PHOENIX — An Arizona ranch once owned by a member of an armed group accused of terrorizing illegal immigrants has been given to two of the people the owner had tried to keep out of the country.
The land transfer is being done to satisfy a judgment against Casey Nethercott, a member of a self-styled border-watch group who is serving a five-year prison term for firearms possession.
Morris Dees Jr., chief trial counsel of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which represented the immigrants, said he hoped the ruling would be a cautionary tale to anyone considering hostile measures against border crossers.
"When we got into this case, ranchers all along the border were allowing these types to come on their property," Dees said. "Now, they're very leery of it, especially when they see someone losing their ranch because of it."
The ruling comes as the governors of Arizona and New Mexico declare states of emergency in their border counties, moves designed to free up money for enforcement while drawing more national attention to illegal immigration.
Nethercott was a member of the group Ranch Rescue, which works to protect private property along the southern U.S. border. In March 2003, he was accused of pistol-whipping Edwin Alfredo Mancia Gonzales, 26, at a Hebbronville, Texas, ranch near the Mexico border.
A jury deadlocked on the assault charge but convicted him of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
Mancia and another immigrant traveling with him from El Salvador, Fatima del Socorro Leiva Medina, filed a civil lawsuit last year, saying they were harmed while being held by Ranch Rescue members.
Named in the suit were Nethercott; Jack Foote, founder of Ranch Rescue; and the owners of the Hebbronville ranch, Joe and Betty Sutton. The Suttons settled for $100,000. Nethercott and Foote did not defend themselves, and a Texas judge issued default judgments in April of $850,000 against Nethercott and $500,000 against Foote.
The transfer of the ranch outraged border-watch groups.
"If the federal government was doing its job, ranchers would not be living in fear," said Chris Simcox, president of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, a group that watches for illegal-immigrant crossings and reports them to the U.S. Border Patrol.
Simcox said the Minutemen have a policy against touching the migrants and use video to document their patrols.
A message left for Nethercott's family and his attorney was not returned yesterday.
Myster X
08-21-05, 12:14 AM
more details from NYT... FUCK!
I hope these ranchers let illegals die from heat exhaustion next time and won't intervene at all.
DOUGLAS, Ariz., Aug. 18 - Spent shells litter the ground at what is left of the firing range, and camouflage outfits still hang in a storeroom. Just a few months ago, this ranch was known as Camp Thunderbird, the headquarters of a paramilitary group that promised to use force to keep illegal immigrants from sneaking across the border with Mexico.
Now, in a turnabout, the 70-acre property about two miles from the border is being given to two immigrants whom the group caught trying to enter the United States illegally.
The land transfer is being made to satisfy judgments in a lawsuit in which the immigrants had said that Casey Nethercott, the owner of the ranch and a former leader of the vigilante group Ranch Rescue, had harmed them.
"Certainly it's poetic justice that these undocumented workers own this land," said Morris S. Dees Jr., co-founder and chief trial counsel of the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., which represented the immigrants in their lawsuit.
Mr. Dees said the loss of the ranch would "send a pretty important message to those who come to the border to use violence."
The surrender of the ranch comes as the governors of Arizona and New Mexico have declared a state of emergency because of the influx of illegal immigrants and related crime along the border.
Bill Dore, a Douglas resident briefly affiliated with Ranch Rescue who is still active in the border-patrolling Minuteman Project, called the land transfer "ridiculous."
"The illegals are coming over here," Mr. Dore said. "They are getting the American property. Hell, I'd come over, too. Get some American property, make some money from the gringos."
The immigrants getting the ranch, Edwin Alfredo Mancía Gonzáles and Fátima del Socorro Leiva Medina, could not be reached for comment. Kelley Bruner, a lawyer at the law center, said they did not want to speak to the news media but were happy with the outcome.
Ms. Bruner said that Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva, who are from El Salvador but are not related, would not live at the ranch and would probably sell it. Mr. Nethercott bought the ranch in 2003 for $120,000.
Mr. Mancía, who lives in Los Angeles, and Ms. Leiva, who lives in the Dallas area, have applied for visas that are available to immigrants who are the victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with the authorities, Ms. Bruner said. She said that until a decision was made on their applications, they could stay and work in the United States on a year-to-year basis.
Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were caught on a ranch in Hebbronville, Tex., in March 2003 by Mr. Nethercott and other members of Ranch Rescue. The two immigrants later accused Mr. Nethercott of threatening them and of hitting Mr. Mancía with a pistol, charges that Mr. Nethercott denied. The immigrants also said the group gave them cookies, water and a blanket and let them go after an hour or so.
