When illegal immigration shocks me no more.... this...

[GSF]

Originally posted by Cskin

Just a few months ago, this ranch was known as Camp Thunderbird, the headquarters of a paramilitary group that promised to use force to keep illegal immigrants from sneaking across the border with Mexico.

Originally posted by Cskin

In April, Mr. Nethercott told an Arizona television station, "We're going to come out here and close the border with machine guns." But by the end of the month, he had started his prison sentence.

These guys don't sound much different than the KKK in the old South to me. Use false patriotism as an excuse to kill or abuse people.

I don't necessarily agree w/ giving the illegals a free pass, but it seems pretty obvious that these ranchers were up to no good. i'm glad they lost their land.

[Sarge]

Had the illegals not broken the law to begin with, none of this would have happend

[GSF]

Originally posted by Sarge

Had the illegals not broken the law to begin with, none of this would have happend

True, but irrellevant.

[twa]

Originally posted by GSF

True, but irrellevant.

Tresspassing

Ilegal entry into this country

I suppose this is irellevant also?

Just what is rellevant ,besides the civil rights of the El Salvadoreans?

[Cskin]

True, but irrellevant.

I'll equate that to... Irrelevant = Pack illegal alien a lunch bag and water bottle and place beside gate commonly utilized for illegal entrance into this country occurs. :doh:

Oh.... and god forbid the illegal dies in the desert within US territory... because then it's the state's fault for killing the man. :doh:

What about chronology here? The two men broke the law entering this country. The men running the paramilitary camp stopped them, possibly at gunpoint, then let them go (I'd say they probably told them to go back the way they came).

Why can't the illegals be deported immediately and the "convicted felon" be sent back to prison for gun charges and false imprisonment?

Simply put... an activist judge and attorney decided that wasn't enough... and chose instead to grant them temporary stay here in this country and REWARDED them property as payment for a judgement that should never have been processed. Why do illegal aliens have the right to break the law FIRST, then allowed to enter our justice system for rewards?

Effed up... It's just the way this country is going via Liberalism... the enemy within. Judges not following the law, and instead deciding matters beyond their jurisdiction. He should have immediately deported the illegals and delt with the convicted felon within the parameters set forth by state law. Anymore is activism and the root of many of our current social problems.

[Larry]

Originally posted by Cskin (my emphasis)

I'll equate that to... Irrelevant = Pack illegal alien a lunch bag and water bottle and place beside gate commonly utilized for illegal entrance into this country occurs. :doh:

Oh.... and god forbid the illegal dies in the desert within US territory... because then it's the state's fault for killing the man. :doh:

What about chronology here? The two men broke the law entering this country. The men running the paramilitary camp stopped them, possibly at gunpoint, then let them go (I'd say they probably told them to go back the way they came).

Why can't the illegals be deported immediately and the "convicted felon" be sent back to prison for gun charges and false imprisonment?

Simply put... an activist judge and attorney decided that wasn't enough... and chose instead to grant them temporary stay here in this country and REWARDED them property as payment for a judgement that should never have been processed. Why do illegal aliens have the right to break the law FIRST, then allowed to enter our justice system for rewards?

Effed up... It's just the way this country is going via Liberalism... the enemy within. Judges not following the law, and instead deciding matters beyond their jurisdiction. He should have immediately deported the illegals and delt with the convicted felon within the parameters set forth by state law. Anymore is activism and the root of many of our current social problems.

I'll equate that to Activist Judge = Judge who followed some laws I don't like.

Just to point out,

Mr. Mancía, who lives in Los Angeles, and Ms. Leiva, who lives in the Dallas area, have applied for visas that are available to immigrants who are the victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with the authorities, Ms. Bruner said. She said that until a decision was made on their applications, they could stay and work in the United States on a year-to-year basis.

, those illegals are staying here because someone passed a law that rewards illegals who turn informer against American Citizens who object to illegals.

(No doubt, the article doesn't mention how such a program got created, because It's Clinton's Fault, and The Liberal Media is covering for him.)

[Cskin]

I'll equate that to Activist Judge = Judge who followed some laws I don't like.

Huh? Are you trying to tell me that the law states that when an illegal is unlawfully detained in this country, and ALLEGEDLY abused, that A LAW states that the illegal shall have the opportunity to recover punitive damages such as being rewarded US land? I doubt that.

I believe the law probably states that the two illegals be turned over to the federal govt. for deportation proceedings and subsequently sent back to Mexico. Sure, there may be a law compensating illegals "who are victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with authorities".... and the temporary visas make sense while they're dealing with the issue within the justice system.... but I DOUBT the law allows for illegals to obtain ownership of US territory and a free pass to the front of the line for citizenship proceedings.

Yep... come to America, get in a barfight, nark on the perpetrators.... then smile all the way to the bank with your new land deed and a "You're now an American" card. :doh:

those illegals are staying here because someone passed a law that rewards illegals who turn informer against American Citizens who object to illegals.

