Everyone could send a buck to Roger Barnett of the Cross Rail Ranch near Nogales, AZ. The Border Patrol needs to patrol the border or defend those who do so within the rights defending property ownership. The State of AZ needs to respect their responsibility to PROTECT and honor the rights of private property owners.

Kidnapping of Americans by Mexicans is soaring where Barnett lives. When sensing a threat to life or property, the TX Castle Law protects property owners who act in self defense against trespassers.

The ONLY way anyone could portray Roger Barnett a “vigilante” would require displacing him from his own property. [Nuance: "sever digestive difficulties" aka DEATH of livestock due to trespasser behavioral patterns.] But is this Cross Rail Ranch land leased? If leased from the State of AZ for ranching, is it HIS ranch that he has every Constitutional right to protect as with owners of personal property?

Bisbee, AZ-Over the past week, one of the most important trials about border vigilantism has unfolded in the small canyon town of Bisbee, Arizona. On one side of the courtroom sits two Mexican-American Douglas, Arizona families; on the other side, Roger Barnett and his wife, a local businessman and rancher, who boast of detaining more than 10,000 migrants in the Arizona desert.

The civil trial, brought by the Morales and English families against Roger Barnett for an October 30, 2004 incident during which three little girls, a father and grandfather were threatened by Barnett at the point of a chambered AR-15 assault rifle at the conclusion of a important right-of-passage: Vanese Morales’ first hunting trip in the Douglas hills. The lawsuit charges Barnett, considered by many as the grandfather of border vigilantes, with intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, assault and negligence.

Ron Morales, father of Vanese and Angelique who were eleven and nine, respectively, at the time of the incident, explained the long list of things the family did to seek justice prior to and after filing the civil suit. He reported calling the Cochise County Sheriff’s and Attorney’s office to find out the status of the case until the latter simply stopped returning their calls. They wrote letters to their Congressmen. They met with the State Land Department to question Barnett’s use of leased state trust lands for vigilante activities.

Ed English, father of Emma English who was eleven at the time of the incident and accompanied her two friends on the trip, even took part in an event presenting Cochise County Attorney Ed Rheinheimer with a “Grinch of the Year” award for failing to uphold the law and bring criminal charges against Barnett.

Over the past four days of the trial, powerful and emotional testimony was presented by the three children and their parents and grandfather. Arturo Morales, the grandfather, trembled as he recounted his horror at seeing the girls terrified and his inability to soothe them.

Dr. Jorge Barillas conducted a psychological assessment of each girl and their parents. He testified that he diagnosed all three girls with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. During their testimonies, all three girls talked about fears, nightmares and anxiety about being seen and shot by Barnett.

Though residents of Bisbee, to clarify the story, were the Morales’ legal residents of the USA? And why were they camping or hunting on someone’s property without permission? Evidently, this “right-of-passage” Morales family hunting trip was on Barnett’s ranch. And as hunters, the Morales’ had guns on Barnett’s ranch. Leased or not, without permission to be there, IF ON BARNETT’S RANCH, the Morales hunting trip was a gross infraction against Barnett’s property rights. None the less, Barnett needs to clarify WTF he was doing, going to such extremes as the story accuses him of kidnapping them. Were they “hunting” his cattle? Poaching is a huge problem.

maverick muse on February 18, 2009 at 12:56 PM