[2dogs]

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/03/20/articlemg.htm

Ranch Rescue Members Arrested In South Texas
Special Report By Michael Gaddy

Information has been received that two members of Ranch Rescue, who were patrolling the border in South Texas, have been arrested and charged with "Aggravated Assault."
The arrests stem from actions taken by members of Ranch Rescue on the night of 3/18. Jack Foote, spokesman for Ranch Rescue, said that they had detained two out of several hundred illegals, gave them food, water, and a ride to the border. The Ranch Rescue members (names given only as Hank and Casey) were both arrested on charges of "aggravated assault with a weapon" and are currently in Hogg County jail. No bail has been set at this time. Foote insists both men were on private property.

The detained individuals were questioned and one had a work visa from El Salvador in
his possession, which meant he could have ridden the bus across the border and did not have to be where he was and by being on private property he was trespassing regardless of his work visa.

The area where the crossing occurred was a location of one of the worst rattlesnake infestations in the area and that particular fencing between the borders of Mexico & the US is one of the absolute hardest to enter. It was obvious these two individuals had to work exceedingly hard to cross where they did.

The detained individuals were fed, given fresh water and blankets to keep warm and then taken by van (belonging to a RR member) to the main gate of the ranch they'd trespassed on, and let go.

The arrests appear to have been made by the Texas Rangers with assistance from Jim Hogg County Sheriff, Erosmo Alarcon. Alarcon recently was the author of a warning to citizens of paramilitary activities in the area. It would appear at this time to have been a backhanded affront to the members of Ranch Rescue who are trying to protect our porous border.

As of this writing no bail has been set for the two. Information received indicates both are being held at: Texas Rangers Detention
Company "D"
6502 S. New Braunfels
San Antonio, TX 78223
| 210-532-2923

Prosecution for the government in this case may encounter a problem as Jack Foote of Ranch Rescue reports that a RR videographer filmed the entire episode and a French Journalist was also filming.

Updates to follow.

[Thumper]

Prosecution for the government in this case may encounter a problem as Jack Foote of Ranch Rescue reports that a RR videographer filmed the entire episode and a French Journalist was also filming.

Good for them. I'm surprised the TexRangers are serving as Alarcon's errand boys.

[Raymond VanDerLinden]

why would that shock anyone, many Gov agencies don't want people helping with the problem they like the problem just as it is.

What if the citezens can help or -HORRORS- do it better than they do, how can the Goverment say we need more money, and worse yet how can they say the people can't be trusted with weapons.

I think we may be seeing the begining of the anti-self defense movement get institutionalize. Keep watch.

[wQuay]

:cuss:

Sooner or later I'd like to join RR.

[El Tejon]

How would evidence of an alleged crime via a videotape be a problem for the prosecution?:confused:

[Don Gwinn]

El Tee, I believe their contention would be that no crime was committed. Thus they believe the videotape will show that no crime was committed, which certainly would be a problem for the prosecution. I'm not a lawyer, but that sounds reasonable IF the tape shows what they say it does.

Remember the Rodney King trials, where the (entire) videotape of the incident convinced most of the juries to acquit? Surely you wouldn't argue that the tape didn't hinder the prosecution in that instance?

[El Tejon]

Don, if the tape shows no crime, no prosecution=not a problem. If the tape shows a crime, prosecute=not a problem.

I do not see how evidence, whatever it shows, is ever a problem for the prosecution. I always liked it slopping over the sides.:D

[buzz_knox]

I think the potential problem is that aggrav. assault with a weapon is a very serious charge, and has some specific elements to it. If that is the case and the video shows that no such thing occurred, people are going to wonder why the prosecutor charged something so severe right off the bat. If he's perceived as trying to send a message with unwarranted charges, there might be a backlash, especially given the apparent popularity of these operations down there.

[TallPine]

I don't see how they can hold a charge like this in Texas, where you can use force to protect private property.

It was private property, the alleged "victims" were trespassing, so what is the crime even if "assault with a deadly weapon" did in fact occure?

A successful prosecution in this case would be an effective "taking" of all private property in Texas - don't think it's gonna happen ...

