News : BP agent’s trial gets under way : Sierra Vista, AZ

Today's Weather


Click for Sierra Vista, Arizona Forecast


BP agent’s trial gets under way

By Jonathon Shacat
Herald/Review
Published/Last Modified on Thursday, Feb 28, 2008 - 06:24:50 am MST

TUCSON — The testimony from three people in U.S. District Court on Wednesday began to paint the picture of what happened when a Border Patrol agent killed an illegal immigrant from Mexico near Naco last year.

Before the testimony, attorneys gave opening statements to the jury. The prosecution then called its first three witnesses to the stand, including a Border Patrol agent, a criminalist and one of the victim’s brothers.

Grant Woods, the lead special prosecutor, told the jury there is an “overwhelming” amount of evidence in this case, including testimony from three eyewitnesses, ballistics, forensics, autopsy results and video footage of the incident.

He said Border Patrol Agent Nicholas Corbett claims to have fired the gun during a face-to-face confrontation with the victim, but the evidence will show the bullet entered the victim’s body in his left armpit and became lodged in his right lower abdomen. He said Corbett “lied” to try to justify what happened.



Sean Chapman, the lead defense attorney, said the three witnesses are “lying,” and Cochise County Sheriff’s Office detectives conducted “a horrible investigation.” He pointed out that officials failed to preserve gloves that were worn by the victim at the time of the shooting. Those gloves could have been tested to support Corbett’s claim that the victim held a rock.

He said Corbett did not want to shoot the victim, but he was forced to do so out of self-defense. The victim was trying to “crush his skull” with a “baseball or softball-sized” rock. He said the defense agrees the shot was fired at very close range.

Corbett is charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide for fatally shooting Francisco Dominguez-Rivera. His trial began Tuesday and is expected to last up to two weeks.

The victim illegally entered the United States with his two brothers, Jorge and Rene, and Jorge’s girlfriend, Sandra Guzman. Border Patrol officials spotted the group, and they were eventually stopped by Corbett.

John Maciulla, a criminalist, testified on Wednesday that he conducted tests on Corbett’s gun and the victim’s clothing. He said the gun was functioning normally. He said the presence of gunshot residue indicates the shot was fired between 3 inches and 2 1/2 feet away from the victim. Burnt fiber testing showed the gun was at a distance of between 3 to 12 inches.

During cross-examination by Jim Calle, one of the defense attorneys, Maciulla  acknowledged  that  the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office could have requested an examination of Corbett’s uniform for possible gunshot residue. He also acknowledged the gun’s handle could have been tested for the presence of skin, hair or DNA to determine if it is true that Corbett struck the victim with it.

Steve Berg, who was the first Border Patrol agent to respond to the shooting, said he heard the gunshot and then heard a “shots fired” call from Corbett via a hand-held radio. He arrived at the scene about 90 seconds later.

He said Corbett was attempting to remove the clothing of the victim. The victim’s brothers and a girlfriend were sitting on the ground nearby. Berg handcuffed the three individuals and then tried to expose the wounds of the victim. He checked for a pulse but was unable to find it.

Berg said that when Border Patrol field supervisor Murray Adams arrived, Corbett said he fired his weapon because the victim had a rock and he threatened to throw it at him. During cross-examination by Calle, he said Corbett was not specific about the distance between himself and the victim at the time of the shooting.

Jorge Dominguez-Rivera, one of the victim’s brothers, testified that he and his brothers and the girlfriend surrendered to Corbett. He said they did not pick up a rock or threaten Corbett in any way.

The defense did not get an opportunity to cross-examine the victim’s brother on Wednesday, but will do so this morning.

The victim’s parents were present in the courtroom on Wednesday. The mother became emotional at different times throughout the day. The father, Renato Dominguez, was supposed to testify, but the prosecution decided not to call him to the stand.

On  Tuesday,  Chapman said he would object to allowing the father to testify. He said the father would only “invoke sympathy” and would not add any “probative value” to the case. He said testimony regarding his son’s good character would open the door and allow him to inquire if the victim had gang affiliation and therefore was aggressive.

Woods said it would be “unbelievable” not to let the father explain to the jury that his son was bringing his brothers and the girlfriend to New York to get jobs.

Judge David Bury said the father’s testimony would need to offer evidence that is relevant to the charges. He also said he thinks Woods knows what is relevant to the case. But, on Wednesday, Bury said he was not sure the father’s testimony would be relevant.

Woods ended up deciding that he would ask the brothers to testify regarding the background of why they were crossing the border and where they were going.

Woods also told the judge that on Friday he intends to present evidence of prior  bad acts that were committed by Corbett that shows violence or a propensity toward violence. Chapman inquired why this evidence was not disclosed prior to the trial. Woods said he was just made aware of these incidents.

Judge Bury said the prosecuting attorneys will need to explain why it took more than a year to obtain the information.

Herald/Review Reporter Jonathon Shacat can be reached at 515-4693 or by e-mail at jonathon.shacat@bisbeereview.net.



Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comments appear once they are approved. Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
Current Word Count:
   





    leo friend wrote on Mar 1, 2008 7:56 AM:

    " The problem lies with the nostalgic idea that Americans have of the "poor mestizo" just coming in to this country to earn a living for their family in Mexico. Well, times have changed. There are still those who have no criminal intention, but there are so many more people crossing illegally who have serious criminal backgrounds, coyotes who try to blend in as a migrant, criminals who have been deported trying to sneak back in... An agent never knows who is going to be in a group. Forget the nostalgia, times have changed! "

    BOB IRVIN wrote on Feb 29, 2008 9:15 AM:

    " IS THERE A BOUNTY ON BORDER PATROL AGENTS? SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME THEY FIRE A SHOT PROSECUTORS ARE READY TO POUNCE ON THEM. I HAVE NEVER SEEN A PROFESSION BEING SO ABUSED WHILE TRYING TO PROTECT AMERICA. ILLEGALS ATTACK THEM AND IF THEY REACT THERE ARE PROSECUTORS STANDING BY TO SEND THEM TO PRISON. SOMETHING ROTTEN GOING ON.
    BOB I. "

    Sierra VIsta Resident wrote on Feb 29, 2008 2:06 AM:

    " We can expect a lot of this sort of thing if Hillary or Obama get into office.
    The ACLU and it's ilk will rule supreme with the socialist... "

    retired law enforcement wrote on Feb 28, 2008 4:51 PM:

    " Its like Ive said before the justice system in this country is a JOKE "

    emily wrote on Feb 28, 2008 11:18 AM:

    " I hope Agent Corbett is acquitted of all the charges. In this case it's the word of Agent Corbett against the word of how many illegals that were present when this happened? Of course the illegals are going to cover for each other. I would say illegals always want to be rewarded for something... I guess what I don't understand is, if Americans are so bad to these people why don't they go back to where they come from? "

    Sierra Vista Resident wrote on Feb 28, 2008 11:18 AM:

    " Ok, where is Jay, Young White Boy and Ron to support this poor, misunderstood immigrant. I've got an idea, let's get their addresses, send them to the immigrant center in Naco (making sure to mention they are opposed to citizens with firearms) and see if their attitude changes after the illegals mess with them and their family! "

    Pinto Spice wrote on Feb 28, 2008 10:44 AM:

    " In any situation regarding any type of public service officer the main objective is scene safety; yours and the subject(s). This is a very stressful time as you are trying to digest everything around you and with multiple subjects it adds even more stress to the situation. The agent felt threatend and used his right to use deadly force. He was protecting his own life, the rights and future of our country and our families. I think he did a great job at that. Every bad guy has a sad story. Prayers for Corbett! "

    jofn wrote on Feb 28, 2008 8:34 AM:

    " Trials are no different than any other political event. Both sides do whatever they need to do to win their case. I find the people that write these comments have little sense of reality when illegals are involved. Many have already decided the case based on emotion or bias. This case will definitely have to be tried on the physical evidence, which is lacking because the CC Sheriff's Office failed, in their duty, to collect it all. "

    Rock throwers wrote on Feb 28, 2008 8:10 AM:

    " From the Tucson Citizen.
    There has been a 29 percent increase in assaults in the sector, the country's most trafficked, since last year,
    Eighty-one agents were assaulted between Oct. 1 and Jan. 31, and 63 were assaulted over the same period the year before.
    Most of the assaults involve "rockings," where drug and human smugglers throw rocks, bricks and other objects at agents. Almost three-quarters of the Tucson-sector assaults since October were that kind. "

    KB wrote on Feb 28, 2008 8:03 AM:

    " (cont). . .his son WAS affiliated with a gang. I am not saying that everyone with a "Mi Vida Loca" tattoo is involved in a gang. I am just saying that it is likely the deceased was involved in a gang and that HE had a propensity towards violence. And how interesting that with all the county's bluster about Agent Corbett's conflicting statements about where the shooting happened, one of the first witnesses said that Agent Corbett didn't even mention the distance. And who exactly headed this illustrious investigation? Toddlers? "

    Me again wrote on Feb 28, 2008 8:00 AM:

    " I am fairly disgusted reading this article this morning. I was looking to a trial and I believed the truth would come out. The truth is not going to come out when the prosecution is using dirty tricks. Weren't they in the paper accusing agencies of not giving them information when they wanted it? Discovery is a two way street, not only does the defense have to show but they do too. They are not supposed to pull out last minute punches. I am disappointed terribly. "

    KB wrote on Feb 28, 2008 7:59 AM:

    " Hmmm, why indeed did it take the prosecution more than a year to find so-called evidence of prior bad acts by Agent Corbett? And, yes, I am one of those fervent supporters of the Border Patrol and do not believe complaints made against agents by illegals 99.9% of the time. After all, illegals are sometimes rewarded when they complain with room and board until the investigation is completed. I think it is hilarious that the prosecution will not allow the father to testify. They are obviously scared that he will have to admit that... "

    I don't believe wrote on Feb 28, 2008 7:58 AM:

    " That the prosecutors supposedly have evidence that Corbett has "a propensity towards violence" and they just sprung this, conveniently in the courtroom? Why can't we show the defendant had a "propensity towards violence" with a gang affiliation? The whole point of those tattoos is to show gang affiliation. This is not going to be a fair trial, I hope it is a mistrial and the prosecutors learn not to play dirty. I have lost all respect here. "

    Wait wrote on Feb 28, 2008 7:55 AM:

    " I am all for a fair trial, but here we go...the tattoo to show gang affiliation is not allowed and they don't want to ask the father that, but it is ok to paint a picture of the poor, nice immigrant? Can't have it both ways.

    If the tattoo could not be allowed in as it was considered not relevant to the shooting, then neither is the father relevant to the shooting. What a charade this is turning into. "

Community Videos



Additional recent videos can be viewed here


Use the arrows on each side of the player to for the next/previous video

Lastest U.S. Videos


In Tomorrow's Herald


News from the Fort Huachuca schools meeting.

Subscribe Today!

Photo Galleries

Contact Us


Staff Directory

Advertisement




Reader Poll



Calendar

Upcoming Events:

Faith and Spirituality