Trespassing illegals sue property owner - Huhh?

[Bilbo]

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

I find it most interesting that he only started rounding up the damn illegals AFTER they made a habit of damaging his property and stealing from him. So anyone who says they are just coming north for a better life can shove it up their ass. If you want a better life you can start by not stealing/destroying the property of another scumballs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... a-rancher/

16 illegals sue Arizona rancher
Claim violation of rights as they crossed his land
Jerry Seper (Contact)
Monday, February 9, 2009
Comment
Print
Font Size Share
Got a Question?
You Report
Click-2-Listen
Buzz up!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.

Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.

His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as "the avenue of choice" for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.

Trial continues Monday in the federal lawsuit, which seeks $32 million in actual and punitive damages for civil rights violations, the infliction of emotional distress and other crimes. Also named are Mr. Barnett's wife, Barbara, his brother, Donald, and Larry Dever, sheriff in Cochise County, Ariz., where the Barnetts live. The civil trial is expected to continue until Friday.

The lawsuit is based on a March 7, 2004, incident in a dry wash on the 22,000-acre ranch, when he approached a group of illegal immigrants while carrying a gun and accompanied by a large dog.

Attorneys for the immigrants - five women and 11 men who were trying to cross illegally into the United States - have accused Mr. Barnett of holding the group captive at gunpoint, threatening to turn his dog loose on them and saying he would shoot anyone who tried to escape.

The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which also charged that Sheriff Dever did nothing to prevent Mr. Barnett from holding their clients at "gunpoint, yelling obscenities at them and kicking one of the women."

In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property, and that he was carrying a pistol and threatening them in English and Spanish. At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett's dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish, "My dog is hungry and he's hungry for buttocks."

The lawsuit said he then called his wife and two Border Patrol agents arrived at the site. It also said Mr. Barnett acknowledged that he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.

In March, U.S. District Judge John Roll rejected a motion by Mr. Barnett to have the charges dropped, ruling there was sufficient evidence to allow the matter to be presented to a jury. Mr. Barnett's attorney, David Hardy, had argued that illegal immigrants did not have the same rights as U.S. citizens.

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.

He said he carried a pistol during his searches for the immigrants and had a rifle in his truck "for protection" against immigrant and drug smugglers, who often are armed.


ASSOCIATED PRESS DEFENDANT: Roger Barnett said he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.

A former Cochise County sheriff´s deputy who later was successful in the towing and propane business, Mr. Barnett spent $30,000 on electronic sensors, which he has hidden along established trails on his ranch. He searches the ranch for illegal immigrants in a pickup truck, dressed in a green shirt and camouflage hat, with his handgun and rifle, high-powered binoculars and a walkie-talkie.

His sprawling ranch became an illegal-immigration highway when the Border Patrol diverted its attention to several border towns in an effort to take control of the established ports of entry. That effort moved the illegal immigrants to the remote areas of the border, including the Cross Rail Ranch.

"This is my land. I´m the victim here," Mr. Barnett said. "When someone´s home and loved ones are in jeopardy and the government seemingly can´t do anything about it, I feel justified in taking matters into my own hands. And I always watch my back."

[Aratech]

12,000 over a ten year period? Someone's been busy...

I think I'll have a chat with my Property Law and Torts professors over this, see what grounds they may have for a suit under some obscure law I've not yet learned.

[Bilbo]

12,000 over a ten year period? Someone's been busy...

I think I'll have a chat with my Property Law and Torts professors over this, see what grounds they may have for a suit under some obscure law I've not yet learned.

They are going for the "violated our Civil Rights" line of bullshit, which to me seems to be a legal gray area that allows you to suggest lots of things. Once they convicted the LA cops of for the Rodney King incident for "violating his Civil Rights" they really opened up the floodgate on odd legal interpretations.

[Count Chocula]

he yelled at them in Spanish, "My dog is hungry and he's hungry for buttocks."

Oh, the cruelty of this man knows no bounds.[/sarcasm] I think I'll add that to my sig!

U.S. District Judge John Roll rejected a motion by Mr. Barnett to have the charges dropped, ruling there was sufficient evidence to allow the matter to be presented to a jury.

So a Federal judge decided that Mr. Barnett violated the "civil rights" of illegal aliens, who in this case were the latest in a long line of illegals trespassing, vandalizing, littering, stealing and destroying his property. Whuuhhhh? Who TF does this judge think he is? While I'm fairly confident that a competent jury will acquit Mr. Barnett, his wife, his brother, the Sheriff and the family dog, they're being forced to defend themselves against the US government over an issue where the US government has re-defined FAIL.

[Aratech]

Indeed. It's lawsuits like this that have made me vow that in the event that I manage to graduate from lawschool, I will avoid Torts like the plague. I haven't facepalmed this hard since reading about that case where three teenagers tried to break into their school, fell through the skylight, and turned around and sued the school for negligence... and won.

[bozazz]

It's odd but I've never actually seen cases like these here in Canada. Is it because of the way the US system is structured that allows them to make it through the system? Anyone here who practice law in Canada know if these kind of frivolous lawsuits even make it to court?


on topic: I wouldn't exactly be surprised if the immigrants won their case against the property owners. After all a lady in the US won against McDonald when she poured hot coffee over herself due to her own negligence.

[Surlethe]

(1) The Washington Times is a right-wing rag, not a trustworthy source.

(2)

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

"Illegal alien scum"?

I find it most interesting that he only started rounding up the damn illegals AFTER they made a habit of damaging his property and stealing from him. So anyone who says they are just coming north for a better life can shove it up their ass. If you want a better life you can start by not stealing/destroying the property of another scumballs.

If the traffic through his property is really greater than 1200/year, that damage could well be caused by a minority of them; tarring them all with the same brush is a hasty generalization fallacy.

(3)

So a Federal judge decided that Mr. Barnett violated the "civil rights" of illegal aliens, who in this case were the latest in a long line of illegals trespassing, vandalizing, littering, stealing and destroying his property.

Because illegal aliens don't have rights? You sound like you're dismissing their case on the grounds that illegal aliens don't have rights, instead of on the grounds that no rights were violated.

[bozazz]

(1) The Washington Times is a right-wing rag, not a trustworthy source.

(2)

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

"Illegal alien scum"?

I find it most interesting that he only started rounding up the damn illegals AFTER they made a habit of damaging his property and stealing from him. So anyone who says they are just coming north for a better life can shove it up their ass. If you want a better life you can start by not stealing/destroying the property of another scumballs.

If the traffic through his property is really greater than 1200/year, that damage could well be caused by a minority of them; tarring them all with the same brush is a hasty generalization fallacy.

(3)

So a Federal judge decided that Mr. Barnett violated the "civil rights" of illegal aliens, who in this case were the latest in a long line of illegals trespassing, vandalizing, littering, stealing and destroying his property.

Because illegal aliens don't have rights? You sound like you're dismissing their case on the grounds that illegal aliens don't have rights, instead of on the grounds that no rights were violated.

It's good to know that the Washington Post is a right-wing paper. I didn't realize that before. A second more in depth and less cursory read of the article certain appears to be quite heavily biased. Thanks for pointing that out Surlethe.

[The Original Nex]

It's good to know that the Washington Post is a right-wing paper. I didn't realize that before. A second more in depth and less cursory read of the article certain appears to be quite heavily biased. Thanks for pointing that out Surlethe.

The Washington TIMES is a right wing rag. The Washington POST is a mainstream, fairly reputable newspaper.

[Glocksman]

So a Federal judge decided that Mr. Barnett violated the "civil rights" of illegal aliens, who in this case were the latest in a long line of illegals trespassing, vandalizing, littering, stealing and destroying his property.

No, he did not.
What that judge did rule was that there was sufficient evidence for the case to be heard at trial and not be summarily dismissed.

Because illegal aliens don't have rights? You sound like you're dismissing their case on the grounds that illegal aliens don't have rights, instead of on the grounds that no rights were violated.

That's the question.
Just what civil rights were violated?

Going by the description, personally I'd say none or a de minimis violation at most, but IANAL.

As for the rest of it, the real scandal is that he has this problem to begin with.
It's the US Government's job to secure the borders and at that they earn a big FAIL because chamber of commerce types love illegal immigrant labor.

[MKSheppard]

(1) The Washington Times is a right-wing rag, not a trustworthy source.

Umm what? It's actually a reliable source, as long as you follow one simple rule:

1.) Stay the hell away from anything that Bill Gertz says.

[Illuminatus Primus]

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

"Illegal alien scum"? All Mexican nationals are interchangeable with illegal alien scum?

