Posted on 08/07/2003 8:27:02 PM PDT by AZ GRAMMY
Second arrest made in immigrant incident
BY LOUIE VILLALOBOS, Staff Writer Aug 7, 2003
Email this page Printer friendly page Subscribe to The Sun
Yuma County sheriff's deputies have arrested a second man in connection with the alleged unlawful detention of six illegal immigrants on July 31 in Gadsden.
Alexander David Dumas, 26, was arrested Tuesday evening after driving to Yuma from his home in Big Bear Lake, Calif., for an interview, said sheriff's spokesman Lt. Eben Bratcher.
Dumas was charged with six counts of aggravated assault and five counts of unlawful imprisonment following the early morning July 31 incident where deputies said he and Matthew Paul Hoffman, arrested on the same charges on Monday, detained a group of six illegal immigrants that had just entered the United States through the Colorado River.
A third man, Martin Hoffman Jr., was with the two suspects but won't be charged because he was not armed and did not take part in the handcuffing of the illegal immigrants, Bratcher said.
Bratcher said the department will continue to investigate the case and warned citizens against taking the law into their own hands.
He said anyone who sees a group of suspected illegal immigrants should call the Border Patrol, and not take it upon themselves to apprehend the group by using guns and handcuffs. Asking a group to stay put while making a phone call is permitted and would constitute a citizen's arrest, he said.
"When you have someone holding someone against their will with the use or the threat of the use of force, you've crossed the line between a citizen's arrest and unlawful detention," he said. "There was no justification for the use of force."
Deputies said the two men handcuffed five members of the group, which included three children and two women, and held them at gunpoint until U.S. Border Patrol agents arrived.
Agents have said they were dispatched to the scene when a surveillance camera operator noticed the incident unfolding. The agents called the sheriff's department, who then identified and interviewed all three men before letting them go, officials said.
Bratcher said the men are not believed to be part of a larger group, such as the citizen patrol groups that operate on private property along the Tucson border and use various forms of technology to alert Border Patrol agents to the presence of illegal immigrants in the area.
Also being charged with five counts of endangerment is a 16-year-old Mexican national who Bratcher said was paid $600 to bring the illegal immigrants into the United States. Bratcher also said the illegal immigrants were planning to meet with a taxi cab in Gadsden and were to be taken to a unidentified Yuma hotel, according to interviews done of the illegal immigrants by detectives.
William Robbins, Border Patrol spokesman, said the six illegal immigrants were in the agency's custody as of Wednesday morning but couldn't be interviewed.
Hugo Oliva, Mexican consul in Yuma, said the group was in good condition following the incident and that his office is encouraged by the sheriff's department's efforts regarding this case.
"This is a very disturbing thing to happen here," Oliva said. "We can't have people with guns do the job of law enforcement agencies."
http://yumasun.com/artman/publish/a...tory_6619.shtml
The Second Amendment of the Constitution, in all but its most basic form of interpretation (that being that the citizens should be armed as a defense against tyranny from their own government) is also moot.
Which shifts the issue to what, duck hunting?
Aside from that, one of the Constitutionally MANDATED functions of the Federal Government is to provide for the common defense. Invasion need not be conducted with a military force, merely saturating the infrastructure with non-citizens will suffice.
There are methods by which those who wish to enter The United States of America can do so, legally. If these people wish to come here and be Americans, speak the language of our culture (English, more or less), and become American citizens, fine. But many of these people do not wish to 'join up', just milk the great tit. I have no sympathy for this. Send 'em home.
That said, for years, the INS whined about insufficient manpower, etc. Now people are voluntarily apprehending (without bloodshed) the invaders, and the response is to arrest the volunteers. Just another reminder of the vast number of entrenched Clintonite 'true believers' lurking in the halls of bureaucracy.
Whaddya want to bet someone in the local sherrif's department is fattening their retirement fund by looking the other way? After all, these meddling civillians could be bad for bidness.
Oh relax, don't let it bother you too much that I don't ping all my buddies to fight my battles for me.
Nor did I...your "point" is meaningless.
236 posted on 08/07/2003 11:29 PM PDT by PRND21
I didn't say you did, and I didn't expect you to comprehend this issue any more than you have the others we've been discussing.
No problem. There are others who can read here.
Wrong, as usual. Handcuffs are not a deadly weapon. Two suspects were charged with six counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and five of unlawful imprisonment. The third man was with the two suspects but won't be charged because he was not armed and did not take part in the handcuffing of the illegal immigrants.
Those who detained them should be paid a bounty. IOW the FedGuv should acknowledge it can't do a complete job on the border and hire citizens who are willing to help. A partial privatization of our Border Patrol. Deputization just like in the Western movies when citizens are needed for the posse. Since times are tight some would welcome the extra income.
And they are telling you you're wrong, too. Look.
Surely you can do better than that.
Putting the handcuffs on has been charged as an assault. The fact that guns were present brings the additional charge of aggravated.
Wrong, as usual. Handcuffs are not a deadly weapon. Two suspects were charged with six counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and five of unlawful
imprisonment. The third man was with the two suspects but won't be charged because he was not armed and did not take part in the handcuffing of the illegal
immigrants.
243 posted on 08/07/2003 11:50 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
LMAO, assault with a deadly weapon? Yes, you are correct. I had thought the charge was aggrivated assault. So anotherwords what the DA is saying is that these men should have been unarmed so that if they came into contact with drug runners they could have been shot and left for dead. What a great idea. Well at least they would be dead right. Sorry, I don't buy into that nonsense. I believe I've read a number of articles discussing drug running in that area.
The mere carrying of a gun does not constitute assault with a deadly weapon by my standard. What the hell is the second ammendment for. Although the reporter states the men pointed the guns at the illegals, we don't know that for a fact. Oh let me guess, the illegal alien's word was more trustworthy than US citizen's word.
These guys are being jobed.
Trumped up charges designed to run off other citizen protectors of our border. The FedGuv has shown itself incapable of enforcing our borders. In a jealous rage it comes down on those who demonstrate Federal incompetence. Many in the Border Patrol want to do a better job but are held back by their superiors on orders from Washington
LOL! Thanks for the chuckle, Chuckie.
What flights of fancy. You have no knowledge of guns being shoved in anyone's face.
But I do know the Border Patrol is well armed because they have been assaulted and killed by illegal alien Mexicans. Illegal aliens are not the peaceniks you make them out to be. Many properties are ransacked by them, rancher's cattle killed, cooked in the field and eaten. Mountains of trash are left by border jumpers making one National Park into a dump
Needless to say you are wrong again. The men were not charged with having holstered pistols, but assaulting these women and children by pointing their weapons at them. Such big, brave men they were, too, to shove guns into the faces of unarmed women and children. If they had smaller handcuffs I don't doubt there would have been 6 charges of false imprisonment instead of 5.
254 posted on 08/08/2003 12:12 AM PDT by Cultural Jihad
They are charged with pointing their guns at them. What that is based on neither you or I know. As for shoving guns into the faces of unarmed women and children, that continual charge on your part is groundless.
I assume this is so that they may be given a limousine ride to their ultimate destination to deliver drugs, pick tomatoes, or whatever.
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.