Posted on 03/21/2003 9:14:39 AM PST by Technoman
HEBBRONVILLE, Texas – A pair of Ranch Rescue volunteers arrested here Wednesday are facing two felony charges each, Texas Department of Public Safety officials say.
As WorldNetDaily reported yesterday, Casey Nethercutt of California and Hank Conner of Louisiana were arrested by Texas Ranger Sgt. Doyle Holdridge and charged with two counts of aggravated assault with a weapon and two counts of unlawful restraint for allegedly pistol-whipping and detaining a Salvadoran man and his wife early Wednesday morning.
Nethercutt and Conner were part of a four-man detachment from Ranch Rescue – a property-rights activist group – which was led by Texas chapter head and national spokesman Jack Foote. The four-man contingent, at the request of rancher Joe Sutton, was here to prevent criminal trespassers from crossing Sutton's property.
Law enforcement and other sources say the men are being held in a detention facility in nearby Falfurrias. Officials said yesterday that bond for each man had been set at $200,000. The men were expected to be arraigned in Hebbronville this morning.
Holdridge told WorldNetDaily that the Salvadoran couple – a man and woman described as being in their mid-20s, but whose names have not yet been released – bore some visible physical signs of injury. After Nethercutt and Conner were apprehended, the Salvadoran couple picked the men out of a photo array, said the arresting officer.
Foote said the charges are bogus. He said he and his team "never touched" the couple, "except to pat them down and search them for weapons" after discovering them lying down in brush early Wednesday morning around 1 a.m. He says he has pictures to prove it, although they weren't available at publication time.
After Nethercutt and Conner searched the two Salvadorans, said Foote, they "were taken by van" to the front of Sutton's property, which is guarded by a heavy, steel, sliding gate that remains locked along Hwy. 16.
In the interim, said Foote, the U.S. Border Patrol – which mans an inspection station about seven miles north of Sutton's ranch – was notified to come pick up the Salvadorans. But after waiting around 45 minutes, Sutton grew impatient and ordered his detachment to simply open the front gate and release the Salvadoran couple, said Foote.
The Border Patrol arrived about 10 minutes later, said Foote. Sources told WND the Salvadoran couple eventually turned themselves in to Border Patrol officers, but agency officials would not confirm that.
Border Patrol spokesmen in Hebbronville and Laredo had no comment, except to say the case was being handled by Texas authorities.
It was unclear how the Salvadorans' testimony was obtained; neither Holdridge nor Jim Hogg County Sheriff's Department officials would say. Holdridge did say Wednesday, however, that the Salvadoran couple did not swear out a complaint.
"I filed charges on behalf of the state of Texas," he told WND.
In addition to legal problems, Nethercutt, who is in his mid-30s, and Conner, who was described as being nearly 60, have experienced health problems since being incarcerated. Officials say Nethercutt is suffering complications from pancreatitis, while Conner is suffering from chronic high blood pressure.
Authorities allowed volunteers to bring Conner medicine early yesterday, but refused to allow them to visit Nethercutt. Officials were also unclear as to whether Nethercutt had been taken for treatment to an area hospital or whether he was being treated on-site at a detention center health facility.
Foote says he is confident the men will be exonerated, but believes they will have to endure a lengthy court battle to prove their innocence. He also said he is having difficulty raising bail money and that he asked Sutton to help, but that he refused.
Although the current "mission" on Sutton's ranch is over, Foote pledges that the incident won't permanently damage Ranch Rescue.
"We just have to pick our battles," he said. "Right now, I just want to get these guys out of jail."
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/cqcgi?CQ_SESSION_KEY=SOGNEEVOQKNV&CQ_QUERY_HANDLE=125792&CQ_CUR_DOCUMENT=59&CQ_TLO_DOC_TEXT=YES
CHAPTER FOURTEEN—ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT
Art. 14.01. [212] [259] [247] Offense within view
(a) A peace officer or any other person, may, without a warrant, arrest an offender when the offense is committed in his presence or within his view, if the offense is one classed as a felony or as an offense against the public peace.
--------------
Offense against the peace typically is construed as rioting (Arizona has a similar provision, as I mentioned).
The statute you cited provides for a 6-month maximum sentence for a first offense. That's a misdemeanor, not a felony.
Let's wait and see if that law firm has any comment.
--Boot Hill
All the other arrest without warrant sections only mentioned a peace officer, and did not include the phrase or any other person - so it looks like this paragraph is the only one that covers citizens arrest in the arrest powers section of the Texas code. Maybe there are some powers lurking elsewhere in the code...
While this is going on, six Iraqis are trying to smuggle chem or bio weapons across that border.
It is the law in TX, as it is here in Arizona, that a trespasser MAY BE SEARCHED for weapons or contraband by the party detaining him/her.
I'm not challenging you, I want to have this available, as I'm trying to stay up to speed on the law regarding this matter.
Just look at what illegal immigration has done to the once great state of CA and the other Border States. What can one say about a government that willingly allows another country to build their own illegal colonies here, insert their politicos directly into OUR domestic political affairs, bleed American Taxpayers white and put struggling Americans out of work. It's just incredible that large regions of America are being literally taken over by Mexico’s citizens, silently, while our leaders find new enemies in foreign lands.
And to those Wild Eyed Zealots who support the wacky notion that we can spread an American Empire to every corner of the globe, presumably by the blood of someone else’s kid (not their kids of course), you are in for a RUDE awakening. You are going to find out that the rapidly growing contingent of unassimilated Hispanics and other third world immigrants really don’t appreciate or understand the concept of limited government or our rule of law. And with their growing political clout they will most definately put America permanently in the hands of the democratic party…that is, unless, the republican party keeps drifting ever more leftward like it has for the last 20 years. Either way, conservatism will be a dead ideology in a Balkanized America. Perhaps that is the plan.
AZ LAW: NO DUTY TO RETREAT!
Arizona state law: there is apparently no "duty to retreat" when faced with violent criminal activity, and the use of deadly force is lawful when Citizens are attempting to prevent these crimes or to apprehend the perpetrators. 13-411. Justification; use of force in crime prevention
A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force and deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or first degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section 13-1304, manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder under section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section 13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated assault under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2.
B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force justified by subsection A of this section.
C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of this section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the offenses listed in subsection A of this section.
You can run a search on the other statutes referred to at http://www.megalaw.com/az/azcode.php
Saying that the breaking of laws have consequences may be inflamatory remarks at DU or LP, but not on a conservative forum.
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.