Another "illegal" dead. Fortunately, it doesn't change the overall "averages," so nobody is much worse off at all. At last count, the Feds would admit to about 500 dead in the last two years. Once you kill enough of them, the averages don't change much at all.
=====================================================
Thursday, 25 November 1999
Man killed at border was shot in back
By Tim Steller
The Arizona Daily Star
http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/131-7639.html
An autopsy revealed yesterday that a man killed Tuesday by a Border Patrol agent was shot in the back.
The shooting victim, David Maldonado Quijada, 29, of Nogales, Sonora, died after a bullet grazed his heart and lung, then exited through his chest, said Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada.
Maldonado, who had been driving a van with about 200 pounds of marijuana inside, reportedly led agents on a chase about five miles northeast of the downtown Nogales port of entry before the shooting.
The report by the Pima County Medical Examiner's Office adds complexity to the investigation of Maldonado's death, Estrada said. But he added that it does not necessarily mean the shooting was a homicide.
``I could not tell you that because he got shot in the back that it was not self-defense,'' Estrada said.
Mexican Consul Roberto Rodriguez Hernandez of Nogales, Ariz., agreed that the shooting isn't necessarily criminal, but added that the autopsy report ``indicates the need for an exhaustive investigation.''
``We shouldn't tolerate drug trafficking, but we shouldn't tolerate excessive use of force either,'' Rodriguez said.
Neither Estrada nor the Border Patrol would identify the two agents involved. The agents have refused to speak to investigators until Monday, when they will likely have attorneys present.
``Our intent is to cooperate with the investigation,'' said Michael Piccarreta, the attorney for the shooter.
The shooting occurred early Tuesday afternoon after a Border Patrol supervisor and a line agent pursued a van on back roads east of Nogales. The van got stuck on a dirt road and the driver fled south on foot.
The agents ran after the man and encountered him in Kimmer Wash, where the supervisor shot the man from a distance of 15 to 20 feet, Estrada said. A second shot was fired but apparently did not strike the victim. Estrada said investigators do not yet know who fired the second shot.
While the foot pursuit ensued, other agents found the marijuana in the van the man had abandoned, Estrada said.
Investigators have received word that the shooting victim either threw rocks at the agents or threatened them with rocks before the shooting. There may also have been some sort of man-to-man struggle, Estrada said.
``They have to use the force necessary to repel the threat,'' said Consul Rodriguez. ``But the force used should be proportional to the force they're facing.''
Among the elements to consider are the size of the rocks and the distance between the shooter and the victim, Rodriguez said.
Three law enforcement entities are investigating the shooting. Estrada's department is looking into possible criminal conduct; the FBI is investigating potential civil rights violations; and the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General is conducting the internal investigation into the killing.
The Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Department will turn its findings over to the Santa Cruz County Attorney's Office for a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges. The FBI will hand its investigation to the U.S. Attorney's Office for a decision on whether to pursue a civil rights case.
Maldonado's father and sister came to Tucson yesterday to identify his body. Maria Trinidad Maldonado said her brother lived in Colonia Bellavista, in the eastern hills of Nogales, Sonora.
He worked for his brother's business hauling building materials and had not smuggled marijuana in the past, she said.
Said Maldonado's father, Francisco: ``He was pretty shiftless, but . . .''
==========================================================
To take a man's property without his consent, and then to
infer his consent because he attempts, by voting, to
prevent that property from being used to his injury, is a
very insufficient proof of his consent to support the
Constitution. It is, in fact, no proof at all.
- Lysander Spooner <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Dreom/">http://members.aol
.com/Dreom/</A>
==========================================================