16 illegals sue Arizona rancher (32million)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Justyntym

The Pessimistic Optimist
Donating Member
Registered
Uh huh....???
I find this all so hard to believe...those poor illegal aliens are nothing but a
huge benifit to our society :banghead:

It's ridiculas that a bunch of illegal aliens (being illegal in the first place) can
trespass on a mans property (law break number 2 at the very least) and then
sue for any amount for being caught.

Washington Times - 16 illegals sue Arizona rancher

16 illegals sue Arizona rancher
Claim violation of rights as they crossed his land
Jerry Seper
Monday, February 9, 2009

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.
 
That would be very sad. Let's hope that is not the case.

The sad thing is they may just win the case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"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."

He should get some kind of award. If he needs $$ for a defense fund I'll contribute!
 
This is one of the things that is wrong with this country. This guy is on his own property, outnumbered 16 to 1. I would say being armed isn't just a right for him but a necessity. The violators are illegals, shouldn't be in the country, let alone on this guys property and a judge allows them to sue. What rights did he violate? ???
 
Erect a fence, throw all their arses on the other side along with
their ACLU (I assume) Lawyer with them.

The absurdity of the whole situation...&#^% country.
 
If this poor man is punished for doing America a FAVOR...I'm seriously moving to Australia. I just can't take it anymore. He should be allowed to shoot them! The gov't should pay him $32 million for the service he's done for this country.
 
Shoulda just shot them all:whistle:

That's kinda what I thought his first mistake was...
don't stop...get the lawyers too

Man don't have a right to defend or take of his own land anymore...wtf
 
Come on guys, get in touch with reality and its consequences. Nobody had a right to just shoot them! Statements like that, even in jest are just idiotic. Man up already...:please:
 
How did they get a lawyer to represent them in the first place? I mean really?
This is amazing that someone even entertained this notion.
:rulez:???
 
Trespassing is illegal in all states. There are certain laws regarding signage and such but someone on your property is trespassing and you have the right to hold them until authorities arrive. He didn't shoot anyone so he's not crossed that line.

I cannot believe the judge is letting it go through. I'm sure any jury of his "peers", i.e. citizens, will throw this out.

Another thought. When they show up to appear in court, I hope someone checks for their visitors visa. If they don't have one, arrest and deport.
 
Last edited:
I was called into jury duty one time in my life. We go into the courtroom
for jury pooling by the Defense attorney and his defendant (who had an
interpreter) and the defense attorney asked..."all those who think that
people in this country should speak english, raise your hand".

Of course I raised my hand..."your all excused". ???

Somehow I don't think what this POS country has become is what the
founding fathers intended nor do I think that fact is any way a plus.

I wondered today, not just about this article but things in general, if the
founding fathers were around somehow today and get a grasp of all that is
transpiring and then go back in time to write the constitution...I wonder what
that document would look like.

How the hell did we get here ???
 
Last edited:
Come on guys, get in touch with reality and its consequences. Nobody had a right to just shoot them! Statements like that, even in jest are just idiotic. Man up already...:please:

Mmmkay, Ohio has a castle law. I would take care of trespassers, that's my right
 
Come on guys, get in touch with reality and its consequences. Nobody had a right to just shoot them! Statements like that, even in jest are just idiotic. Man up already...:please:

Used to happen probably a lot more than you think...

Castle law in Florida to...don't even have to be home though
as long as I believe my life is in danger....
 
Last edited:
How did they get a lawyer to represent them in the first place? I mean really?
This is amazing that someone even entertained this notion.
:rulez:???

ACLU lawyer would be my guess...
Lawyer probably contacted them.
 
They will win cause that s the way this country works. A guy breaks into your home to rob you trips over an extension cord an falls an he sues you for 80K an wins. SO I guess it means the right thing to do is shoot him or them an plant knifes an guns on them??? that doesn't sound right either but I don't see any other options???


Is it possible what we need to do is shoot lawyers maybe thats the fix to the problem
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top