The Salvadorans testified against Mr. Nethercott when he was tried by Texas prosecutors. The jury deadlocked on a charge of pistol-whipping but convicted Mr. Nethercott, who had previously served time in California for assault, of gun possession, which is illegal for a felon. He is now serving a five-year sentence in a Texas prison.
Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva also filed a lawsuit against Mr. Nethercott; Jack Foote, the founder of Ranch Rescue; and the owner of the Hebbronville ranch, Joe Sutton. The immigrants said the ordeal, in which they feared that they would be killed by the men they thought were soldiers, had left them with post-traumatic stress.
Mr. Sutton settled for $100,000. Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote did not defend themselves, so the judge issued default judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against Mr. Foote.
Mr. Dees said Mr. Foote appeared to have no substantial assets, but Mr. Nethercott had the ranch. Shortly after the judgment, Mr. Nethercott gave the land to his sister, Robin Albitz, of Prescott, Ariz. The Southern Poverty Law Center sued the siblings, saying the transfer was fraudulent and was meant to avoid the judgment.
Ms. Albitz, a nursing assistant, signed over the land to the two immigrants last week.
"It scared the hell out of her," Margaret Pauline Nethercott, the mother of Mr. Nethercott and Ms. Albitz, said of the lawsuit. "She didn't know she had done anything illegal. We didn't know they had a judgment against my son."
This was not the first time the law center had taken property from a group on behalf of a client. In 1987, the headquarters of a Ku Klux Klan group in Alabama was given to the mother of a boy whose murder was tied to Klansmen. Property has also been taken from the Aryan Nations and the White Aryan Resistance, Mr. Dees said.
Joseph Jacobson, a lawyer in Austin who represented Mr. Nethercott in the criminal case, said the award was "a vast sum of money for a very small indignity." Mr. Jacobson said the two immigrants were trespassing on Mr. Sutton's ranch and would have been deported had the criminal charges not been filed against Mr. Nethercott.
He criticized the law center for trying to get $60,000 in bail money transferred to the immigrants. While the center said the money was Mr. Nethercott's, Mr. Jacobson said it was actually Ms. Nethercott's, who mortgaged her home to post bail for her son.
Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote had a falling out in 2004, and Mr. Foote left Camp Thunderbird, taking Ranch Rescue with him. Mr. Nethercott then formed the Arizona Guard, also based on his ranch.
In April, Mr. Nethercott told an Arizona television station, "We're going to come out here and close the border with machine guns." But by the end of the month, he had started his prison sentence.
Now, only remnants of Camp Thunderbird remain on his ranch, a vast expanse of hard red soil, mesquite and tumbleweed with a house and two bunkhouses. One bunkhouse has a storeroom containing some camouflage suits, sleeping bags, tarps, emergency rations, empty ammunition crates, gun parts and a chemical warfare protection suit.
In one part of the ranch, dirt is piled up to form the backdrop of a firing range. An old water tank, riddled with bullet holes, is on its side. A platform was built as an observation post on the tower that once held the water tank.
Charles Jones, who was hired as a ranch hand about a month before Mr. Nethercott went to prison, put up fences and brought in cattle to graze. He has continued to live on the property with some family members.
But now the cattle are gone, and Mr. Jones has been told that he should prepare to leave. "It makes me sick I did all this work," he said.
Ms. Nethercott said she was not sure whether her son knew that his ranch was being turned over to the immigrants, but that he would be crushed if he did.
"That's his whole life," she said of the ranch. "He'd be heartbroken if he lost it in any way, but this is the worst way."
JasonF
08-21-05, 12:14 AM
I'm not sure why the sentence you bolded was bolded (in the first article). Remember, OJ was acquited in criminal court but still lost a civil case filed by Ron Goldman's family.
Myster X
08-21-05, 12:17 AM
That's two separate lawsuits. How can you lose a ranch for weapon possession?
Mordred
08-21-05, 02:45 AM
That's two separate lawsuits. How can you lose a ranch for weapon possession?Well he was a convicted felon, and obviously knew he wasn't allowed to have a firearm. The judgement does seem a bit excessive though, but again he did go back to prison for 5 years.
Whether the judgement was right or wrong, I don't think I'd be so quick to defend the leader of a paramilitary organization dedicated to keeping out illegals with force. That's coming dangerously close to KKK territory.
