Yesterday, I had an interesting email exchange with CNN's Nick Valencia regarding the Examiner.com story of a supposed takeover of a ranch in Laredo, Texas by Los Zetas. He had been exchanging emails with the story's author, Kimberly Dvorak, who was still sticking to her story, despite heaps of evidence to the contrary. Well, the "evidence" she provided him that the takeover actually occurred is making the Internet rounds today - a screenshot (and possibly a digital snapshot) of a police blotter entry. Here it is:
Nick asked for my thoughts on it, and here's what I told him:
Analysis: "There are several tiny details wrong with the entry. First of all (and you probably already know this), you have the City of Laredo Police Department and Webb County Sheriff - two separate law enforcement entities with different jurisdictions. Why would an official blotter entry refer to LSO (Laredo Sheriff's Office) when there's no such thing? LPD is only referred to as such at the end of the report. I have a hard time believing a deputy with WCSO or officer with LPD would make such an error repeatedly. Also, why would Border Patrol respond to such an incident that would clearly fall under the jurisdiction of local law enforcement? If anything, the FBI would respond with a hostage rescue team, not Border Patrol. From a law enforcement perspective, this report makes no sense to me. Finally, Los Zetas telling the ranch owner that no one is allowed on-site without permission? Really? Like someone would come knocking in the middle of an armed takeover of a ranch on US soil and be allowed to visit by one of the most dangerous cartels in Mexico."
This story still hasn't made it into the mainstream media. The blotter entry story made it into the North Star National (never heard of it) and some blogs, but nothing like CNN, FOXNews, or MSNBC. And now that I've had more time to think about it, I'm finding more and more holes in the blotter story. Why haven't subsequent entries been provided, which would ostensibly outline how things turned out? It looks like a photo of a computer screen, which may have been taken with a cell phone camera. Why didn't the leaking party at whatever law enforcement agency take a photo of more entries to back up his claims? Why isn't there any evidence of arrests, or injured hostages/narcos/cops? That blotter entry also contained a LOT of sensitive operational details. Normally, blotter entries are short and to the point. It's not good operational security to include how many SWAT team members are involved, where they're setting up for surveillance and/or building breach, etc.
Still, waaaaay too many things that don't make sense. Still not convinced, Kimberly!