16 illegals sue Arizona rancher

[HAL 9000 96]

HAL 9000 only wishes for A$HOLES to multiply themselves by 0.

lol dude u r such a geek

I can't help it. I am an AI.

[Heracles 417]

HAL 9000 only wishes for A$HOLES to multiply themselves by 0.

lol dude u r such a geek

I can't help it. I am an AI.

Explains the whole VJ, if you get what I am saying..

Oops nearly forgot 'bro'.

[HAL 9000 96]

It seems Mr. Barnett and the rest go way out of their way to harass people.

So is he protecting his property or being a {low class} BP officer in his own mind? Or just a crazy dude?

I guess we don't know, eh.

Rancher Ordered to Pay $98,000 to Hispanic Family He Confronted with an Assault Rifle

DOUGLAS, AZ (By Randal C. Archibold, NYTimes) November 24, 2006 — For years, Roger Barnett has holstered a pistol to his hip, tucked an assault rifle in his truck and set out over the scrub brush on his thousands of acres of ranchland near the Mexican border in southeastern Arizona to hunt.

Hunt illegal immigrants, that is, often chronicled in the news.

"They're flooding across, invading the place," Mr. Barnett told the ABC program "Nightline" this spring. "They're going to bring their families, their wives, and they're going to bring their kids. We don't need them."

But now, after boasting of having captured 12,000 illegal crossers on land he owns or leases from the state and emerging as one of the earliest and most prominent of the self-appointed border watchers, Mr. Barnett finds himself the prey.

Immigrant rights groups have filed lawsuits, accusing him of harassing and unlawfully imprisoning people he has confronted on his ranch near Douglas. One suit pending in federal court accuses him, his wife and his brother of pointing guns at 16 illegal immigrants they intercepted, threatening them with dogs and kicking one woman in the group.

Another suit, accusing Mr. Barnett of threatening two Mexican-American hunters and three young children with an assault rifle and insulting them with racial epithets, ended Wednesday night in Bisbee with a jury awarding the hunters $98,750 in damages.

The court actions are the latest example of attempts by immigrant rights groups to curb armed border-monitoring groups by going after their money, if not their guns. They have won civil judgments in Texas, and this year two illegal Salvadoran immigrants who had been held against their will took possession of a 70-acre ranch in southern Arizona after winning a case last year.

The Salvadorans had accused the property owner, Casey Nethercott, a former leader of the Ranch Rescue group, of menacing them with a gun in 2003. Mr. Nethercott was convicted of illegal gun possession; the Salvadorans plan to sell the property, their lawyer has said.

But Mr. Barnett, known for dressing in military garb and caps with insignia resembling the United States Border Patrol's, represents a special prize to the immigrant rights groups. He is ubiquitous on Web sites, mailings and brochures put out by groups monitoring the Mexican border and, with family members, was an inspiration for efforts like the Minutemen civilian border patrols.

"The Barnetts, probably more than any people in this country, are responsible for the vigilante movement as it now exists," said Mark Potok, legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks the groups. "They were the recipients of so much press coverage and they kept boasting, and it was out of those boasts that the modern vigilante movement sprang up."

Jesus Romo Vejar, the lawyer for the hunting party, said their court victory Wednesday would serve notice that mistreating immigrants would not pass unpunished. Although the hunters were not in the United States illegally, they contended that Mr. Barnett's treatment of them reflected his attitude and practices toward Latinos crossing his land, no matter what their legal status.

"We have really, truly breached their defense," Mr. Vejar said, "and this opens up the Barnetts to other attorneys to come in and sue him whenever he does some wrong with people."

Mr. Vejar said he would ask the state attorney general and the county attorney, who had cited a lack of evidence in declining to prosecute Mr. Barnett, to take another look at the case. He also said he would ask the state to revoke Mr. Barnett's leases on its land.

Mr. Barnett had denied threatening anyone. He left the courtroom after the verdict without commenting, and his lawyer, John Kelliher, would not comment either.

In a brief interview during a court break last week, Mr. Barnett denied harming anyone and said that the legal action would not deter his efforts. He said that the number of illegal immigrants crossing his land had declined recently but that he thought it was only a temporary trend.

"For your children, for our future, that's why we need to stop them," Mr. Barnett said. "If we don't step in for your children, I don't know who is expected to step in."

Mr. Barnett prevailed in a suit in the summer when a jury ruled against a fellow rancher who had sued, accusing him of trespassing on his property as he pursued immigrants. Another suit last year was dropped when the plaintiff, who had returned to Mexico, decided not to return to press the case.