JasonF
08-21-05, 09:44 AM
That's two separate lawsuits. How can you lose a ranch for weapon possession?
Like you say, it was two separate cases. Case one was a two-count criminal indictment. Nethercott was convicted of one count (weapons possession) but the jury deadlocked on the other count (assault). Case two was a civil suit by the illegal aliens. Nethercott didn't defend himself, so a default judgment was entered against him. Because he didn't have many assets, his land was used to satisfy the judgment.
Pharoh
08-21-05, 10:44 AM
Like you say, it was two separate cases. Case one was a two-count criminal indictment. Nethercott was convicted of one count (weapons possession) but the jury deadlocked on the other count (assault). Case two was a civil suit by the illegal aliens. Nethercott didn't defend himself, so a default judgment was entered against him. Because he didn't have many assets, his land was used to satisfy the judgment.
I believe he first attempted to hide the ranch from his list of assets by 'selling' it to his sister, or some other family member. When the judge learned of this, and since Nethercott was still in jail, the ranch was offered as a payoff for the civil suit.
I have no problem with that aspect of the case, since it was due to Nethercott's stupidity, but find the original judgement against him a very dangerous one.
JasonF
08-21-05, 11:02 AM
I have no problem with that aspect of the case, since it was due to Nethercott's stupidity, but find the original judgement against him a very dangerous one.
Which original judgment? The criminal judgment in which a jury of his peers found that he illegally possessed a firearm? Or the civil judgment in which he didn't mount a defense to the accusation that he beat the plaintiffs?
Pharoh
08-21-05, 11:07 AM
Which original judgment? The criminal judgment in which a jury of his peers found that he illegally possessed a firearm? Or the civil judgment in which he didn't mount a defense to the accusation that he beat the plaintiffs?
The civil case and judgement.
mikehunt
08-21-05, 11:12 AM
sad fucking day when a god damn ILLEGAL gets given property from a US citizen
JasonF
08-21-05, 12:20 PM
The civil case and judgement.
Doesn't bother me. If someone sues you for assult and you don't bother to defend yourself, of course the plaintiff is going to win.
Goldblum
08-21-05, 12:29 PM
Mr. Mancía, who lives in Los Angeles, and Ms. Leiva, who lives in the Dallas area, have applied for visas that are available to immigrants who are the victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with the authorities, Ms. Bruner said.
Good God. -ohbfrank-
Duran
08-21-05, 01:18 PM
This is non-news. The land wasn't "given" to the illegals. The guy lost a civil suit because he's a complete idiot and decided not to defend himself. He therefore lost. What a surprise!
Ranger
08-21-05, 05:08 PM
Nethercott was a member of the group Ranch Rescue, which works to protect private property along the southern U.S. border. In March 2003, he was accused of pistol-whipping Edwin Alfredo Mancia Gonzales, 26, at a Hebbronville, Texas, ranch near the Mexico border.
If the illegals were crossing the border on private property, wouldn't this be trespassing? Shouldn't the owner be allowed some use of force to prevent that? Sure, pistol-whipping might be a bit excessive but the trespassing should still outweight that. A counter-suit should be filed against the illegals for trespassing, which can cause economic harm to the land.
This is non-news. The land wasn't "given" to the illegals. The guy lost a civil suit because he's a complete idiot and decided not to defend himself. He therefore lost. What a surprise!
Wasn't the land still "given" to the illegals as a result of him losing the case?
JasonF
08-21-05, 06:39 PM
Generally speaking, you can't pistol whip somebody simply because they trespass on your land. Which is a shame, because those dmaned kids just won't stay off my lawn.
Note that the foregoing rule applies even if the trespasser is a filthy Mexican.
Ranger
08-21-05, 07:09 PM
Dammit, why didn't anyone tell Fat Tony this? His ranch thugs are going to be out of a job now. :)
Duran
08-21-05, 08:10 PM
If the illegals were crossing the border on private property, wouldn't this be trespassing? Shouldn't the owner be allowed some use of force to prevent that? Sure, pistol-whipping might be a bit excessive but the trespassing should still outweight that. A counter-suit should be filed against the illegals for trespassing, which can cause economic harm to the land.
Wasn't the land still "given" to the illegals as a result of him losing the case?
I know of no place that would accept physical violence by a citizen as an acceptable response to simple trespass across his/her land without threatening anyone living there.
