Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rancher faces charges in illegal immigration case
Sierra Vista Herald ^ | Feb 03, 2009 | Jonathon Shacat

Posted on 02/04/2009 4:43:35 AM PST by radar101

Mexicans say Barnett violated their civil rights

BISBEE — A trial started Monday in federal court in Tucson against a Douglas rancher and others charged with conspiring to violate the civil rights of some illegal immigrants along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The defendants of the lawsuit are Roger Barnett, his wife, Barbara, and his brother, Donald. The plaintiffs are five women and 11 men who were in a wash in Douglas in 2004. The trial is taking place before Judge John Roll in U.S. District Court and is scheduled to run through Feb. 13.

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund is representing the plaintiffs. According to a statement from that group, the plaintiffs were accosted by Roger Barnett, who was armed with a gun and accompanied by a large dog.

“Roger Barnett held the group captive at gunpoint, threatening that his dog would attack and that he would shoot anyone who tried to leave. During the encounter, Barnett kicked a plaintiff as she was lying, unarmed, on the ground,” states the press release.

Pima County political activist Roy Warden issued a press release in which he said groups, including the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and Arizonans for Immigration Control, will rally in support of Barnett in front of the court today and other days.

Herald/Review reporter Jonathon Shacat can be reached at 515-4693 or by e-mail at jonathon.shacat@bisbeereview.net.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: aliens; illegalaliens; immigrantlist; immigration; maldef; propertyinvaders; propertyrights

1 posted on 02/04/2009 4:43:35 AM PST by radar101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: radar101

Were these illegal immigrants not only in the country illegally but trespassing on his property?

Is this a sovereign nation or a wild open frontier?


2 posted on 02/04/2009 4:47:59 AM PST by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, John 11:25, 14:6, 1 Tim 2:5, John 3:17-18, John 20:31, 1 John 5:13, John 6:69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

I take it they were not only illegally in this country but trespassing on this family’s property. The defendants sound like they acted with great restraint here. A lot more than I would have exercised.


3 posted on 02/04/2009 4:50:39 AM PST by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

FROM A CITIZEN WATCHING THE TRIAL:
First Day at the trial was for jury selection.... interesting process.

The trial started with 65 jurors being brought in to the courtroom, with 18 seated in the jurybox for questions from the judge. The idea wasto start with 18, each side could disqualify 4, ending up with a jury of 10. Roger’s attorneys brought in two gals as jury consultants to help decide who to eliminate. I made my picks and after lunch, the lawyers had a pow-wow and the decision of who to eliminate was made.

Interestingly, 4 of the jurors were dismissed when the question was asked by the judge..... “ Do any of you have a problem with the fact that even though someone is illegally in this country, they still have a right to bring a lawsuit.?” Interesting because 3 our of 4 were Hispanics!
Kind of blows away the idea that Hispanics would be for illegal immigration. Ifeel we ended up with a pretty good jury.... about50-50 male and female. One Hispanic gal’s husband works for Wackenhut... I figured they would eliminate her but they didn’t .... along with a male computer programmer who belongs to the NRA.

I think there were about 10 of the Plaintiffs in the courtroom.... a couple more will show up today..... I think they couldn’t find four. The Illegal Alien’s evidently were accompanied by two US Marshalls.... in the courtroom at the request of the judge. The judge cautioned the jurors about potential demonstrations outside the courthouse today and I believe the Marshalls will be there for possibility that something would occur inside the courtroom.

The Plantiffs’s lawyers went first..... the usual BS about these are human beings.... Roger makes sport about hunting human beings..... they all feared for their lives and have had daily bouts of Post Traumatic Syndrome since Roger pointed a gun at their heads and threatened to kill them all (which a high paid psychatrist will testify to). They also stressed how poor the the Plaintiffs are, coming here for a “better way of life”..... at the same time stressing that this lawsuit “is not about money”..... its about punishing Roger’s behavior.

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s opening statements seemed pursuasive at first..... what a “bad ass” Roger is. He was maintaining a”militia”, hates anybody with Latino decent, harbors “racial animus”, has a vicious dog, speaks extremely foul language, and maintains his ranch as a compound for the “sport” of hunting people...... and the plaintiffs, who were just out for a Sunday afternoon stroll, were accosted by Roger for no cause....and he brutally accosted and traumatized them. Roger, Don & Barbara had long conspired to violate the Plaintiff’s civil rights... and the rights of all Latinos that crossed their paths.

Hell.... I would have convicted Roger at that point!

