Posted on 06/04/2012 9:54:14 AM PDT by massmike
Officials with the Taos Police Department say they are still working to get to the bottom of the alleged beating of a Taos landowner over the removal of political signs from in front of his property.
In an interview with The Taos News Friday, property owner Roy Cunnyngham and his wife Joni recounted the events when they returned home, across from Casa los Córdovas May 1.
According to the police report filed the same day, Eighth Judicial District Court judge candidate Ernestina Cruz was having a “meet and greet” event at Plaza de Colores. At the same time, across the street, Cunnyngham and his wife were returning home from dinner to find several of Cruz’ campaign signs in front of his property.
As in the police report, Cunnyngham confirmed that three men approached him and demanded that he replace the signs where they’d been staked. Cunnyngham said he resisted.
“We were setting them in the car and we’d planned to call whoever they belonged to,” Cunnyngham said. “I told them I thought it was very distasteful to put these signs in front of my property.”
At that point, a younger man came across the street and again told Cunnyngham to put the signs back. When Cunnyngham refused, the man “pounded me in the chest,” Cunnyngham said.
At the time of the incident, Cruz denied having any knowledge of anyone involved in the incident, saying that it was “unfortunate” that Cunnyngham removed signs that “did not belong to him.”
What followed was far from a fair fight, the Cunnynghams say. Cunnyngham was later checked out by a doctor who treated him for cuts and bruises, injuries to his mouth and a concussion, Cunnyngham said.
“They just attacked him, all three of them,” Joni Cunnyngham said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
It’s become so that the only safe rule is to Zimmerman first, ask questions later.
A dead thug is far better than a bruised homeowner
Didn’t happen unless there’s a video. Plenty of cell phones out there to verify.
That the PROPERTY did not belong to Cruz or his supporters didn't matter to THEM.
To Marxists, all property is theft anyway.
Eric Holder's people will be RIGHT on this... < /sarc >
punks, my suggestion..hidden video camera, arm yourself well,
remove said signs or paint “f that, lying commies” on each one and when attacked draw on them. Hopefully they leave. If not they are likely to attack you anyway, you just chose your time instead of them deciding theirs..
Time to apply “Rule .303”
The stupid ass Cruz is running for Judge? What is placed on private property becomes a tool of the owner. I used to destroy home sale signs every week on a corner I owned and where the placers assumed was on the ROW (NOT!). A few complaints but when the law found out is was on my property, it was TS to the planters. If this had happened to me, the first thing I would do is to go armed with large caliber weapon before uprooting any sign on my property.
Taos hasn’t been the same since 1970, when Sam McCloud took semi-permanent special assignment with the New York City Police Department.
Were the signs on his property?
If they were, he had every right to remove them; if not then they were on either public property or someone else’s private property and that is a different story.
No one can put signs in my yard without my permission.
However, the city can prohibit signs on my boulevard (10 feet of my property between th street curb and sidewalk.
When cleaning up after the left, make sure you have the right tools with you.....
“Eric Holder’s people will be RIGHT on this...”
Yah, on the side of the Cruz crudders...evil has no limits...unless we stop it.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I wonder what the Mormon thugs will do to me whan I wont allow Romney signs in my yard...
>>>At the time of the incident, Cruz denied having any knowledge of anyone involved in the incident, saying that it was “unfortunate” that Cunnyngham removed signs that “did not belong to him.” <<<
If you put it on MY property it does belong to me, or at the very least, I have an absolute right to remove it.
If the leftists so much as THOUGHT the property didn’t belong to Cunnyngham, the article would have promintently mentioned it.
That is exactly the right answer. Colt, Smith and Wesson, and several other great Americans knew what tools were needed to keep thugs from using numbers or strength to overwhelm ordinary, free citizens. "An armed society is a polite society." - Robert A. Heinlein
In the artcle it keeps saying “in front of his property”. It doesn’t say “on his property”.
There is still no justification for a beating.
Yeah, Welcome to 2009...! Seriously Mr. Hoft "Are you paying attention, NOW...?" Finally...? (Warning Bad Language...!)
Remember the Romney guy who was impersonating a cop and pulling people over when Romney was motorcading somewhere in the last election?
I once read that New Mexico receives more federal money per capita than any other state in the union.
Between the welfare cases and the natives you will find the reason for beating anybody who stops the paychecks.
When they left the sign on his property, the sign became his property, to do with as he wishes.
Document everything. There is a story from a few years back of a little old lady in Suffolk county MA that had the police chief stop by to ask if he could put up a campaign sign. She told him no. Less than an hour later a marked police car pulled in the driveway, Three uniformed police got out and put up the sign. They told her to leave it up "If you know what's good for you."
Unfortunately, there was no evidence of this and no witnesses dared to come forward.
And this is a JUDGE who’s running. So much for the American justice system.
This pseudo-judge saying ANYTHING like what she said about removal of signs put without permission on someone’s property makes her by definition unqualified.
If Eomney stooges tried to put oner of Romneys signs in my yard that way, and threatened me like they did that old lady, the sign would have been tossed out on the street before they could exit my driveway...
This is not MASS...
I don’t think they were ON his property.
“to find several of Cruz’ campaign signs in front of his property. “
The beating was wrong, no matter what.
He’s Anglo, they’re Hispanic. Nothing new for northern NM where Anglos are very much in the minority.
Good Point!
“Officials with the Taos Police Department say they are still working to get to the bottom “
Translation: Ignoring it and hoping it goes away.
NM list PING!
I may not PING for all New Mexico articles. To see New Mexico articles by topic click here: New Mexico Topics
To see NM articles by keyword, click here:New Mexico Keywords
To see the NM Message Page, click here: New Mexico Messages
(The NM list is available on my FR homepage for anyone to use. Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
Forward!
The story is a bit unclear. But it does seem the signs were either “on” his property or “in front of” his property.
In either case he had the right to remove them since the signs were illegally placed.
The usual rule is that campaign signs have to be “on” a persons property and cannot be on the “right of way” in front of a person’s property.
Liars, thieves and thugs are all that is left in the Democrat Party. Let one of those Democrat punks TRY putting one of their stupid signs anywhere near my yard and I will give them a well earned lesson in common courtesy and consideration for others. It will be a lesson they will not soon forget.
What begins?
I would like to see a 2nd confirmation that the signs were put near his property and not on his property. If they were in his property, I hope he sues for millions. If they weren’t then I hope they at least arrest the mob thugs who put the signs there and castrate them for the completely unnecessary assault on the homeowner.
You’re the first to make the salient point....where the signs on the guy’s property? If not he may have been wrong in removing them.
If it’s a public right of way, the abutting land owner does not have the right to remove the signs during the election season. There may even be a fine for doing so.
I don't know about the state in the article, but in Mi a property owner owns, and is taxed, to the center of the road. The public has a right to walk or drive on the ‘right of way’ but beyond that it is trespassing.
Here is the article in the Taos News
Doesn’t AZ have some odd real estate law wherein you own the building, but not the land that your home is built on?
Signs in NM must be on private property. They may not be placed on the public right-of-way, and campaign staff must have permission prior to placing them on private property. Either way, the signs were placed illegally.
The incident took place May 1,
but it took the Taos News
one month: June 1 to report it.
I’m sure it varies from state to state, but going back to my post, you’ll notice my first word was “if”.
Anyone putting their political signs on my property better have my permission. If not, I’ll set them on fire.
Of course, I’ll throw out the signs too...
He could have put a bigger sign(s) in front of the unwanted ones, unless they were on his property. In that case, call the law first and remove them.
If anyone puts signs ‘in front’ of or ‘on’ my residential property, the law will be called.
There are laws about that where I live.
I notice the article doesn’t actually say the signs were on his property. It states they were “in front of” his property. I’m betting they were on his property but the original author did not want to concede that point.
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.