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

Skip to comments.

Arizona Rancher Will Fight Court Order To Pay Damages to Undocumented Immigrants
Fox News Latino ^ | February 10, 2011 | Elizabeth Llorente

Posted on 02/10/2011 5:31:32 AM PST by La Lydia

An Arizona rancher who was ordered to pay nearly $90,000 in punitive damages to undocumented immigrants he confronted, with a gun, is going to request a rehearing, his attorney said. “We’ll be filing a motion for a rehearing,” said David T. Hardy, who is representing Roger Barnett. “He feels he got screwed. I have some sympathy for that view.”

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld a lower court verdict ordering Barnett to pay the damages for the 2004 incident, in which the plaintiffs claimed that he approached them with his dog and said he’d shoot them if they tried to leave. The court said that an Arizona law permitted a person to threaten to use – or actually use – physical force against someone else when that person believes it is necessary for protection “against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.”

But the court said that Barnett held them at gunpoint even after becoming aware that no one in the group of 16 men and women was armed, and so he could not use the argument of self-defense....

Hardy took exception at MALDEF’s description of Barnett as a trigger-happy vigilante.

He said Barnett has been “swamped” by the impact of undocumented immigrants and drug smugglers coming onto his property. Hardy said "the FBI twice told him his life was in danger."

“Whole areas of his land have been covered in trash” left behind by people crossing on it illegally, Hardy said. “Some are parties of illegal entrants, sometimes there are groups of 40 or 50. He has drug smugglers come through too. They take vehicles and plow through his fence.”...

(Excerpt) Read more at latino.foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; citizenship; govtabuse; illegalimmigration; illegalinvaders; illegalinvasion; illegals; immigration; invaders; itsnotimmigration; judicialactivism; nojustice; notimmigrants; privateproperty; rapeofliberty; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
So, when it comes to illegals, your property isn't your property and your government is not on your side.
1 posted on 02/10/2011 5:31:38 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

A group of 16 can certainly overpower a man and a dog. No need for the “they were not armed defense”.


2 posted on 02/10/2011 5:37:19 AM PST by battlecry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

‘Barnett held them at gunpoint even after becoming aware that no one in the group of 16 men and women was armed, and so he could not use the argument of self-defense....’

16 on 1 is a cause for armed self protection.

What was the rancher suppose to do, hold a drum circle and sing kumbaya??


3 posted on 02/10/2011 5:38:58 AM PST by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: battlecry

Did he strip search each one?


4 posted on 02/10/2011 5:39:02 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

While the numbers of illegal aliens crossing the ranch where we live is down, we still carry at least a side arm daily and whenever we see illegals we add at least one 12 gauge shotgun. Most illegals stop when confronted but I have had some take off running. The border patrol collects the ones who sit and wait but the runners get away for at least a while.


5 posted on 02/10/2011 5:39:13 AM PST by ammomajor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge

No dog! That’s unfair. He should have brought a cat.


6 posted on 02/10/2011 5:39:55 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

I gather the issue was he kicked one woman and he was yelling and cussing and they were afraid of his dog and he was waving his gun around. Well, he shouldn’t have kicked the woman but, the yelling and cussing I can understand. He’s probably tired of it. The dog scaring them is to darned bad. He can have whatever dog he wants to, it’s a free country. Or at least it use to be. The only thing he should be charged with is kicking the woman. The other stuff needs to be dropped I don’t care if the illegals were scared or not, to bad. Stay out of our county and off private property, if your coming here illegally and you won’t be scared.


7 posted on 02/10/2011 5:41:10 AM PST by MsLady (If you died tonight, where would you go? Salvation, don't leave earth without it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Let’s put those bastard so called judges on this man’s property without gun alone at night...see how threatened those cowards feel.


8 posted on 02/10/2011 5:41:19 AM PST by Wpin ("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge

If he had not had the gun and the dog, would they have attacked him? Who knows, but 16 on 1, they could have beat him to death easily.


9 posted on 02/10/2011 5:42:43 AM PST by MsLady (If you died tonight, where would you go? Salvation, don't leave earth without it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia; moonshinner_09; OldNewYork; rabscuttle385; Grampa Dave; Cincinatus' Wife; AuntB; ...
They're turning the US---firmly founded on the rule of law---- into a lawless Third World hellhole. Property rights are sacrosanct.....until now. This serves to underline that illegals think Americans are dumb, that we don't know they're stealing our tax dollars AND our country out from under us and that we are scared of them.

The Arizona Rancher should use this procedure to protect his property.

