Posted on 02/04/2011 6:39:17 PM PST by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court has upheld $78,000 in damages to illegal immigrants who were held at gunpoint by a rancher in the southern Arizona desert, a case that prompted death threats against a federal judge who was fatally shot last month in Tucson.
U.S. District Judge John Roll was one of six people slain Jan. 8 when a gunman opened fire outside a supermarket at a crowd of constituents meeting with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., who was critically wounded. Jared Lee Loughner, 22, is being held in the slayings.
Roll, 63, was killed nearly three years after ruling in the case of the rancher, Roger Barnett, who found the migrants in a dry creekbed near his 22,000-acre property in March 2004. They said he had threatened to shoot them or turn his dog on them, called them racial names and kicked one of the women.
Barnett denied assaulting or threatening them but acknowledged holding them while summoning the Border Patrol.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
just shoot traspassers
They say you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead.
But it was merely a federal judge.
Spit.
That is not the way things used to work when the country was founded. Besides, doesn't NO TRESPASSING mean something?
What about those folks in AZ who tackled and disarmed the leftist shooter?
I want a divorce. You take the illegals, the debt and all your taxes. I'll take my freedom, my liberty and a government the believes in less is more.
Signed,
I hate you.
This might have been the salient point. You can't hold (or shoot) somebody for trespassing if they aren't actually on your property.
fwiw
this was from a european newspaper...
scary if true
http://www.eutimes.net/2011/01/top-us-federal-judge-assassinated-after-threat-to-obama-agenda/
Maybe if it read:
NO PASAR POR FAVOR
But even then you couldn't do anything if they declined your polite request.
What about those folks in AZ who tackled and disarmed the leftist shooter?
They will be sued for any damages they did to him, including psychological ones.
Yes. I think it’s legitimate to hold illegal trespassers until the law arrives to deal with them. But it’s possible that this rancher went beyond the limits of defending his property.
From everything I’ve heard, this was a very decent judge, unlikely to have made an activist liberal decision.
I’d want to read the documents before condemning him. If, as this report says, it was “near” his property, then that does indeed raise problems.
‘Migrants’? Try ‘illegal aliens’, then I’ll take this news item seriously. Imagine if this were reversed - American farmers illegally crossing into Mexico, trespassing on a Mexican farmer’s land, and then suing that Mexican for how they weren’t treated nicely enough. Sound ridiculous? That’s because this ruling was ridiculous.
The issue to me is “illegal aliens”. What right do those leaches have to access to our courts. If they hadn’t broken numerous laws in the first place they wouldn’t have been held at gunpoint. That is the problem I have with this judge’s ruling, and why I don’t especially mourn his death.
That link is Popup City. Yuck. Alt-F4 for the save.
According to the article they were only “near” his property, so they weren’t trespassing.
It’s the SVR, the external security branch of what used to be the KGB.
I don’t think I’d put much faith in what they might have to say, At least I’d need some really solid independent confirmation.
It’s the SVR, the external security branch of what used to be the KGB.
I don’t think I’d put much faith in what they might have to say, At least I’d need some really solid independent confirmation.
Were they in Mexico or in our country,Why do the courts give this trash the same rights as Americans?
I like that. Can we have sort of a class action divorce here?!
“A federal appeals court has upheld $78,000 in damages to illegal immigrants who were held at gunpoint by a rancher in the southern Arizona desert.
So the judge who was shot thought it’s okey-dokey to fine a rancher protecting his property a whopping $78,000. I’d guess it’s not this judge’s best decision and it’s unfortunate that he can’t try to rectify his stupidity. Death does that.
Backhoe, end of problem.
“the case “sends a very important message that people cannot take the law into their hands.””
That is not the way things used to work when the country was founded. Besides, doesn’t NO TRESPASSING mean something?
What about those folks in AZ who tackled and disarmed the leftist shooter?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.