Thread: SF: Officials try to explain suspect’s release

SAN FRANCISCO
Officials try to explain suspect's release
Man charged with killing man, 2 sons was jailed in March
Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

(07-21) 19:05 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Authorities couldn't fully explain Monday how an alleged gang member and suspected illegal immigrant was able walk out of jail in San Francisco - three months before police say he shot and killed a father and two sons.

Edwin Ramos, 21, appeared in court Monday on charges stemming from the June 22 slayings of Anthony Bologna and his sons Michael and Matthew. Police say the three were shot near their home in the Excelsior district when Anthony Bologna, driving home from a family picnic, briefly blocked the gunman's car from completing a left turn down a narrow street.

Ramos is scheduled to enter a plea in the case on Wednesday.

The Chronicle reported on Sunday how Ramos, a native of El Salvador, was repeatedly shielded as a juvenile from deportation by city officials who failed to notify federal authorities of separate assault and attempted robberies he committed when he was 17.

Things took an unexplained turn earlier this year when Ramos, now a 21-year-old adult, was jailed on gun and gang allegations in San Francisco. Federal and local officials struggled Monday to explain the circumstances surrounding his release - given that his status as an illegal immigrant was known to federal authorities - when local prosecutors didn't file charges.

He was arrested on March 30 when police stopped his car in the Tenderloin and a passenger in the car tried to dispose of a handgun. After three days in jail, Ramos was released. Police learned that the weapon tied to his passenger had been used in a double murder the day before. But at the time, prosecutors could not tie the weapon to Ramos, instead seeking charges against his passenger.

San Francisco Sheriff Mike Hennessey, who oversees the jails, said his agency sent a fax to federal immigration authorities about both Ramos and the passenger shortly after their arrests.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office issued a immigration hold for the passenger but not for Ramos, Hennessey said, adding that his deputies then released Ramos when no local charges were filed.

"We gave them that document, we faxed it to the local office," Hennessey said. "They didn't respond to our fax for a hold, it was faxed four hours after of the arrest."

Hennessey said that about an hour after Ramos' release, deputies made a formal request of a federal computer database about Ramos' status for "billing purposes," so as to possibly recoup the cost of housing him on behalf of immigration.

Tim Counts, a spokesman for the immigration agency, said his agency's records reflect that sheriff's deputies didn't ask about Ramos' status until more than an hour after Ramos was freed from custody.

The response to San Francisco officials was that Ramos was undergoing deportation proceedings, Counts said, adding that he did not know if the federal authorities told local officials to hold a man who had already been released.

Later on April 2, according to Counts, the local immigration office filled out the paperwork needed for a detainer to keep Ramos in custody. But, he said, there was no indication that the detainer was forwarded to sheriff's authorities. In any case, Ramos was already out of custody by that point.

Earlier Monday, one of Ramos' defense attorneys, Robert Amparan, said he would ask for a court- imposed gag order about his client's case, saying news coverage was damaging his client's right to a fair trial.

"False information is being placed out there, his rights are being violated - in terms of the disclosure of alleged juvenile records," said Amparan.

On Sunday, The Chronicle reported that Ramos, at age 17, was twice found to have committed felonies - a gang motivated assault of a Muni bus passenger followed by the attempted street robbery of a pregnant woman - but he was shielded from deportation by the city's policy of providing sanctuary for immigrants.

Amparan did not specify what he thought was false in The Chronicle article and has not requested a correction.

"It's important to get a fair trial, and we can't get a fair trial if false information is being put out there by The Chronicle and then copied and mimicked" by other media, Amparan said. "He's a young man, he was working, he has a young child. He's not a gang banger. The attempts to try to portray him as some kind of violent, horrific individual is just an attempt to deny him a fair trial."

Amparan said his client is not responsible for the June 22 slayings and is not a gang member. He said he did not enter the country illegally.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 11SK2S.DTL

Hmmm, Robert Amparan is no longer a Public Defense Attorney. The question now is - WHO is paying him to defend this scumbag?

http://www.robamparan.com/education.html

Please post on related threads that have more comments.

Let's try to keep these stories together (for future reference and research) unless there is a Breaking Announcement about the case.

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-124496.html

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-124362.html