It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

16 Illegals Sue Arizona Rancher--Claim violation of "rights."

page: 13
26
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
OK! Wait just a minute and consider what the jury actually did:


Jury Questions

Violation of "Civil Rights" (he detained them for Trespass)? NO

Battery? (assault causing bodily injury)? NO

Assault (threatening harm or offensive contact)? Yes-2
(Rancher kicked at one woman, threatened another
woman, used offensive language) NO-14

Damages: $1,804 for injury to kicked woman
$76,000 punitive damages.


The U. S. Supreme Court has held that punitive damages must be rationally related to actual damages and not in an arbitrary or excessive amount.

Result: Rancher wins 46 out of 48 issues, pays $1,804 plus costs of court.
Punitives likely reduced on appeal to less than $10k.

Moral of the story: You can stop illegal aliens/trespassers, just don't be stupid or mean.

Not really a bad result when you think about it!

jw

[edit on 19-2-2009 by jdub297]

[edit on 19-2-2009 by jdub297]




posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Wow, just Wow!!

Being that I am not a citizen of the United States, I am finding this rather absurd.

If you ask me, this guy deserves a bloody medal!! 10,000 illegals, in the past ten years!?!

If this were happening in Canada (my country of residence) I'd be FURIOUS!

I like Mexico, and enjoy visiting during our cold harsh Canadian winters. But, on a recent visit to Arizona, we (the hubby and I) were told some eye-awakening things.. (if these figures are wrong, PLEASE tell me so as I don't want to be spreading BS)

We were told, on average, between 800-1000 illegals are detained in the State of Arizona, per day. Like I said, I don't know if these figures are correct, bit we were in a bit of shock, and reassured that we heard the numbers correctly. I am tempted to believe it as we went through two border security checkpoints and we were at least 50 miles from the Mexican border.

I just think this is crazy that this has happened to this rancher. I think this is rather bad news, to be honest. I just keep thinking that along with the disappearance of the freedoms and rights of the citizens of the United States, ours as Canadians are sure to follow suit.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
I posted a lengthy reply on another thread prior to finding this one, so I will spare you all my disgust with this case. My feelings are pretty much like most of yours, this is an outrage plain and simple. Here is my question:

What can we as tax paying citizens honestly do to change the way things are? I am being completely serious, please don't respond with comments like buying guns and shooting at them. I mean what are our REAL options? I have heard from too many intelligent people that we can't do anything but I refuse to buy that. I have spent 9 years so far defending this country, I can't just sit by and be angry anymore.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Has anyone looked into this rancher's history?

Has he had run ins with the law/legal system prior to this one?

I bet he has.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 
There are actually "Support" Groups established funding both sides of this 'contest.'

He has. He was sued in 2003 when he detained 4 Mexican-American hunters on the ranch.

They were represented by another 503(c) org." SPLC."

They won big, but it didn't stand up. There was also a similar case from Texas where the detainers ended up losing their land to the detainees.

jw


[edit on 20-2-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by mike597
 




What can we as tax paying citizens honestly do to change the way things are? I have heard from too many intelligent people that we can't do anything but I refuse to buy that. I have spent 9 years so far defending this country, I can't just sit by and be angry anymore.



It's a money thing.

As the 2007 Swift and Co. ICE raids showed, undocumented workers are UNION busters. Americans for the most part don’t give a hoot about unions but they do like CHEAP food. Swift & Co and 99% of other American companies, LOVE undocumented workers and use the ICE to keep those in-line. Recall that out of 5,000 employees of Swift 1,500 were undocumented. No one from Swift was prosecuted.

Many who I label the R&Fs - Rich and famous - use undocumented workers as house servants or nannies or whatever the current term for INDENTURED servants is. You get 168 hours a week of service for 40 hours a week of minimum wage. Republicans conveniently refused to raise the minimum wage for 10 years! 1997 to 2007. Most household workers are excluded by state laws from unemployment insurance. Most have NO health insurance and MANY would have great difficulty pressing a workers compensation claim.

POOR people do not hire undocumented workers. RICH people hire them. RICH people write the rules. POOR people pay the taxes and serve in the lower ranks of the Army and USMC. It’s an ancient arrangement we have not yet figured how to change.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Has anyone looked into this rancher's history?

Has he had run ins with the law/legal system prior to this one?

I bet he has.


He sure has!

For the same thing he is in the news now for!

Claiming a citizens arrest and holding illegal aliens, ...

Rancher Ruling Adds to Border Debate


U.S. District Judge John M. Roll, for starters, dismissed the claims of 10 of the illegals because they did not testify at trial. He then tossed related conspiracy complaints against Mr. Barnett's wife, Barbara, and his brother Donald, saying illegal immigrants had no constitutionally protected right to travel in the United States.

Judge Roll said the Barnetts, who live in close proximity to the border, could reasonably assume that large groups of people they encountered hiding or trespassing on their property were doing so with the aid of smugglers.

He said entering the United States illegally was a federal felony, for which a citizen's arrest was authorized under Arizona law.

Ultimately, the jury of four men and four women decided that Mr. Barnett did not violate the civil rights of the remaining six plaintiffs and was not guilty of false imprisonment, battery and conspiracy as charged in the suit.



This rancher broke NO laws, and even the punitive damages that he was ordered to pay will be overturned due to the fact that Arizona made it ILLEGAL for ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS to sue somebody in Arizona for punitive damages!



A 2006 Arizona constitutional amendment bars awards of punitive damages to illegal immigrants, and Mr. Barnett's attorneys are expected to argue that the jury was given flawed instructions by the judge, which led to the award of those damages.


And there is always the "Castle Doctrine", which allows people to use force protect themselves and their property from intruders!



the "Castle Doctrine," now applicable in both Arizona and Texas. The doctrine protects people who use force to defend themselves from an intruder by presuming that a person defending their property "acted in self-defense."


He also always HAS to carry a gun when driving around his 22,000 acre ranch due to all the drug smuggling going on across the border, most of the drug smugglers carry weapons!

Cohcise County Sheriff Department


In addition BAG officers seek out and monitor narcotics smuggling corridors through which narcotics are smuggled illegally into the United States by mule groups or driven through vehicle loads. These smuggling corridors often are in remote or less uninhabited areas. BAG officers frequently seize significant amounts of narcotics smuggled into Cochise County.


Sounds like they would love to smuggle their drugs through his ranch!

Here's a list of drugs confiscated by the Sheriff's Department where he lives.



The Border Alliance Group has seized the following amounts of narcotics:


It wouldn't cut & paste right, so I'll have to type this info in from their site.

------------------Marijuana -----------Methamphetamine ---------Cocaine

2003...............143,693 lb....................29 oz............................169 lb

2004................38,158 lb...................18,264 oz.......................416.6 lb

2005................28,771 lb.....................769 oz...........................138 lb

TOTAL.............210,622 lb..................1191.4 lbs........................724 lb

I would venture to say A LOT of these drugs were smuggled through HIS property!

I believe this rancher was well within his rights doing what he did!

[edit on 2/22/2009 by Keyhole]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by psyko45

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist
reply to post by psyko45
 




You are a disgrace to this country.

.





He didnt know wether they were illeagal or not.(neither do you)
So somebody walks across your yard you have the right to hold them at gunpoint because somebody peed on your rosebush last week?



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   
what i ment to say was, if someone was in my yard with a gun, i belive that I would hold them at gun point 'til LE arrived, if ever.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join