Tux of Borg Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/f...rizona-rancher/ 16 illegals sue Arizona rancher 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. ASSOCIATED PRESS DEFENDANT: 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 $30,000 on electronic sensors, which he has hidden along established trails on his ranch. He searches the ranch for illegal immigrants in a pickup truck, dressed in a green shirt and camouflage hat, with his handgun and rifle, high-powered binoculars and a walkie-talkie. His sprawling ranch became an illegal-immigration highway when the Border Patrol diverted its attention to several border towns in an effort to take control of the established ports of entry. That effort moved the illegal immigrants to the remote areas of the border, including the Cross Rail Ranch. "This is my land. I´m the victim here," Mr. Barnett said. "When someone´s home and loved ones are in jeopardy and the government seemingly can´t do anything about it, I feel justified in taking matters into my own hands. And I always watch my back." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarkLessWagMore Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett's dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish, "My dog is hungry and he's hungry for buttocks." May be too literal a translation, but nonetheless, still sig worthy. On a serious note, how the h*ll did this get to a trial. The rights of illegal immigrants are greater than those of the legal property owner?!? Truly a WTF moment. Good luck, Mr. Barnett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I believe this is the same guy about whom, I read an article about last year. His family has been dealing with this for years, including having his calves barbacued by these toolbags tresspassing on his property. Tell me that's not !@#$ed up, some illegal types vandalizing your property, trashing it with thier filth and then killing your animals to eat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSJayDee Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 What I find most astonishing is that he's supposedly turned over like 12,000 illegals over a 10 yr period. That's like 3/day! Either our Border Patrol isn't doing their job or this problem is WAY more severe than I imagined. I would imagine that there's a significant # of Law Enforcement Officers that perform less than 3 arrests /day. Maybe I live a pretty sheltered life (thankfully), but this guy has to resort to doing this for myself? He shouldn't have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooderson Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Reminded me of Gran Torino for some reason. I wouldn't want my hard-earned land to be overrun by illegal Mexicans. They seem to be destroying his land, his cattle, his house, and his supplies. Let the old bastard do work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I believe this is the same guy about whom, I read an article about last year. His family has been dealing with this for years, including having his calves barbacued by these toolbags tresspassing on his property. Tell me that's not !@#$ed up, some illegal types vandalizing your property, trashing it with thier filth and then killing your animals to eat... If I was this guy, I might just favorite the site below and look to make a purchase... Tanks for Sale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 My guess is MALDEF has no intention of winning this case. They're trying to send a message to all landowners along the border to just suck it up and let the illegals pass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I'm not sure that the legal status of the people involved should be a big issue. Some of the comments here are pretty racist, IMO. But, this does seem like trespassing and vandalism and destruction of property, etc. Does it really matter whether the perpetrators are Mexican, or illegal? Seems to me the guy should have a right to protect his property against trespassers irrespective of their nationality or legal status. If the landowner did anything illegal while defending his property, then that should be addressed, again without regard to the status of the individuals. I'm guessing MALDEF is involved as these individuals happen to be Mexican and have nowhere else to go, to get a legitimate defense. The system works best when the least among us still gets a vigorous defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 So 16 illegals are seeking $2M each because after crossing miles of desert and cramming their bodies into the back of a van with 40 other illegals, they suffered emotional distress when a landowner !@#$ks with them? This seems ill-advised. If I'm one of the illegals, I say screw the rancher and sue the US Government. I mean, these people must be pissed when they risk life and limb to get here only to find out our government has !@#$ed the economy up so badly that Americans are suddenly ready to start picking strawberries and mowing lawns. If the illegals were smart, they'd bypass the law suit and just ask for some bailout money. I mean, the Congress and Senate both seem to think another billion here or there is no big deal, right? Plus, if they do it right, they can end up with 16 more votes if they just let the illegals in and have ACORN take their bailout money to help illegals get a mortgage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Change Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I'm not sure that the legal status of the people involved should be a big issue. Some of the comments here are pretty racist, IMO. But, this does seem like trespassing and vandalism and destruction of property, etc. Does it really matter whether the perpetrators are Mexican, or illegal? Seems to me the guy should have a right to protect his property against trespassers irrespective of their nationality or legal status. If the landowner did anything illegal while defending his property, then that should be addressed, again without regard to the status of the individuals. I'm guessing MALDEF is involved as these individuals happen to be Mexican and have nowhere else to go, to get a legitimate defense. The system works best when the least among us still gets a vigorous defense. Why wouldn't it? They have no right to be in the country let alone to trespass on his land. So therefore they are wrong twice. Although you didn't post about it I feel it necessary to point out that the 'nice' illegeals aren't the only ones coming across the border. The drug cartels who have taken Islamic murder to the next level (killing in acid, beheading children, etc) are also trespassing regularly and who knows how well armed thay are. Actually, we do know how well armed they are... Weren't you the poster who doesn't see the need for Americans to arm themselves? The guy who "Talked his way out of being held at gunpoint" numerous times? Or am I mistaken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Why wouldn't it? They have no right to be in the country let alone to trespass on his land. So therefore they are wrong twice. Although you didn't post about it I feel it necessary to point out that the 'nice' illegeals aren't the only ones coming across the border. The drug cartels who have taken Islamic murder to the next level (killing in acid, beheading children, etc) are also trespassing regularly and who knows how well armed thay are. Actually, we do know how well armed they are... Weren't you the poster who doesn't see the need for Americans to arm themselves? The guy who "Talked his way out of being held at gunpoint" numerous times? Or am I mistaken? I defend the right for American's to arm themselves, but think it is folly for most people to think they need to. I believe I said I have had guns pointed on me on several occasions, which is the case. I suppose we could quibble about the demarcation between "a few" and "several". It was four times (of any consequence), to be precise. Irrespective of the nationality or legal status of these people, they were trespassing. "Doubly wrong" is fairly nonsensical, IMO. I think it is clear they committed illegal acts (which is all that really matters, here). But, if they were mistreated, I also don't care what their status was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I defend the right for American's to arm themselves, but think it is folly for most people to think they need to. I believe I said I have had guns pointed on me on several occasions, which is the case. I suppose we could quibble about the demarcation between "a few" and "several". It was four times (of any consequence), to be precise. Irrespective of the nationality or legal status of these people, they were trespassing. "Doubly wrong" is fairly nonsensical, IMO. I think it is clear they committed illegal acts (which is all that really matters, here). But, if they were mistreated, I also don't care what their status was. Four times, Deano? You've gotta start hanging out with some more savory people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Four times, Deano? You've gotta start hanging out with some more savory people. Those days are behind me, thankfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 The difference between the illegal alien trespassers and the run-of-the-mill trespassers is the illegal alien trespassers are like minnows - they are caught, fed, housed and released while the others are arrested, bailed, do time and if continuously repeat offense locked up forever. I am sure that the land owner was dealing with repeated illegal alien trespassers some who have been caught and returned 10 or more times. When you have those who have no fear of legal consequences the reaction is different and justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Those days are behind me, thankfully. I am assuming that this all happened in the Falls.....while at NU, I looked over my shoulder everytime I was in "Downtown" NF, USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I am assuming that this all happened in the Falls.....while at NU, I looked over my shoulder everytime I was in "Downtown" NF, USA I was pretty wired-in, in the Falls, so I never had that much trouble there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 This is what is disgusting about this country. A guy has to go to court to defend himself for.....defending himself??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Haven't looked into it much (or the actual suit that was filed) and agree he has every right to defend his land. If I was to hazard a guess, though, he's probably not being sued for the act of defending his land, but probably for detaining them under threat of violence. Like I said, haven't looked into it and am only speculating based on the news clips. The suit is for civil rights violations, though, which I'm sure prolonged detention under threat of physical harm would fall under. I'm guessing they will say he has the right to try and run them off his property and/or call the actual border patrol, but that his actions crossed over some legal threshold for property defense. From the scant articles I can find reporting on it, it looks like a US District Court judge has ruled that the evidence is compelling enough to go forward. Also, it looks like this same individual has lost two other cases, one in which he was found guilty by a jury for falsely imprisoning another family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I believe I said I have had guns pointed on me on several occasions, which is the case. I suppose we could quibble about the demarcation between "a few" and "several". It was four times (of any consequence), to be precise. and yet you've never been married! I have been for going on 25 years. I consider myself lucky that she's only threatened to blow my head off 3 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 How in the hell can a bunch of ILLEGAL ALIENS sue? As soon as they tried to file, send their asses back. How is saying what they are (illegal aliens) racist?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts