Posted on 08/20/2005 8:15:09 AM PDT by kennedy
I have read this through several times. Unless I am missing a grievous crime committed by the US citizens, this ruling is absolutely incredible. First, violence committed while defending your property is frequently mischaracterized as criminal. Some states call it a crime to defend your home before the intruder is actually inside the house and in some cases the owner must further justify the amount of force used in defending the the home from within! The Left seems intent on extending the benefits of our Constitution to those who are not only not citizens, but frequently are violent and/or criminal.
It is an unfortunate legacy of the Democrats that our country is starting to be run by the judicial branch and not the legislative branch. And even worse, the judiciary is ignoring the Constitution and are imposing their own personal views.
Amen, brother.
I'll bet that these two lose this piece of property within a few years... probably for non-payment of taxes. I wonder who'll pick it up ??.
End Welfare = Labor Supply Problem Solved!
The lies roll out of the child molester's mouth endlessly.
So they people that are hiring the illegals are ALSO violating the Federal Wage Protection Laws? HUMMM, how interesting.
Property owner, in an attempt to protect his property, throws illegal immigrants off his land. Property owner is thrown in jail. Court gives illegal immigrants property owner's land. Yep. It's almost time to take up arms.
If this is a remedy that is even legal I would be surprised. It seems another judge overstepped his bounds.
Round these parts, Morris Dees is referred to as a lowdown snake. And that's putting it mildly.
It seems that the main action prosecuted was the violation of probation/parole which allowed the immigrants a "loophole" of a rebuttable presumption; id est, "his word against yours" swings in favor of the petitioner since the defendant violated a condition of his probation. The poor land owner was dead in the water before the "trial" started.
Watch as this border ranch becomes a safehouse for more illegals coming over the border.
They were in the country illegally when the incident happened. They now have money in their pockets and temporary permits.
One should parse this sentence carefully. "They are" is present tense and does not say they were legal at the time of the incident. There is an excellent chance that the plaintiffs' lawyer locked in their legal status post-incident so as to secure their ability to have continued standing in the court and be able to secure ownership of the property. The lawyer is thus able to secure his fee when the property is sold.
A simple step in rationalizing this conjecture is answering the posit of why "legal" immigrants were crossing the border at this defendant's property line?
When a property owner loses his land to the intruder for protecting it, it's time for drastic action. This should be a warning to other property owners on the border.
For fear of being banned or called a racist, I'm not posting what I think they should've done. But I wouldn't have been quite so nice as these guys were.
The gloves are off. This is serious stuff.
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.