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.
“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.
Border bump!
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.
That’s right - at a rest stop on I-10, I believe. Course, it could’ve been I-8...
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.
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...
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.
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...
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?
Good point. IIRC, Martinez had Barnett covered with a rifle before Barnett reached back into the truck for his own...
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....
At the Martinez trial there were bowhunters, a surveyor, and a game and fish employee who testified that they all received the same treatment
It’s a good policy in that part of the country....
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.
Heh. Well, better than being dead...
And his name was Jack Nethercott. HiJinx I believe either knew him or followed the whole travesty closely.
Those were all old school guys. Gilchrist came along and showed them all how to make big money off of it.
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.
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.
very sad day for our nation
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
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.