[Editor’s note: I consider Cele Castillo to be a friend, a great American, and a source of needed wisdom and truth-telling on our planet. Beyond his public work, testifying as an expert witness against corrupt cops, he came to my classes and told young people about the lies of the current Bush administrations and those previous administrations.  Cele knows, first-hand, that the war on drugs is about helping a few politicians get rich and gain power while killing innocents and destroying lives through the prison-industrial complex.  His prosecution exemplifies everything wrong with American criminal law which seeks to criminalize otherwise legal activity, construct crime, create and use snitches, and exact misery against those without political power.]

This article was first posted on Narconews.

According to one federal prosecutor, Celerino “Cele” Castillo III, Vietnam vet, anti-war activist, and former DEA agent, who played a key role in exposing the U.S. government’s role in narco-trafficking as part of the Iran/Contra scandal, is now “a discredited man.” So says U.S. Attorney Johnny “House of Death” Sutton.  Notably, Sutton, calls himself a “dear friend” of unindicted murderer and admitted felon (for domestic spying and ordering torture among other things) President George W. Bush.

On 22 October 2008, Sutton’s office released a statement saying, “United States Attorney Johnny Sutton announced that … 58-year-old former Drug Enforcement Administration agent Celerino “Cele” Castillo, III, of McAllen, Texas, was sentenced to 37 months in federal prison for his role in dealing firearms without a license.”

To add some perspective, Castillo, a Vietnam veteran (who was awarded the Bronze Star for bravery) will spend three years in prison, though he has no prior criminal record, for the act of selling some firearms at gun shows in South Texas, because Cele did not submit paperwork – which was probably not required!

At his sentencing, a federal judge in San Antonio ordered that Castillo be committed to a federal medical facility due to Castillo’s multiple medical problems, including diabetes and heart problems. However, that is no guarantee that such is significantly better.  According to Castillo:

“I thought the judge was doing me a favor by sentencing me to a medical facility.  But I recently talked to someone who just got out of one of these medical facilities and he said [that] there isn’t a day that goes by where someone inside doesn’t die because of a dose of the wrong medication or maybe an overdose of chemo.  So maybe, it is a death sentence.  I can’t tell you.”

What is the law?

And while many of us might think that Cele deserves to be incarcerated for something heinous like selling guns, it is important to remember that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s freedom to possess firearms.  Furthermore, federal law on selling guns is less than simple and arguably is designed to snare innocents like Cele through a plethora of degrees of nuance and interpretation.

For example, the law in question, the Federal Gun Control Act distinguishes between individuals who sell firearms as a hobby (i.e., occasionally) and those who engage in the practice as a regular business.  The latter require a license issued by the government, the former do not.

Here is the wording from that act: [FN1]

The term “engaged in the business” means … a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms. See 18 USC §921(a)(21)

This definition, which is pretty clear, has been clarified further by a host of federal judges and courts.  Nevertheless given the recent events surrounding Cele’s ordeal, anyone who is charged with a firearms violation is well-advised to find expert legal counsel, as the law can easily be twisted to the wrong ends by over-zealous federal agents and prosecutors.

Castillo is honest about his activity in this case, but whether the government had any evidence that he crossed the line into violating the Gun Control Act is a bigger question. And even if Castillo did broach that line, the question of “the punishment fitting the crime” is now a matter for appeal (though Castillo says he is still trying to find the money and an attorney to handle that appeal).

Here is what Castillo says about the case against him on his Web Site:

Approximately three years ago, I started to attend the Saxet Gun Show by selling my book, Powderburns.  I found the experience overwhelming because it turned out to be great therapy for my PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). To ease my “cutting edge” a bit, I was back to wearing my Vietnam attire for the gun shows.

… As time went on I started to collect Vietnam vintage surplus to sell.  But before long, I began to do what most of the vendors were doing at the gun show, selling and buying both used and new guns without a license.  Over half of the vendors [at gun shows] are still doing what I got charged with.  However, I strongly believe that because of my involvement as an “expert witness” and [activism] against certain actions of our government, I obviously had become a target.

