[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[House]
[Page 16550]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        U.S. ATTORNEY GONE WILD

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, before I came to Congress, I had a career in 
public service in Texas, first as a prosecutor for 8 years. I was a 
chief felony prosecutor and tried felony cases in Houston, Texas. And 
then I assumed the bench for 22 years and tried felony criminal cases 
and heard over 25,000 felony cases.
  And I say that to say during that time, both as a prosecutor and as a 
judge, I heard cases where peace officers were the victims of crime and 
I heard cases where peace officers were accused of criminal conduct 
against other individuals, people they had arrested. And I want to talk 
about a situation that has occurred down to the Texas-Mexico border 
involving a Border Patrol agent by the name of David Sipes. David Sipes 
was a Border Patrol agent patrolling the south Texas area, and he came 
in contact with a coyote. A coyote is a phrase we use in the vernacular 
for a person who is a smuggler of human beings into the United States. 
He makes money off of the plight of people who want to be in the United 
States for economic reasons.
  David Sipes arrested a coyote by the name of Jose Guevara, who 
resisted arrest. There was a fight that ensued and David Sipes hit Jose 
Guevara in the back of the head when he resisted arrest and he was 
charged with smuggling people into the United States.
  But what happened was, the U.S. Attorney's Office, rather than 
prosecute the human smuggler, they decided to prosecute the Border 
Patrol agent for using too much force in arresting the coyote and 
charged him with civil rights violations against the illegal in this 
country smuggling other human beings.
  David Sipes was tried for that offense. This all occurred back in 
April 2000. He was tried for that offense, civil rights violations, and 
the U.S. Attorney's Office vigorously and relentlessly prosecuted him 
for this so-called offense. But after the trial it turned out, after he 
was convicted of the civil rights violation, that the U.S. Attorney's 
Office hid evidence from David Sipes and his lawyer.
  So the district judge ordered a new trial because the U.S. Attorney's 
Office cannot hide evidence in a criminal case, but they did so against 
this Border Patrol agent. Why? We don't know, but they did. So the 
district judge ordered the case to be retried. But before it could be 
retried, the U.S. Attorney's Office appealed the judge's decision, and 
the Fifth Circuit agreed with the trial judge that David Sipes was 
entitled to a new trial and the Federal Government's appeal was thrown 
out and this year David Sipes was retried.
  The jury heard all of the evidence, evidence that the U.S. Attorney's 
Office hid from the jury when it was first tried, and in less than an 
hour David Sipes was found not guilty, and properly so.
  The evidence that the U.S. Attorney's Office hid from the jury, well, 
first of all they never told the jury that the U.S. Attorney's Office 
gave this drug smuggler travel expenses so he could go back and forth 
to Mexico, that they gave him witness fees, that they gave him free 
telephone access, that they gave him a border crossing permit, that 
they gave him a U.S. Social Security card, and they even gave him a 
Texas driver's license. But the biggest thing that the jury never heard 
about, besides all these benefits, back room deals he was given, it 
turns out that this human smuggler brought in another load of humans 
into the United States and the jury never heard about the second 
situation.
  Why does our U.S. Attorney's Office hide this type of evidence from a 
jury? We are going to find out why, Madam Speaker. Not only that, but 
Guevara was given $80,000 by our United States Government when he 
threatened to sue our government for his so-called illegal arrest, and 
reports are that he has gone back to Mexico and bought himself a ranch 
down there with American taxpayer money.
  Madam Speaker, just last week David Sipes asked to receive back pay. 
Of course, our Federal Government fought that, too, but he received 
back pay for the 6 or 7 years that he was out of service with the 
Border Patrol. But his life was destroyed. His wife divorced him 
because of this. He went bankrupt. He is destitute and he lives with 
his original trial lawyer. All of this because our Federal Government 
fought every inch of the way to prosecute a Border Patrol agent for 
arresting a criminal on our border smuggling human beings instead of 
prosecuting a human smuggler, a coyote.
  Our government had the choice, prosecute border agent or prosecute 
human smuggler, and our government chose poorly, and they prosecuted a 
Border Patrol agent.
  Of course we all know this isn't the end of the story because with 
agents Ramos and Compean the same situation has occurred. But, Madam 
Speaker, justice is the one thing we should always find. And finally, 
after 7 years, a jury heard all of the evidence in this particular case 
and David Sipes was vindicated and our government chose the wrong side. 
We are going to follow this case and other cases and see why the 
government has gone wild about prosecuting Border Patrol agents.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________