• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

What's this country coming to?

kmurphy

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2005
Messages
1,484
Reaction score
51
Points
0
Age
76
Location
Auburn, ME
This was in the Washington Post today and it really pissed me off. Does MALDEF get government money? This should have been thrown out by the judge in the first place.

16 illegals sue Arizona rancher
Claim violation of rights as they crossed his land

Monday, February 9, 2009


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.

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."
 
Sued....the Man should be given a metal for protecting his country from illegals crossing our border.
 
Now illegal immigrants have more rights than the property owner and legal citizens. WTF!!!
 
It's still ridiculous that they CAN sue him and they aren't even legal citizens of the US! I put that right up there with the criminal that breaks into someone's home, gets shot by the homeowner & turns around and sues the homeowner for shooting him...THANK GOD WE HAVE THE CASTLE DOCTRINE NOW!
But I digress--I also hope to read that this frivolous lawsuit is thrown out or the rancher is found NOT GUILTY.
 
Hmm, the "illegal aliens" are called "illegal", why? What civil "rights" do they have while engaging in an illegal activity in a foreign country (to them)? And even if they may have some privilege while being a visitor in this country, how would this trump the rights of a land owner and citizen of this country in his pursuit of enforcing the apprehension of violators of trespassing laws on his private land?

This should be interesting to see the outcome. But based on the current atmosphere in Washington D.C., I fear that the outcome will likely defy logic and common sense.

Weren't two Border Patrol agents imprisoned recently for doing their job?
 
Weren't two Border Patrol agents imprisoned recently for doing their job?

Their sentences were quietly commuted by outgoing President Bush. It's good to see that several criminals were given full pardons while 2 men who were defending our border against an historically brazen and violent drug smuggler are stuck with a conviction on their records for life:angry:. Did I mention the smuggler was granted immunity for his testimony?

Needless to say, that wasn't why I voted for him!:shootfoot
 
Here's another article that gives more interesting facts...I paid particular note to the fact that atl east one of these people filing suit has been previously removed from this country due to drug conviction, which makes his return to this country a FELONY. MALDEF is also referring to these illegals as "citizens" of Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Georgia...and they want a million bucks each...what the hell?

TUCSON – A jury trial is underway in U.S. District Court in Tucson over a complaint filed in 2005 by 16 illegal aliens against Douglas ranchers Roger Barnett, his wife Barbara and his brother Donald.

The case stems from a March 7, 2004 incident in which Barnett, 64, held a group of illegal aliens trespassing on his ranch at gunpoint until the U.S. Border Patrol could pick them up.
For the past ten years, Barnett has been attempting to protect his property from damage caused by trespassing aliens as they illegally enter the United States.

Barnett, who has turned over 12,000 illegal aliens to the Border Patrol since 1998, says illegal aliens have destroyed his property, cut his water lines, killed his calves, left piles of trash and drugs behind and broken into his home.

The complaint, which also names Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever as a defendant, was filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) on behalf of the illegal aliens and tells quite a different story.

MALDEF claims the Barnetts “have engaged in a private campaign and have conspired with each other and others to ‘hunt’ and detain against their will, and at gunpoint, Latino migrants or presumed migrants such as plaintiffs.”

The complaint asserts there have been numerous incidents involving anti-immigrant vigilantism in Cochise County over the past six years, including the incident on March 7, 2004, and states, “Plaintiffs were peaceably resting in a wash in or around Douglas, Ariz., when they were accosted by Roger Barnett, with the assistance of Barbara Barnett.”

It goes on to say Barnett pointed a gun at the plaintiffs, directed racial epithets at them, assaulted them, threatened attack by a vicious dog and detained them against their will and without legal justification.

MALDEF states Barnett’s actions were a violation of Arizona tort law, federal civil rights law and “were committed in furtherance of defendants’ unlawful conspiracy.”

The complaint continues by accusing Dever, “motivated by discriminatory animus,” of joining in the conspiracy by encouraging and permitting the Barnetts and other defendants to attack, harass, threaten and unlawfully detain Latino migrants.

The 16 plaintiffs are all Mexican nationals and primarily residents of Michoacan, although the complaint states certain individuals were “citizens” of Pennsylvania, Illinois or Georgia.

On Jan. 6, 2009 MALDEF filed a motion to preclude questioning, testimony or evidence regarding plaintiff Gerardo Gonzalez’s prior drug conviction and record of his removal from the United States, citing the evidence “is irrelevant to the factual and legal issues at hand and extremely prejudicial against the plaintiffs, including Gonzalez.”

Gonzalez was convicted in September 1993 for the possession for sale of a controlled substance and ordered removed to Mexico.