Still, the threat of liability has discouraged ranchers from allowing the more militant civilian patrol groups on their land, and accusations of abuse seem to be on the wane, said Jennifer Allen of the Border Action Network, an immigrant rights group.

But David H. Urias, a lawyer with the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund who is representing the 16 immigrants suing Mr. Barnett, said fewer complaints did not necessarily mean less activity. Immigrants from Mexico are returned to their country often within hours and often under the impression that their deportation — and chance to try to return again — will go quicker without their complaints.

"It took us months to find these 16 people," Mr. Urias said.

People who tend ranches on the border said that even if they did not agree with Mr. Barnett's tactics they sympathized with his rationale, and that putting him out of business would not resolve the problems they believe the crossers cause.

"The illegals think they have carte blanche on his ranch," said Al Garza, the executive director of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in Arizona, a civilian patrol group that, Mr. Garza says, does not detain illegal immigrants but calls in their movements to the Border Patrol. "The man has had it."

Mr. Barnett, a retired Cochise County sheriff's deputy and the owner of a towing business, acquired his ranch in the mid-1990s, buying or leasing from the state more than 22,000 acres.

Almost from the start he took up a campaign against the people crossing the border from Mexico, sometimes detaining large groups and radioing for the Border Patrol to pick them up.

Chuy Rodriguez, a spokesman for the agency's Tucson office, said the Border Patrol maintained no formal relationship with Mr. Barnett or other civilian groups. Agency commanders, concerned about potential altercations, have warned the groups not to take the law into their hands.

"If they see something, we ask them to call us, like we would ask of any citizen," Mr. Rodriguez said.

Mr. Barnett's lawyers have suggested he has acted out of a right to protect his property.

"A lease holder doesn't have the right to protect his cattle?" Mr. Kelliher asked one of the men in the hunting party, Arturo Morales, at the trial.

"I guess so, maybe," Mr. Morales replied.

Mr. Barnett has had several encounters with local law enforcement officials over detaining illegal immigrants, some of whom complained that he pointed guns at them. The local authorities have declined to prosecute him, citing a lack of evidence or ambiguity about whether he had violated any laws.

A few years ago, however, the Border Action Network and its allied groups began collecting testimony from illegal immigrants and others who had had confrontations with Mr. Barnett.

They included the hunters, who sued Mr. Barnett for unlawful detention, emotional distress and other claims, and sought at least $200,000. Ronald Morales; his father, Arturo; Ronald Morales's two daughters, ages 9 and 11; and an 11-year-old friend said Mr. Barnett, his brother Donald and his wife, Barbara, confronted them Oct. 30, 2004.

Ronald Morales testified that Mr. Barnett used expletives and ethnically derogatory remarks as he sought to kick them off state-owned property he leases. Then, Mr. Morales said, Mr. Barnett pulled an AR-15 assault rifle from his truck and pointed it at them as they drove off, traumatizing the girls.

Mr. Kelliher conceded that there was a heated confrontation. But he denied that Mr. Barnett used slurs and said Ronald Morales was as much an instigator. He said Morales family members had previously trespassed on Mr. Barnett's land and knew that Mr. Barnett required written permission to hunt there.

Even as the trial proceeded, the Border Patrol reported a 45 percent drop in arrests in the Douglas area in the last year. The agency credits scores of new agents, the National Guard deployment there this summer and improved technology in detecting crossers.

But Ms. Allen of the Border Action Network and other immigrant rights supporters suspect that people are simply crossing elsewhere.

http://hispanic7.com/rancher_ordered_to_pa...sault_rifle.htm

Interesting... so this guy has a history of being an A$HOLE. And A$HOLES tend to have major problems with differentiating between defending one's own and violating those they capture while doing so.

Like I said a while back... one thing is to uphold immigration law as a citizen, even at gunpoint. And another is to be like that.

Perhaps that's why the judge in the current case found probably cause? Interesting indeed.

My bad- this is the second bump I wanted to redo to include my reply.

Bump#3 for the late comers. But do read the OP article in full.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.

His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as "the avenue of choice" for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.

Trial continues Monday in the federal lawsuit, which seeks $32 million in actual and punitive damages for civil rights violations, the infliction of emotional distress and other crimes. Also named are Mr. Barnett's wife, Barbara, his brother, Donald, and Larry Dever, sheriff in Cochise County, Ariz., where the Barnetts live. The civil trial is expected to continue until Friday.