I find it most interesting that he only started rounding up the damn illegals AFTER they made a habit of damaging his property and stealing from him. So anyone who says they are just coming north for a better life can shove it up their ass. If you want a better life you can start by not stealing/destroying the property of another scumballs.

Hasty generalization fallacy and anecdotal evidence; you cannot refute the generalization that "illegal immigrants want a better life" because one rancher had some damage to his ranch over the course of thousands of people coming across it, out of millions coming across throughout the border. Very poor reasoning.

(1) The Washington Times is a right-wing rag, not a trustworthy source.

Umm what? It's actually a reliable source, as long as you follow one simple rule:

1.) Stay the hell away from anything that Bill Gertz says.

Maybe you think the Moonie Times, that used to put marriage in quotes when referring to gay marriage - for the benefit of its wingnut readership, that called Clinton "Hillary" reflexively, that reflexively called illegal immigrants illegal aliens and gays homosexuals, that has drained over a billion dollars from the Unification Church since its founding, - yes, maybe you think its a reputable newspaper.

[MKSheppard]

You know, maybe we should contract out guarding our border to the FSB; since apparently nobody in the Border Patrol knows what the hell they're doing.


In Soviet Russia, Border Guards Shoot You!

[Solauren]

It's odd but I've never actually seen cases like these here in Canada. Is it because of the way the US system is structured that allows them to make it through the system? Anyone here who practice law in Canada know if these kind of frivolous lawsuits even make it to court?

We have rules for lawyers that don't let them work on contingency. They can work on retainer, for pay, or for free, but not contingency.

That really discourages the frivilous lawsuits, because people have to pay up front, and may not get any money back. (In other words, there stupidity costs them from the outset).

[Executor32]

on topic: I wouldn't exactly be surprised if the immigrants won their case against the property owners. After all a lady in the US won against McDonald when she poured hot coffee over herself due to her own negligence.

Wrong.

[Solauren]

On topic; Perhaps the rancher could sue the government to put in a nice electrified fence around his entire property. With a inner fence designed to keep livestock from hitting the electric fence.

He could use this lawsuit as evidence that illegals are frequently on his property, and some of them have no respect for it.

[MKSheppard]

Hasty generalization fallacy and anecdotal evidence; you cannot refute the generalization that "illegal immigrants want a better life"

If they want "a better life", they can follow our laws concerning immigration and come here legally, and thus not have to fear the INS.

Because one rancher had some damage to his ranch over the course of thousands of people coming across it, out of millions coming across throughout the border. Very poor reasoning.

Um. Teh fact is that illegals pretty much trash the crossings they take into the US.

From a Right Wing Rag, the Seattle Times!

Mountains of trash, recurring fires, despoiled natural springs, vandalized historic sites and disappearing wildlife are part of the devastating toll that the government's running battle with smugglers and migrants is taking on national parks and wildlife refuges along the U.S. border with Mexico.

In southern Arizona, the damage extends to American Indian and private land, jeopardizing a broad expanse of the Sonoran Desert.

At Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, 2 ½ million pounds of garbage is scattered through broad valleys and desert arroyos every year, according to Roger DiRosa, the refuge manager. Officials with the U.S. Border Patrol say the refuge's seven mountain ranges — home to bighorn sheep and a prized destination for wilderness hikers — now serve as posts for lookouts who use night-vision equipment to track Border Patrol movements. Mountain peaks conceal clandestine radio repeating stations. Illegal "ghost roads" carved by smugglers and pursuing federal agents crisscross Cabeza Prieta and nearby Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument.

Officials at the U.S. Department of the Interior say they are considering giving the Border Patrol control of the hard-hit areas of the refuge and park nearest the border.

"We've talked about what kind of swath they would need, how much we would let them control, recognizing that you would be sacrificing a small area for the greater good," said Larry Parkinson, Interior's deputy assistant secretary for law enforcement and security.

On a recent tour of the damage, DiRosa, who manages Cabeza Prieta for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, steered his truck toward the Growler Mountains, making slow headway through what used to be fertile desert topsoil. A constant stream of vehicles has pulverized the sand into a fine powder that DiRosa and other federal land managers call "moon dust."

There is only one official road in Cabeza Prieta's 860,000 acres, and this wasn't it. The nameless routes, stretching north from the Mexican border, are the result of an estimated 1,000 illegal foot crossings a day and countless vehicles transporting undocumented migrants, drug runners and Border Patrol.

The constant human pressure is threatening to eliminate the area's wildlife. The refuge's population of the endangered Sonoran pronghorn, a deerlike creature, had fallen to 21 — down from 179 in 1992 — and the species was headed for extinction before a captive-breeding program was established in 2004.

Cabeza Prieta has 400 plant species and 300 types of wildlife, including ringtail cats, kit foxes, bighorn sheep, javelina, badgers, bobcats, mule deer, desert tortoises, 24 snake species, 11 bat species and 212 bird species.

It's only a matter of time, officials say, before these animals' home is rendered uninhabitable.

Federal officials describe the effects of massive trespass as "staggering" and warn of dire repercussions.

East of Organ Pipe, residents of the Tohono O'odham Indian Reservation recently removed more than 7,000 abandoned vehicles.

Wendy Glenn, whose family runs a cattle ranch near Douglas, described the harm done to livestock and wildlife.

"There are at least two semi [tractor-truck] loads of trash in the canyon behind us, and there are probably seven canyons like that," she said. "Our cattle eat the trash. Little animals stick their heads in bean cans and walk around with the cans on their muzzle until they die. Our neighbor had a cow in a corral — it was having a problem calving. They came back in the morning to check on it, and two illegals had killed the calf and were cooking it.

"There's constant harassment of wildlife," Glenn said. "Deer don't feed during the night, because there's too many people running around. They need to go into the thickets to shade up during the day, but they go in now and there's people there, along with trash and fecal matter."

Arizona's border with Mexico, more than 350 miles long, includes six national parks, three wildlife refuges, three national monuments, two national conservation areas and a national forest. Government scientists have documented the most serious damage at Cabeza Prieta and Organ Pipe.

At Organ Pipe, on Cabeza Prieta's eastern border, the National Park Service estimates that visitors hiking the park's trails may encounter 200 pounds of trash per mile. Wildlife biologists say trash and human waste spread disease among animals.

Soil compaction across hundreds of miles of roads and trails has killed cactuses' shallow root systems, causing towering saguaro and organ-pipe cactuses to topple, taking with them animal food sources and bird nests.

At Organ Pipe, American Indian relics and pioneer ranch buildings have been damaged or destroyed, Billings said. The corral from Dos Lomitas Ranch, a 19th-century site listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is being taken apart board by board and the wood used for campfires.

Thirsty border crossers are draining many scarce natural water sources and have damaged or destroyed water tanks placed by biologists for bighorn sheep and pronghorn. Dripping Springs, a centuries-old desert oasis for pioneers and prospectors, now regularly tests positive for high levels of E. coli bacteria.

Last year, 3,500 acres burned in Cabeza Prieta, said Mike Coffeen, a Fish and Wildlife biologist at the refuge. The previous annual high was 50 acres. According to refuge staff, the increase is caused by "come-get-me fires" set by undocumented migrants who become lost in the desert.

Preventing damage is complicated by the Border Patrol's virtual immunity from laws designed to protect the border environment.

Border Patrol agents pursue illegal immigrants in high-speed chases across fragile desert lands. Driving in the area normally would be prohibited by the Wilderness Act.

The agency has established camps in wilderness areas, obliterating plants to make way for helicopter pads, trailers, fencing, generators and high-intensity lights. Since much desert wildlife is nocturnal, the noise and lights have driven animals out of their natural habitat.

"What would this be like if the Border Patrol was not here?" DiRosa mused, walking around a bullet-ridden white station wagon stuck in the sand at Cabeza Prieta. "I'd shut the door, because the refuge would be so damaged and compromised. But the Border Patrol is a Catch-22: They protect the refuge but damage the wilderness."

The Border Patrol says it now requires environmental sensitivity training and mandates that agents who drive through wilderness areas report incidents to refuge or park managers.

"We've come a long ways," said Ron Colburn, the Border Patrol's chief patrol agent for the agency's Yuma sector. "It has been an evolution in the cultures of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists and Border Patrol personnel. We were both operating in the same area but had recognizably different missions. We didn't see our missions joining."

Now they do, Colburn said, citing a pending national agreement between the Border Patrol and several federal land- and wildlife-management agencies that seeks to reduce conflict and spell out how to operate in sensitive habitat.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I've always been a major proponent of closing the border, but this will have to involve changing the legal immigration quotas to reflect demand, comprehensive development aid with Mexico, real guest worker programs, and in the meantime an amnesty program for existing illegals needs to be drawn up so we can take pressure off border patrol. And hell, why don't we put some people who're out of work to work enforcing the border, building things, and cleaning up national refuges and the like?

[bozazz]

on topic: I wouldn't exactly be surprised if the immigrants won their case against the property owners. After all a lady in the US won against McDonald when she poured hot coffee over herself due to her own negligence.

Wrong.

That's interesting...I had no idea. I only heard about it in my law class years ago when we discussed lawsuits against corporations. Thanks for sharing that...at least now it has dispelled my false understanding of that case.

[bozazz]

It's odd but I've never actually seen cases like these here in Canada. Is it because of the way the US system is structured that allows them to make it through the system? Anyone here who practice law in Canada know if these kind of frivolous lawsuits even make it to court?

We have rules for lawyers that don't let them work on contingency. They can work on retainer, for pay, or for free, but not contingency.

That really discourages the frivilous lawsuits, because people have to pay up front, and may not get any money back. (In other words, there stupidity costs them from the outset).

Ah. But I'm sure proponents of the contingency fees will argue that it decreases the incentive of the lawyers. But I like the Canadian system. I'm not a fan of the litigious nature of the American system. Thanks for the information.

[Bilbo]

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

"Illegal alien scum"? All Mexican nationals are interchangeable with illegal alien scum?

The "Mexican Nationals" in question are all scumballs he caught illegally crossing our border and trespassing on his land. That makes them scum. So yes every time a Mexican National crosses our border illegally his name becomes synonymous with illegal alien scum.

[Illuminatus Primus]

So a guy detains and then hands over to the border patrol illegal aliens he finds crossing his private property on the Mexcan border. So now a group of Mexican nationals (aka illegal alien scum) are sueing him for violating his civil rights.

"Illegal alien scum"? All Mexican nationals are interchangeable with illegal alien scum?

The "Mexican Nationals" in question are all scumballs he caught illegally crossing our border and trespassing on his land. That makes them scum. So yes every time a Mexican National crosses our border illegally his name becomes synonymous with illegal alien scum.

How do you feel about American nationals illegally crossing borders to kill other countries' nationals?

[Bilbo]

How do you feel about American nationals illegally crossing borders to kill other countries' nationals?

That has what to do with this? Please illuminate me.

[Kanastrous]

The "Mexican Nationals" in question are all scumballs he caught illegally crossing our border and trespassing on his land. That makes them scum. So yes every time a Mexican National crosses our border illegally his name becomes synonymous with illegal alien scum.

You know, I really, really despise illegal migration into the US, as well as the deleterious effects it has on our medical care, public welfare, education and law-enforcement systems, not to mention the wage-depressing effect on our labor market.

But I can't see despising or hating the individuals who are trying to get in. They're mainly poor people who have been elaborately fucked over by their own rulership for about 200 years, and who are trying to find a low-paying job so as to send some extra money home to where there are nothing but barely-paying jobs, if that.

I don't propose relaxing or ceasing enforcement of the law, but at the same time I think that sentiments like 'illegal alien scum' are counter-productive and really kind of unfair.

[Guardsman Bass]

The problem is that they really need to go after the source of demand, which is basically employer demand for cheap, low-cost labor for everything from agriculture to housekeeping. If you could couple that with some type of temporary worker reflecting a certain amount of demanded labor, then you could drive cross-border migration back into the city areas and ports-of-entry, and away from the open, sparsely inhabited border areas.

There's a bit of a dilemma, as I see it here. On one hand, we need those immigrants; they are helping to keep our society from suffering what the Europeans and Japanese are being hit by, which is a rapid rise in the average age of the population coupled with a declining work force size. On the other hand, they have greatly increased the size of the work force over the past 30 years (which means more competition for jobs, and usually slower income growth unless you have correspondingly greater job and economic growth to absorb the immigrants), and they tend to be heavily concentrated in the impoverished classes, which means that the burden falls heavily on state and local governments in terms of providing all the services (such as education and so forth) they need to avoid being a permanent underclass (the federal government actually makes a small profit, if I recall correctly, since illegals don't have access to most federal welfare help, and many of them, using stolen Social Security Numbers, pay Social Security taxes but don't collect any payments).

The worse thing, too, is that since you generally need more and more qualifications and training (either a college degree, or some type of specialized skill-related knowledge like plumbing and so forth) to get ahead than we did 100 years ago in the last massive immigration wave, this has become much harder.