In 1996, Congress expanded the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to include violations of federal immigration law.

1 While this expansion may not have received much publicity, it could potentially change the face of U.S. immigration law enforcement. Under the new RICO provisions, a violation of certain provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) meets the definition of racketeering activity, also known as a "predicate offense,"

2 and an entity that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity for financial gain can be held both criminally and civilly liable.

3 Among other things, the INA makes it unlawful to encourage illegal immigration or employ illegal aliens,

4 which violations were included as predicate offenses under RICO.

The 1996 law changes in the INA made hiring illegal aliens a predicate act of racketeering activity under RICO, but illegal hiring wasn’t the only violation of the INA made a predicate act. Other INA prohibitions made RICO predicate acts were encouraging or inducing illegal immigration, smuggling, and harboring illegal aliens.10 Together, these additions make the RICO Act potentially a very strong new tool in the hands of private parties against persons and companies that profit by violating U.S. immigration law.

Additionally, the RICO provision regarding the unlawful encouragement of illegal immigration could justify a suit against a private entity, such as a bank, that accepts foreign-issued identification cards that are only needed by illegal aliens. One example of this, of course, is the matricula consular issued by the Mexican consulates in the United States.

Since both the supporters of the matricula and those who oppose its acceptance agree that only illegal aliens have need to rely on the card, acceptance of the card knowingly encourages illegal immigration. Part of the legislative intent of the RICO laws in general was to afford private citizens a remedy for lawbreaking when authorities normally charged with such enforcement became derelict in their duties.

For example, in a town in which political corruption and racketeering activity have combined to the detriment of law-abiding citizens and the rule of law, the RICO Act was intended to provide private citizens the ability to initiate court action to compel enforcement and respect for the law.

10 posted on 02/10/2011 5:47:26 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

“But the court said that Barnett held them at gunpoint even after becoming aware that no one in the group of 16 men and women was armed, and so he could not use the argument of self-defense....”

How did he “become aware” of that? No No Senior. No weapons here. We are all American ceetizens out for a walk.


11 posted on 02/10/2011 5:48:49 AM PST by Conan the Conservative (Crush the liberals, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of the hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
16 property invaders don't need a gun to kill one man. One man needs a gun to defend himself against 16.

The world is upside-down.

Welcome to Aztlan.


12 posted on 02/10/2011 5:50:48 AM PST by Travis McGee (EnemiesForeignAndDomestic is now on Kindle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

He captured foreign agents invading our nation. He should have gotten a medal


13 posted on 02/10/2011 5:53:00 AM PST by SECURE AMERICA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MsLady

Remember back in the day when our govt was on the side of honest, land owning American citizens rather than trespassing foreigners entering the country illegally?


14 posted on 02/10/2011 5:55:10 AM PST by Conan the Conservative (Crush the liberals, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of the hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Liz
MALDEF and the US attorney in Arizona, DENNIS K. BURKE, are turning the US---firmly founded on the rule of law---- into a lawless Third World hellhole. Property rights are sacrosanct.....until now. This serves to underline that illegals think Americans are dumb, that we don't know they're stealing our tax dollars AND our country out from under us and that we are scared of them. Dennis Burke served as Chief of Staff to Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano from 2003 to 2008. Seeing a pattern here. We need to keep our enemies in focus. THE US ATTORNEY FOR ARIZONA IS NOT ON OUR SIDE, DOES NOT REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS, AND OPENLY FAVORS ILLEGALS.
15 posted on 02/10/2011 5:58:08 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge
What was the rancher suppose to do, hold a drum circle and sing kumbaya??

Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

He is supposed to pull out a guitar and sing "La Bamba".

16 posted on 02/10/2011 6:00:27 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
Not that I've ever been faced with the situation but I doubt that I could defend myself against a group of 16 unarmed even if they were 13 year olds, unless I had a gun. (The great equalizer).
17 posted on 02/10/2011 6:01:27 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Of course Obama loves his country. The thing is, Sarah loves mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

But it’s a good thing that Sarah Palin and other republican leaders are so passionate about defending ordinary Americans in such cases... /s


18 posted on 02/10/2011 6:02:11 AM PST by LastNorwegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

We don’t need a US Atty or a private atty.

ANYBODY can file a RICO case——even private citizens.

A good bet is to file the RICO case against deep-pocketed mexico——b/c the litigant gets a share of the financial damages.


19 posted on 02/10/2011 6:03:32 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

After the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling, MALDEF released a statement that said: “Today’s ruling sends the strong message that “vigilantes will not be tolerated in Arizona.”

