Blown DEA sting riles truck owner
The phone rang before sunrise. It woke Craig Patty, owner of a tiny North Texas trucking company, to vexing news about Truck 793 — a big red semi supposedly getting repairs in Houston.

“Your driver was shot in your truck,” said the caller, a business colleague. “Your truck was loaded with marijuana. He was shot eight times while sitting in the cab. Do you know anything about your driver hauling marijuana?”

“What did you say?” Patty recalled asking. “Could you please repeat that?”

The truck, it turned out, had been everywhere but in the repair shop.

Commandeered by one of his drivers, who was secretly working with federal agents, the truck had been hauling marijuana from the border as part of an undercover operation. And without Patty's knowledge, the Drug Enforcement Administration was paying his driver, Lawrence Chapa, to use the truck to bust traffickers.

At least 17 hours before that early-morning phone call, Chapa was shot dead in front of more than a dozen law enforcement officers — all of them taken by surprise by hijackers trying to steal the red Kenworth T600 truck and its load of pot.

Still waiting

But eight months later, Patty still can't get recompense from the U.S. government's decision to use his truck and employee without his permission.

His company, which hauls sand as part of hydraulic fracturing operations for oil and gas companies, was pushed near failure after the attack because the truck was knocked out of commission, he said.

Patty had only one other truck in operation.

In documents shared with the Houston Chronicle, he is demanding that the DEA pay $133,532 in repairs and lost wages over the bullet-sprayed truck, and $1.3 million more for the damage to himself and his family, who fear retaliation by a drug cartel over the bungled narcotics sting.

“When you start a new business, there are obvious pitfalls you go through, a learning curve,” said Patty, who before buying his two trucks worked in the pharmaceutical industry. “But who would ever be ready to deal with this?

“How am I — a small businessman, father of three, American Joe from Texas — supposed to make a claim against a federal agency that has conveniently shrouded itself behind a red, white and blue cloak of confidentiality and secrecy?”

Copies of letters and emails from Patty's insurance company state that it won't pay for repairs because the truck was part of a law-enforcement operation. Patty drew from his 401(k) retirement fund to repair the truck, which was out of operation for 100 days.

“I was not part of this,” he said. “I had absolutely no knowledge of any of it until after it happened.”

For its part, the DEA has not admitted that it was using Chapa as a spy because its official policy is not to comment on whether someone was an informant.

Lisa Johnson, a spokeswoman for the DEA Houston Division, confirmed that Patty's demand had been received and noted that it would be investigated by the agency. But the Chronicle established Chapa was an informant based on interviews with multiple law-enforcement officials who spoke on the condition they not be named, and later by courtroom comments of prosecutors.

Houston lawyer Mark Bennett, who is advising Patty, said if Patty's initial claim is not resolved, the next step would be to sue.

1,000-mile detour

Patty hired Chapa five weeks before the shooting and now wonders how many of the trips in the $90,000 rig included DEA work.

GPS information from the truck reveals an unauthorized trek to the Rio Grande Valley in the days before Chapa was killed. He took a 1,000-mile round trip detour from the route he was supposed to travel.

Perhaps most unnerving, Patty says, is that drug mobsters now likely know his name, and certainly know his truck.

Panic at the Patty home these days can be triggered by something as simple as a deer scampering through the wooded yard or a car pulling into the driveway. One morning as his wife made breakfast, one of his young sons suddenly bolted across the house yelling, “Get the guns!”

A Bronco sport utility vehicle had pulled into the driveway past a broken gate. The dogs were barking in the darkness. Patty grabbed a pistol and headed toward the front yard.

The Bronco pulled away, leaving a shiny object by the front walkway. It turned out to be the morning newspaper wrapped in a plastic bag reflecting a neighbor's floodlight.

The ordeal has forced his children to grow up more quickly than he'd like, Patty said.

The truck has a new driver, but there's still one bullet hole inside the truck's cab. A chunk of seat cushion, sliced out as evidence, has been covered with a patch.

“I really do not worry about driving it,” said driver Norman Anderson — as long is it doesn't involve a trip to South Texas.

“I feel like if I go there, I should put an ‘X' on each side of my neck, draw a dotted line between them, and write, ‘cut here.'”

dane.schiller@chron.com



Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Blown-DEA-sting-riles-truck-owner-3745213.php#ixzz227uMbaIp

That's pretty fethed up, right there. So how does a small business man go about suing the DEA for damages?

Phanatik wrote:Can this administration do anything right?