Shouldn't all American citizens object to illegals?

[Thiebear]

Like i said earlier...

there are laws that state that illegals that inform on an "incident"/"crime" will not receive punishment... ie.. don't discount them because thier illegal...

I just didnt know you could use that on a crime committed by THEM!... this is an example of taking the law to the extreme..

It will be repealed by the next court i hope.

[Larry]

Originally posted by Cskin

Huh? Are you trying to tell me that the law states that when an illegal is unlawfully detained in this country, and ALLEGEDLY abused, that A LAW states that the illegal shall have the opportunity to recover punitive damages such as being rewarded US land? I doubt that.

No, what the law states is that anyone who is the victim of a crime has the right to sue for damages.

(I even support that right. I simply believe that they should have been laughed out of court for even attempting to claim that criminals are entitled to a presumption of safety while committing crimes. I support their right to sue, just not to win.)

I believe the law probably states that the two illegals be turned over to the federal govt. for deportation proceedings and subsequently sent back to Mexico. Sure, there may be a law compensating illegals "who are victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with authorities".... and the temporary visas make sense while they're dealing with the issue within the justice system.... but I DOUBT the law allows for illegals to obtain ownership of US territory and a free pass to the front of the line for citizenship proceedings.

Yep... come to America, get in a barfight, nark on the perpetrators.... then smile all the way to the bank with your new land deed and a "You're now an American" card. :doh:

Shouldn't all American citizens object to illegals?

And as I've stated, I have a problem with what's happened here.

But it wasn't the "activist judge"'s fault. It was the morons who created another special-interest law that was specifically designed to reward illegals. (And the people who hire them.)

[twa]

Larry ,maybe you can help me understand how a judge can grant this judgement(which you say should have been laughed out of court) and not be a activist judge?

I tried for more info on the trial ,but have not found anything... only that he was never convicted of a crime against them.

[Larry]

Oh, if you're saying that the vigilante wasn't convicted of a crime against the illegal, I'd certainly hope that he wasn't charged.

Based on my vast experience as a DA, (Mom likes to watch Law and Order), given a choice between prosecuting the guy for assault (and having an illegal testify against a citicen, in front of an all-citizen jury, and then let the jury vote for which one they like least), or charging the guy with "posession of a firearm by a felon", in which case the prosecution's witness will be a police officer who will swear that "Yep, that weapon was his.", guess which case I think will be easier to prosecute?

Which was how this case wound up as a civil case. (I assume it was a civil case, since I don't think it's possible for the victim to win the farm in a criminal one, although some states are starting to do things like that in criminal cases.)

In any case, the judge can't change a verdict, or an award of damages, (as far as I know, both are determined by the jury) unless there's a law saying that the jury can't make that award.

I do agree with you, though. More info would be a Really Good Thing.

[twa]

Oh he WAS charged and it resulted in a hung jury ...three times far as I have read.

There seems to be a decided lack of information on how the judgement award was reached and by who.:2cents:

[Thiebear]

Heres something on the case:

http://www.vdare.com/mann/rescue_ranch.htm

(reads from the Rancher side and describes what they do..)

The Ranch Rescue group, and an independent eyewitness—French journalist Eric Boye who accompanied the two men—insist that the charges are false.

Some of the people are afraid of the police/etc. as you would expect.

But there are some good articles from the Sheriff and such in there..

http://ccir.net/NEWS/RR_Update030401.html

Nethercott and Conner were denied medical treatment for the first two days after their arrest. Conner requires blood pressure medication and Nethercott requires insulin, yet neither were provided for their first 48 hours of incarceration. Casey Nethercott is now being kept in Solitary Confinement. He has no TV, no radio, no newspapers, no magazines, no books, not even a Bible. He has been denied all Visitors, including religious counselors. He is being psychologically tortured by this isolation. This is an outrage! This is the behavior of rogue states like Iraq and North Korea, not the United States of America.

and thats where this quote comes into effect:

In what may be the first documented case of a non-terrorist, American citizen being held without charges under terms of the so-called "Patriot Act", Arizona rancher Casey Nethercott was arrested March 1, 2004 by exclusive and arbitrary order of Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano.

Using a "Governor’s Warrant" to hold Nethercott without charges in the Pima County Jail located in Tucson, Arizona, Nethercott was released to the State of Texas on March 22, 2004. According to the records clerk of the Pima County Jail, no one knows where in Texas Nethercott was taken. In fact, she informed me that Nethercott would have to call someone to let him or her know where he is being held. That is, of course, only if Nethercott is allowed to make a telephone call.

Some of these people are a little crazy after having a couple dozen people a week ransack their house/water/food after a week of starving...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/28/1069825986841.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true

Grabbed the part that was about the story:

Agent Thaddeus Cleveland of the US Border Patrol says the US Government is fortifying the border, hiring more agents and trying to break smuggling cells. Jack Foote's plan is to confront the smugglers head-on. "After our last operation in the desert, the wife of the ranch owner took my face in her hands and kissed me on the lips and said, 'Thank you for the first decent night's sleep I've had in two years'."

