Debra J. Saunders

Last month, when Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean began serving 11-year and 12-year prison sentences, respectively, for shooting at a fleeing drug smuggler, many Americans were outraged that the federal government would prosecute two agents for doing their jobs.

Their trial uncovered policies that seem designed to undermine success -- such as the rule that prohibits agents from pursuing a speeding suspected smuggler without a supervisor's authorization. Drug smugglers know that if they speed to the border, they'll likely get away.

But the real outrage in this story is how federal prosecutors used their discretion to shelter a drug smuggler and go after two men who, at the worst, should have been fired for shooting at the smuggler and then not reporting what they had done. The outrage is that this case ever came to trial.

Reading the trial transcript -- which was released Tuesday -- you can't tell which witnesses seemed credible. Nor do you see drawings that show the lay of the land on the afternoon of Feb. 17, 2005, when drug smuggler Osvalo Aldrete-Davila drove a truck filled with 743 pounds of marijuana off a West Texas road and then tried to run for the border when he encountered agent Compean.

Did agents Ramos and Compean shoot at a man whom they knew to be unarmed? I see reasonable doubt. Compean said that as Aldrete-Davila fled, the smuggler turned toward him with a shiny object in his hand, so the agent fired back in self-defense. Ramos said that he heard the shots while he was crossing a ditch and could not see what was happening. Then, fearing for his partner's safety, he fired one round at the suspect, who first dropped out of sight and then was seen walking into Mexico and being driven away in a friend's car.

I see how jurors could have seen the agents' failure to tell supervisors about the shooting, their failure to tell other agents the suspect was armed, and the fact that agents scooped up the spent shells when Ramos and Compean realized they had engaged in a bad shoot. Hence the guilty verdict.

But there is no way to know for certain if Aldrete-Davila had a gun or a cell phone in his hand as he fled. Yet U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton's office waged this prosecution based on Aldrete-Davila's version of events -- even though the smuggler originally lied to a Border Patrol agent when he said he was shot as he was simply returning to Mexico. He left out the drug smuggling.

Debra J. Saunders

TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Debra Saunders' column. Sign up today and receive daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.