jiro said:
um.... he is not acquitted yet. He can be brought to trial again if they want to.

Mistrial and Acquittal are not the same thing.
Click to expand...

No ..., he will not be tried a third time. It was proven the witnesses in the case were coached by the Mexican Consulate and lied under oath. U.S. District Court Judge David Bury filed a motion to dismiss. The Jury was deadlocked 11-1 for acquittal.

Makes you wonder if the witnesses had any credibility to begin with as they were breaking the law by entering the US illegally.


http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/01/08/20090108border-shooting0108-ON.html
 
Steinhauer said:
No ..., he will not be tried a third time. It was proven the witnesses in the case were coached by the Mexican Consulate and lied under oath. U.S. District Court Judge David Bury filed a motion to dismiss. The Jury was deadlocked 11-1 for acquittal.

Makes you wonder if the witnesses had any credibility to begin with as they were breaking the law by entering the US illegally.
Click to expand...

again - he was not acquitted. it was declared mistrial. like I said - he can be brought to trial again if they want to in future time.

Please show me any source that the jury has acquitted him.
 
Jiro said:
again - he was not acquitted. it was declared mistrial. like I said - he can be brought to trial again if they want to in future time.

Please show me any source that the jury has acquitted him.
Click to expand...

The first case was declared a mistrial. The second one was dismissed .... by a Federal Judge. He also said he will not be tried a third time for murder.

That is why a Civil Action was filed.

(btw: It was dismissed since it was proven in court that the witnesses lied).
 
Steinhauer said:
The first case was declared a mistrial. The second one was dismissed .... by a Federal Judge. He also said he will not be tried a third time for murder.

That is why a Civil Action was filed.
Click to expand...

again.... mistrial is not an acquittal.
again.... show me any legal case that officially & legally declared an acquittal
again.... he can be brought to trial again in future time if there is new evidence


Steinhauer said:
(btw: It was dismissed since it was proven in court that the witnesses lied).
Click to expand...
so why was he not acquitted? why did jury opt for mistrial instead of acquittal?
 
Jiro said:
again.... mistrial is not an acquittal.
again.... show me any legal case that officially & legally declared an acquittal
again.... he can be brought to trial again in future time if there is new evidence



so why was he not acquitted? why did jury opt for mistrial instead of acquittal?
Click to expand...

Your talking about the first case that was declared a mistrial. He was tried a second time in Federal Court and the case was dismissed.
 
Steinhauer said:
Your talking about the first case that was declared a mistrial. He was tried a second time in Federal Court and the case was dismissed.
Click to expand...

sigh.....

do you understand that when you are acquitted - you cannot be tried again even if there was a new evidence that implicates him? It's called Double Jeopardy. That's why OJ Simpson is a free man.

Dismissal or Mistrial is not the same as Acquittal. He CAN be tried again in the light of new evidence.
 
In the old western TV shows, there would be times when someone would draw their weapon, and the other man, a trained marksman, would shoot his hand, making the gun fall out. If we are talking about what a fine patrol officer this guy was, with advanced weapons training and accuracy, why was it necessary to shoot to kill a kid with a rock? Could have just shot him in the hand? The leg?

For the hothead(s) here, why do you want everyone eliminated? So you can sit on your porch in your hole-filled underwear shooting beer cans off a fence post? What is with favoring deadly force for any infraction? I cannot understand such logic, and it terrifies me that people that think this way walk among us.
 
Foxrac said:
Throwing rocks aren't strong as throwing knifes and guns.
Click to expand...

depend on size of rocks. If being hit the head, he/she would become retard enough to shot. Brain damage. uh-oh!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top