I've seen it with my very own eyes, but sadly, what you say is largely true.

LOL.
I've also heard the 'don't be afraid to disrobe, I'm a doctor' line too.
(Now what kind of a doctor [sociology, chemistry, or even a physician], well you get the idea...)

"Illegal immigration is wrong and against the law."

Yes, at a bare minimum. However, that characterization omits the more important aspect of WHY it is illegal and wrong: because it is harmful to the country. Otherwise, it would be highly unlikely that illegal entry would have a prohibition enshrined in US Federal Law.

"But to assume these illegal immigrants were "violent" is wrong. The coyotes (smugglers) were the ones in the wrong."

Well, technically, both groups of people are in the wrong.
Entering the US by evading entry points and/or failing to adhere to the required procedures is a violation of Federal Law.

When a prospective illegal alien hires a 'coyote' to help enter the US, they are in effect, entering into a conspiracy to break Federal Law. They KNOW (at least if an adult) what they are planning to do is illegal. Often times Federal Prosecutors that oversee filing of charges against the perps will opt to lessen or even not charge the smuggled, but elicit their cooperation in helping to prosecute the smugglers (it's the big fish and organized gangs they are mostly after).

Do I think the smuggled were likely to be violent people themselves? Well, no, probably not. But, then again, how do you know if they don't stop and submit to the required inspection as all the LEGAL entrants into the US do? The CBP agents in this situation didn't have the luxury of KNOWING what they were dealing with though.

Re: your example above - having intentions on doing one criminal act, and having that go awry or not as expected does not shield you from the responsibility of some other situation that might develop in response to the first act. Criminality often begets more criminality. Don't do the first crime and you wouldn't have had the second problem to worry about. It's just that simple.

PS. Not all people against illegal immigration and/or high levels of legal immigration (which I would argue are unsustainable) are 'ultra right wingers'. To assume that is the case would be to engage in stereotyping.

Great points Ralph.

About the ID Theft/SSNs angle... I don't think there is any requirement (by SSA) to actually initiate an investigation if there is a name+SSN mismatch - at least in the case of a bogus SSN (of course, most here will probably think there SHOULD be though). Things like that can be explained away with such rationalizations as: "Oh, I wrote the number down wrong" (never defensible in my book, but oh well...)
In such cases, and by my understanding, most of the time the person is simply not hired. Rarely are there any significant consequences for people that just game the system using 'made up' SSNs (again, there SHOULD be of course).

In the other case where a legit existing SSN is paired with a name other than the one to which it was initially issued invites some meaningful scrutiny though. Those cases are considered to be more likely to be bonafide cases of full-blown ID Theft, etc.

One thing that would help all this ID Theft/Misuse of Official Documents/Finding Prosecuting Tax Evaders/etc... is a law which FORCED the SSA to share critical information with the IRS and law enforcement agencies.

Godzilla posted an excellent example of race-baiting folks.
It's too bad the forum rules don't treat it on equal footing as it does outright racism.

This pair is costing the Oregon and US taxpayer:

Alejandro: 35 years x $30,000 = $1,050,000 (likely to rise over that time span)
Gilberto: 6 years x $30,000 = $180,000
(excluding Court, investigation and related police costs...of course)

Do you think either one of them worked a job and even paid a fraction of that into Fed, State or local taxes? I doubt it.

Again, my ability to reply to existing posts is 'hosed' for some reason. I'll just put my response to C_David_F out here in the main thread. Apologies for any confusion or inconvenience...

1. There is no greater insult to immigrants everywhere than to be confused with illegal aliens.

2. At least one of the perps had already come across the 'radar' of local law enforcement before the Countryman murder. Translation into practical terms: they had the chance to check his status and hold him and avoid the later disastrous chain of events. For anyone following this subject at any depth knows that this is a story the likes of which has been repeated countless times before.

3. Many don't hate the immigrants themselves (well, in this case that might be understandable, considering what they did). Most people do hate the system that allows the problem to continue to exist.

4. Every crime committed by illegal aliens is, by definition, a preventable crime. It need not happen. Secure the borders, enforce all immigration laws, force local law enforcement to cooperate with the Feds (ICE, CBP, CIS, etc) then this problem will begin to quickly go away.

5. And, I'd throw out to consider: in terms of US law and the immigration system, asylum and refugee status only applies in cases of POLITICAL or RELIGIOUS persecution. There is no 'ECONOMIC refugee' in US law (nor would you want that to be the case). If that were the case, then about 6.0 billion people on earth would then have instant entry into the US regardless of any law. (Of course, it goes without saying that our country could never withstand adding even a token fraction of that - say 307 million - the current population)

Let me leave you with a question to consider: Why is it we allow almost 80% of illegal immigrants from the relatively rich countries which comprise Mexico/Central America/South America...when the poorest country in the Hemisphere is grossly under-represented (in terms of the flow of illegal immigrants into the US)?

Thanks to K2 for covering the story and doing a respectable job of detailing the important facets of it.

'Vantikka' = Indian?

Ray_O_Vantikka wrote:

"I bet he was raised in Oregon public schools. They have extended history of producing this kind of standard/sub-standard specimin [sic] of Humanity"

HAHAHAHAHAHA!
You misspelled the word specimen. LOL

(I only have one college degree from an Oregon university so I guess I'm not qualified to point that out though....hehehehehe. The other one I earned out of state, so maybe I'm only 1/2 dumb, eh?)

LOL.

To assuage your concerns, no, there is no relationship whatsoever between myself and any other news organization in this town - or elsewhere for that matter.

The reason you'll see me do things like the above is for a very simple reason: often times when stories occur and other stations cover them, K2 is either slow to cover or reluctant to - while this may all be purely innocent and not be design, it often has the appearance of 'political correctness' - not covering stories because certain people or groups of people find the truth either unpalatable or disconcerting. I can think of no worse reason to not cover a news event. The truth is the truth - all I ask is that it be reported. I can decide how to interpret or how important it is.

In this particular case, other stations not only covered the story, but also included detailed identity info as well. Still, after a few hours, K2 had not covered it. (they scrubbed my first post about the perp's record at WCSO Jail in fact). But, alas, Bob Heye has provided an update and all is well.