News reports indicated that the federal indictment against Cruz makes no mention of a personal relationship between him and the woman.

However, at least three other border law enforcers have been accused in recent months of being involved in “spouse-like” relationships with women they have smuggled across the border. So it is reasonable to assume law enforcers might be targeting such cases in the area, and Cruz simply got pulled into the dragnet.

The fact that Cruz blew the whistle on alleged government abuse of illegal immigrants last year, though, continues to pose the troubling question of whether his indictment on illegal-immigrant smuggling charges this month is a form of retaliation.

In other words, was he targeted for investigation simply because he brought to light embarrassing facts about the government’s treatment of illegal immigrants?

Well, if that is the case, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona is not denying it, but they’re not confirming it either. In fact, they’re not really saying much of anything about the Cruz case beyond what has already been made public about the indictment.

In fact, Sandy Raynor, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Phoenix, declined to even discuss what relationship, if any, Cruz had with the woman he is accused of smuggling across the border.

“I cannot confirm or deny anything beyond what is in the indictment,” Raynor says. “And there is no mention of the relationship between the individuals in the indictment.

“That could be because it’s not relevant to the case. … But I don’t know what the relationship was between the accused and the woman, and even if I knew that information, if it’s not in the indictment, I cannot discuss it.”

But why?

If we put aside the possibility that the government outright framed Cruz — and, he is innocent until proven guilty, after all — we are left with two primary scenarios. He did, in fact, smuggle the woman across the border illegally for 1.) Love; or 2.) Money.

In that context, it seems hard to believe that the relationship between Cruz and the alleged illegal immigrant “is not relevant to the case.”

If they were a married couple, for example, it would make a big difference in the outcome of a trial.

If Cruz did assist the woman in illegally entering the country because he was in love with her, then it would be harder for the U.S. Attorney’s Office to paint him as a true villain, both at trial and in the media.

After all, you would be dealing with an individual whom a year ago exposed alleged government mistreatment of illegal immigrants. As a result, Cruz might rightly fear that his loved one, if exposed as an illegal immigrant, might suffer the same abuse.

That doesn’t make his actions justified in terms of the letter of the law, but in terms of the spirit of the law, would it merit an indictment that could get him 10-plus years in prison?

Assuming Cruz and the woman he allegedly helped smuggle into the country were married, or in love, it might not be in the best interest of the prosecution to let that fact out, as it could weaken their efforts to throw the book at him.

Maybe the strategy is to isolate Cruz by staking the deck against him to the greatest extent possible, so he agrees to a plea bargain before trial, so he'll never have a chance seek the sympathy of a jury. It could just be that Cruz has been thrust into a game of high-stakes chicken with the government.

Clearly, it seems, that is the more logical conclusion. Because if Cruz had smuggled the woman in for a profit (or perverse) motive, he would likely have no sympathy in the eyes of the public, so prosecutors would have every incentive to broadcast his sin of greed to the masses — which would have the added effect of greatly detracting from his credibility as a whistleblower.

At least one law enforcer with the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Border Patrol, agreed with that analysis.

“You’re absolutely correct,” the law enforcer says. “Whether information is relevant or not (to an indictment), at times, is mere semantics.

“The common practice is that if you have a subject that can be charged with a felony, don’t charge the subject with a misdemeanor. Why? Because you do not want him to plead guilty to the lesser charge.

“In other words, the government controls your life, sometimes unjustly.”

But that’s just speculation. For whatever reason, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has chosen to keep the issue of Cruz’ relationship to the woman in this case out of public view — for now. In the process, it seems Cruz’ accusations of government abuse against illegal immigrants are out of view, for now, too.