Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila was the focus of a drug investigation why would Sutton grant him immunity?
He said that under Mr. Sutton's direction, prosecutors characterized the smuggler as an innocent victim, "which is clearly not the case," and when Mr. Sutton's office was told by the DEA of Aldrete-Davila's involvement in a second offense, "chose to disregard the information." http://www.washtimes.com/national/200703...
Answer:
This case is just like the old "Breaker Morant" movie about how the British Government conducted a kangeroo court in order to obtain a conviction against two outstanding soldiers.
The British Government lied, influenced the judge and prosecutor and denied the defendants basic rights.
The British Government felt that if they executed the two soldiers, then the enemy would surrender.
And that is what happened, the enemy (Borers in South Africa) did surrender.
Sutton felt pressure from the administration that wanted to show the Mexican Government that we really like them. There was NO WAY that these two men got a fair trial.
But the choice was to scrifice the two border patrol officers to appease the Mexican Government.
The investigating agent lied on his affidavit. Pertain evidence was with held.
And why did the judge seal certain information?
Google "Breaker Morant" and see the similiarities.
That is one of the many questions I would like my Senator to investigate when the Judiciary Committee investigation begins. I think there is a lot there.
To keep Mexico happy, and help Bush with his push for open borders.
The immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness