Posted on 08/19/2005 2:19:28 PM PDT by radar101
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.
Now, the 70-acre property about two miles from the border is being given to two immigrants whom the group caught trying to enter the United States illegally.
The land transfer is being made to satisfy judgments in a lawsuit in which the immigrants had said that Casey Nethercott, the owner of the ranch and a former leader of the vigilante group Ranch Rescue, had harmed them.
"Certainly it's poetic justice that these undocumented workers own this land," said Morris S. Dees Jr., co-founder and chief trial counsel of the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., which represented the immigrants in their lawsuit.
Mr. Dees said the loss of the ranch would "send a pretty important message to those who come to the border to use violence."
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.
Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were caught on a ranch in Hebbronville, Tex., in March 2003 by Mr. Nethercott and other members of Ranch Rescue. The two immigrants later accused Mr. Nethercott of threatening them and of hitting Mr. Mancía with a pistol, charges that Mr. Nethercott denied. The immigrants also said the group gave them cookies, water and a blanket and let them go after an hour or so. The immigrants said the ordeal, in which they feared that they would be killed by the men they thought were soldiers, had left them with post-traumatic stress.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
If it were my home they would get ashes. If it is my home and I can't live in it, no one else will either.
Unbelievable. I'm fed-up with this illegal alien invasion. I'm looking forward to the 2008 election. The democrats and republicans are in for a big suprise.
OK, bear with me, because I'm not a lawyer (and maybe not even very bright!) but, he didn't defend himself. What exactly does that mean? Does it mean he showed up to the court and said nothing? Or threw himself on the mercy of the court (can you really do that?) or just didn't show? I'm a little confused. And I'm curious why he didn't defend himself.
susie
This is just mind-boggling.
Thanks to the SPLC.
Somebody should tell President Bush about this case and remind him he has a ranch in Texas, maybe then he will don't something about the borders.
One man says to a second man: "Do you believe in the First Amendment freedom of speech?"
The second man says: "Of course I do."
The first man then asks: "Do you believe in the Second Amendment freedom to bear arms?"
The second man replies: "No, I don't."
The first man insists: "Then shut up!"
The moral of the story is: you can have your rights, but you have to protect and defend them, too.
I can remember when they were called 'wet backs'.
I believe the article stated it was a default judgment; basically meaning that the defendant failed to answer a sumons to appear in court or otherwise failed to defend himself. Don't know the procedure in Texas, but the judge then probably conducted some form of "proof hearing" to at least establish the validity of the claim then rendered judgement in favor of the illegal aliens.
"Can anyone explain to me why Nethercutt didn't respond to the lawsuit?"
Casey Nethercott acted like a federal informant from day one. He's a convicted felon who showed up at Ranch Rescue and started being a loose cannon, ending up getting Ranch Rescue in trouble.
Maybe he thought the whole thing was as absurd as the rest of us. Who would have thought you could lose your house to criminals based on the fact that you impeded their criminal activity?
If I hit a bank robber with a bat while he is leaving the bank, can he take my house?
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,
1. The act of invading; the act of encroaching upon the rights or possessions of another; encroachment; trespass.
Except this: Rather than post among ourselves this news, make a vow, and fulfill that vow in the next few days, to let everyone you know---all your friends, family, relatives, co-workers, everyone on your E-mail/Christmas/Chanukah card list...know every detail of what's in this story. This story needs to be known, and it needs to be debated, far and wide, long and hard---throughout the whole nation.
There have been cases where the unjustified use of force against a criminal, while in the commission of a crime, has resulted in both criminal and civil (money) liability against the person employing such force.
Unjustified force has got to be an incredibly difficult thing to judge. If a criminal is caught in the act, I'm not against some pretty substantial force.
and shall protect each of them against Invasion;"
And failing that, see amendment the 2nd.
I just saw the answer on Foxnews. Apparently the guy was in jail, that's why he didn't appear or respond. Thanks for answering my question tho.
:)
susie
"If I hit a bank robber with a bat while he is leaving the bank, can he take my house?"
There are laws regarding (a) citizen's arrest and (b) application of deadly force. Nethercott managed to raise the question of whether he had violated those laws.
Nethercott's behavior was typical of a federal "confidential informant" (i.e., tame criminal who is looking to reduce his sentence by helping entrap others).
First, he joined a group that engaged in armed patrols--despite being a convicted felon who was (and is) not allowed to carry a weapon.
Second, he proceeded to act like a total nutcase.
He got Ranch Rescue into a ton of legal trouble--and the feds said, "mission accomplished."
"From my cold, dead hands." would have been my response.
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.