Preps and Solutions
(Sponsored Ads)
Silver
Strategic Relocation
Recently Posted Articles and Videos
Ready Nutrition - Homesteading and Preparedness
Ready Gardens - A Ready Nutrition Company
The Daily Sheeple
The Prepper Website
SGT Report
The Daily Coin
top Prepper Web Sites
Featured Destinations
The Liberty Mill
Web Destinations

Clarocet for Kids
Silver

After The Feds REPEATEDLY Violate Man’s Rights And Property, He SUES

Mac Slavo
February 22nd, 2018
SHTFplan.com
Comments (55)
Read by 9,286 people

An elderly man is suing two federal government agencies for Constitutional rights violations. The rancher claims that both agencies trespassed on his property and installed cameras on his trees without his permission – but the icing on the cake was when they threatened to arrest him.

According to ARS Technica, last November a 74-year-old rancher and attorney was walking around his ranch just south of Encinal, Texas, when he happened upon a small portable camera strapped approximately eight feet high onto a mesquite tree near his son’s home. The camera was encased in green plastic and had a transmitting antenna. The rancher removed the camera, and that’s when the trouble began for the feds involved in this property violation.

Soon after, Ricardo Palacios, the rancher, received phone calls from Customs and Border Protection officials and the Texas Rangers. Each agency claimed the camera as its own and demanded that it be returned. Palacios refused both, and they threatened him with arrest. Palacios saw the camera as the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. So he sued. He sued both CBP and the Texas Rangers for continued violation of his property and Constitutional rights.

“My client is 74 years old, he’s a lawyer, been practicing for almost 50 years, he has no criminal history whatsoever, law-abiding citizen, respected lawyer, and senior citizen,” Raul Casso, one of the attorneys representing Palacios, told Ars. “To have put him in jail would have been—forget the indecency of it—what a way to end a career.”

In court filings, Texas officials have claimed qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that protects law enforcement officials.

The camera now remains in Palacios’ attorneys’ possession while they are attempting to ask the case’s judge to allow them to formally introduce it in court as evidence. This federal lawsuit has raised thorny questions about the limits of the government’s power to conduct surveillance on private property, without the landowner’s permission.

“As a matter of policy, CBP does not comment on pending litigation,” Jennifer Gabris, a CBP spokeswoman, emailed Ars Technica.  The Texas Department of Public Safety similarly declined comment.

Nothing makes freedom lovers happier than seeing others stand up to the abusive rights violations of the federal government. Godspeed, Palacios!

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.
The Most Trusted Tactical Gas Mask In The World
Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Author: Mac Slavo
Views: Read by 9,286 people
Date: February 22nd, 2018
Website: www.SHTFplan.com

Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.

55 Comments...

Vote: Click here to vote for SHTF Plan as a Top Prepper Web Site
  1. Wile e. Coyote says:

    What purpose did the cameras serve? Was it to catch illegals? Being this guys a lawyer which I despise I don’t really care. If they were trying to catch illegals then some wetbacks stole some shit he’d still be bitching. They should’ve asked him first if they could install but maybe they did. There’s always 2 sides to every story. I know if I lived along the border they could stick all the cameras up they wanted.

  2. Heartless says:

    Same issue is already present if you are being tapped or surveilled. Try using a cellphone jammer on your property. You’ll see.

    • Philosopher Deplorabilis says:

      See what? I get that you can’t use one in a public place, like a theater, but on your own property? Too fricken bad.

      • Heartless says:

        yep PD – if any signal is cutoff and reported, all the person filing the complaint has to say is that my/your jammer prevented them from being able to make a 911 call. I usually offer a couple of Dixie cups and some kite string; but, for some reason, I’ve never had any takers.

  3. I wish this man well. When i took the irs to court, the court never even commented on the law(s) the irs is breaking. This man will be fortunate to even get “due process” unless they keep it in the national news. There is no lawful legal doctrine that protects the corrupt law enforcement agencies. These people allegedly have a fiduciary type relationship with citizens. As usual the courts will not apply this or hold them accountable.

  4. Many ranchers along the border have complained about illegals crossing their property. Had they asked the rancher, he probably would have said yes. Had he said no, then they should have taken it to court. This is the same obstacle to putting up a wall or its equivalent.