[Waitone]

The detained individuals were questioned and one had a work visa from El Salvador in
his possession, which meant he could have ridden the bus across the border and did not have to be where he was and by being on private property he was trespassing regardless of his work visa.I'm suspicious. Does anyone know if the detainees had legal counsel? Why would someone with proper documentation who could have ridden a bus across the border voluntarily wade through a rattlesnake pit for no apparent reason. Then LE making the bust just happens to be the most adament in opposition to civilian advocacy groups. And we conveniently have not one, but two videographers who just happen to be on scene at the right time?????<sniff, sniff> Something smells here.

I'd really be interested in seeing who the detainees legal aid is. I really do smell a set up.

Time will tell if I'm paranoid or clairvoyant.

[DeltaElite]

There's much more to this, both sides are telling just enough to make themselves look good. As is always the case in the legal system.

[rock jock]

In Texas, deadly force may be used for "mischief in the night". So, the moral of this story is shoot the trespassers rather than help them out.:confused:

[El Tejon]

buzz, it is my understanding that AggBatt was what they were arrested for but the prosecution has not yet acted. Isn't Texas a grand jury state?

[buzz_knox]

According to the first post, it was agg. assault with a deadly weapon. As for whether Texas is a grand jury state, I don't recall.

[El Tejon]

buzz, oh, yeah, sorry, don't have "assault" round these parts. Well, we will know soon enough, p.c. for something has to be found by today.

[Quartus]

If he's perceived as trying to send a message with unwarranted charges, there might be a backlash,


Like, maybe, a lawsuit for false arrest? Malicious prosecution?


If the facts are that the Sherriff and prosecutors are trying to impose their brand of "That's MY job! And I won't let YOU do it!", I hope the good guys go all the way with lawsuits.



Waitone, good questions. Very interesting...


Watch it never get on the radar of Big Media.

[s&w 24]

bloody interlopers stay off there land !!

[spacemanspiff]

what is the definition of "aggravated assault with a deadly weapon"? isnt it defined as simply pointing a gun at a person?

if so, then by the letter of the law, perhaps the RR are 'guilty'.
however, should the tapes show that the RR's confronted the trespassers in the same manner than we would confront an unwanted trespasser, then no charges should be filed.

and even if the tape shows that they detained the illegals at gunpoint and threatened them with being shot and badmouthed their mother and told them they'd never see another chalupa ever again, so what? INS/border patrol/whatever its being called nowadays isnt doing their damn job.

[longeyes]

Talking about a situation like this in terms of "legality" is a joke. This is about scumbag economics and racial politics. We all know exactly what's going on and what's going to happen.

[LawDog]

Texas Penal Code, Aggravated Assault:

(a) A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in Section 22.01 and the person:

(1) causes serious bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse; or

(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault.

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree, except that the offense is a felony of the first degree if the offense is committed:

Assault in 22.01 is defined as "Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing bodily injury to another, including the persons spouse".

Serious Bodily Injury: means "Bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ."

LawDog

[nemesis]

I know that area well and frequently hunt just a few miles further south. The locals are terrified of the coyotes and the drogaderos operating there and some of my friends have seen the mysterious "patrols" that materialize out of the brush and quickly disappear as suddenly as they arrived.

I shot a deer right at sundown and went out into the brush looking for it. I eventually found the deer and dragged it out but when I got back to the ranch and told them, they just about passed out and told me never to go in there again at night because of the "traffic" that passes through there.

They have reported the "patrols" to the Border Patrol but have never had a response. Their fences are constantly being cut and it is easy to follow the trail of the illegals as it goes out to Agua Dulce where they water up for the journey.

It really is a war zone but it's a one sided battle as nobody represents us.

[waterdog]

Maybe that DAMN sheriff told that story to draw border watchers in for an arrest.

If that sheriff is making s*** up, then he needs to be held accountable.

And the head of the RR, needs to put that video on the net, for all of us to see, before the local law decides it's evidence and locks it up.

waterdog

[TallPine]

So if you live in Texas, and someone breaks into your house, you are guilty of assault if you even get your gun out ....? :confused: