Cochise County rancher Roger Barnett cannot escape paying punitive damages to border crossers he kidnapped despite a 2011 state law passed specifically to help him, a federal judge has ruled.
Frank Zapata acknowledged that Arizona voters approved a measure in 2006 which constitutionally spells out that anyone not in this country legally is ineligible to collect punitive damages after winning a lawsuit.
That, however, came too late for Barnett who was sued following a 2004 incident when 16 illegal immigrants said the rancher illegally imprisoned them while they were crossing his property. One woman also said she was kicked.
So last year, the Legislature voted to make that ballot measure retroactive to the start of 2004.
Armed with that law, Barnett went back to federal court to void the $60,000 in punitive damages that four of the plaintiffs were awarded two years ago.
Zapata rejected the arguments.
The judge, almost in passing, said in a footnote that he accepted the arguments of attorneys for the plaintiffs that the 2011 law is unconstitutional. But Zapata said he could reject Barnett’s arguments on more basic grounds: If lawmakers were trying to help Barnett, they did not do it right.
The judge pointed out that the constitutional language says those not in this country legally cannot be awarded punitive damages.
But Zapata said that the question of punitive damages — a special award meant to punish a defendant for outrageous conduct or make an example of that person — does not arise until the case is finished and a defendant is found liable.
More to the point, Zapata pointed out that when a different judge awarded punitive damages in February 2009, three of them were lawfully present in the country. And a fourth, the judge said, had returned to Mexico after she was allowed to be present to testify at the trial.
“Therefore, when punitive damages were awarded, none of the plaintiffs were present in Arizona in violation of federal immigration law.”
During the 2011 legislative hearing, Rep. Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix, said helping Barnett was exactly what he had in mind.
He said the 2006 constitutional amendment, referred to the ballot by the Legislature, was a direct reaction to the fact lawmakers knew Barnett was being sued.
“We weren’t smart enough at that point to understand that there was going to be a time lapse,” Weiers said at the time, making Barnett unable to take advantage of that change.
Zapata, however, said all that is legally irrelevant. He said that judges are bound to follow the words lawmakers put on paper — and into the statute books.
“If we find no ambiguity in the statute’s language, we must give effect to that language and we may not employ other rules of construction to interpret the provision,” the judge wrote.
Weiers argued at the time that the restriction against punitive damages makes sense.
“How incredibly silly that you’ve got people breaking the law, trespassing, doing this and that on personal property, and then you’re handed punitive damage awards,” he said.
Barnett’s separate efforts to have the entire verdict overturned have proven no more successful. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected his arguments that the trial judge should have told jurors they could consider his claim of self-defense.
TeaPartyPatriot posted at 8:19 am on Mon, May 21, 2012.
Since when did making a citizen arrest of criminal invaders become kidnapping? Since when is the penalty for kidnapping paying punitive damages to the kidnapped criminal invaders? Shouldn't all Americans be assisting law enforcement when they can? This whole affair sticks of Mexican appeasement. Liberal judges will be the death of America.
PortTabacco posted at 10:09 pm on Fri, May 11, 2012.
Another ATTACK against an innocent American citizen for THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS and Globalism!
Remember when this government threw out Proposition 187 in illegal alien bloated California?
Passed by the citizens of California? Now California has a bill going though
to give these foreign criminal work permits.
Something isn't right is it? American citizens get ready for more of this dung against the citizen!
Rino and Proud posted at 9:46 pm on Fri, May 11, 2012.
HA HA......Barnett should stick to ranching....he is a poor kidnapper at best. Let the Border Patrol do their job.
BajaRat posted at 7:17 pm on Thu, May 10, 2012.
Zapata is a Mexican government operative (fifth columnist) appointed by the despicable lying cretin Bill Clinton. This guy should be thrown off the bench. Hopefully Barnett will take this to a higher court.
asuaguila posted at 3:54 pm on Thu, May 10, 2012.
That darn constitution. You three are next by the way. Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
mlimberg posted at 7:08 am on Thu, May 10, 2012.
Expect to see a raise in bodies found in the desert soon.... Do you think Americans have had enough?
Be certain to vote out all Liberal Judges!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Masterrogue666 posted at 10:10 pm on Wed, May 9, 2012.
Gee, the last rancher that tried to HELP ILLEGAL ALIEN CRIMINALS was murdered for his trouble!
I say place "No tresspassing or you will be shot!" in English, Spanish, Madarin, et al. Wait a minute, why should the property owner incur that cost?
Time to pass some laws like they have in Texas. I believe that if you are trespassing there, you can be shot!
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/In_Texas_can_you_shoot_someone_for_stepping_on_your_property
Juggernaut8000 posted at 6:12 pm on Wed, May 9, 2012.
Judge Zapata you are a worthless piece of trash and have no business enforcing the laws of this Country.
I, as an American, have less rights that those who are here illegally because of cowards like Zapata who can't stand up and for what is right.
By the way, Zapata, are you hispanic? sounds like a conflict of interest and you should have excused yourself from the case if you had any morals/brains.