Posted by
Boaz on Saturday, November 01, 2008 8:56:54 PM
Nicholas Corbett was doing his job. Stopping Illegal Immigrants from entering the US, and for that he is on trial for murder. On trial for defending himself against an Illegal Invader who was intent on killing him with a rock. Francisco Javier Domínguez Rivera was intent on killing Nicholas Corbett for stopping him, his two brothers and a girlfriend they shared.
The prosecution in this case, being
held in Tuscon, Ariz., is using the two brothers, and the girlfriend as witnesses who describe the incident as the murder of an innocent man.
The prosecutor Grant Woods should be ashamed of himself, but he is an attorney and they typically have no idea what shame means. The idea of the three other Illegal Invaders being unbiased witnesses not under pressure from the Mexican Gov't and in their own interest, to help gain a guilty verdict is ludicrous at best. At its worst, the concept of using people as witnesses with a vested interest in a guilty verdict should be criminal in nature.
The first trial ended in a hung jury, the trial in process has gone to the jury. (on Friday 10-31-08)
While the issue of one man doing his job being held criminally responsible for a non crime is important, the larger issue goes much deeper than the individual case.
The prosecution demands the jury find that "no man is above the law". But the larger issue I'm talking about is the problem of whether or not this is a courtroom legal issue or a War on Illegal Invasion issue.
If it were nothing more than a traffic fine Rivera faced, and he was dragged out of the car, thrown to the ground and few slugs pumped into his head, I could agree that perhaps Nicholas Corbett was over reacting a smidgeon.
But that's a long way from reality on the ground between Arizona and Mexico, or Texas and Mexico or California and Mexico. The people who are crossing the border as Illegal Invaders by the act of crossing Illegally already have one strilke againbst them, they are Invading the US illegally.
On top of that some of these invaders may have paid thousands of dollars (not peso's) to 'mules' to get them across the border. Money which isn't easy to come by on the far side of the border. Losing the money by being caught and returned to Mexico can be a multi year setback for some invaders.
The impetus to get across the border is great, the need to break free from the Border Patrol when caught is even greater since they have already made it in! They may only need to go literally a few more yards to be loose in the country of destination. Losing that battle and giving up meekly and calmly as the prosecution in the case against Nicholas Corbett is suggesting simply runs counter to human nature. Even more so for those who would choose to break international law to gain access to a country they have no legal right to be in.
The nature of a court setting is deliberately confrontational, the prosecution has a job to do, and that job is to convict. The defense has a job to do and that is to see the accused go free. The two sides are mututally excluded from finding common ground, even if the defense and prosecution can agree on a plea bargain. They would still be angling for the best deal for their own side of the equation to get the longest or shortest sentence to justify the courtroom process.
But I would suggest this is not a process which belongs in a courtroom at all. Officer Corbett was doing a job on an unsecured border. That job entails risks he was willing to take. Such as being alone in an area of desert or on a lone stretch of highway at night with his only nearby backup being his wits and his sidearm. All other help being long minutes or slow hours away.When seconds count and your backup is minutes away, the need for action becomes a life or death decision chosen without the luxury of an air conditioned courtroom and an uncomfortable chair to sit in.
Those choices made in the field by Border Agents should never under any circumstance be second guessed or be subjected to a Monday Morning Quarterback routine.
Hire the people who can be trusted to do the right thing under difficult circumstances and then stand behind them, every time, and in every case.
That is the only formula to follow for successful resolution of the cross border infiltration by Illegal Invaders. All other formulas are a recipe for failure inflicted on men and women trying to keep this country secure against the Illegal Invaders. The pro illegal groups such as La raza and Border Action Network who have been demonstrating at the trial of Nicholas Corbett should be scrutinzed very carefully to make certain they are not harboring, aiding or abetting any Illegal Invaders in the commission of the crime of entering this country.
Men such as Nicholas Corbett should be given merit pay increases for job performance instead of being placed on trial for the 'crime' of defending themselves.
A guilty charge in this case will be wrong, a wrong verdict for a non crime, and a wrong precedent to set for securing the border between the US and Mexico. Innocent on all charges is the only verdict which has any merit in this case.