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.

 

Jury orders rancher to pay $77,804 to illegal aliens

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by spinkyboo
 


I understand what you are saying
and I can empathize

however 800 bases in over 140 countries is just too large a number


Of course it is.




posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Jury orders rancher to pay $77,804 to illegal aliens


www.chron.com

But the jury did find him liable on four claims of assault and four claims of infliction of emotional distress and ordered Barnett to pay $77,804 in damages — $60,000 of which were punitive.


He has to pay THEM for EMOTIONAL DISTRESS!!!!

Don't you think that this poor guy had some EMOTIONAL DISTRESS having THOUSANDS of illegal immigrants using his land as an illegal immigrant super highway and destroying his property and killing his livestock?

Don't you think anybody would have a pretty good dose of emotional distress if you found people daily just wondering around on YOUR property?

Who do you think has had more emotional distress?

The illegal immigrants who had a gun drawn on them for a little while because they were doing something illegal, or the rancher who, for years, has had to deal with thousands of illegal immigrants using his property illegally as a safe highway to enter the US illegally and damage his personal property and kill his livestock.

I believe this rancher has had FAR more emotional distress thrust upon him than any of those he had held at gun point.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Keyhole
 



So, you believe that the person pointing the gun, the person detaining(kidnapping) the women...HE was the one under stress? What? The PAST actions of OTHER people, people who were NOT there that day...have ZERO to do with this, can't you see? If not, why not? What is wrong with the cognitive abilities of people who cannot comprehend such a simple thing?

The RANCHER, like all of us, has a duty to act responsibly. The PAST he experiencd has NO bearing on how he isupposed to act. Fact.

Now, the RANCHER pointed an assault rifle at WOMEN and held them against their will. In many circumstances that could be called armed kidnapping and much more, calling for a long prison term..He is LUCKY that the local cops are his pals and hate Mexicans as much as he does, or the lawyers would not have had to seek justice in the courts in a lawsuit.

The RANCHER is a coward and bully. He has to use big guns on WOMEN and has admitted to abusing and slamming people around already...he laughs and think that abusing human beings is funny!! Trespassing is a MINOR deal...petty. It is NEVER justified to grab guns and detain people without legal basis for merely crossing some invisible line in the sand.

If the rancher doesn't believe that he is getting the proper help from his government, then he can do what we are all told to do: Write your politicians and then wait for hell to freeze over.the rancher does NOT have the right to detain anyone for trespassing...he cannot point guns at people and threaten to kill them...all for merely walking on his precious dirty ranch land? Please.

This rancher is no better than any other violent thug....grab a gun and hassl women..sounds like a great guy...I hope he loses his ranch to the next group he assaults.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
reply to post by Keyhole
 



So, you believe that the person pointing the gun, the person detaining(kidnapping) the women...HE was the one under stress? What? The PAST actions of OTHER people, people who were NOT there that day...have ZERO to do with this, can't you see? If not, why not? What is wrong with the cognitive abilities of people who cannot comprehend such a simple thing?

The RANCHER, like all of us, has a duty to act responsibly. The PAST he experiencd has NO bearing on how he isupposed to act. Fact.

Now, the RANCHER pointed an assault rifle at WOMEN and held them against their will. In many circumstances that could be called armed kidnapping and much more, calling for a long prison term..He is LUCKY that the local cops are his pals and hate Mexicans as much as he does, or the lawyers would not have had to seek justice in the courts in a lawsuit.

The RANCHER is a coward and bully. He has to use big guns on WOMEN and has admitted to abusing and slamming people around already...he laughs and think that abusing human beings is funny!! Trespassing is a MINOR deal...petty. It is NEVER justified to grab guns and detain people without legal basis for merely crossing some invisible line in the sand.

If the rancher doesn't believe that he is getting the proper help from his government, then he can do what we are all told to do: Write your politicians and then wait for hell to freeze over.the rancher does NOT have the right to detain anyone for trespassing...he cannot point guns at people and threaten to kill them...all for merely walking on his precious dirty ranch land? Please.

This rancher is no better than any other violent thug....grab a gun and hassl women..sounds like a great guy...I hope he loses his ranch to the next group he assaults.



do you hate reading or is it just in your best interest to act this stupid???? have you ever been confronted by this many people before????

is it kidnapping if you are holding CRIMINALS in custody waiting for police to arrive? because last time i checked it was called a citizens arrest and is 100% legal in America, they were criminals and these people are known to kill or wound anyone they come across to get into this country.

unless you have been in one of the above scenarios, you should shut your liberal mouth.


[edit on 19-2-2009 by Swatman]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


Thanks Eyewitness

I'm glad to see some sanity in this thread

starred



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


Thanks Eyewitness

I'm glad to see some sanity in this thread

starred



he has 0 sanity at all. he is just as crazy, if not more crazy then you.


if the rancher was killed by all these people and he has no gun on him, you would be saying "well it is their right to come into our country, he should have stayed out of their way"

this is why liberal ideology turns into socialism/communism, because you people feel everyone has the same rights and deserves a fair share, and anyone that opposed is wrong and deserves what they get.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
reply to post by Keyhole
 



So, you believe that the person pointing the gun, the person detaining(kidnapping) the women...HE was the one under stress? What?


Yes, if I was detaining criminals who trespassed on my property, I would be VERY stressed. I suppose you would be calm and relaxed during such an incident?


The PAST actions of OTHER people, people who were NOT there that day...have ZERO to do with this, can't you see? If not, why not? What is wrong with the cognitive abilities of people who cannot comprehend such a simple thing?


So... if someone trespassed on my property and damaged my property, or even myself... Then the next time someone trespasses should I meet them with roses? No my friend, past experiences will always come into play in a situation like this. Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.


The RANCHER, like all of us, has a duty to act responsibly. The PAST he experiencd has NO bearing on how he isupposed to act. Fact.


Of course past experiences have bearing on how you act in the present... Are you even listening to yourself? THAT makes absolutely no sense.


Now, the RANCHER pointed an assault rifle at WOMEN and held them against their will. In many circumstances that could be called armed kidnapping and much more, calling for a long prison term..He is LUCKY that the local cops are his pals and hate Mexicans as much as he does, or the lawyers would not have had to seek justice in the courts in a lawsuit.


I like how you throw the word WOMEN around in here, lets replace that term with one more accurate: CRIMINAL... and detaining criminals in a citizens arrest is completely legal.


The RANCHER is a coward and bully. He has to use big guns on WOMEN and has admitted to abusing and slamming people around already...he laughs and think that abusing human beings is funny!! Trespassing is a MINOR deal...petty. It is NEVER justified to grab guns and detain people without legal basis for merely crossing some invisible line in the sand.


Big guns, lol... should he have used a little gun? Oh and he used them on criminals... even if they were women, don't forget equality so it shouldn't matter that they were women. If someone crosses my "invisible" line they'll wish I performed a citizens arrest. Oh and it wasn't invisible, it was clearly marked with signs. As was the international border they also crossed illegally.


If the rancher doesn't believe that he is getting the proper help from his government, then he can do what we are all told to do: Write your politicians and then wait for hell to freeze over.the rancher does NOT have the right to detain anyone for trespassing...he cannot point guns at people and threaten to kill them...all for merely walking on his precious dirty ranch land? Please.


He does have the right to detain them for trespassing and he can use whatever force is neccesary... Its calle citizens arrest, look it up before you act like you know what your talking about.


This rancher is no better than any other violent thug....grab a gun and hassl women..sounds like a great guy...I hope he loses his ranch to the next group he assaults.


This rancher was hassling CRIMINALS... I hope the next group shows up on your property

[edit on 19-2-2009 by XTexan]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
* wrong option chosen*

[edit on 19-2-2009 by Swatman]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by XTexan
 


why do i agree with you 100%? are we both insane? you speak so much truth yet these ignorant two characters continue to be ignorant without considering the correct choice.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Swatman
 


lol, it seems to be a very polarized issue... Some people support the rights of criminals over the rights of others. Some don't. It baffles me really.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by XTexan
reply to post by Swatman
 


lol, it seems to be a very polarized issue... Some people support the rights of criminals over the rights of others. Some don't. It baffles me really.


however it clearly is a case of right or wrong.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I live in Arizona, and I'm angry beyond words.

My wife fended off 2 illegals with a pistol, do I need to start saving now because she didn't let them rape her?



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh
I live in Arizona, and I'm angry beyond words.

My wife fended off 2 illegals with a pistol, do I need to start saving now because she didn't let them rape her?


your lucky that your wife wasnt sued for emotional distress to those thugs. you would have people like Academia judging your wife on why she didnt let them just rape her, because remember criminals have rights and citizens dont.


[edit on 19-2-2009 by Swatman]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Keyhole
 


He should do a counter sue and claim that he is also been distress over having strangers braking the law while invading his land.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Swatman
 


I've supported this guy from the get-go. I'm appalled that he has to pay this amount. No one was there to see what happened, so basically their word was taken over his. They have no credibility in my book, they lost that when they illegally crossed an international border, then trespassed on this mans land.

I have a feeling that this is going to lead to a rise in the deaths of those illegally crossing. I don't condone it... but thats what I see in the future



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 


Tell your wife, that in the future... one shot to each forehead. Case closed and no lawsuit.

Do you have the castle law in Arizona? Learn from Joe Horn.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Holy * I am a new poster but long time lurker, I made an account just because i was angry that this man has to pay that much and there are people here supporting it and calling him(the rancher) the bad guy. Are you kidding, if he was such a bad guy he would have killed him if he wanted...Correct me if im wrong, i thought when you hold a criminal (which they are) untill cops arrive, wouldn't that be citizens arrest? and i put emphasis on correct me if im wrong. I feel sorry for the guy, hopefully he can afford it.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by XTexan
reply to post by Retseh
 


Tell your wife, that in the future... one shot to each forehead. Case closed and no lawsuit.

Do you have the castle law in Arizona? Learn from Joe Horn.


I am in Arizona also, and i can tell you, a lot similarly to texas is, if you are going to rob a bank or a resturant/place of business, the criminal better make sure they bring a lot of fire power because 70% of the people in that store will pack a weapon the same size or bigger than the criminals, and they will think nothing about putting two in the criminals chest



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Venom23cq
Holy * I am a new poster but long time lurker, I made an account just because i was angry that this man has to pay that much and there are people here supporting it and calling him(the rancher) the bad guy. Are you kidding, if he was such a bad guy he would have killed him if he wanted...Correct me if im wrong, i thought when you hold a criminal (which they are) untill cops arrive, wouldn't that be citizens arrest? and i put emphasis on correct me if im wrong. I feel sorry for the guy, hopefully he can afford it.


you are 100% correct. hell the guy should be given a medal for defending America against foreign invaders



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Venom23cq
 


You are correct on the citizens arrest, and welcome to the forum. There are lots of opinions on here, some crazy, some not so crazy, and some absolutely awesome! So be prepared, you'll learn a lot on here.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join