AZ - rancher charged in killing of trespassing serially-deported migrant

[Anti Federalist]

Held on a million dollars bail because he shot a trespassing migrant invader???

Something is missing here.

Or maybe it's just another escalation in the war on white people, I don't know.

And not for nothing, but where the $#@! are they graduating people from "journalism" school these days?

That headline says the dead migrant invader is being held on bail.



Migrant shot dead by Arizona rancher held on $1M for murder charge was deported several times before: report

https://news.yahoo.com/migrant-shot-...LKhc62-K2VnUxW

Danielle Wallace

Wed, February 8, 2023 at 1:35 PM EST·3 min read

A migrant, who was allegedly shot and killed by an elderly Arizona rancher whom a judge ordered held on $1 million bail despite pleas that his wife is left alone on their property near the U.S.-Mexico border, had been deported several times before the deadly encounter, according to records obtained by the Daily Mail.

George Alan Kelly, 73, was charged with first-degree murder in connection to the shooting of a man authorities believe to be 48-year-old Gabriel Cuen-Butimea, based on the Mexican voter registration card he carried. The Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office in Nogales, Arizona, said Cuen-Butimea’s body was found with one gunshot wound about 100 to 150 yards from Kelly’s home on Jan. 30.

The sheriff’s office confirmed Monday that Kelly had been arrested last week.

The shooting reportedly happened on Kelly’s Vermilion Mountain Ranch in Kino Springs.

According to Nogales International, Kelly pleaded with a judge to reduce his $1 million bail because his wife is now left to fend for herself on the cattle ranch they share. The judge declined Kelly's request.

"She's there by herself," Kelly reportedly said at a court hearing. "Nobody to take care of her, the livestock or the ranch. And I'm not going anywhere. I can't come up with a million dollars."

"Federal court records show Cuen-Butimea has had a history of illegal border crossings and deportations in and around Nogales, with the most recent documented case in 2016," the Daily Mail reported. Fox News Digital reached out to the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office Thursday to confirm those records, but did not immediately hear back before publication.

The Mail reported that Santa Cruz Chief Deputy Gerardo Castillo declined to comment on Cuen-Butimea’s immigration status, claiming that it has not yet been confirmed.

Castillo reportedly said investigators are still working to confirm the circumstances of the shooting as well as a potential motive, adding that it does not appear Kelly knew the victim.

Citing a dispatch report, Nogales International reported that the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office first received a call about 2:40 p.m. Jan. 30 from U.S. Border Patrol agents relaying details of a "possible active shooter" in the area of Sagebrush Road. Border Patrol said someone at the scene, identified as "Allen," described a "group of people running" and said he was "unsure if he was getting shot at as well."

By about 5:50 p.m., sheriff’s deputies received another report about shots fired at the property. By 6:42 p.m., authorities recovered the body of a "deceased Hispanic male" and said he had no weapons on him at the time, Castillo told the outlet. Investigators reportedly collected two assault-style rifles from Kelly's property to determine if either was used in the shooting.

Kelly’s neighbor, Maria Castillo, told KOLD News 13 that it is not usual to see migrants crossing the border and entering town. Cuen-Butimea lived just south of the border in Nogales, Mexico.

Kelly, who remained held at Santa Cruz County Jail ahead of a Wednesday court appearance, reportedly doubles as a self-published fiction author writing about ranch life in the border region. One book available as an Amazon e-book is titled "Far Beyond the Border Fence" and is described as "bringing the Mexican border/drug conflict into the 21st century," according to the Mail.

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Probably intentionally written to confuse the reader. The less a person understands the easier it is to control them. I read nothing about the alleged reason the rancher killed the guy.

[Occam's Banana]

In the absence of further details, this sounds like a job for jury nullification.

And not for nothing, but where the $#@! are they graduating people from "journalism" school these days?

That headline says the dead migrant invader is being held on bail.

Another sign o' the times. Journalists and editors are people whose profession it literally is to use words.[1] In Ye Olden Days, any respectable venues (even - indeed, especially - the establishmentarian ones) would have been ashamed and appalled to have permitted such sins against grammar to have been committed under their aegis. Symptomatically of our age (and intentionally or not in this particular case), the degradation and destruction of language and meaning proceed apace.



