OMG! Two Salvadoran immigrants take formal possession of seized ranch

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Stephanie, Jan 26, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,361
    Of course what the title leaves out of it is, Two illegal immigrants.

    (AP) - BISBEE, Arizona-Two Salvadoran immigrants are now the legal owners of an Arizona ranch near the Mexican border that was seized from an anti-immigrant activist accused of pistol-whipping them.

    Documents granting the 70-acre ( 28-hectare) ranch once owned by Casey Nethercott to Fatima del Socorro Leiva Medina and Edwin Alfredo Mancia Gonzales were signed by a Cochise County judge on Monday.



    Nethercott is serving a five-year prison term in Texas stemming from a 2003 incident on a Texas ranch where he confronted Leiva and Mancia and was accused of pistol-whipping them. He was acquitted of assault but convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm.

    Nethercott was a member of the group Ranch Rescue, which works to protect private property along the southern U.S. border from incursions by illegal immigrants.

    The Southern Poverty Law Center brought suit against Nethercott on behalf of the two immigrants. Nethercott did not respond and a Texas judge ordered him to pay $500,000. Also named in the suit was Jack Foote, the founder of Ranch Rescue, and the owners of the Texas ranch, Joe and Betty Sutton. The Suttons settled for $100,000. Foote also didn't offer a defense and was ordered to pay $500,000.

    Leiva and Mancia were illegal immigrants from El Salvador. They received temporary legal status in the United States as crime victims and are seeking visas to stay longer.

    They don't plan to hold on to the ranch, said Kelley Bruner, an attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center. Instead the property near Douglas, Arizona, will be sold, with the proceeds going to the immigrants.

    http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/01-25-2006/2249000886f24712.html
     
  2. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    So I guess we can conclude that crime DOES pay!
     
  3. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    and so it begins. Whatever happened to "trespassers will be shot on sight?" ITs his property. Don't go on it. Now not only does a judge take his land away but they give it to the criminals that entered it? This has got to get overturned. This is just ri-goddamn-diculous.
     
  4. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    It's big government, liberal politics. The founding fathers believed that every man had an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that it was the job of the government to help every man protect those rights and to punish those who would infringe on them. These men broke the laws of this country, denied this man his basic property right to exclude others, and then cried a lot when they got caught. The government then told this man that he didn't have the right to protect his property, since that's solely the government's job. Now, for being a felon possessing a firearm, yeah, he should be in jail, but those two illegals should be charged with tresspassing and then sent back to Mexico with nothing more than the clothes they were wearing, if that.
     
  5. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    The bolded part no doubt explains why the "Southern Poverty Law Center" went after him. These low-cost or free law centers are as liberal as it gets, and they probably knew of Nethercott's beliefs and wanted to stick it to him.

    And while this outcome stinks to high heaven, even though he was in jail, Nethercott should have hired a lawyer and responded to the Complaint. Why let it go as a result of what looks like a default judgment?

    What is not clear to me from the article is why the Suttons had to settle for $100,000? What did they do wrong?
     
  6. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    that is why you shoot them dead......drag them inside.....clean up.....then call the cops.....then call your attorney.....remain silent
     
  7. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    So if an illegal person is a "crime victim" he gains legal status to sue within our court system? This surely is the height of liberal "victimhood".
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    You got it. "Sleaze Dees" and his crooked outfit make the ACLU look like patriots. No Southern, no poverty, no law: pretty much all they are is a "center."
     
  9. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    What i dont get is that these people are defedning their property from foreign invaders that the Government won't do anything about and they are penalized for not killing them. Had they just shot them dead, buried them in the desert and went about their lives, NO ONE would have been the wiser.

    The more i think about this story the more it sickens me.
     
  10. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    It is definitely barf-inducing.
     

Share This Page