Skip to main content

Ramon Bazan, A Former ATF Agent Pleads Guilty to Making False Statements

Ramon Bazan, a former Special Agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia to a one-count criminal information charging him with making false statements in connection with a series of fraudulent visa referrals, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division.

According to court documents, Bazan, 57, served as the ATF Assistant Country Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, Mexico, from 2003 to 2008. During this time, the embassy maintained a visa referral program that helped expedite the processing of non-immigrant visa applications for Mexican nationals and other foreign citizens, whose travel to the United States would advance the national interests of the United States or U.S. diplomacy efforts in Mexico. As the ATF Assistant Country Attaché, Bazan had the authority to make visa referrals through this program.

From February 2006 through August 2008, Bazan submitted fraudulent visa referrals on behalf of Mexican nationals who were friends, and in some instances relatives, of Bazan’s colleagues. According to court documents, Bazan admitted that in connection with these referrals, he falsely represented that the visa applicants were official ATF contacts and that the applicants provided assistance necessary to the ATF. Bazan also admitted that he falsely claimed that certain applicants were associated with the ATF canine program and that the purpose of the applicants’ travel to the United States was to visit the ATF canine facility in Front Royal, Va. In fact, according to the court document, the individuals on whose behalf Bazan submitted the fraudulent visa referrals were not official contacts of the ATF, had not provided assistance to the ATF and were not associated with the ATF canine program.

Bazan faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and three years of supervised release following his prison term. Bazan’s sentencing is scheduled for July 9, 2010, before U.S. District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman.

This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Justin V. Shur and Marc E. Levin of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section. This case is being investigated by the Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General; U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security; and ATF’s Office of Professional Responsibility.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...