Well, you can imagine my delight when it was Roger’s attorney’s turn. They had BIG poster pictures of all the garbage on Roger’s land........ big poster pictures of large groups of aliens “posing & smiling” for pictures with Roger (he is such a bad ass.... its a game to
them).... big poster pictures of LARGE stacks

Roger’s attorneys then proceeded to portray Roger as the victim of a conspiracy.... a conspiracy by the Plaintiff’s attorneys to “take Rogerout”, because the lawsuit was “all about money”.... money that the drug cartels and the Mexican Government are losing every time Roger turns a group in to the Border Patrol...... $20k in just that one group.... over 1 million for the 12,000 aliens Roger claims to have turned in to the Border Patrol. In one fell swoop, Rogers’ attorneys planted the idea with the jurists of another conspiracy going on in this trial which will put the Plainitff’s attorney’s on trial themselves during the trial. Brilliant !

And you could imagine my delight when Roger’s attorney responded to the ideal that the Plaintiffs were so traumatized by their 15 minutes with Roger while waiting for the BP agent to show up (who had been tracking the group and was within a mile of the party), that they...TOTALLY FORGOT ABOUT THE TRAUMA OF BEING ROBBED AT GUNPOINT THE
NIGHT BEFORE... AND THE WOMEN IN THE GROUP BEING RAPED BY BANDIDOS !
Stay tuned folk.... is going to be an interesting duel.

From down in the trenches......


4 posted on 02/04/2009 4:52:33 AM PST by radar101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101
charged with conspiring to violate the civil rights of some illegal immigrants along the U.S.-Mexico border.

This is the first problem.

They are not CITIZENS and as such do not have rights.

5 posted on 02/04/2009 4:54:49 AM PST by mouser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bookmark


6 posted on 02/04/2009 5:01:25 AM PST by pdunkin (I feel more like I do now than I did this morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mouser

There have been cases where federal judges have granted them civil rights. The precedents are there due to liberal judges legislating from the bench. Making up the law as they go.


7 posted on 02/04/2009 5:06:13 AM PST by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: radar101

The biggest trauma I see here is that an American is being forced to pay lawyers and spend his time in court to defend himself for defending his property.

How does this man recoup what this trial is costing him.? He doesnt. He was not only defending his property he was defending Americans. Which is more than our government is doing.


8 posted on 02/04/2009 5:16:42 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gubamyster

Ping.


9 posted on 02/04/2009 5:19:55 AM PST by TADSLOS (McCain always has a job as Obama's Butt Boy when he loses his seat in 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101
Such cases are a sham to intimidate the citizen to bow to the scum in government as not to interfere with the government breaking its own laws and making money on the side from it.

It just slow down the dance for socialism and the NWO.

10 posted on 02/04/2009 5:20:55 AM PST by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: radar101

Here’s an example of what happens when Americans defend their property and country from invaders:

http://forums.realpolice.net/showthread.php?t=38364


11 posted on 02/04/2009 5:23:08 AM PST by ScottinVA (Make my world PURRRFECT, Lord Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

IIRC, if someone is trespassing on your property, you cannot stop them from leaving. It is considered kidnapping. That may just be a state law in NC though.


12 posted on 02/04/2009 5:42:08 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101

“”FROM A CITIZEN WATCHING THE TRIAL:””

Super - Please keep us to date here at FR....


13 posted on 02/04/2009 6:43:35 AM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

In CA at least, it would be a legal private persons arrest for trespassing.


14 posted on 02/04/2009 7:14:43 AM PST by pelicandriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pelicandriver

You have the same right in AZ, even more, You are allowed to use Deadly Force in any case whereby you are witnessing a FELONY violation of LAW. Alien Smuggling is a FELONY.

eyeamok


15 posted on 02/04/2009 8:03:16 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: radar101

bttt


16 posted on 02/04/2009 8:41:07 AM PST by SuperLuminal (Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..

ping


17 posted on 02/04/2009 9:11:44 AM PST by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

“Is this a sovereign nation or a wild open frontier?”

No comment.
____________

Life on the Border

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2162179/posts

Townhall ^ | Dec. 5, 2008 | Sharla Ishmael
Joe Johnson’s family has lived and worked on the same property near Columbus, N.M., for almost 100 years. “Our grandfather came here in 1918, right behind Pancho Villa,” he says proudly. Yet he also admits, “If it wasn’t home, I would move away from it.” The Johnson ranch lies right up against the Mexican border, and illegal immigration has turned what was already a hard way to make a living on drought—plagued rangeland into a nightmare of stolen cattle, broken water lines,ruined fences and grass fi res. “In 2005, we had 500-plus people crossing our ranch every day,” explains housewife,...


