FriendsOfTheBorderPatrol.com is the best source of information when it comes to bad government persecutions by way of prosecutions in what we call the "War on Law Enforcement". As such, we present a case people have heard many things about but have been unable to read and review for themselves until now.

FOBP with the assistance of Defense Counsel Ron Tonkin has made it possible to present the case of U.S. Government vs USBP Agent Gary Brugman. We thank Mr. Tonkin for providing Mr. Brugman's original trial transcripts and appeal documents (see bottom of page for documents/transcripts). In reviewing this case independently by reading the official court transcripts and filings, and not coming to a decision on Mr. Brugman's statement alone, it is clear that Gary was purely utilized to give the Mexican Government a Border Patrol Agent's scalp. U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton and his minions used an extremely weak assault charge and put the full weight of not just the local U.S. Attorney Field Office, but the Department of Justice behind this prosecution.

Even the blindest, most ignorant person without one iota of common street sense can tell Gary was railroaded. It's clear that the "star witness" had no credibility. This prosecution is not merited let alone justified when the victim cannot even ID his assailant. The other star witness, is a criminal, caught in the act, and a repeat, so how is he credible? I find no relevance to suggest a pattern when Saldana can't ID any specific assailant. So Gary is guilty by his own mere admission, since he cannot be identified? Our question to the public is, if Gary Brugman had remained silent, would he have been innocent? The judge in this trial should have never have allowed the 2nd witness/criminal alien to testify. It is clear Sutton's office plays by one set of rules for criminal aliens, and another for agents doing their jobs. The 2nd witness' testimony is irrelevant in my opinion, with no credibility. Did "W" appoint this judge, too?

It's clear that this judge is not far from Kathleen Cardone in sheer stupidity considering the statement that he knew an appeal of the conviction would not be overturned. That was an asinine declaration and demonstrates pure arrogance, or was the fix in? This case clearly has no merit and never should have belonged inside the confines of a courtroom. Unlike Ramos/Compean who in point of fact screwed up and should have been fired, at minimum, though I remain uncertain as to prosecution, Gary's prosecution is completely aggregious. His case didn't even rate time on the beach with/without pay. He did not screw up, admitted the push, which by definition is assault, though extremely weak and justifiable within the context and under the conditions as I see it.

There is not one solitary issue that establishes credibility in the prosecution's case. It's a waste of taxpayer dollars considering this money would be better spent on prosecuting dopers, murderers, and other real criminals. Mind you, Gary should not have received a medal either, but this prosecution stinks. What is also apparent is that Sutton's office was trying to make an example of Gary. Also clear is that Mexico was influencing the case. I'll give you odds that Saldana was compensated after the trial. Let me state it as Senator Feinstein did in the Senate Judiciary Hearing (July 17, 2007) into the Ramos/Compean case: "you made a bad guy into a good guy, and a good guy into a bad guy." That clearly is evident and fits the pattern we've been able to uncover and link.

To summarize, we must note that in reading the transcripts and briefs, Gary Brugman was clearly represented by qualified counsel who had his best interest in mind, unlike Ramos and Compean's original trial counsels and left no questions that the infamous El Paso case screams to have asked. The fact remains Gary Brugman lost though he was innocent, and not at all due to ineffective counsel. This is our view after reading the transcripts and based on our experience in reviewing prosecutions of law enforcement officers by U.S. D.O.J. (Main DOJ) and U.S.A. Field Offices. We, at FOBP, always believed Gary Brugman innocent, but reading the transcripts and briefs has cemented it without any doubt.

---

*Official Appeal Documents Filed in U.S. vs Gary Brugman

Click HERE to read the Brugman Writ of Certiorary Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court

Click HERE to read the Brugman Petition for Rehearing "En Banc" to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals

Click HERE to read the Brugman Petition "En Banc" to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals

Click HERE to read the Brugman Brief to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals

---

Brugman Trial Transcripts

All trial transcripts case if U.S. vs Gary Brugman are available below and were provided to FOBP by Defense Counsel Ron Tonkin.  These files are available in Adobe Acrobat format.

Grand Jury Proceedings (Partial)

Volume I

Volume II

Volume III

Volume IV

Saldana Testimony Transcript

Sentencing Transcript