And from my last link, a bit of information that should have been added since it answered the question of when and why two people were previously denied entry:
"This is not the first trouble the family has had with Customs and Border Patrol: the border patrol spokesperson said two members of the family were denied entry into the U.S. last year, and deemed "inadmissable," due to possible ties to criminal activity."
Please note that entry into the U.S. is not a right. It is a privilege that can be denied for many reasons. A full trial is not needed to have someone appear to be guilty enough to keep them out.
So let's review the story of our recent guests. From the article linked by the OP:
"In her statement, Connors said that on Oct. 3 her family was visiting Vancouver, Canada, and did not intend to enter the U.S. Her husband’s cousin, Michael Connors, was driving close to the border, and when an animal suddenly appeared in the lane, he turned onto an unmarked road to avoid a collision."
So it says that the person that had been refused entry to the U.S. with possible criminal ties was driving. The claim is than an animal suddenly appeared. If one looks at the video one can see an animal down the road quite a ways. That is no "suddenly appeared". Nor was there any need to veer to avoid it. Nor did he. If you watch the video he did not "turn onto an unmarked road". Perhaps "turn" means something different in England. He crossed a ditch to a separate parallel road in a slow and determined manner. He did so immediately after turning onto that road. Second he was carrying $16,000.00 Canadian cash which I do believe is a bit over the $10,000.00 dollars in U.S. equivalent allowed to be brought in from another country. There was also cannabis present. At first I said that did not bother me, but on second thought I do have a problem with it. For every good reasons there are open bottle laws when it comes to alcohol and driving. Cannabis and driving is also a significant problem. It has led to an increase in accident rates in my state and others that have legalized it. Back in the bad old days people that were high on pot were usually to afraid to drive. Now that it is legal that same pressure is not on them:
Legalized marijuana linked to a sharp rise in car crashes
So I have to walk back my claim that this did not bother me. If a person uses cannabis at home that is not a problem. But they would need to explain why it is in a car, with young children to boot. It is as significant of a finding as an open bottle in a car would be. It is the sort of discovery that puts a burden of proof upon the driver of that vehicle at the very least.
And here is a link to an article with the video of the illegal crossing. One can tell it is shot through a telescopic lens which means that distances are foreshortened. The foreshortening can be seen in the apparently small distance between utility poles. Link to the video:
https://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/crime/article236336838.html
And the CBP notice the animal too, but they understand foreshortening:
'A border patrol spokesperson, who spoke on condition of not being named, acknowledged that the video shows a small animal crossing the street some distance ahead of the Connors' vehicle. But he said it would be odd to drive through a ditch to avoid an animal moving so slowly and so far away."
The story of the crossers falls apart when one looks at the evidence. When they lied about crossing why would one believe them about the conditions that there were kept in?
I have not seen anything that supports the story of the crossers, yet if there claims were true there should be some evidence of that.