[1] To be fair in this case, it is more often editors rather than authors who compose the headlines under which articles are published - though I doubt as a general rule that journalists are any more grammatically skilled than their editors (and it should, if anything, be the opposite).

[Anti Federalist]

In the absence of further details, this sounds like a job for jury nullification.



Another sign o' the times. Journalists and editors are people whose profession it literally is to use words. In Ye Olden Days, any respectable venues (even - indeed, especially - the establishmentarian ones) would have been ashamed and appalled to have permitted such sins against grammar to have been committed under their aegis. Symptomatically of our age (and intentionally or not), the degradation and destruction of language and meaning proceed apace.

I forgot, after I wrote that, that good grammar is racist.

You gotta hand it to the Marxists, they are not stupid.

Swapping "class" with "race" has yielded brilliant results.

[sparebulb]

..... this sounds like a job for jury nullification.

Jury nullification would prove to be only a pyrrhic victory once the man looses his ranch to pay for his defense.

Moving whitey out is priority over eliminating him.

[Occam's Banana]

Jury nullification would prove to be only a pyrrhic victory once the man looses his ranch to pay for his defense.

Maybe it's just me, but not being imprisoned in a rape-cage for the rest of one's life seems like quite a bit more than "only a Pyrrhic victory".

In fact, if I were forced to choose between:

(1) NOT going to prison for life, but losing my ranch to pay for my defense, or
(2) going to prison for life, but NOT losing my ranch to pay for my defense, or
(3) going to prison for life, AND losing my ranch to pay for my defense,

then I would choose (1) every time, and it's not even close.

Of course, I would prefer (4) "NOT going to prison for life, and NOT losing my ranch to pay for my defense", but if that's not an option ... *shrug*

There are also indirect consequences to consider: if the charges were jury-nullified (even with the direct consequence of losing one's ranch to pay for one's defense), a valuable signal would be sent to the effect that such egregious charges won't go unrepudiated - which certainly won't be a Pyrrhic victory for any subsequent might-be defendants who won't face such charges because might-be prosecutors fear they won't win with them. (Prosecutors are political creatures and are highly conscious of the notches in their belts. I doubt there are many prosecutors who would be willing to fall on their swords and take losing cases, just so they can maybe financially ruin some defendants.)

[Anti Federalist]

Legal and civil insurance for self defense is a must.

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/membership/

[Occam's Banana]

In the absence of further details, this sounds like a job for jury nullification.

On further consideration, jury nullification may not even be relevant here.

Jury nullification is for instances in which the defendant is technically "guilty" of a particular charge, but is nevertheless acquitted on that charge because the jury thinks a verdict of "guilty" would not serve the interests of justice (as distinct from the interests of "the law" - i.e., of judges, lawyers, politicians, police, prison guards & bureaucrats, et al.).

Based on the limited information publicly available at the moment, a charge of first-degree murder does not seem warranted. (Perhaps something like "voluntary manslaughter" would be more appropriate?) If that is the case and the defendant has been "overcharged", then an acquittal on first-degree murder would not be jury nullification, since the defendant would not be technically "guilty".

[Anti Federalist]

GoFundMe removes all pages for Arizona rancher accused of killing migrant

Give Send Go page for his bail.

Donated.

https://www.givesendgo.com/G9T79

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

This guy needs to sue the US government for failure to secure the border. He has standing.

[Anti Federalist]

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/sta...70152151932932

[Origanalist]

Any word on the poor bastards wife?

[Anti Federalist]

Any word on the poor bastards wife?

No...I know his GiveSendGo drive is up to $310,000

https://www.givesendgo.com/G9T79

I would hope that a good bondsman can spring him for 10 percent of stated bail, which means he has more than enough.

[Anti Federalist]

What have I said, a million times or more: NEVER TALK TO COPS!

Come to find this out:

George Alan Kelly, a rancher charged with first-degree murder in the shooting of a Mexican national, allegedly fired "warning shots" after armed men "pointed an AK-47 right at him."

This poor bastard's defense attorney is a $#@!ing idiot.

NEVER admit to a "warning shot".

Never do it, in fact.

If you must use deadly force then use it and stop the threat as best you can and cease shooting when there is no more threat.

In Arizona (and almost every other state) firing "warning shots" are illegal and can be used to establish premeditation, thus the first degree murder charge.

If it's too late and you already did, then, well, dummy up and keep your $#@!ing mouth shut about it.