After all, I had been forewarned by a defense attorney, that a Federal prosecutor had advised him to instruct me that in some way, shape or form, the [Feds] were going to target me until they got me.  And that they did.

Whatever Happens to Whistleblowers?

Over two decades ago, while serving as a DEA agent in Central America, sometime in the 1980s, during the Reagan/Bush administration, Castillo uncovered evidence that the CIA and the White House National Security Council, through national counter-terrorism [sic] coordinator (and San Antonio native) Lt. Col. Oliver North and other CIA assets, were carrying out illegal durg, gun and money-laundering operations at Ilopango Airport in El Salvador.  Those airport hangars, Castillo contends, served as weapons and narcotics transshipment centers for funding and arming the Contra terrorists, indirect contravention of American law (the Boland Amendment) against the legally elected government of Daniel Ortega and the FSLN in Nicaragua. From that moment forward, Castillo became a target of those pulling the strings in that dirty war.

“Cele became a household name inside DEA,” says Sandalio Gonzalez, a retired DEA commander who worked in Latin America at the same time Castillo was stationed in the region. “[The DEA] ruined his reputation over the [criminal activity] in El Salvador and [Cele] became a target.  He took on the Establishment, and it didn’t come out so good for him.”

Castillo’s investigation into the Ilopango operation was eventually torpedoed via CIA interference and he was subjected to a steady stream of retaliatory DEA internal investigations. Subsequently, after a relatively successful 12-year career, Castillo retired from the DEA.  To this day, however, Cele remains an outspoken critic of the hypocrisy of the war on drugs, penning a book about his experiences in DEA, Powderburns, and appearing on numerous radio and TV shows —most recently in a series produced and aired by the Showtime network called American Drug War.

And Castillo tells Narco News that he also has caused the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which led the investigation against him in the firearms case, some heartburn in recent months.  Castillo says that earlier this year (2008) he went to City Hall and later to the local newspaper in Pharr, Texas, to expose ATF agents.  Castillo claims that ATF agents were clandestinely filming shows at the Pharr Convention Center and racially profiling Hispanics who attended guns shows — then ATF agents would show up at the homes of attendees and demand to see the weapons that these Mexican-Americans had just purchased legally.

Castillo also claims that as part of his part-time work as a consultant on various criminal cases, he uncovered evidence that two ATF agents “were on the payroll of a Mexican drug cartel.” Cele asserts, “One informant, who actually paid one of these ATF agents in Monterrey, Mexico, told me about their involvement. That informant later got whacked. [ATF brass] knows who these corrupt agents are, but they don’t want to deal with the embarrassment of cleaning the whole mess up.”

Cele’s “Criminal” Case

Castillo was arrested in San Antonio, in March (2008) on the basis of an ATF complaint strewn with allegations unconstrained by evidence and the word of a snitch who was trying to save his own neck.

The snitch, Jay Lemire, was confronted by ATF agents in February 2008 concerning a series of alleged “straw” purchases that Lemire made from licensed firearms dealers. Under U.S. law, an individual purchasing a firearm from a licensed dealer must fill out a form swearing to the fact that he or she is the true purchaser of the weapon. The purpose of the rule is to prevent “straw” transactions whereby the purchaser later provides the weapon to a “prohibited person” — such as a convicted felon.

According to the ATF complaint against Lemire, Lemire admitted to making numerous straw purchases and claimed that they were made on behalf of Castillo. (This point is really unbelievable because Cele, as an American citizen and non-convict, was never a person prohibited from making said gun purchases).  Lemire then became a snitch for the ATF in an attempt to ensnare Castillo. The ATF plan of attack included having Lemire make numerous phone calls to Castillo about weapons purchases, which Lemire recorded, and also setting up surveillance on Castillo.

The ATF complaint later filed in court against Castillo, which became the basis for the criminal indictment, attempts to paint Castillo as a major arms trafficker who was acquiring guns from Lemire in order to resell them in Mexico. But the ATF offered no evidence that Castillo ever had contact with anyone from Mexico, or sold or attempted to sell weapons in Mexico. For his part, Castillo insists that he never sold guns in Mexico or to individuals who trafficked arms in Mexico.

Castillo concedes that he did purchase some guns from Lemire.  These purchases were primarily hunting rifles or shotguns to be sold or traded at gun shows.  However, Castillo claims that Lemire was reselling guns to a number of individuals and that the ATF falsely (and bizarrely) tried to pin all of Lemire’s gun sales on Castillo! some 35 purchases were listed in the original indictment. 

It was on the basis of Lemire’s claims that Castillo was arrested and indicted and charged with two counts of making illegal straw purchases — facing a potential 10-year sentence.

A Lawyer with a Conflict of Interest?

Initially, Castillo was assigned a court-appointed public defender, who told Castillo that he could not help him, that “They (the Feds) got you,” Castillo recalls. At that point, Castillo put out the word to friends that he needed to find a private attorney. A short time later, Castillo claims attorney Roberto “Eddie” De la Garza of San Antonio, an old college friend, contacted him and offered to represent him. So Castillo, in mid-April, retained De La Garza as his attorney.

“I told [De La Garza] that I had very little money,” Castillo says.  De la Garza took the case for $15,000, telling Castillo that “he normally charges $20,000 or $25,000.”  But because Castillo didn’t have the $15,000, and Castillo had purchased weapons from Lemire, De la Garza arranged a plea deal in June 2008.  Castillo accepted the deal expecting a lenient sentence because, according to Castillo, De la Garza insisted that the judge was fair and Castillo had a record of exemplary service to his country.

Castillo says that he was aware early on that his attorney, De la Garza, had a potential conflict of interest.  But of course, De la Garza, assured Castillo not to worry about it. Here is what the conflict was.

In February 2007, De la Garza’s son, Andrew, was indicted on weapons charges as the result of an ATF investigation in McAllen, Texas.  Andrew De la Garza was charged with making a false statement to a firearms dealer and other related charges, and was facing a potential 15-year prison stint. That case was playing out in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (McAllen) while Castillo’s case was being heard in the Western District (San Antonio, some 260 miles North of McAllen).

On May 2, 2008, within weeks of De la Garza taking Castillo’s case, a plea deal was reached in the case involving Andrew De la Garza’s. The federal prosecutor agreed to drop one count “at the time of sentencing” and recommend a decrease in the offense level on the other count. That was a good deal but all was still subject to the judge’s discretion.

After being rescheduled a couple times, the sentencing date for Andrew De la Garza was set for October 14, less than two weeks after Castillo sentencing date. Despite the fact that his son’s fate was in the hands of sister courts within the same judicial district, seeking to punish a decorated Vietnam vet for lesser charges, Eddie De la Garza told Narco News that “he did not feel any pressure” as a result of his son’s pending case that in anyway affected his handling of Castillo’s case.

Another Twist

When Castillo showed up in federal court in San Antonio on October 1, 2008, he was dealt a surprise that must have seemed to lift the weight of the world from his shoulders. The prosecutor informed Castillo’s attorney that the straw gun-purchase charges pending against Castillo had to be dropped, because of case law precedent.  In other words, Castillo was not guilty of a crime in purchasing firearms from Lemire.

A motion filed by the U.S. prosecutor to dismiss the indictment against Castillo reads in part:

United States v. Polk … precludes an individual being charged with [a crime] where the straw purchaser bought a firearm for an individual who was not a prohibited person.FN2  The defendant [Castillo] … was not a prohibited person.

But there was a catch, of course. Before agreeing to dismiss the bogus charges, the U.S. prosecutor said that Castillo would have to plead guilty to two new charges of dealing firearms without a license.  Castillo says he was told that if he refused to do so, then Sutton’s office would re-indict him on four new counts and he would be re-arrested and forced to battle the system with even more serious charges pressed against him — though Castillo still no money for the fight.