    • Plan twice, prep once says:

      This guys ranch is 35 miles from the Mexican border. There is a regulation that allows Border Pratrol free access to property up to 25 miles from the border. So he is within his rights to fight this.

      The fly in the ointment is these Midwest areas were heavily targeted by Obama in his judicial appointments. The progressives want conservative Anerica under their dominion. Cases like this display the problem. Crooked Federal law enforcement backed up by crooked prosecutors and judges results in citizens ending up like LaVoy Finicum.

      There are two sides, some ranchers along the border are on drug cartel payrolls, they may have had a warrant for the camera. Some ranchers are simply sympathetic to illegals crossing their property. Surprises may come out during the law suit.

      • living on the border says:

        The law give them 25 miles from the border. Obama has been telling them 100 mi from the border or any international airport.
        I agree some ranchers may be on payroll but most of us hate illegals on our land because they have a really bad habit of destroying fences and property, and stealing anything not nailed down, particularly tools and water.

  5. Ron Ahrens says:

    Suing Lucifer’s criminal treasonous psychopath controlled United States Corporation Government from the bowels of the pits of hell in Washington DC….Thank you today’s hearty laugh in the Police State hell on earth of damned and doomed New Babylon America

  6. the blame-e says:

    This guy has more going on for him than 90-percent of us do, and his chances of receiving justice in this case are moot.

    At best he will win but will never know why.

    Most likely the government will keep this matter tied up in the courts until this 74-year-old codger kicks.

    The legal system in the United States has been completely corrupted by professional politicians, corporate oligarchs and “special interests.”

    There is no “rule of law” anymore. The United States has reverted from a republic to an oligarchy, where “what pleases the prince has the force of law.”

    And things will only get worse when Hillary Clinton, the Democrats, the Soros’ get back in power.

  7. JoeSmoe says:

    “Qualified immunity,” what an abortion of justice.

  8. john stiner says:

    Where they recording the rancher or were they recording illegals running across his property?

  9. swinging richard says:

    Near his son’s place?

  10. DeplorableBitterClinger says:

    Note that 2 ‘agencies” claimed the camera, and both threatened him with arrest, but neither has done so. They know he has them dead to rights, and were hoping to be able to bully him. The lawsuit probably has some people worried, and will probably outlive him. He may not live to see the end of this, but the lawsuit can probably keep going after he’s gone.

    • 41MagMan says:

      “He may not live to see the end of this, but the lawsuit can probably keep going after he’s gone.”

      Yes, and they will, too, if they want to make an example of someone who is foolish enough to demand their legal rights rather than just knuckling under to their “authority”. Remember: they have infinite resources to use against us and we do not. One can win in court and still lose their financial @$$e$ to these jackals.

  11. watching and waiting says:

    The real belief that we think we live in a free country
    is unfounded.

    I am under the belief if any of the founding fathers were to come back today they would not recognize our form of government.

    The New World order is still unfolding as I write this post. Trump is a speed bump slightly hindering that process.

    In the end you and I may be dead from age or sickness but the generation that follows will feel the boot of complete suppression and oppression on their necks.

    From the article: The camera now remains in Palacios’ attorneys’ possession while they are attempting to ask the case’s judge to allow them to formally introduce it in court as evidence. This federal lawsuit has raised thorny questions about the limits of the government’s power to conduct surveillance on private property, without the landowner’s permission.—and they don’t

    From the article: “As a matter of policy, CBP does not comment on pending litigation,” Jennifer Gabris, a CBP spokeswoman, emailed Ars Technica. The Texas Department of Public Safety similarly declined comment.
    —- means screw you, we do as we please, we make the laws.

  12. Hunter says:

    all of you are nothing more than slaves so why not stfu

  13. cranerigger says:

    Libtards don’t believe in a citizen’s property rights. They need to ask permission to install anything on a citizen’s property. If they want to claim imminent domain (property rights infringement supposedly for the “greater good”) then they need to go through the legislative & legal process to secure that type of confiscation. This citizen is an attorney, they might have a serious battle on their hands.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Depending on the law as written, the government may have the legal right to do this.

