Assault ruling upheld against Arizona border rancher

Source: Arizona Daily Star (Tucson)

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a 2009 ruling against Cochise County rancher Roger Barnett,
forcing him to pay about $87,000 in damages related to his assault of illegal immigrants
on his ranch in 2004.

The decision comes on the heels of the same ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February.

The court disagreed with the arguments made in the appeal, which included a claim that deceased
U.S. District Judge John Roll made errors while presiding over the February 2009 trial. Roll was
one of six people killed in the Jan. 8 mass shooting in Tucson.

In that February 2009 trial, a federal jury issued a split verdict in a case against Barnett
stemming from the 2004 incident. The jury found that he didn't violate the group's civil rights
and that he wasn't liable on claims of battery and false imprisonment.


Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_9fb9f854-ef6e-11e0-9635-001cc4c002e0.html

too bad the same thing could not be said about justice in Mexico.

This is the second case in which a ruling has been upheld against Barnett. In February 2008, the Arizona Court of Appeals refused to throw out a jury verdict of guilty from November 2006 — and a nearly $100,000 monetary award — against Barnett in another civil case in which a jury concluded he falsely imprisoned members of a Douglas family.

In that case, Barnett held a family of Hispanic U.S. citizens at gunpoint, screaming racial slurs at them, and threatened to kill them all, including two girls aged 9 and 11, according to MALDEF.

Barnett is credited with helping to start the Minuteman movement in Arizona in the late 1990s when he began patrolling ranch lands near Douglas, looking to stop illegal immigrants. Barnett has said he's detained thousands of border crossers on property he owns or leases near Douglas in the last decade, and then turning them over to Border Patrol officials.

Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_9fb9f854-ef6e-11e0-9635-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1ZwVSO5Ml

...but, continue it around the entire state of Arizona so the assholes can't get out. Just let me and the 4 other Democrats in the state out first. :)

The Supreme Count did not uphold the ruling. That would imply they had considered the merits of the case. They did not. They declined to hear the case. They only agree to hear about 1% of the cases that are presented to them. When they don't hear the case the lower court ruling stands.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

In that 2004 incident, he should have gotten 20 years for kidnapping and death threats.