The lawsuit is based on a March 7, 2004, incident in a dry wash on the 22,000-acre ranch, when he approached a group of illegal immigrants while carrying a gun and accompanied by a large dog.

Attorneys for the immigrants - five women and 11 men who were trying to cross illegally into the United States - have accused Mr. Barnett of holding the group captive at gunpoint, threatening to turn his dog loose on them and saying he would shoot anyone who tried to escape.

The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which also charged that Sheriff Dever did nothing to prevent Mr. Barnett from holding their clients at "gunpoint, yelling obscenities at them and kicking one of the women."

In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property, and that he was carrying a pistol and threatening them in English and Spanish. At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett's dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish, "My dog is hungry and he's hungry for buttocks."

The lawsuit said he then called his wife and two Border Patrol agents arrived at the site. It also said Mr. Barnett acknowledged that he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.

In March, U.S. District Judge John Roll rejected a motion by Mr. Barnett to have the charges dropped, ruling there was sufficient evidence to allow the matter to be presented to a jury. Mr. Barnett's attorney, David Hardy, had argued that illegal immigrants did not have the same rights as U.S. citizens.

Mr. Barnett told The Washington Times in a 2002 interview that he began rounding up illegal immigrants after they started to vandalize his property, northeast of Douglas along Arizona Highway 80. He said the immigrants tore up water pumps, killed calves, destroyed fences and gates, stole trucks and broke into his home.

Some of his cattle died from ingesting the plastic bottles left behind by the immigrants, he said, adding that he installed a faucet on an 8,000-gallon water tank so the immigrants would stop damaging the tank to get water.

Mr. Barnett said some of the ranch´s established immigrant trails were littered with trash 10 inches deep, including human waste, used toilet paper, soiled diapers, cigarette packs, clothes, backpacks, empty 1-gallon water bottles, chewing-gum wrappers and aluminum foil - which supposedly is used to pack the drugs the immigrant smugglers give their "clients" to keep them running.

He said he carried a pistol during his searches for the immigrants and had a rifle in his truck "for protection" against immigrant and drug smugglers, who often are armed.

Roger Barnett said he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.

A former Cochise County sheriff´s deputy who later was successful in the towing and propane business, Mr. Barnett spent $30,000 on electronic sensors, which he has hidden along established trails on his ranch. He searches the ranch for illegal immigrants in a pickup truck, dressed in a green shirt and camouflage hat, with his handgun and rifle, high-powered binoculars and a walkie-talkie.

His sprawling ranch became an illegal-immigration highway when the Border Patrol diverted its attention to several border towns in an effort to take control of the established ports of entry. That effort moved the illegal immigrants to the remote areas of the border, including the Cross Rail Ranch.

"This is my land. I´m the victim here," Mr. Barnett said. "When someone´s home and loved ones are in jeopardy and the government seemingly can´t do anything about it, I feel justified in taking matters into my own hands. And I always watch my back."

Happy Hal? ....Hal?

[peejay 327]

Watching the Roger Barnett Trial – FAIR’s Legal Arm, IRLI, Helps for the Defense

By Dan Stein, President of FAIR

As many of you know, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has been harassing rancher and brave American Roger Barnett for years over his efforts to prevent his ranch land from being used as a virtual superhighway for illegal border crossers. FAIR’s legal arm, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), has been assisting with Roger’s defense. MALDEF has for years filed legal cases using trumped up stories to try to force states, cities and counties into settlement agreements that have helped make illegal immigration an institutional process in America. Here, FAIR’s legal institute says “not this time.” By taking this case to trial, Roger Barnett has made MALDEF prove these wild allegations are true. My opinion: It’s time to challenge these sorts of lawsuits and defend the Americans who are standing tall in defense of their property and communities. The judge dismissed the conspiracy to violate civil rights and negligence complaints against Roger. The judge granted the Barnett motion to dismiss all plaintiffs who had not testified, on the ground that expert opinion as to the psychological injuries they were alleged to have incurred was not evidence. This leaves about nine plaintiffs left, out of the original sixteen. In making his ruling, Judge Roll reportedly made some important statements from the bench: He reaffirmed his ruling on a prior evidentiary motion that illegal aliens do not have a constitutionally protected right to travel. He explained that because Southern Arizona was (and is) “ground zero” for illegal immigration into the United States, and that the overwhelming amount of illegal entry is made using guides or coyotes, it is reasonable for a person encountering a large group in the desert to assume that the felony of alien smuggling is occurring. He stated that under Arizona’s citizens arrest law, if a property owner chose to make a legitimate citizens arrest, with the burden of risk on the citizen, no federal civil rights violation occurred. Roger’s defense team is working on the remaining claims right now. It could wrap at any time. In the end, it appears that the only criterion on which the jury may find for the plaintiffs on any of the remaining claims will be whether Roger used “excessive force” to detain the aliens, under the circumstances out in the desert. The case should go to the jury on Thursday. Read the article about this case at Investor’s Business Daily Web site, and stay tuned for more.