    If so, it will surely come out in court.

    But I doubt there will be any followup stories showing the final outcome and the reasons for it, stories like this usually don’t generate enough interest for a followup story.

  15. The camera was placed on the man’s private property without his permission – it therefore becomes his. Keeping it as evidence makes nothing but sense.

  16. 2isone says:

    So, let me get this straight. The camera was mounted onto a tree on this guy’s property. Sounds like a gift to me.

    • 41MagMan says:

      @2isone

      Yes, it does to me too. Like when a company sends us something by mail that we did not order and then demands payment. The law sees that as a GIFT and not as a purchase. One can keep such gifts if they choose or they can return it.

      I once ordered a computer modem from a company. But they double shipped 2 modems to me, only one of which required payment. In a generous mood, I wrapped up the 2nd modem and sent it back to them. But they got all pi$$y because I did not have an RMA number, so returned the modem to me. So, I just kept it and to heck with them.

  17. southside says:

    They should have asked permission. It is private property,and I don’t believe qualified immunity will work. A publuc relations disaster

  18. heff says:

    looks like somebody wrote this ‘story’ with about 5 extra minutes on hand while they were pumping gas. It’s so vague and bereft of information that it makes no sense.

  19. Anonymous says:

    A bedroom is private property too so I wonder if someone in government thinks it has the right to put a camera in anyone’s bedroom ?

  20. I live along this border that Mr Palacios’ ranch is near. There is no jurisdiction for the Border Patrol to do what they did and are still doing. The whole case deals with on going harassment not just a single incident. Everyone who lives or travels near the border gets the same treatment. If everyone would take the time to read and use a legal dictionary then you would already know the “other side of the story”. Obviously, most Americans have never read the organic laws of the country or their state. Take the time to sit and study just one evening a week and you would be surprised at what you will learn.

  21. Ray Zorback says:

    There are actually three sides to every story. Side “A”, Side”B”, and the “Truth”.

  22. Hubert Reiter says:

    Reading this Nonsense, I can’t help feeling sorry for America. There seems to lurk more Danger within than without. If those Contributors to this (whatever it is supposed to be) Nonsense are an Example of the Average American, one can only fear for the Future of the Rest of the World. Is it possible for so many stupid People to live in one Country?

  23. ronna says:

    The camera at least should have had a label on it, “Property of US government. Do not remove. Call 123456 for information.” Without any label (if that is the case) he had every right to remove the camera. He didn’t at the time know who it belonged to.

  24. Think aboout it says:

    Only one side
    The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

  25. Think aboout it says:

    only one side
    The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
    Enough Said

  26. I’ve taken hunting cameras and treestands off my property for years and sold them on craigslist. Great little moneymaker. You put it up on my property, its mine, I dont care if you are joe dumbass, or the feds.

  27. Paul the cab driver says:

    Were I to find one of these things on my property there are a number of things I could do. A tiny bit of vaseline on the lens, for example.
    Ignore it for now, shoot it with a Winchester 30-30 later…
    But the best idea I’ve come up with is to carefully take it down, take it to a local topless bar, and leave it on one of the tables, pointed at the stage.

  28. True Patriot says:

    The tyrannical overreaching on private farms, ranches and land is completely out of control. Its time for Fedzilla to be Bitchslapped into non existence, preferably eliminated by Trump. Im writing and getting others to write, call Congress, Senate and WH to shut down BLM, ATF, FBI & since the Texas Rangers have destroyed any credibility they once had shut them down as well. Greg Abbott might do it since he is a Conservative. This will not stop until we stop it.

 

Web Design and Content Copyright 2007 - 2015 SHTF Plan - When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You - All Rights Reserved

Our Supercharged Intel Xeon E5-2620 v4 Octo-Core Dual Servers are Powered By Liquid Web

Dedicated IP Address: 69.167.174.108

The content on this site is provided as general information only. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of sponsors or firms affiliated with the author(s). The author may or may not have a financial interest in any company or advertiser referenced. Any action taken as a result of information, analysis, or advertisement on this site is ultimately the responsibility of the reader.

SHTFplan is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.