Or, if faced with no other option other than prison for the rest of your life, frankly, lie.

"I did not fire warning shots. The trespassers were armed and pointed a weapon directly at me. I fired in self defense, as I reasonably thought I was in immediate danger of getting shot and killed. Under stress and bad conditions, my shots were poorly placed and I did not hit my assailant, to the best of my knowledge."

In this case the perp is dead, and dead men tell no tales.

[Origanalist]

DA aughta be lynched.

[Anti Federalist]

[jon4liberty]

The cartels own the DA's, judges, and politicians. More than likely this guy was with the cartel or helping them. This is retaliation.

The constant war on white men from every angle. Marxists have destroyed society and the family unit. Only a few slivers of light remain.

[Occam's Banana]

Well, at least George Kelly didn't call the cops to deal with the situation.

Otherwise, he might be dead: Border Patrol kills Arizona man who reported migrants on property

[Valli6]

...

Judge declares mistrial in Nogales rancher murder case
Sarah Lapidus - Arizona Republic
April 22, 2024

Jurors in the murder case against a Nogales-area rancher accused of killing an unarmed migrant on his property were unable to reach a unanimous verdict and remained deadlocked on the charges.

After more than 15 hours of deliberation, Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink declared a mistrial just after 4:30 p.m. The court scheduled a status meeting for 1:30 p.m. April 29 to allow the Santa Cruz County Attorney's Office to decide if it wants to retry the case.

"They won't wear me down," rancher George Alan Kelly told reporters after the mistrial was declared...

...Kelly’s defense attorneys called it a victory and the second-best outcome. One of his two attorneys, Texas attorney Kathy Lowthorp, said the trial is the longest she has had in her 24 years of practice. She said she will represent Kelly if the case goes to trial again. She called the disclosure requirements in Arizona “mind-boggling.”...

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...se/73390409007

[Anti Federalist]

Good I guess.

[susano]

...

Help me out here. I'd never thought the deadlocked jury thing before but if just one juror won't agree to a guilty verdict, isn't that an automatic acquittal? What's the difference with a hung jury?

[acptulsa]

Help me out here. I'd never thought the deadlocked jury thing before but if just one juror won't agree to a guilty verdict, isn't that an automatic acquittal? What's the difference with a hung jury?

A unanimous verdict stands. Otherwise it's a mistrial, and up to the prosecutor whether they try again.

So, no, an entire jury doesn't have to agree to nullify to very possibly do a little jury nullification.

[susano]

A unanimous verdict stands. Otherwise it's a mistrial, and up to the prosecutor whether they try again.

So, no, an entire jury doesn't have to agree to nullify to very possibly do a little jury nullification.

Man, I must be a real dope because I thought all it took for an acquittal was one juror refusing to convict. Either that or I'm a space case and forgot how trials work. Heck I watched every day of OJ and Casey Anthony, lol. I should know this because of previous hung juries in the news. A mistrial makes me nervous for the AZ man because if it's a woke prosecutor, they'll persist.

[Anti Federalist]

Man, I must be a real dope because I thought all it took for an acquittal was one juror refusing to convict. Either that or I'm a space case and forgot how trials work. Heck I watched every day of OJ and Casey Anthony, lol. I should know this because of previous hung juries in the news. A mistrial makes me nervous for the AZ man because if it's a woke prosecutor, they'll persist.

He's toast anyways.

Even if acquitted on the state charges, the feds will come in and file some bull$#@! "he violated the invader's human rights" charges.

And they have a 94 percent conviction rate.

"Fifth amendment? Never heard of it...move along prole."

[sparebulb]

He's toast anyways.

Even if acquitted on the state charges, the feds will come in and file some bull$#@! "he violated the invader's human rights" charges.

And they have a 94 percent conviction rate.

"Fifth amendment? Never heard of it...move along prole."

Agreed.

Plus, they bankrupt people if they win or lose.

Just see who ends up with his property when this is over.

[Occam's Banana]

He's toast anyways.

Even if acquitted on the state charges, the feds will come in and file some bull$#@! "he violated the invader's human rights" charges.

And they have a 94 percent conviction rate.

"Fifth amendment? Never heard of it...move along prole."

