2 Border Vigilantes go to jail in capture

Arizona Republic ^ | 8 October 2003 | Daniel Gonzalez

[45Auto]

Two men received jail sentences Wednesday for illegally hunting down undocumented immigrants along the southern Arizona border with Mexico.

Human rights advocates, prosecutors and Mexican officials hailed the sentencing as a blow against border vigilantes, but the leader of a citizens border patrol group said the case has galvanized a group of people in the Yuma area to take up arms and patrol the border themselves.

[Gringo1]

So in a nutshell these guys go to jail for enforcing laws that the feds refuse to enforce?

And that the law of the land only applies to American citizens and not illegal immigrants?


Sheesh.....I'm moving to another country.

[Poohbah]

Only the first time and you know it. Second time - and all further entries that someone is arrested and convicted for - are felonies.

Did the two guys who made the arrests know, FOR A FACT, that these two were repeat crossers when they made the arrests?

[Timesink]

This, by the way, is why you should NEVER attempt a citizen's arrest of anyone for any reason. In most places, if your arrest turns out to have been a mistake, you'll be the one going to jail for unlawful imprisonment.

[Poohbah]

This, by the way, is why you should NEVER attempt a citizen's arrest of anyone for any reason. In most places, if your arrest turns out to have been a mistake, you'll be the one going to jail for unlawful imprisonment.

Bingo.

[Cultural Jihad]

Did the two guys who made the arrests know, FOR A FACT, that these two were repeat crossers when they made the arrests?

Of course they didn't, and it's no big surprise that no one responded to your important point. Shoving guns into the faces of women and children immigrants is not much different from shoving guns into the face of a woman who illegally parks in a handicapped parking space.

For all the bellyachers and mau-mauers, none have addressed the fact that the men pleaded guilty to their felonious acts.

[Regulator]

The predictable reply.

Obviously not. But the fact that they were crossing illegally in the first place is reasonable suspicion of the possibility that it was not their first offense.

And anyway, the point is: you made the blanket assertion that crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor - without the qualifier of first offense only.

[Cultural Jihad]

Only the first time and you know it. Second time - and all further entries that someone is arrested and convicted for - are felonies.

Actually you are wrong. A subsequent offence is not automatically prosecuted as a felony. It is up to the discretion of the prosecutor's office.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Excuse me, your Honor, but you are already persecuting these gentlemen for doing a very important community service. THey were busy cleaning up the trash that Mexico ceaselessly dumps over onto our side of the border.

Picking up trash, hardly makes one a vigilante.

THey were just doing the job for free that you and your ilk will not allow those being paid to do it to do.

[Cultural Jihad]

What trash is that? I read they pleaded guilty to felonious acts against people, not litter.

[Poohbah]

The predictable reply.

Obviously not. But the fact that they were crossing illegally in the first place is reasonable suspicion of the possibility that it was not their first offense.

Actually, it isn't. "Reasonable suspicion" extends only to the specific act in question. Otherwise, one could detain anyone on any grounds whatsoever--if you make enough leaps of logic, you will magically have "reasonable suspicion" of SOME felony, SOMEWHERE.

Again, please note: they did not actually SEE the crossing event, they only SUSPECTED that these people were crossing the border. It was not an established fact at that point.

And anyway, the point is: you made the blanket assertion that crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor - without the qualifier of first offense only.

I said "in and of itself." The things that make it a felony are qualifications on the basic charge that must be established as fact prior to making a citizen's arrest.

[F.J. Mitchell]

No, they probably didn't know for a fact, that these illegal aliens were not in fact, little green aliens from a distant galaxy disguised as illegal aliens from Mexico.

But like they say: If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck-it is probably an illegal alien from Mexico.Clue: Ducks don't hang out in the desert.

[F.J. Mitchell]

It all depends on your definition of litter.

[FreeFireBorderZone]

Guilty plea to one of how many original charges? What total jail time were they facing? Authorities always go that route rack up loads of charges and most people wilt under the pressure innocent or not. No trial no outcry.
Drove past Community Benefit Services office in Lompoc one morning last week .It had about 200 Latinos queueing outside. Thats your tax dollars on their way to Mexico.
First thing Arnold should do is mobilsise a few Californian National Guard brigades and have rotating service totally shutting down the border.

[Poohbah]

But like they say: If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck-it is probably an illegal alien from Mexico.Clue: Ducks don't hang out in the desert.

That wasn't the issue. The specific issue at hand is that illegal immigration is not, in and of itself, a felony. Arizona law allows a citizen's arrest in two circumstances:

1. The citizen witnesses or has reason to believe that a felony was committed by the arrestee; or

2. The citizen WITNESSES the arrestee committing a misdemeanor.

These two did not have reasonable suspicion that the arrestees had committed a felony; and they did not witness the arrestees actually crossing the border (the misdemeanor offense).

[F.J. Mitchell]

"It's up to the discretion of the prosecutor's office."

That sure explains a lot about how the border has turned into a revolving door for repeat invasions by illegal aliens. If the prosecutors office is more interested of the welfare of the Government of Mexico and it's citizens, than in enforcing the laws of the USA, protecting her citizens and securing her sovernty, they are very likely to enable the illegal traffic, by persecuting any American Citizen who dares try to defend his/her country.

[F.J. Mitchell]

How convenient for the invaders and their enablers.

Where was the border patrol? Handing out coffee, donuts and a map of the USA?

[Political Junkie Too]

Mexican officials have asked U.S. authorities to investigate the border militias,

Can't we tell Mexico that we're just doing on our southern border what they do on their southern border?

-PJ

[dennisw]

Makes me wanna hurl !!! This is rubber stamping the invasion of American sovereignty by a worthless 3rd world pest hole.

[Carry_Okie]

Under what statute did the judge find the defendents guilty?

It would be an interesting appeal to determine whether there were conflicting laws at work here. I am surprised that the defendants did not select a jury trial. It's really too bad our citizens are not informed of their powers on a jury to throw out the law.