At least 17 hours before that early-morning phone call, Chapa was shot dead in front of more than a dozen law enforcement officers — all of them taken by surprise by hijackers trying to steal the red Kenworth T600 truck and its load of pot.

kronk wrote:Damn.

That's pretty fethed up, right there. So how does a small business man go about suing the DEA for damages?

Phanatik wrote:I know an old lawyer that could handle the case for him:

kronk wrote:He could also show loss in business and seek compensation for that, I'd imagine.

Kanluwen wrote:

Phanatik wrote:Can this administration do anything right?

Yes.

Because this is a problem with the administration.

Do us all a favor.
Read the bloody article before commenting.

At least 17 hours before that early-morning phone call, Chapa was shot dead in front of more than a dozen law enforcement officers — all of them taken by surprise by hijackers trying to steal the red Kenworth T600 truck and its load of pot.

Phanatik wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Phanatik wrote:Can this administration do anything right?

Yes.

Because this is a problem with the administration.

Do us all a favor.
Read the bloody article before commenting.

At least 17 hours before that early-morning phone call, Chapa was shot dead in front of more than a dozen law enforcement officers — all of them taken by surprise by hijackers trying to steal the red Kenworth T600 truck and its load of pot.

Reading comprehension is fundamental.

Cheers!

Frazzled wrote:Yea I wasn't going there. This is purely a local DEA thing.

Frazzled wrote:Yea I wasn't going there. This is purely a local DEA thing.

Frazzled wrote:You had me until your last sentence. Thats wrong from the article "running drugs," was not an agreed contract between the owner and the DEA. in effect the DEA is committing the trespass of conversion of property both in its uncontracted use and its destruction. Its pretty horsegak.

Phanatik wrote:
The FBI did it at Ruby Ridge

Kanluwen wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You had me until your last sentence. Thats wrong from the article "running drugs," was not an agreed contract between the owner and the DEA. in effect the DEA is committing the trespass of conversion of property both in its uncontracted use and its destruction. Its pretty horsegak.

True, but depending on the particulars of how the trucking company is organized I could see there being potential loopholes.

After all, there is precedent in the idea of rental properties having the "resident" being a separate entity to the "owner".

Frazzled wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You had me until your last sentence. Thats wrong from the article "running drugs," was not an agreed contract between the owner and the DEA. in effect the DEA is committing the trespass of conversion of property both in its uncontracted use and its destruction. Its pretty horsegak.

True, but depending on the particulars of how the trucking company is organized I could see there being potential loopholes.

After all, there is precedent in the idea of rental properties having the "resident" being a separate entity to the "owner".

But if the "resident" wrecks the truck, the resident is still liable. Also helps to actually rent said vehicle and not commit what amounts to illegal activity with it.

d-usa wrote:Did the DEA demand the truck?

Or did the driver make that decision himself? Why did the driver cooperate? Did he have a background that was not fully investigated prior to being hired?

Who sucked at checking logs? Almost all truck drivers I know get paid by the mile, so it would seem that somebody would ask a question about a 1000 mile detour, never mind the 14+ hour delay that would cause.

It is also one of two trucks, so how the heck did the owner not notice it was gone during all the times it was running drugs across the country instead of loads he assigned.

There are so many actions by the driver that seem like they should have been noticed by the owner and if he didn't he comes across as pretty out of touch with what 50% of his trucks were doing.

Goliath wrote:

d-usa wrote:Did the DEA demand the truck?

Or did the driver make that decision himself? Why did the driver cooperate? Did he have a background that was not fully investigated prior to being hired?

Who sucked at checking logs? Almost all truck drivers I know get paid by the mile, so it would seem that somebody would ask a question about a 1000 mile detour, never mind the 14+ hour delay that would cause.

It is also one of two trucks, so how the heck did the owner not notice it was gone during all the times it was running drugs across the country instead of loads he assigned.

There are so many actions by the driver that seem like they should have been noticed by the owner and if he didn't he comes across as pretty out of touch with what 50% of his trucks were doing.

The owner had been told that the truck was being repaired in Houston, and so would not have "checked the logs" for that period of time, which'll be when the drug busts took place I'd assume.

Phanatik wrote:I know an old lawyer that could handle the case for him:

d-usa wrote:So as the owner of the truck he would not have been contacted by a repair shop about what repairs are being made? Do drivers routinely just take the truck into shops to have day-long repairs done and pay for them our of their own pocket? How else does the owner not know what is happening to his own truck? If my truck is in a shop and the shop doesn't call me I am going to raise some questions about what is happening to it, especially since hours and days in a shop equals money that I am not making.