But during an operation in South Texas this year, police charged a Ranch Rescue member with pistol-whipping an immigrant and setting a dog on him. The ranger who made the arrest, Doyle Holdrige, told reporters the man had a "knot on the back of his head about half the size of your fist" and "pistol-whipping illegal aliens is not something that's going to be tolerated in this country".

In an American twist, the immigrant, Edwin Mancia, is suing for damages. This outrages Foote, who says the pistol-whipping never occurred. French photojournalist Eric Boye backs his story. Foote believes the case is being driven by human rights groups that are trying to bankrupt Ranch Rescue, and he is partly right.

Some would say the rise of vigilante groups is typical of the gun-toting madness of the US, but maybe its vibrant democracy is working just as it should: people in one state complained about immigrants; the Government cracked down; the problem shifted interstate, where the few ranchers had trouble being heard; Ranch Rescue's round-ups at the barrel of a gun got attention as no petition ever could, forcing the Government to triple border agents to 10,000 in six years, boost patrols and install iron fences, night-vision cameras and spotlights. And the harassed immigrants are getting redress through US courts.

But many remain uneasy, among them, Agent Cleveland: "You rarely have to draw a gun. Most of the people we find are pretty desperate. Some haven't eaten for 14 days, and they are so grateful to see somebody who can save their lives. We give them water. I've lost count of the number of times I've given them my lunch. We do get trouble. Sometimes they throw rocks. But mostly, what we find is good people - men, women, children and the elderly - who are just trying to make a better life for themselves. And I know that if the tables were turned, and I'd been born on that side, one of them would be me."

WHy would the Gov of Arizona use a terrorist law and then send him to Texas?

Edit: Found the results so far:

Foote and Conner were not charged in the case, but Jim Hogg County prosecutors initially charged Nethercott with assault, unlawful detention and possession of an illegal weapon.

The assault and unlawful detention charges were dropped after a trial resulted in a hung jury, according to Nethercott's attorney Joseph Jacobson.

The weapons charge stuck, though, and Nethercott began serving a five-year sentence April 18 in a Texas prison.

Foote also is in prison, but in Arizona, on an unrelated weapons conviction.

Leiva Medina and Mancia Gonzales, with the aid of Laredo attorneys, the Mexican American Defense Fund and the Southern Poverty Law Center, filed a civil lawsuit over the alleged confrontation on June 26, 2003.

Ranch Rescue Texas and members Nethercott, Jack Foote and Henry Mark Conner were named as defendants in the suit. The Suttons also were named in the lawsuit.

In December, the Suttons chose to settle for $100,000 because it would have been more expensive to fight the suit, Ed Watt said.

The plaintiffs' attorneys dropped the suit against Conner, who they say was marginally involved, and the state organization, which dissolved after Nethercott and Foote were arrested and another member, not named in the lawsuit, was shot in a confrontation with federal agents.

Both Foote and Nethercott failed to answer the civil lawsuit. On April 19, the 229th district court awarded the plaintiffs $500,000 against Foote and $850,000 against Nethercott.

"[Nethercott] didn't have the money to make it worthwhile to defend the case," Jacobson said.

Attorneys for neither the plaintiffs nor the defense expect Leiva Medina and Mancia Gonzales to get very much money beyond the settlement with the Suttons, though.

Plaintiffs' attorneys are seeking to seize a piece of Arizona land owned by Nethercott. The land may fetch another $100,000 for the plaintiffs, de Anda said, but the defendants don't have much wealth.

De Anda and the other plaintiffs' attorneys helped Mancia Gonzales and Leiva Medina obtain work visas. Mancia Gonzales now works for a janitorial service in Los Angeles, and Leiva Medina works at a restaurant in Dallas.

The national Ranch Rescue organization, which was not a defendant in the lawsuit, continues to operate. They have provided private security to a wildlife preserve in Colorado and have another action planned in Arizona in spring and summer, national spokesman Wright said.

Neither Foote nor Nethercott is associated with Ranch Rescue any longer, he said.

[twa]

Yeah,I found quite a bit on the blogs and discussion boards too,but very little on mainstream news.

More questions than answers imo.

[BlueTalon]

Some folks may be getting off their positions, here.

I don't think anybody is saying the vigilante should get off scot free.

I don't think anybody is claiming that it's impossible to think of a situation in which having his property siezed would be justice.

The disagreement is: Should the illegal immigrants and trespassers recieve a free ticket for their crime, and a reward.

I don't often agree with you, but I think you pegged it with this post.

(Although, I'll qualify that statement about the "vigilante." I'm wondering whether the guy was in fact a vigilante or a political sacrificial lamb, picked because he was so inherently offensive to the PC crowd, based on other info that was posted.)