//

Fewer than [half of] 1% of federal criminal defendants were acquitted in 2022
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-re...itted-in-2022/
{John Gramlich | 14 June 2023}

Former President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty this week to federal criminal charges related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents after his departure from the White House in 2021. The unprecedented charges against Trump and his subsequent plea raise the question: How common is it for defendants in federal criminal cases to plead not guilty, go to trial and ultimately be acquitted?

In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available statistics from the federal judiciary. Another 1,379 went to trial and were found guilty (1.9%).

The overwhelming majority of defendants in federal criminal cases that year did not go to trial at all. About nine-in-ten (89.5%) pleaded guilty, while another 8.2% had their case dismissed at some point in the judicial process, according to the data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

These statistics include all defendants charged in U.S. district courts with felonies and serious misdemeanors, as well as some defendants charged with petty offenses. They do not include federal defendants whose cases were handled by magistrate judges or the much broader universe of defendants in state courts. Defendants who entered pleas of “no contest,” in which they accept criminal punishment but do not admit guilt, are also excluded. The 2022 federal fiscal year began Oct. 1, 2021, and ended Sept. 30, 2022.

The U.S. Justice Department indicted Trump earlier this month on 37 counts relating to seven criminal charges: willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document or record, concealing a document in a federal investigation, scheme to conceal, and false statements and representations.

Trump’s case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, where acquittal rates look similar to the national average. In fiscal 2022, only 12 of 1,944 total defendants in the Southern District of Florida – about 0.6% – were acquitted at trial. As was the case nationally, the vast majority of defendants in Florida’s Southern District (86.2%) pleaded guilty that year, while 10.7% had their cases dismissed.

It’s not clear from the federal judiciary’s statistics how many other defendants nationally or in the Southern District of Florida faced the same or similar charges that Trump is facing or how those cases ended.

Broadly speaking, however, the charges against Trump are rare. In fiscal 2022, more than eight-in-ten federal criminal defendants in the United States faced charges related to one of four other broad categories of crime: drug offenses (31%), immigration offenses (25%), firearms and explosives offenses (16%) or property offenses (11%). In Florida’s Southern District, too, more than eight-in-ten defendants faced charges related to these four categories.

Trump, of course, is not a typical federal defendant. He is the first former president ever to face federal criminal charges and is running for president again in 2024. The federal case against Trump is still in its early stages, and it’s unclear when – or whether – it will proceed to trial.

Well yeah if they kept slapping an overabundance of charges on any of us, eventually they could probably build a case.

That's exactly how they do it. They slather on the charges ("three felonies a day"), accumulating longer potential terms of incarceration - so defendants (who do not have the effectively "infinite" resources available to the feds) are strongly incentivized to accept deals in which they plead "guilty" in order to reduce or avoid lengthier prison sentences (keeping in mind that there is no parole for federal convictions).

The only alternative is to imagine that federal prosecutors are (1) so extremely competent that they are able to win even the iffiest cases (so much so that even innocent defendants feel compelled to acquiesce), or (2) so extremely restrained that they only ever take on cases that are obvious "slam dunks" (so much so that even guilty defendants feel compelled to acquiesce).

[Anti Federalist]

//

My mistake comrade...99 percent.

[Anti Federalist]

Prosecutors say they will not retry an Arizona rancher accused of murder near the US-Mexico border

https://apnews.com/article/us-mexico...source=Twitter

BY ANITA SNOW
Updated 7:34 PM GMT-5, April 29, 2024

PHOENIX (AP) — Prosecutors said Monday they will not retry an Arizona rancher whose trial in the fatal shooting of a Mexican man on his property ended last week with a deadlocked jury.

The jurors in the trial of George Alan Kelly were unable to reach a unanimous decision on a verdict after more than two days of deliberation. Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink declared a mistrial on April 22.

After the mistrial, the Santa Cruz County Attorney’s Office had the option to retry Kelly — or to drop the case.

“Because of the unique circumstances and challenges surrounding this case, the Santa Cruz County Attorney’s Office has decided not to seek a retrial,” Deputy County Attorney Kimberly Hunley told Fink Monday.

Fink agreed to dismiss the case. He said a hearing would be scheduled later to determine if it would be dismissed with prejudice, which would mean it couldn’t be brought back to court.

Kelly’s defense attorney Brenna Larkin told the judge that she would file a request for the case to be dismissed with prejudice.

Larkin did not immediately return a request for comment sent by email after the ruling.

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/TexasLindsay_/st...56612454932659