So, at his attorney’s urging, right there in court, after only being allowed to skim through the new plea deal, Castillo agreed.  However, Castillo claims that De la Garza told him that the judge would be fair and that he (Castillo) would likely receive probation, or at worst a year of home confinement.  In addition, Castillo alleges the prosecutor told De la Garza, and later the judge, that the plea deal would assure that Castillo would not lose his DEA or other government health and retirement benefits — a promise that Castillo says he has since discovered was as bogus as the initial straw gun-purchase charges brought against him.

“There was evidence of [Castillo] selling guns,” De la Garza says. “And even if that evidence was not substantive, [the prosecutors] could have proven a conspiracy. If [Castillo] had not taken that [new] plea, they could have brought in multiple new charges.”

If any evidence exists that Cele violated the letter and intent of the Gun Control Act of 1968, we’ll never know now.  And so the deal was struck, and Castillo walked out of court that day facing yet another sentencing date, October 22.  Coincidentally, on October 10, the sentencing date for Andrew De la Garza’s son was pushed back, to December 15.

Reflections

Mike Levine is a former DEA agent who provided a supportive letter to the judge hearing Castillo’s case that praises Castillo’s long record of service to the country.  Levine, who now works as an expert witness in court cases and has a weekly radio show on WBAI in New York City, had this to say about De la Garza’s conflict of interest in Castillo’s case:

In the best of all possible cases, this attorney takes on Cele’s case with a natural reluctance to go to trial against those who held his son’s future in their hands. …

Of course one cannot say this is what happened with certainty. However, the fact that this outcome was a reasonably foreseeable should have been enough to indicate to the court that Cele needed a different attorney. And under the stewardship of Mr. Sutton, who has already placed himself well above the laws of God and man, this particular arrangement just sucks.

At the sentencing, the prosecutor took it to Castillo, making the baseless allegations that Castillo was trafficking arms in Mexico. Unsurprisingly, despite assurances to the contrary, the judge came down hard on Castillo — sentencing him to 37 months in prison plus two years of probation. As a result, Castillo will lose his DEA and other government retirement and medical benefits, at least for the period of is incarceration, and possibly forever.

Castillo is now all but broke, wondering how his wife and children will survive while he is locked up, wondering if he will ever see his 84-old mother again outside the walls of a prison.  As a former DEA agent, Castillo has long understood how the legal system works — or doesn’t work. He confesses that he was too trusting, even foolish, in his actions, given his assumption that he was a target of the government.

The one telling thing Castillo said was that after years of battling the system, “as we get older, we kind of lose the fight in us.”

It seems Castillo was willing to take a hit on this travesty of justice, believing and trusting that he would only get probation and keep his government benefits, if merely in an effort to avoid a trial that he couldn’t afford and which held out the greater risk of resulting in being put away for a long time if he were convicted.

Former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are now each doing 10-plus years in a federal penitentiary for shooting a drug smuggler in the posterior as the smuggler fled from a van packed full of dope.  Their prosecution, courtesy of Johnny Sutton, has been the subject of a congressional hearing.

Sutton’s office continues to prosecute people like Castillo (a decorated war veteran with no prior criminal record), destroying lives for political gain, to build a record of being tough on crime, though Sutton himself has been accused of enabling grave transgressions against humanity — such as turning a blind eye to an informant’s role in the torture and murders of more than a dozen people in the House of Death in Juarez, Mexico, and then assisting in the subsequent cover-up of the U.S. government’s role in the bloodshed.

Castillo might have seen it coming, but he was tired of the struggle, and just wanted to rest, and in that moment, when his guard was down, and after the feds sent in a snitch to befriend him, they nailed this whistleblower to the cross.

“This (Cele’s case) is the kind of stuff that happens in nations ruled by dictatorships,” says former DEA commander Sandalio Gonzalez. Gonzalez knows it first hand for he exposed Sutton’s role in the House of Death murders only to suffer the swift injustice of retaliation from the minions of the Bush Administration. As a result, Gonzalez was denied deserved promotions and forced into early retirement.

“I’m not surprised this happened in Sutton’s district,” Gonzalez adds. “He and his people did a whole lot of egregious things in the House of Death case, and still they are allowed to go around prosecuting people. It’s amazing.”