| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Home Front: Culture Wars | ||
| Jury: Rancher didn't violate illegal immigrants' rights | ||
| 2009-02-18 | ||
| TUCSON, Ariz. — A federal jury found Tuesday that a southern Arizona rancher didn't violate the civil rights of a group of illegal immigrants who said he detained them at gunpoint in 2004. The eight-member civil jury also found Roger Barnett wasn't liable on claims of battery and false imprisonment. But the jury did find him liable on four claims of assault and four claims of infliction of emotional distress and ordered Barnett to pay $77,804 in damages — $60,000 of which were punitive. Barnett declined to comment afterward, but one of his attorneys, David Hardy, said the plaintiffs lost on the bulk of their claims and that Barnett has a good basis for appeal on the two counts on which he lost. "They won a fraction of the damages they were seeking," Hardy said. All six plaintiffs are citizens of Mexico, five of whom are living in the United States with visa applications pending, and the sixth resides in Mexico but was allowed into the U.S. for the trial, said Nina Perales, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. She declined to say where in the U.S. they're residing. Perales called the outcome "a resounding victory that sends a message that vigilante violence against immigrants will not be tolerated."
For years, Arizona has been the busiest point along the Mexican border for illegal immigrants entering the United States. For more than a decade, Barnett has been a controversial figure in southern Arizona. He's known for aggressively patrolling his ranch property and along highways and roads in the area, often with his wife and brothers, on the lookout for illegal immigrants. The plaintiffs alleged that Barnett threatened them with his dog and told them he would shoot anyone who tried to escape.
Barnett's wife and a brother were dismissed as defendants; in addition, 10 more people initially named as plaintiffs were dropped from the proceedings. Barnett has been known to wear a holstered 9-mm pistol on his hip and upon coming across groups of migrants, to flash a blue and gold badge resembling that of the highway patrol, with the wording "Barnett Ranch Patrol. Cochise County. State of Arizona." The Barnetts detain and turn over those whom they encounter to the U.S. Border Patrol. In 2006, Barnett estimated that he had detained more than 10,000 illegal immigrants in 10 years. His actions have resulted in formal complaints from the Mexican government against what it considers vigilante actions, and in several other lawsuits, including one stemming from an October 2004 incident. In that case, a jury awarded a family of Mexican-Americans on a hunting trip $100,000 in damages, later upheld by the Arizona Supreme Court. Barnett's 22,000-acre ranch, about five miles north of the Mexican border, includes private and federal lease holdings in addition to nearly 14,000 acres of state-leased land. | ||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #21 Barnett should request a change of venue. |
| Posted by: William Marcy Tweed 2009-02-18 19:07 |
| #20 Here is a better view of the link... |
| Posted by: Percy Ulereper5842 2009-02-18 18:59 |
| #19 What part of "NO TRESSPASSING" do people not understand? |
| Posted by: Percy Ulereper5842 2009-02-18 18:58 |
| #18 Be sure to bill the BP and ICE for doing their job. |
| Posted by: mojo 2009-02-18 12:37 |
| #17 Now counter sue. |
| Posted by: newc 2009-02-18 12:19 |
| #16 So if you want to protect what's yours, you can't let anyone go to the authorities. It seems like a simple equation - can you buy some serious digging equipment for less than $77K? Remember to dig at night. |
| Posted by: flash91 2009-02-18 11:48 |
| #15 It strikes me that there should be some kind of Malfeasance or Dereliction of Duty case here against the US Border Patrol; it is beyond reasonable that this guy's ranch should have so many border jumpers that he can catch 3 a day, for ten years, by himself. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-02-18 10:41 |
| #14 An inscription in a fence in South Africa: "Do you believe in life after death? Trespass and you will know" |
| Posted by: JFM 2009-02-18 10:17 |
| #13 Were I in this rancher's shoes, I would use an alternative technique to policing my land. I would invite some Apaches from the reservation to set up camp to investigate some "Apache religious artifacts" that might be there. Of course, while they were camped there, it would be up to them to provide security against anyone intending to "loot" their sacred artifacts. And, because Apaches see themselves as directly above Mexicans on the food chain, pretty soon word would get back to Mexico that my land is a place that Mexicans had better avoid. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2009-02-18 09:20 |
| #12 Mexicans (even illegals) outnumber and have more political clout than ranchers. |
| Posted by: ed 2009-02-18 09:07 |
| #11 I attended law school in Arizona and my college admitted a felon who bound two DEA agents, hauled them into the desert, and executed them. They justified his admission by claiming that he'd give his fellow students a "unique perspective" on the criminal justice system. This is an "Alice through the looking glass perspective." Criminal behavior is rewarded? Rancher Roger Barnett who defended himself and his property should be hired as an Adjunct Professor at this school by this reasoning--he has a "unique perspective" on the criminal justice system--defending your rights. Maybe he should have called an attorney for an "emergency lawsuit" when these coyotes traipsed across his property. WTF? We are becoming a nation of "attorney guided sheep." Citizen arrest is apparently a dead concept. Only police can make arrests? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2009-02-18 08:57 |
| #10 The US Government has betrayed this guy and his property rights for years by not securing the border. The betrayal continues by permitting him to be tried in a US court by foreigners. Unfortunately, I suspect we'll see more of this in the coming days. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-02-18 08:30 |
| #9 All six plaintiffs are citizens of Mexico, five of whom are living in the United States with visa applications pending, What the hell is this? While their visa applications are pending - in other words they are being allowed to live here ILLEGALLY? Shouldn't they be banned for life for violating the border? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-02-18 08:27 |
| #8 I've got some ideas on how to eliminate the liberal rot but it's going to require real commitment... Just sayin. |
| Posted by: Hellfish 2009-02-18 08:06 |
| #7 How about adopting the Cowachin Legal Code. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-02-18 07:21 |
| #6 We need to eliminate the liberal rot, AzCat. I don't know of a good way to do it other than to fire and deport all of 'em. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2009-02-18 07:13 |
| #5 It'd be interesting to know how many burritos the jury ordered for lunch during deliberations... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2009-02-18 05:17 |
| #4 Jim I don't think you realize how far gone the legal profession is. I attended law school in Arizona and my college admitted a felon who bound two DEA agents, hauled them into the desert, and executed them. They justified his admission by claiming that he'd give his fellow students a "unique perspective" on the criminal justice system. We don't need to eliminate the lawyers, we need to eliminate the profession. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2009-02-18 01:05 |
| #3 It would be nice of the plaintiffs were returned home as well. |
| Posted by: tipover 2009-02-18 00:58 |
| #2 Second thought, name and investigate the lawyers suing him, put them out of the law business if at all posible. |
| Posted by: Rednek Jim 2009-02-18 00:42 |
| #1 I get it, "How dare be successful gotta punish him so he stops." |
| Posted by: Rednek Jim 2009-02-18 00:40 |
