Border Patrol Outrage

The Ramos-Compean story continues.

I've written about this twice before (here and here) but there's so much material on this that I have to address it continually.

World Net Daily has the scoop on a potential mistrial in the case, as the defense attorney is now claiming that exculpatory evidence (this agency memo), which seemingly implicates the two agents, was withheld from the defense.

According to Ramos' attorney Mary Stillinger, the prosecution violated both the Jencks Act and Brady v. Maryland.

World Net Daily has a good round-up of the entire story here.

Democratic strategist Kirsten Powers shrewdly points out that "the defenders of Ramos and Compean would be smarter to focus on (the harsh sentence) instead of claiming that the agents just simply didn't do anything wrong."

The argument could be convincingly made that the agents were in the wrong - Deb Saunders acknowledges as much: "(Attorney Johnny) Sutton can point to inconsistencies in Ramos' and Compean's stories. He is right to argue that law enforcement officials cannot be allowed to shoot at unarmed suspects or lie about what they do."

But 10 and 11 year sentences?

When rewards are bestowed on illegal aliens for their testimony against Border Patrol Agents, and people cry about the "prison-like" conditions to which illegals are subjected when they're actually caught...isn't it about time that we stick up for people who actually try to DEFEND our borders?

For more on this and other illegal immigration controversies, check out Laura Ingraham's website.