18 posted on 02/04/2009 9:15:16 AM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: radar101

Thanks for that account, radar101.

“One Hispanic gal’s husband works for Wackenhut... I figured they would eliminate her but they didn’t”

Wackenhut....the private prison system that makes big bucks storing illegal aliens...and gives out some of the biggest campaign contributions for their open border politicos...like John McCain.


19 posted on 02/04/2009 9:21:49 AM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

“The biggest trauma I see here is that an American is being forced to pay lawyers and spend his time in court to defend himself for defending his property.

How does this man recoup what this trial is costing him.? He doesnt. He was not only defending his property he was defending Americans. Which is more than our government is doing.”

You nailed it.


20 posted on 02/04/2009 9:23:22 AM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

“You have the same right in AZ, even more, You are allowed to use Deadly Force in any case whereby you are witnessing a FELONY violation of LAW. Alien Smuggling is a FELONY.

eyeamok”

You should be right, but that’s not the way it pans out. Do you recall the young Marine a few years ago who stopped a smuggler and held them until the border patrol came? They arrested the Marine and he had to go to trial for ‘violating’ the aliens’ ‘rights’. I believe that was in Arizona.


21 posted on 02/04/2009 9:25:56 AM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: radar101

Border bump!


22 posted on 02/04/2009 9:46:00 AM PST by SwinneySwitch (Mexico- beyond your expectations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radar101
The Plaintiff’s attorney’s opening statements seemed pursuasive at first..... what a “bad ass” Roger is. He was maintaining a”militia”, hates anybody with Latino decent, harbors “racial animus”, has a vicious dog, speaks extremely foul language, and maintains his ranch as a compound for the “sport” of hunting people...... and the plaintiffs, who were just out for a Sunday afternoon stroll, were accosted by Roger for no cause....and he brutally accosted and traumatized them. Roger, Don & Barbara had long conspired to violate the Plaintiff’s civil rights... and the rights of all Latinos that crossed their paths.

Hell.... I would have convicted Roger at that point!

Unless, of course, you actually know Roger. Too bad they won't let me sit on that jury. I could easily refute every word from the plaintiffs' attorney.

23 posted on 02/04/2009 10:23:38 AM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

That’s right - at a rest stop on I-10, I believe. Course, it could’ve been I-8...


24 posted on 02/04/2009 10:27:17 AM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
If anyone has a better memory, I don't mind being corrected.

The land in question is actually federal land on which Barnett has a grazing lease.

Plus, Barnett is a equal rights gun puller. He had done the same thing to some bow hunters previously.

25 posted on 02/04/2009 10:38:59 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: radar101
This is all about the traffickers putting Barnett out of business and putting everyone else on notice that no resistance will be tolerated.

Same message that the Mexican government wanted Sutton to send to the BP with the prosecution of Ramos and Compean.

By the way, isn't Arpaio arresting people by the dozens up in Maricopa county under the new state law that makes the inmigrantes co-conspirators with the coyote?

And doesn't that law make ALL the plaintiffs suspected criminals under Arizona STATE law? Well, actually I don't think the law was passed when this happened, and ex post facto and all that, but....what would be their standing to sue now?

Don't worry. A judge would say the burglar can sue you for trying to stop him. On we go into the Looking Glass...

26 posted on 02/04/2009 10:55:45 AM PST by Regulator (Off With Their Heads, said the Queen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Plus, Barnett is a equal rights gun puller. He had done the same thing to some bow hunters previously.

The Martinez case? Man, his father, his daughters? They were rifle hunting for deer on land the Barnett's lease. They crossed posted and deeded land owned by the Barnett's in order to get to where they were.

The Barnett's were fined nearly $100,000 in that case.

As for the current case, I don't remember the facts well enough to say where this group was when they were detained.

27 posted on 02/04/2009 11:01:02 AM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: radar101

I just had one of those random thoughts...while working out an exchange in my mind...(I know, keep this up and I’ll have no mind left!)

When a rancher leases land from the Federal Gov’t, doesn’t he enter into a contract wherein he is expected to be a good steward of that land? And doesn’t that then make him an agent of the Federal Gov’t to protect that land from encroachment and damage?

That would seem to me then to prefer a duty upon the lessee to detain those who are abusing the leased land. And, judging from your description of the condition of the land after illegals move through, they are indeed abusing the land.

I dunno, just a thought...


28 posted on 02/04/2009 11:11:47 AM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HiJinx
The Martinez case?

That was a clear frame against Barnett. They were put up to it.

A good demonstration would have been to have a bunch of armed people show up on Mr. Martinez's front lawn in Tucson and then refuse to leave when he comes out of his house.

Gee, do you think the jury would award them 100 grand if he were to come out with his rifle?

29 posted on 02/04/2009 11:38:34 AM PST by Regulator (Off With Their Heads, said the Queen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

Good point. IIRC, Martinez had Barnett covered with a rifle before Barnett reached back into the truck for his own...


30 posted on 02/04/2009 11:46:40 AM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: HiJinx
When a rancher leases land from the Federal Gov’t, doesn’t he enter into a contract wherein he is expected to be a good steward of that land? And doesn’t that then make him an agent of the Federal Gov’t to protect that land from encroachment and damage?

I worked on a ranch just outside of Rodeo, NM back in the early 70s which routinely leased access to high country pasture in the Chiricahua (it's done on a rotating basis for all the ranchers in that valley) from the BLM.

The ranchers are expected to keep up the property: mend fences, keep up stock tanks and pens, etc (and of course, close the gates!!). We did all of that routinely. So the answer is yes, you're supposed to take care of it.

The problem of illegals damaging the area didn't come up then because the traffic was a lot smaller, but they were there - would usually hide in empty stock tanks during daylight, move at night; we would know they were there because no cattle would be around the tanks - and some of them would shoot at us hoping to scare us into not calling the BP. Or kill us, never did get to ask them what the point was....

31 posted on 02/04/2009 11:47:06 AM PST by Regulator (Welcome to Zimbabwe! The looting begins in five minutes...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: HiJinx; Regulator

At the Martinez trial there were bowhunters, a surveyor, and a game and fish employee who testified that they all received the same treatment


32 posted on 02/04/2009 11:54:30 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

It’s a good policy in that part of the country....


33 posted on 02/04/2009 12:15:26 PM PST by Regulator (Welcome to Zimbabwe! The looting begins in five minutes...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
At a 100 grand a pop, it might not be good policy.

Like wise in Texas. The man from Arizona working with Ranch Rescue went to prison over pistol whipping the illegal and then lost his 100 acres in Arizona to that illegal in a civil suit. What was his name? I remember his bodyguard's, Tiny, who got blasted in the head by the FBI.

34 posted on 02/04/2009 12:40:58 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin; HiJinx
At a 100 grand a pop, it might not be good policy

Heh. Well, better than being dead...

And his name was Jack Nethercott. HiJinx I believe either knew him or followed the whole travesty closely.

35 posted on 02/04/2009 2:12:58 PM PST by Regulator (Welcome to Zimbabwe! The looting begins in five minutes...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
You jogged my memory. It was Casey Nethercott.

Those were all old school guys. Gilchrist came along and showed them all how to make big money off of it.

36 posted on 02/04/2009 2:44:54 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Sorry, you’re right. I googled it and probably the news article had it mangled, confusing Jack Foote the head of Ranch Rescue with Casey his budd.


37 posted on 02/04/2009 3:04:13 PM PST by Regulator (Welcome to Zimbabwe! The looting begins in five minutes...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

You jogged my memory again. Jack Foote also lost in the civil judgement but didn’t lose his property because Texas has homestead laws that prevent a man from losing his homestead in a civil judgement.


38 posted on 02/04/2009 3:30:34 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: radar101

very sad day for our nation


39 posted on 02/04/2009 6:55:45 PM PST by television is just wrong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

You are correct sort of, he was released with no charges, the Sheriff made a Public Statement on TV informing the public that he broke no laws in the apprehension of these Suspected Felons. not sure if the FEDS tried to prosecute him for civil rights,I don’t really Know.

eyeamok


40 posted on 02/05/2009 8:54:17 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: HiJinx
When a rancher leases land from the Federal Gov’t, doesn’t he enter into a contract wherein he is expected to be a good steward of that land...(making) him an agent of the Federal Gov’t to protect that land from encroachment and damage?

That would seem to me then to prefer a duty upon the lessee to detain those who are abusing the leased land. And, judging from your description of the condition of the land after illegals move through, they are indeed abusing the land.

Easily the largest visible problem the EPA should be tackling (as opposed to taking people's property for the sake of mutant critters). We don't see any concern from the Sierra Club, Greenpeace or Earth-Firsters, either.

Nooo! Maintenance comes down to the ranchers and residents of the border who are learning "government support" too often means support of the polluters/invaders. May that scalawag of a prosecutor's lying tongue fall off.

41 posted on 02/05/2009 9:11:28 PM PST by NewRomeTacitus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson