Illegals Trespass on Rancher’s Land, Sue Him After He Detains Them
This story is from Monday, but I hadn’t had time to blog it yet. Still, it cries out to be blogged:
An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.
The guy claims that he has turned in 12,000 illegals over the years. And he has good reason to resent them:
Mr. Barnett told The Washington Times in a 2002 interview that he began rounding up illegal immigrants after they started to vandalize his property, northeast of Douglas along Arizona Highway 80. He said the immigrants tore up water pumps, killed calves, destroyed fences and gates, stole trucks and broke into his home.
Some of his cattle died from ingesting the plastic bottles left behind by the immigrants, he said, adding that he installed a faucet on an 8,000-gallon water tank so the immigrants would stop damaging the tank to get water.
Mr. Barnett said some of the ranch´s established immigrant trails were littered with trash 10 inches deep, including human waste, used toilet paper, soiled diapers, cigarette packs, clothes, backpacks, empty 1-gallon water bottles, chewing-gum wrappers and aluminum foil – which supposedly is used to pack the drugs the immigrant smugglers give their “clients” to keep them running.
Unbelievable. And they’re suing him. For $32 million. Because he detained them at gunpoint.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop drinking.
Unbelievable. And they’re suing him. For $32 million.
Considering the foolishness and gall of all those people — of all those voters — who put the current bunch in charge of the White House and Congress, I’d say other examples of lunacy (of deranged Third-Worldish attitude and ideology) are merely a part of one big theme: Banana Republic north of the border, Banana Republic south of the border (and I won’t even mention the story about all the kidnappings occurring in Phoenix, Arizona).
Mark (411533) — 2/11/2009 @ 11:39 pmIf this doesn’t get tossed out I’d be amazed. It has GOT to be legal to do what he did… If it isn’t, I’m buying a city in Montana, and seceding from the Union…
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 2/11/2009 @ 11:58 pmIs the ACLU representing the Mexican nationals?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/12/2009 @ 12:53 amMaybe he should just shoot the bastards instead of holding them at gunpoint. Probably less pain, legally. Claim self defense.
After all, if you hit someone with your car, isn’t it better to back over them and finish the job? A wrongful death lawsuit has to be cheaper than a maiming.
Dr. K (24b8da) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:06 amAnd conservatives wonder why Mexican-Americans don’t vote Republican…
Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:48 amSo, Hax, Mexican-Americans don’t vote for Republicans because Republicans support private property rights against the “rights” of people who are breaking multiple laws? Because we support the right of someone to defend their livelihood against vandals and thieves?
If that’s true, well, good. I don’t want their support if it means we have to let them break the law and ruin a man’s life simply because they want to.
Rob Crawford (b5d1c2) — 2/12/2009 @ 4:34 amHax, you just gotta remember that if you’re 19 and conservative, you have no heart. If, on the other hand, you’re 40 and liberal, you have no brain.
Dr. K (24b8da) — 2/12/2009 @ 5:40 amHacks – Why should this gentleman lose his own personal property rights because of the illegal activities of another, who wishes to trespass upon and vandalize his property? I know, he should be forced to provide food, clothing, shelter, and medical care to those that wish to utilize his property as their own toilet.
JD (80c89a) — 2/12/2009 @ 6:16 amComment by Hax Vobiscum — 2/12/2009 @ 2:48 am
So early in the thread to already be ignoring the essence of the post…
Do you believe that the illegals have civil rights, that they were indeed violated, and that it is a viable suit?
What would you have suggested the rancher do to protect his home and property – and/or does he even a right to do that?
Dana (137151) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:01 amAnd conservatives wonder why Mexican-Americans don’t vote Republican…
Comment by Hax Vobiscum
You’re right. Illegals vote Democrat 100%.
How do you think Loretta Sanchez got elected to Congress ?
Mike K (2cf494) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:14 amYou are all wasting your time with Hax. He will get back to you right after he explains how Zogby ‘disowned’ the how Obama won the election poll, how our relative GDP growth went into “free-fall” under Bush, how the tax burden falls on various income groups by decile, how lowering marginal taxation on upper incomes = the “rich” getting more “from the government, etc.
Hax prefers to snipe and dodge; he is not interested in your debate.
carlitos (599c37) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:21 amThe same way that Hilda Solis made it all the way to Labor Secretary-designate. Pandering to open borders.
carlitos (599c37) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:23 amHax also likes making stuff up, a lot.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:27 amHax is a liberal hack.
Mike Myers (674050) — 2/12/2009 @ 7:57 amHax is right. This is why Hispanics don’t vote for Republicans. They vote for their own self interest – or rather what they perceive as their own self interest. They are true liberals, aka “progressives.” I have never once voted for my own self interest. I have always voted for the good of the country – even if it costs me. In the short run I would likely benefit greatly by the proposed policies of the Office of the Former President Elect. In the long run, I fear for my country.
quasimodo (edc74e) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:04 amAnd conservatives wonder why Mexican-Americans don’t vote Republican…
This doesn’t even reach the grade – school level of logic – or comprehension. Watch for more updates from Hack’s readings from the latest issues from Highlights for Children.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:13 amI thought Hax was banned?
And if not, why not? It’s the distilled essence of troll. It’s only purpose here is to wind people up.
Subotai (940564) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:20 amHonestly, Dmac, you write very well. Have you ever done stand-up comedy? You are quick and succinct. I hate to think how you would handle a heckler.
On the other hand, maybe I do know, reading your posts.
Eric Blair (ec334b) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:29 amEric – His wit is every bit as quick in person. Maybe a little less cutting … 😉 But that could be due to the fact that he had his mouth crammed full of dead animal for most of the time.
JD (3d2fbd) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:32 amIt seems to me that this guy is using a non violent method to defend his property. Doesn’t he have that right?
So if every single person, citizen or not, has civil rights then what is the perk of being a citizen? Wouldn’t civil rights be considered American law and since these people are illegals, American law wouldn’t apply to them?
If I’m the rancher, I’m filing a counterclaim for attorney’s fees.
mj (53b86c) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:33 ammj, it is a crazy case.
Personally, I think that we should consider going fully multicultural: let’s use the case law from Mexico on drug trafficking and trespass.
I know, silly. But not as silly as this case.
JD, I thought as much.
Eric Blair (ec334b) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:46 amThe liberals better hope the illegals lose this case. Can iyou imagine the public outrage if this ranchers property has to be sold off to pay off illegals who trampled all over it and the rights of American citizens?
dianne (e05d5f) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:49 amCan you imagine the cone of silence that will descend upon this case if he loses?
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 2/12/2009 @ 8:59 amIf the federal judge doesn’t throw this suit out of court, the Republicans in the House should immediately call for his impeachment–let the Democrats have to defend this despicable nonsense. MALDEF needs to be hammered with sanctions for filing an obviously frivolous action–and that rancher deserves a medal for contributing to the expulsion of 12,000 lawbreakers.
M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:13 amIn the eyes of the law, pointing a gun at someone is not “non-violent;” it is assault.
I’m not sure how tresspassing can be legally defended. I would hope that I get to point guns at people on my property — I remember getting scattered buckshot from the crazy farmer near where we rode minibikes, and we never sued him.
carlitos (599c37) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:22 amWhat standing would illegal immigrants have in a U.S. court?
Leviticus (43095b) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:40 amPlenty, unfortunately.
SPQR (72771e) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:42 amProbably about the same standing as an unlawful combatant captured on foreign soil.
JD (3d2fbd) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:48 amComment by Leviticus — 2/12/2009 @ 9:40 am
Well, since the judge handling this case obviously thinks they are entitled to be in his/her court, it would appear that they have standing until the case is reviewed at a higher level.
AD (a9d46b) — 2/12/2009 @ 9:58 amCan we trace the descent of American Society by comparing the track-line to the seemingly moronic decisions emanating from the Judiciary at all levels?
It would seem so.
When judges stopped using common-sense, and wrapped everything in legalisms, America stopped its’ ascent as a great country, and began its’ descent back into the jungle.
When I said non violent, I was actually thinking of non deadly force, which you’re allowed to use to defend your home.
This seems to be a similar situation, where someone breaks into your house, you catch them, and hold them there until the police shows up. I believe the courts have said you can do that. Maybe I remember wrong.
What precedent does this set for other cases, if the illegals win? What civil rights did he violate exactly? The right not to be scared? The right not to do whatever you so please?
As far as the IIED claim goes, there is no way that I can see that working. Are his actions really that outrageous? Would the average person be shocked at what he did?
mj (53b86c) — 2/12/2009 @ 10:12 amBut you rode a bit further away, too. Amazing how behavior can be so quickly modified… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 2/12/2009 @ 10:36 amYup…
I would have opened fire upon a large group of people I found on my property without my permission…
“I feared for my life, your honor…”
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 2/12/2009 @ 10:44 amCan someone please tell me why we continually grant American Rights to non Americans? Doesn’t this devalue American citizenship? And why doesn’t the Castle Doctrine apply here? (Oh wait, That’s only in Florida?)
pitchforksntorches (12026e) — 2/12/2009 @ 11:50 am“…We found 15 states that adopted a “castle doctrine” bill in the last two years. These states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and South Dakota. A number of other states considered bills on this topic. In New Hampshire, the legislature passed a “castle doctrine” bill but the governor vetoed it…”
AD (d5182a) — 2/12/2009 @ 1:07 pmhttp://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0052.htm
It seems that Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center is involved in this dust-up, and it goes back several years.
AD (d5182a) — 2/12/2009 @ 1:23 pmMr. Barnett has already lost a civil-suit in this matter.
Ah geez. Surely this case won’t fly, or at least will get shot down at some point. These guys are trying to get around the rules of the game. If you get caught and they want to send you back you have to go.
EdWood (b56dcd) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:07 pmCan the rancher sue Mexico for damages caused to his property by its citizens?
“castle doctrine” bill
EdWood (b56dcd) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:12 pmYay ‘Bama! There are some things about Alabama that I’m not crazy about but I do like their sensible approach to this particular situation. If a guy was breaking into my house I’d probably be shaking so hard I couldn’t shoot straight but by God at least I am allowed to shoot.
It would be fun to have Cornyn or Imhofe or McCain or somebody similar invite Geert Wilders to speak to Congress or one of its committees or a caucus right about now and see what kind of a fuss it causes. I don’t think the government would wussy out the way Britain just did, but it might be pretty amusing.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:17 pmThe secret, really, is to NOT keep a round chambered… The sound of a pistol’s action being worked to ready a round is one that terrifies those who prey on the weak.
Also, keep a spare, loaded clip handy. That way, if you are shaking too much to hit the guy, you at least have another pile of chances. 🙂
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:29 pmWhat standing would illegal immigrants have in a U.S. court?
Comment by Leviticus
The same standing that was provided for the drug smuggler who testified against the two border patrol agents who are still in prison.
Mike K (8df289) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:45 pmThe sound of a pistol’s action being worked to ready a round is one that terrifies those who prey on the weak
Ever heard a shotgun action in the dark ?
Mike K (8df289) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:47 pmA shotgun sounds better, but you stand more chance of being overpowered with a long gun than a pistol.
carlitos (599c37) — 2/12/2009 @ 2:50 pmThank you for the advice Scott Jacobs. I decided a few years ago based on my reaction to a very very convincing false alarm(lots of shaking) to go with a shotgun. Took the guesswork out of it. My father in law said to upgrade from 00 buckshot to #4buckshot magnums coz the pattern stayed tighter over a longer range. I’d rather the guy ran when he heard me rack the shell of course.
EdWood (b56dcd) — 2/12/2009 @ 3:00 pmThe idea is to scare them, not cause them to crap themselves…
Because god knows THEY won’t be cleaning up the mess they make… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 2/12/2009 @ 3:15 pmIllegal aliens awarded AZ ranch in lawsuit
Sorry folks, there appears to be precedent for this sort of lawsuit. Check out the New York Times article linked above.
Jay Curtis (8f6541) — 2/12/2009 @ 10:36 pmAlso, notice that it was Morris Dees who was involved in the other suit as well. Seems he has a soft spot for illegals and is willing to steal land from citizens to reward law breakers. I wonder if it is the same judge?
Jay Curtis (8f6541) — 2/12/2009 @ 10:43 pm