Thread: NM:Otero Co. makes deal;caves in to OBLs on raids

Sheriff rejects more changes
Race rights already covered, agency says
The Daily News
By Elva K. Osterreich, Associate News Editor
Article Launched: 04/19/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT

During a settlement conference Thursday with the Border Network for Human Rights, the Otero County Sheriff's Department turned down any suggested policy changes.

BNHR wanted the department to modify language and procedures in a new agreement document between the sheriff's department and the America Civil Liberties Union in conjunction with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

"During the conference we turned down any changes or any of the things they wanted," said Undersheriff Norbert Sanchez. "They wanted us to change our policy and we are not going to have two policies."

The agreement document relates to a lawsuit which was mediated earlier this month between the OCSD, ACLU and MALDEF. The suit was filed by five Chaparral families and the ACLU and MALDEF alleging deputies raided homes in Chaparral in September without search warrants, interrogated families without evidence of criminal activity and targeted households on the basis of race.

As part of negotiations earlier this month, the sheriff's department agreed to new procedures as part of the settlement. The county also agreed to pay the families monetary damages and their attorneys' fees and court costs.

In return, the sheriff's department denies any wrongdoing and the suit was dropped.

Friday, Sanchez said the proposed language and procedure changes were rejected at Thursday's settlement conference Thursday because the negotiated policy was already being followed. A recent written version was a paper version of that policy.

"We are going to stand by what we are doing in Chaparral," Sanchez said. "We have reduced the crime tremendously in that area and started a neighborhood watch."

Sanchez said illegal aliens being apprehended in the Chaparral area are those officers have come across in the department's regular law enforcement capacity.

"We will continue doing our Stonegarden law enforcement in the area," he said, referring to the Stonegarden Operation that was part of the September raids. "Illegal aliens will be apprehended and turned over to the Border Patrol.

"We are going to hold our ground. It's not about us or them. It's this country we need to protect."

Under the new operational procedure policy, deputies "shall not stop, investigate, detain or question a person solely for the purpose of determining whether such a person is in the United States without authorization and proper documentation."

The new policy also notes that "a person's presence in the United States without proper documentation or authority ... is not a criminal violation. Therefore, a deputy may not initiate a criminal investigation based solely" on a person's immigration status.

Also under the new policy, deputies won't inquire into immigration status while investigating a petty misdemeanor. In more serious cases, the sheriff's department agrees to inquire about immigration status only if the status is relevant to the investigation.

Investigations will be initiated only for reasons independent of any suspicions about the person's immigration status, according to the new four-page policy. In addition, if a deputy obtains information "voluntarily, inadvertently or through a collateral source ... during any other criminal investigation or arrest of a suspect, the deputy may contact the appropriate federal law enforcement officials."


Editor's note: Managing Editor Michael Becker contributed to this report
http://www.alamogordonews.com/news/ci_8977519

RELATED THREAD:
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-112410.html

The new policy also notes that "a person's presence in the United States without proper documentation or authority ... is not a criminal violation. Therefore, a deputy may not initiate a criminal investigation based solely" on a person's immigration status.

If it's not a criminal violation.....then what's the point of immigration, work permits, visas, tourist visas, birth certificates, SS#'s, and any other mound of papers we have to show to prove something?

Maybe Judicial Watch needs to take a look at this:


Federal Immigration and Nationality Act of 1996
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):
A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:
* [assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or
* encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.
Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief.



Maybe Mecha, LaRaza, ACLU, etc. needs to be brought to court under the RICO act.

[quote]Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief. [/quote]

Are those sentences in the Act itself? I mean did you quote everything directly? I'm specifically thinking about the last one referring to civil liability. That would really be great news.

Originally Posted by Captainron

Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief. [/quote]

Are those sentences in the Act itself? I mean did you quote everything directly? I'm specifically thinking about the last one referring to civil liability. That would really be great news.

Yes I copy and pasted the quote. I did not post all of what I had because I thought it wasn't needed. Perhaps that is the section that the woman who is suing S&K industries is using. Sounds like if she is, she has a good lawyer.

The pattern of racketeering activity is defined as commission of two or more of the listed crimes.

Gogo, to qualify a lawsuit under the provision of RICO, you have to show two or more predicate acts! This isn't necessarily hard to do in organized crime actions ----"where there's smoke there's fire." But harboring illegal aliens in itself probably wouldn't be enough. However, a lot of times there are oher crimes such as money laundering, a very common crime in rackettering enterprises. Under RICO statute they have a long list of crimes which they refer to as "predicate acts." So to meet the bar of a RICO claim you have to show that there are at least two acts off that list.

The positive side is that we are very fortunate that the long standing RICO law was expanded in 1996 to include immigration violations. Here are the predicate acts:

1) “racketeering activityâ€

Thanks Captainron. So the feds must have good cause for two predicate acts on this one.