http://www.steinreport.com/

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editori...319075626333161

[Ban Hammer 14,290]

Watching the Roger Barnett Trial – FAIR’s Legal Arm, IRLI, Helps for the Defense

By Dan Stein, President of FAIR

As many of you know, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has been harassing rancher and brave American Roger Barnett for years over his efforts to prevent his ranch land from being used as a virtual superhighway for illegal border crossers. FAIR’s legal arm, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), has been assisting with Roger’s defense. MALDEF has for years filed legal cases using trumped up stories to try to force states, cities and counties into settlement agreements that have helped make illegal immigration an institutional process in America. Here, FAIR’s legal institute says “not this time.” By taking this case to trial, Roger Barnett has made MALDEF prove these wild allegations are true. My opinion: It’s time to challenge these sorts of lawsuits and defend the Americans who are standing tall in defense of their property and communities. The judge dismissed the conspiracy to violate civil rights and negligence complaints against Roger. The judge granted the Barnett motion to dismiss all plaintiffs who had not testified, on the ground that expert opinion as to the psychological injuries they were alleged to have incurred was not evidence. This leaves about nine plaintiffs left, out of the original sixteen. In making his ruling, Judge Roll reportedly made some important statements from the bench: He reaffirmed his ruling on a prior evidentiary motion that illegal aliens do not have a constitutionally protected right to travel. He explained that because Southern Arizona was (and is) “ground zero” for illegal immigration into the United States, and that the overwhelming amount of illegal entry is made using guides or coyotes, it is reasonable for a person encountering a large group in the desert to assume that the felony of alien smuggling is occurring. He stated that under Arizona’s citizens arrest law, if a property owner chose to make a legitimate citizens arrest, with the burden of risk on the citizen, no federal civil rights violation occurred. Roger’s defense team is working on the remaining claims right now. It could wrap at any time. In the end, it appears that the only criterion on which the jury may find for the plaintiffs on any of the remaining claims will be whether Roger used “excessive force” to detain the aliens, under the circumstances out in the desert. The case should go to the jury on Thursday. Read the article about this case at Investor’s Business Daily Web site, and stay tuned for more.

http://www.steinreport.com/

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editori...319075626333161

[Heracles 417]

Watching the Roger Barnett Trial – FAIR’s Legal Arm, IRLI, Helps for the Defense

By Dan Stein, President of FAIR

As many of you know, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has been harassing rancher and brave American Roger Barnett for years over his efforts to prevent his ranch land from being used as a virtual superhighway for illegal border crossers. FAIR’s legal arm, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), has been assisting with Roger’s defense. MALDEF has for years filed legal cases using trumped up stories to try to force states, cities and counties into settlement agreements that have helped make illegal immigration an institutional process in America. Here, FAIR’s legal institute says “not this time.” By taking this case to trial, Roger Barnett has made MALDEF prove these wild allegations are true. My opinion: It’s time to challenge these sorts of lawsuits and defend the Americans who are standing tall in defense of their property and communities. The judge dismissed the conspiracy to violate civil rights and negligence complaints against Roger. The judge granted the Barnett motion to dismiss all plaintiffs who had not testified, on the ground that expert opinion as to the psychological injuries they were alleged to have incurred was not evidence. This leaves about nine plaintiffs left, out of the original sixteen. In making his ruling, Judge Roll reportedly made some important statements from the bench: He reaffirmed his ruling on a prior evidentiary motion that illegal aliens do not have a constitutionally protected right to travel. He explained that because Southern Arizona was (and is) “ground zero” for illegal immigration into the United States, and that the overwhelming amount of illegal entry is made using guides or coyotes, it is reasonable for a person encountering a large group in the desert to assume that the felony of alien smuggling is occurring. He stated that under Arizona’s citizens arrest law, if a property owner chose to make a legitimate citizens arrest, with the burden of risk on the citizen, no federal civil rights violation occurred. Roger’s defense team is working on the remaining claims right now. It could wrap at any time. In the end, it appears that the only criterion on which the jury may find for the plaintiffs on any of the remaining claims will be whether Roger used “excessive force” to detain the aliens, under the circumstances out in the desert. The case should go to the jury on Thursday. Read the article about this case at Investor’s Business Daily Web site, and stay tuned for more.

http://www.steinreport.com/

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editori...319075626333161

Good find..

Edited February 12, 2009 by Aficionado

[Carmen & Aldo 0]

The United States Government number one priority is to ensure the sovereignty of their nation. To ensure the safety of their people. Clearly the OP indicates they are failing at this and even ignoring the issue. No one should have to defend their land. The United States government should be protecting the land and freedom of one of their citizens.

If this happened in Australia there would be a lot of Aussie who would be at this guys ranch ready to bust some Inca ####.

I was reading your posts and let me tell you.. your a faggo.ty racist **..... that hides behind a profile on an immigration site..

Inca means indian from south american.. so your not just offending.. mexicans itself.. your dragging the whole central and south america..

I honestly dont approve illegal immigration.. and all that.. but at the moment you typed that word.. your messing with my/our heritage.... you think you got some balls... typing bs on this site.. i really wanna see you telling that to a Inca itself in person... you would't.. would you???

so do me a favor and go ** yourself

thank you

[Carmen & Aldo 0]

The United States Government number one priority is to ensure the sovereignty of their nation. To ensure the safety of their people. Clearly the OP indicates they are failing at this and even ignoring the issue. No one should have to defend their land. The United States government should be protecting the land and freedom of one of their citizens.

If this happened in Australia there would be a lot of Aussie who would be at this guys ranch ready to bust some Inca ####.

the only thing that you Aussie kids bust is your own balls.....

[pedroh 21]

The United States Government number one priority is to ensure the sovereignty of their nation. To ensure the safety of their people. Clearly the OP indicates they are failing at this and even ignoring the issue. No one should have to defend their land. The United States government should be protecting the land and freedom of one of their citizens.

If this happened in Australia there would be a lot of Aussie who would be at this guys ranch ready to bust some Inca ####.

#######?

incas.. dude the inca civilization dissapeared hundreds of years ago.. but certainly for you all southamericans are mexicans too..

gosh

[Der Bücherwurm 1]

I'm confuzzled... Why would Aussies come all the way over to the 'New World' to bust some Inca '####'? If they could/would bust some '####', then wouldn't they stay in Australia to bust some Aboriginal '###'? Why cross the globe to beat on some other country's natives when they have natives of their own to pick on?

*Disclaimer: Hoomsfuturewife is in no way advocating anyone busting anyone's '####' whether they be Inca, Aborigine or otherwise. Nor am I inviting any Aussies to enter the 'New World' either legally or illegally. I'm jus sayin...Though there are many people I've met in my lifetime whose '###' I wanted to kick, (none of which were Inca or Aborigine by the way); I'm rather wimpy and can only fantasize about busting '###' so none need fear my wrath. So, since I would never bust anyone's '***', I can in no way advise anyone else to bust someone's '***' as it would be rather hypocritical of me to do so. However, I would advise certain VJ members to pick up both a history book, a globe and some ethnographies of the Incan and Aboriginal peoples. End disclaimer.*

Edited February 12, 2009 by Hoomsfuturewife

[NickD 203]

Farmers have problems up here, not with illegals, but with deer hunters, hunting on private property, the farmers stock is at risk, one call to the sheriffs department gets these hunters apprehended.

Curious about the mechanics of this case, assume if in a federal court the court is in the USA, and what is the immigration status of these 16 Mexican nationals, are they here illegally, or do they have ties with coyote? Has to be some sort of motivation, if here illegally, why are they deported? If ties with coyote, that should be investigated. Sounds like some of those judges should be investigated as well if they rule in favor of the illegals, maybe they have ties with coyote as well.

With a reported 12-20 million illegals here, and these are brave souls not afraid to take a risk, can only wonder why they don't gang together and fight the corruption in their own government, that would be quite a large size army. Latin America has been having these same kind of problems for years, always some form of a very corrupt government.

[almaty 19]

wow, a seldom reference to busting Inca azz....and by aussies no less....

vj sheesh

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its pretty special

[HAL 9000 96]

Its magical.