I guess that means that only people breaking the law are tolerated.


20 posted on 02/10/2011 6:03:40 AM PST by buggy02 (Never take life seriously, nobody gets out alive anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Good for him!!!! This judgment was really insane....


21 posted on 02/10/2011 6:04:18 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conan the Conservative

The legislators who pass the laws and the Presidents who appointed the judges were all elected by the people. One would therefore assume the government is representing the wishes of the people. If not, the people should stop electing the representatives and Presidents responsible for the conduct of the bureaucracy and the courts.

How many federal judges are impeached and removed by Congress each year? Very few if any. Impeachment is the Constitutional check on the power of runaway judges. Since Congress is not removing judges one must presume Congress is satisfied with their behavior. If Congress isn’t removing judges one must also presume the people who elect the representatives are satisfied with the rulings of the judges.

In addition the people have the ability to check the power of the courts through a Constitutional convention or Constitutional amendment. There is no popular movement underway to amend the Constitution or call a convention to reign in the judicial branch. Therefore, the majority of the people must be either satisfied with or indifferent to the actions of the judiciary.

The point I am making is until the people rise up and change the government, we will have status quo.


22 posted on 02/10/2011 6:04:30 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Hopefully this will lead to more victims like this rancher reverting to the “shoot, shovel and STFU” method of dealing with property violence committed by illegals.


23 posted on 02/10/2011 6:06:10 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
and an entity that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity for financial gain can be held both criminally and civilly liable.

congress?
24 posted on 02/10/2011 6:06:21 AM PST by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Liz
and an entity that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity for financial gain can be held both criminally and civilly liable.

congress?
25 posted on 02/10/2011 6:06:26 AM PST by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

“”The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld a lower court verdict ordering Barnett to pay the damages for the 2004 incident””

Wasn’t the judge in the lower court the judge who was killed in Tucson at the same time the congresswoman was shot?


26 posted on 02/10/2011 6:07:06 AM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

The institution? I wish——well, maybe individual lawmakers.


27 posted on 02/10/2011 6:08:02 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Wow!

Once, when I was a kid, I was trespassing on Old Mr. Williams’ farm and he approached me with his dog and his shotgun and told me he would shoot me with rock-salt if he saw me on his property again.

I never considered suing him, I just (quickly) left his property and never trespassed there again...

...and hoped he didn’t tell my parents.

To this day, for some reason, the song ‘Mr. Charlie’ always makes me think of that old man...


28 posted on 02/10/2011 6:10:36 AM PST by WayneS (Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. -- James Madison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thank You Rush

Yes, I think so.


29 posted on 02/10/2011 6:15:49 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

The judge needs to be arrested.


30 posted on 02/10/2011 6:19:59 AM PST by Monterrosa-24 (...even more American than a French bikini and a Russian AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Shoot, shovel and shut up.

That will be the result if he is forced to pay the invaders; the next guy will know what he’s up against and act accordingly.


31 posted on 02/10/2011 6:20:02 AM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monterrosa-24

The judge is dead.


32 posted on 02/10/2011 6:23:09 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South
until the people rise up and change the government, we will have status quo.

That's what most Americans want, the status quo, and the promise of liberalism.

33 posted on 02/10/2011 6:26:47 AM PST by Theodore R. (Rush was right when he said America may survive Obama but not the Obama supporters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
"MALDEF and the US attorney in Arizona, DENNIS K. BURKE, are turning the US---firmly founded on the rule of law---- into a lawless Third World hellhole....

It appears that Obama's Mr. Burke, as Bush's Mr. Sutton are not U. S. Attorney's but International Attorneys representing illegal aliens instead of U. S. Citizens. And I have a sneaking suspicion that's what is expected of them.
34 posted on 02/10/2011 6:28:20 AM PST by Redhd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Conan the Conservative
Yea I sure do. I'm really sick to death of these liberal judges. They are ruining our country and hurting the entire world. We feed millions of people all over the world. We give aid like no other. What's going to happen to those people that the liberals claim they are so concerned about, if they ever succeed in collapsing our country?

As soon as I typed out that thought, this came to mind. This is how the anti-christ is going to enter and take over the world.

35 posted on 02/10/2011 6:30:49 AM PST by MsLady (If you died tonight, where would you go? Salvation, don't leave earth without it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
1:16 is justification enough to arm yourself.

Stuff like this makes my blood boil.

36 posted on 02/10/2011 6:30:56 AM PST by Dead Corpse (III%. The last line in the sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

*biting my tongue*


37 posted on 02/10/2011 6:34:26 AM PST by Dead Corpse (III%. The last line in the sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Amen to that brother!


38 posted on 02/10/2011 6:51:36 AM PST by TheCause ("that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

When I was about 10 a group of us were up in the apple trees of a neighboor when he came home and caught us and sent us packin...he wasnt packin but we were...

Boy those were good apples...but the whipping my Dad gave me for trespassing and stealing made me forget about them...


39 posted on 02/10/2011 7:24:46 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

“.....But the court said that Barnett held them at gunpoint even after becoming aware that no one in the group of 16 men and women was armed, and so he could not use the argument of self-defense....”

Fer cryin’ out loud there were 16 of them.


40 posted on 02/10/2011 7:36:31 AM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Please note that Pres BO and his AG Holder have sided against American citizens by sueing the state of AZ in order to defend criminal aliens. This is BO’s way of undermining the value of US citizenship and tearing down our borders. When will people realize this sick little man we call a leader is a hate-filled anti-american.


41 posted on 02/10/2011 7:37:24 AM PST by Neoliberalnot ((Read "The Grey Book" for an alternative to corruption in DC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
David Hinojosa, southwest regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund (aka: MALDEF), which represented the plaintiffs in the suit against Barnett,

After the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling, MALDEF released a statement that said: “Today's ruling sends the strong message that vigilantes will not be tolerated in Arizona.”

So Barnett is a "vigilante"? Oh really. I guess Señor Hinojosa never heard of Property Rights. Like 'Private Property, No Trespassing, KEEP OUT'.

And I have news for Señor Hinojosa, there's a Warning sign I saw that I've been meaning to get which would apply to these illegals, or any 'trespassers'. It goes something like:

Warning! If I Find You Here Tonight
You'll Be Found Here In The Morning
We have allowed to have these enemies within like this MALDEF and the SPLC working to destroy the USA and the centuries old concept of Property Rights. Per these traitors all land that adjoins OUR southern border is 'free range'. Open for anybody to do anything they want. And I assume that if the illegals find a spot on someone's ranch and liked it, they could build a cabin and SQUAT there and let the Gringo pay the taxes and clean up costs. And even provide indoor plumbing Free of Charge! (not that any of these people would know what to do with it)
42 posted on 02/10/2011 7:44:52 AM PST by Condor51 (Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a Congressman. But I repeat myself. [Mark Twain])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: buggy02
MALDEF released a statement that said: “Today’s ruling sends the strong message that “vigilantes will not be tolerated in Arizona.”

I guess defending your own property is now being a vigilante.

43 posted on 02/10/2011 7:50:56 AM PST by Only1choice____Freedom (FDR had the New Deal. President 0bama has the Raw Deal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
"Private Property"

It's not private property. Barnett owns 360 acres there and has a grazing lease on 22,000 acres of federal and state land. These events were on the the leased land.

This is not the first suit that Barnett has lost and had to pay damages. The first one was by a Mexican American family who was hunting on the leased land who were held at gunpoint. In that trial there were witnesses testifying that they also had been held at gunpoint by Barnett.

It was only after Barnett lost the first suit that this suit was filed.

44 posted on 02/10/2011 8:03:56 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: All

How to file a RICO suit.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/lit08.htm


45 posted on 02/10/2011 8:15:10 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

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

Ping!


46 posted on 02/10/2011 8:23:22 AM PST by HiJinx (What new decade?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Okay. I didn't know about any previous suits.

But as to the 'leased property'. If he's paying the G for the leased land, then only the owner, 'Lessor' (Gubmint) has the Right To Enter without the consent of the Leese.

It's just as if you're leasing an Apartment. You still have Private Property Rights, or a Right to Privacy under the lease. And one Right would be No Unauthorized Entry (Trespassing).

This guy may be a Flake, or maybe not. But if he's paying to use this land he's responsible for it. Like cleanup after these 'immigrants' who trash it.

47 posted on 02/10/2011 9:05:31 AM PST by Condor51 (Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a Congressman. But I repeat myself. [Mark Twain])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Sainted Judge Roll presided over the original trial.


48 posted on 02/10/2011 9:47:29 AM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monterrosa-24

He’s dead.....the Tucson January 8 incident...and now he’s a saint.


49 posted on 02/10/2011 9:51:01 AM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Monterrosa-24

He’s dead.....the Tucson January 8 incident...and now he’s a saint.


50 posted on 02/10/2011 9:51:15 AM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

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