Although Gonzalez’s illegal reentry into the country after removal is a felony, MALDEF argues Barnett had no reasonable grounds to believe Gonzalez had been previously convicted of possession for sale of a controlled substance or that he had been previously removed to Mexico at the time he was detained by Barnett.

“Even if evidence of Gonzalez’s conviction and removal records is deemed marginally relevant,” wrote MALDEF, “it must still be excluded because it would result in unfair prejudice against all plaintiffs, including Gonzalez.”

While MALDEF acknowledged Gonzalez was previously ordered removed to Mexico and was committing a felony by reentering at the time of the incident, he was also one of the aliens which MALDEF referred to as a “citizen of Pennsylvania.”

MALDEF also filed a motion to exclude numerous photographs and a video depicting vandalism or transport of illegal drugs through the Barnetts’ ranch from evidence at trial, citing it did not involve any of the plaintiffs in this case.

While the complaint accuses the defendants of acting maliciously, oppressively and in reckless disregard of the plaintiffs’ rights, MALDEF attempted to ensure its clients were not portrayed in a bad light for “peaceably resting in a wash” while trespassing on the Barnetts’ property as they illegally entered the United States.

On Jan. 8, 2009, U.S. District Court Judge John M. Roll denied both motions.

In their prayer for relief, the plaintiffs ask that each be awarded actual damages against the defendants in the amount of $1 million and $1 million each in punitive or exemplary damages plus attorney’s fees and costs.

Arizona statute, however, now prohibits illegal aliens from filing for punitive damages in civil suits.

Last March, Roll denied the Barnetts’ motion to dismiss and stated there was sufficient evidence of a conspiracy, denying the plaintiffs their right to interstate travel and the Barnetts’ actions were motivated by race, to allow the matter to be presented to a jury.
The trial is expected to continue through Friday

Photo by Linda Bentley: Over the past six years Roger Barnett says he has turned over 12,000 illegal aliens, found trespassing on his 22,000-acre ranch in Douglas, to the Border Patrol. A lawsuit filed against Barnett by 16 illegal aliens is currently before a jury, seeking $1 million each in damages for civil rights violations.

Link: http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2009/090211/frntpgDouglas.html
 
Unbelievable!!! He has to pay them.

Attention U.S. citizen, do not defend yourself

Rancher pays damages to illegal immigrants captured on his land. That's wrong.

By: Travis Holland

Imagine you live in a small border town in southern Arizona. Every day on the news, you hear reports of murders and drug violence in the area, and the body count is alarmingly high.

Now imagine that one day, you come across a group of Mexican nationals who are squatting on your property.

This happened to Roger Barnett, an Arizona rancher. He detained the group at gunpoint for his own safety and called the U.S. Border Patrol.

As a gesture of gratitude, the jury ordered him to pay the illegal aliens $77,800 in damages.

This has to be one of the most idiotic cases ever tried in an American court. It makes a complete mockery of the judicial system, punishing a man who made a citizen's arrest and contacted the proper authorities.

And Barnett was, indeed, punished.

Of the $77,800 he was forced to pay, $60,000 of it was for punitive damages. Punitive damages are charged to punish a defendant for wrongdoing in a civil court case.

This case poses many problems and sets a very dangerous precedent.

First of all, these people were illegal aliens who don't even have a right to enter this country. How could they possibly have the right to damages in an American court? I'm not arguing the decision was flawed; unfortunately, that's how the system works. I'm arguing the system needs to change.

Also, the fact that Barnett had a shotgun played an important role in the accusation that he violated the illegal immigrants' rights. This violates so many legal precedents and personal rights it's insane. The Washington Post said Barnett's property "has become a major corridor for armed drug and immigrant smugglers." That should be enough reason for Barnett to fear for his safety, absolving him of any liability for having a firearm.

Additionally, Barnett has a legal right to make a citizen's arrest in Arizona. A judge affirmed that right in court, yet the jury awarded the criminals thousands.

This should be a valuable lesson to Americans for two reasons. It shows that the federal government has no intention of securing the border with Mexico, and is in no way concerned about Americans' rights there. If the government really wanted to make the border safe, it would protect people like Barnett in court. He didn't participate in any vigilante justice; he told the criminals to stay put while he contacted the authorities.

Secondly, this ought to ruin the romantic view many have of the justice system in this country. It's no secret that Border Patrol personnel, and law enforcement in general, are stretched thin in the U.S. But until now, most Americans have been confident in the fact that they can at least defend themselves or uphold the law until the authorities can get there. Unfortunately, those days appear to be numbered.

The blatant disregard for American citizens' rights in this case is nauseating. At a time when the federal government needs its people to be on the lookout for crime more than ever, it has taken away that right.

As icing on the cake, five of the plaintiffs in this case are living in this country illegally. Instead of being deported, they were awarded thousands of dollars from an American rancher trying to uphold the law. This travesty of a court case is disgusting, and the American people ought to take a serious look at the loyalties of their elected officials.
 
I guess what it all boils down to is that the legal system is not interested in doing anything other than enforcing the laws against the STATE (meaning all levels of government), and not at all interested in laws concerning personal issues and property.

Of course, loss of respect towards the legal system naturally leads to loss of respect towards the laws of this country. Which might very well explain why there is so much criminal activity going on around us. From the government on down.....
 
And even if they may have some privilege while being a visitor in this country...
I don't think they should have any priveledges. They were entering the country illegally, which shouldn't even entitle them to visitors laws and priveledges!

...Latino migrants or presumed migrants such as plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs were peaceably resting in a wash in or around Douglas, Ariz.,
Legal or illegal, peacebly or riotous, STILL TRESSPASSING

The 16 plaintiffs are all Mexican nationals and primarily residents of Michoacan, although the complaint states certain individuals were “citizens” of Pennsylvania, Illinois or Georgia.
Ok I have to ask.... if some of them were "citizens", why were they entering the country through a well-known illegal immigrant route? Why, if they were legal, would they not avoid the risk and just go through a border checkpoint?

...MALDEF attempted to ensure its clients were not portrayed in a bad light for “peaceably resting in a wash” while trespassing on the Barnetts’ property as they illegally entered the United States.
Too late for that...

...denying the plaintiffs their right to interstate travel
...
Oh, so it's illegal to deny someone a right they don't have to illegal interstate travel?.....

Of course, loss of respect towards the legal system naturally leads to loss of respect towards the laws of this country. Which might very well explain why there is so much criminal activity going on around us. From the government on down.....
:iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree:

Wow.... We should start an online petition or something... eh... doesn't matter what we do, the way things are goin in D.C., anything we do might land us in federal prison for being rebels of the state or some bull like that.
 
I was researching something else and came across this editorial pertaining to this story.
A (partial) victory for common sense
A federal jury in Tucson, Ariz., ruled Tuesday that Arizona rancher Roger Barnett did not violate the civil rights of 16 illegal aliens from Mexico he stopped while they were trespassing on his property in March 2004. The bad news: That federal jury inexplicably awarded them $78,000 in actual and punitive damages on claims of assault and the infliction of "emotional distress." Although the award is a tiny fraction (less than one-quarter of one percent) of the $32 million sought by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), it is disgraceful that the jury awarded anything to the plaintiffs. Barnett's only "offense" was holding the 16 intruders at gunpoint when he encountered them on his land in a location that has become a major corridor for armed drug and immigrant smugglers. He telephoned the Border Patrol and held the trespassers at gunpoint while waiting for law enforcement to arrive. Barnett does not speak Spanish, and the illegals were upset by the fact that he yelled at them and his dog barked at them. Really.

Fortunately, there is good reason to doubt that they will be able to collect any money from him. The central part of the suit was the allegation by MALDEF and the illegals that Barnett violated the rights guaranteed to the illegal-alien trespassers under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 - legislation enacted after the Civil War to protect newly freed slaves from intimidation by the Ku Klux Klan. The implicit argument that a man protecting his property is somehow analogous to the thuggery of the KKK is quite simply obscene. The eight-person federal jury hearing the case saw the absurdity of that argument and unanimously voted to clear Barnett on that charge. MALDEF's failure to prove that Barnett violated the illegals' civil rights gives him the opportunity to claim attorneys' fees - effectively negating the $78,000 that he is liable for.

Roger Barnett is a good man who has been put through hell because of the repeated failures of the federal government and the courts. Washington's failure to secure the Mexican border permitted trespassers to enter the United States and violate Barnett's home and his property. He has repeatedly seen trespassers at his ranch destroy fences and gates, kill calves, tear up water pumps, steal trucks, and break into his home. Barnett said he has rounded up as many as 86 illegal aliens in one night, turning those he captures over to the Border Patrol. For his efforts, he's seen the federal courts, paid for with his tax money, used in an attempt to harass and bankrupt him. This is ludicrous. America needs more people like Roger Barnett and fewer groups like MALDEF harassing them with frivolous lawsuits.

Hopefully, he can negate the 78k.
 
More of a concern, I think is how long before they retaliate by burning his house down. These illegal aliens are getting pretty bold and brazen because of lame brained court cases lately. I wonder what "rights" Americans would have in the Mexican legal system?
 
Back
Top