And for him to win a suit for trespass, he'd have to show actual economic harm.
The land was taken as payment of the judgement, since apparently the guy doesn't have assets to pay. Maybe he should have thought of that and defended himself.
I.Flores
08-22-05, 09:42 PM
Note that the foregoing rule applies even if the trespasser is a filthy Mexican.
Watch it.
There are Mexican users on these forums (Myself included) who do not appreciate that type of comments.
Pharoh
08-22-05, 10:02 PM
Watch it.
There are Mexican users on these forums (Myself included) who do not appreciate that type of comments.
You obviously misunderstood and misinterpreted his comments and intent.
darkflounder
08-22-05, 10:12 PM
Fine. Deport them, and they can take the ranch back south with them.
chess
08-22-05, 10:33 PM
I'd be more worried about the dude's ranch if he didn't sound like such an asshole.
I.Flores
08-22-05, 11:26 PM
You obviously misunderstood and misinterpreted his comments and intent.
Sorry, but when someone ends a sentence with "filthy Mexican" there's only want way to understand it.
JasonF
08-22-05, 11:34 PM
Watch it.
There are Mexican users on these forums (Myself included) who do not appreciate that type of comments.
Sorry, I -- Pharoh was right. My intent was facetious. I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of the comments which seem to suggest that because Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were illegals trespassing on his land, Mr. Nethercott was justified in assaulting them. The attitude seemed to be that spilling the blood of an illegal is somehow less wrong (or not at all wrong) than spilling the blood of someone in the U.S. illegally. My intent by using the phrase "filthy Mexican" was to make explicit some of the subtext that I felt was lurking below this thread (and giving others the benefit of the doubt, I don't think they are conscious how racist some of their rhetoric appears). Anyway, if my attempt to be provocative offended, please accept my apologies.
I'll also note that Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva are from El Salvador, not Mexico.
I.Flores
08-22-05, 11:48 PM
Sorry, I -- Pharoh was right. My intent was facetious. I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of the comments which seem to suggest that because Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were illegals trespassing on his land, Mr. Nethercott was justified in assaulting them. The attitude seemed to be that spilling the blood of an illegal is somehow less wrong (or not at all wrong) than spilling the blood of someone in the U.S. illegally. My intent by using the phrase "filthy Mexican" was to make explicit some of the subtext that I felt was lurking below this thread (and giving others the benefit of the doubt, I don't think they are conscious how racist some of their rhetoric appears). Anyway, if my attempt to be provocative offended, please accept my apologies.
I'll also note that Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva are from El Salvador, not Mexico.
Gotcha
Ranger
08-23-05, 12:01 AM
I know of no place that would accept physical violence by a citizen as an acceptable response to simple trespass across his/her land without threatening anyone living there.
To think of it, doesn't some of our military bases have signs that say that 'trespassers will be shot' (also probably a bit excessive :))?
Is this for real?
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewarticle.php?id=17
Giantrobo
08-23-05, 02:51 PM
I'm going to go to Mexico, start some trouble, get my ass kicked by Locals, then sue and get their property.
tcoursen
08-23-05, 03:33 PM
I'd be more worried about the dude's ranch if he didn't sound like such an asshole.
And I am sure a lot of us would end up sounding like an asshole if our ranch was constantly being "invaded." Given how close this ranch is to the border I would imagine that these two were not the first two to come across onto his property. After having that go on for some time I would imagine that it gets very frustrating.
If hundreds of people are trampling across your ranch every year, wouldn't you get pissed off? Especially when nobody else will do anything about it.
The guy going to jail for having the illegal gun, OK that makes sense.
The guy having to pay these guys something for hitting them and detaining them, I don't think so. I don't think the article said that any permanent damage was done. They really shouldn't have been awarded any monetary settlement. They were in fact breaking the law, first by entering the country and second by trespassing on this ranch. They shouldn't be rewarded for breaking the law.
JasonF
08-23-05, 03:49 PM
They shouldn't be rewarded for breaking the law.
They weren't; they were compensated for being assaulted by an irate land-owner.
Otto
08-23-05, 04:03 PM
The smarter thing to do would be to have killed the two men and claim that they attacked the ranchers.
Dead men don't sue.
Red Dog
08-23-05, 04:05 PM
The smarter thing to do would be to have killed the two men and claim that they attacked the ranchers.
Dead men don't sue.
The 'they're coming right at us" defense.
tcoursen
08-23-05, 05:22 PM
They weren't; they were compensated for being assaulted by an irate land-owner.
And if they were not breaking the law, and not on the property, he would not have assaulted them.
The amount of the compensation was just crazy. I can see giving them a couple hundred bucks or something and pay for medical, but I don't think these guys even had any medical bills and or damage. So why should they get such an outrageous sum. The judge awarded them 850,000. One of them was hit with a pistol ( a charge the guy was NOT convicted of by they way ) and held for an hour. During which time they were given blankets, food and water by the way. So for that they get 850,000?
Duran
08-23-05, 05:29 PM
The amount of the compensation was just crazy. I can see giving them a couple hundred bucks or something and pay for medical, but I don't think these guys even had any medical bills and or damage. So why should they get such an outrageous sum. The judge awarded them 850,000. One of them was hit with a pistol ( a charge the guy was NOT convicted of by they way ) and held for an hour. During which time they were given blankets, food and water by the way. So for that they get 850,000?
Which is why the guy should have bothered to defend himself instead of being a monkeyass. That's what happens when you (or a lawyer representing you) don't show up to defend yourself - you lose by default.
mikehunt
08-23-05, 05:29 PM
they should have gotten one way tickets back to their country of origin, and the judge should have laughed the court case out of court and never let it get past the opening statements
Ranger
08-23-05, 05:33 PM
If one of the assaulted persons was a young woman, I'd bet that the judgment/punishment would be very different.
I didn't think of that before.
tcoursen
08-23-05, 05:57 PM
they should have gotten one way tickets back to their country of origin, and the judge should have laughed the court case out of court and never let it get past the opening statements
Which is probably why the guy didn't defend himself. Plus, he was in jail for the illegal weapon. How was he even supposed to afford a lawyer to defend him?
I've seen Judge Judy throw out cases when people were doing something illegal.
Red Dog
08-23-05, 07:54 PM
Which is probably why the guy didn't defend himself. Plus, he was in jail for the illegal weapon. How was he even supposed to afford a lawyer to defend him?
Take out a mortgage on the home which he owned (or sell the property and use the proceeds to defend himself)? They do let people serving time in jail defend themselves in civil suits (meeting with lawyer, depositions, appear in court, etc).
tcoursen
08-23-05, 08:46 PM
Take out a mortgage on the home which he owned (or sell the property and use the proceeds to defend himself)? They do let people serving time in jail defend themselves in civil suits (meeting with lawyer, depositions, appear in court, etc).
How would he repay a mortgage from jail? He wouldn't have any income in jail. Would a mortgage company give somebody in jail a mortgage?
That certainly doesn't excuse him from not defending himself,but couldn't the judge have ruled in their favor and given them a reasonable amount? Or does he HAVE to give them what they ask for?
DVD Polizei
08-23-05, 08:57 PM
Sorry, I -- Pharoh was right. My intent was facetious. I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of the comments which seem to suggest that because Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were illegals trespassing on his land, Mr. Nethercott was justified in assaulting them. The attitude seemed to be that spilling the blood of an illegal is somehow less wrong (or not at all wrong) than spilling the blood of someone in the U.S. illegally. My intent by using the phrase "filthy Mexican" was to make explicit some of the subtext that I felt was lurking below this thread (and giving others the benefit of the doubt, I don't think they are conscious how racist some of their rhetoric appears). Anyway, if my attempt to be provocative offended, please accept my apologies.
I'll also note that Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva are from El Salvador, not Mexico.
You didn't have to write that entire paragraph. All you had to do was sign over your home and property to I.Flores.
Es todo bueno.
I.Flores
08-23-05, 09:43 PM
You didn't have to write that entire paragraph. All you had to do was sign over your home and property to I.Flores.
Es todo bueno.
I don't need anyone to sign me their home or property.
I have enough with my 5 bedroom, 9,000 sq ft. home, thank you very much.....
:crap:
Red Dog
08-24-05, 09:21 AM
How would he repay a mortgage from jail? He wouldn't have any income in jail. Would a mortgage company give somebody in jail a mortgage?
That certainly doesn't excuse him from not defending himself,but couldn't the judge have ruled in their favor and given them a reasonable amount? Or does he HAVE to give them what they ask for?
Then he could have sold the property and used the proceeds of it to fund his defense. That certainly would have been a better option than losing and having nothing left.
AGuyNamedMike
08-24-05, 09:25 AM
The smarter thing to do would be to have killed the two men and claim that they attacked the ranchers.
Buy: