Discover more from Jon Rappoport
Deep dive into the prosecution of the rancher who "murdered an illegal migrant on his property"
Plus another southern border story: the kidnapping/murder of four Americans; more than meets the eye
Here is the NewsNation/AP account of the story, and then I’ll comment:
NOGALES, Ariz. (NewsNation) — An Arizona rancher accused of killing a Mexican man on his property near the U.S.-Mexico border was back in court Friday for an evidentiary hearing.
In a legal victory, prosecutors lowered the charge against George Alan Kelly, initially charged with first-degree murder, to one count of second-degree murder. They didn’t explain why during the hearing.
Prosecutors allege Kelly opened fire with an AK-47 rifle on about eight unarmed migrants he encountered on Jan. 30 on his ranch outside Nogales, striking the man who died in the back as he tried to flee.
Kelly has maintained that he shot in the direction of several individuals on his property that day, saying he shot 150 yards over their heads — not at them.
NewsNation talked with the 74-year-old rancher, who arrived alone at the courthouse, where he stuck to mostly “No comment” responses.
In addition to the one count of second-degree murder, Kelly is now charged with two counts of aggravated assault against two of the migrants.
One of the two alleged victims came forward and testified Friday, identified only by his initials, D.R.R., to protect his identity.
He arrived at court in a hoodie pulled up over his head and a mask covering his nose and mouth.
D.R.R. testified that he and Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, 48, the Mexican man killed on Kelly’s ranch, had paid for passage across the border from Nogales, Mexico, and were heading to Phoenix.
He told the state that he had crossed the border six or seven times prior to this attempt on Jan 30, and that he was apprehended by Border Patrol every time and even served time in custody for illegal reentry.
The witness described the day he says he ran for his life as shots were being fired by a man he identified as Kelly. He said he was only one step behind Cuen-Buitimea.
He “grabbed his chest and fell back,” D.R.R. said through an interpreter.
D.R.R. said he knew Cuen-Butimea was dead and couldn’t help him, and they were still being fired at, so he ran back to the end of the wall, where they crossed and went back into Mexico.
Cuen-Buitimea was discovered unarmed, but he did have a radio and was wearing tactical boots.
According to D.R.R.’s testimony, Cuen-Buitimea was wearing all tan clothing and boots with a camouflage backpack and bag.
D.R.R. also said that he had a meeting with the Santa Cruz County sheriff and a detective in Mexico that was set up by Cuen-Buitimea’s daughters.
Kelly’s attorney, Brenna Larkin, has said Kelly was being targeted by smugglers who were intimidating witnesses and skewing the investigation.
“Testimony is something that is bought and sold by drug traffickers the same way that drugs and people are bought and sold,” Larkin said. “In this case, the benefit they’re getting is security for their smuggling route through Mr. Kelly’s property, and they’re sending a message to anybody else defending his or her own property that if you defend your property against us, you will be arrested and there will be witnesses who come to stand against you.”
Multiple U.S. Border Patrol sources told NewsNation that Kelly had a reputation among the smugglers as someone who fires his rifle off when undocumented individuals are on his property.
Rodney Scott, a former Border Patrol chief, said Cuen-Butemea also had multiple prior deportations.
“Everything that I’ve seen, in my professional experience, would tell me that that guy was either a scout, or an actual guide for a group with a radio much more likely. He was probably scouting out in advance, or the frontman, if you will,” Scott said. “But that type of activity and behavior doesn’t take place out there. [U]nless it’s part of the cartel.”
Nogales is in the Tucson sector, which is leading the nation in gotaways, and Kelly’s ranch sits on what the U.S. Border Patrol said is a major narcotics route. It’s an area notorious for extremely aggressive and violent smugglers.
“That has been a tough area to work for many, many years; the cartel operating in that area has had a propensity for violence,” Scott said.
He said he’s experienced the dangers firsthand.
“Good friend of mine was actually pinned down by automatic weapons fire for over 20 minutes while the cartel came and recovered the narcotics they were trying to smuggle in and got them and the people safely back to Mexico,” he recalled. “About a year later, two agents were working trafficking that same area, they were both actually shot by smugglers, same types of tactics.”
The shooting has stirred up emotions as the national debate over border security heats up with an eye toward the 2024 presidential election.
—end of NewsNation/AP story—
So the prosecution’s unnamed witness and defendant Kelly tell different stories.
A major part of this piece—the context—is presented by the former Border Patrol chief, Rodney Scott.
And what I’m talking about is the basic ongoing situation in Nogales, on the American side.
Scott is saying that, at worst, this area is controlled by the Mexican cartels, and at best, it is disputed territory.
Some people will blandly respond, “Yes? So?”
I don’t respond that way.
It’s unthinkable that the US government would allow a piece of US soil to belong to murderous Mexican drug cartels.
That’s where you have to start if you want to make sense of this situation.
Why does the defendant, Kelly, have to deal with violent cartel members and assets and smuggled illegal migrants crossing his property in the first place?
For quite some time, he’s been hung out to dry by the US government, who have as much interest in the sanctity of private property as lizards or snakes or wolves do.
And THAT fact has to be understood. We’re not dealing with a federal government that has any interest in, or respect for, the right to own property—unless THEY, THE GOVERNMENT, own it or at least control it.
So NOW you have an untenable situation. The owner of property, Kelly, has zero protection afforded by the federal government—Nogales is cartel land—and THEN, if Kelly shoots people who are illegally crossing his property, he’s charged with murder.
And if you think this is the case of a deranged man with a weapon and a few innocent people walking across his lawn, as in some suburb, check your brain. This is nothing of the kind.
Imagine, say, a place like Scarsdale, or Beverly Hills, as captive territory of organized killers—year after year—where no one can feel safe on the streets, where bullets fly routinely, where strangers are as likely to be packing heat as they are putting coins in parking meters, where many cops are either afraid to enforce the law or are on the cartel payroll, where a cartel rep can stand outside a high-end fashion shop and openly sell lethal fentanyl, where a citizen who complains loudly can be disappeared, where you look out the window of your nice house at night and see strangers in your yard and don’t know whether they’re passing through or planning to murder you and your family—and THEN you’ll start to see and feel the situation as it actually exists.
If you put Joe Biden or Gavin Newsom or Barack Obama in Nogales, in a house on a piece of land, and made them live there for five years or so, without any protection or privilege of any kind, they’d be huddling in dark corners weeping like babies. They’d be weeping and blubbering.
A couple of weeks ago, I published a story that detailed the cartels digging in and operating out of MONTANA. So we’re not just talking about border towns.
True, I don’t know the specifics of what happened around the time rancher Kelly fired his weapon at, or over the heads of, migrants on his land. But I do know what I’ve just explained: The federal government is abandoning responsibility for—and thereby signaling their approval of—the nightmare coming across the southern border.
There comes a point in every continuing crime when you can’t keep saying MISTAKE, ERROR, MISJUDGMENT, in describing the people in charge of doing something to end the crime.
You have to take off the blinders and say THEY INTEND TO LET THIS GO ON.
Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, and the whole parade of Communist big shots, including the utopian philosophers who came before them, were bent on destroying private property and the IDEA of private property. They knew private ownership was the cornerstone of individual freedom in action. The Communists were in the tradition of thieves and murderers called kings and popes and princes who have always stolen property and then justified it with high-flying ideals.
You can add the US government to that list, as they stand by and facilitate the cartels.
It IS a partnership.
I’ve investigated enough crimes to know the facilitators will never admit the slightest bit of complicity—any more than, say, a politician who has been thoroughly blackmailed will confess he is making murderous policy to satisfy his controllers.
I keep saying: if ENOUGH people will stand up and accuse the perpetrators of their crimes, things will change. But we also have to understand that all sorts of pressures and threats of consequences are being brought down upon the American people to keep their mouths shut.
That is also a prominent part of the situation.
Underneath it all, the elite intent is DESTRUCTION. Destruction of America.
It isn’t mistakes, errors, misjudgments, indifference, stupidity, or “mass formation.”
Those excuses are just blinders people wear to avoid seeing what’s there. What’s here. Now.
The result of keeping our mouths shut is dire.
The main rationalization people offer for staying silent goes something like: “Well, I’m not part of this. It wasn’t my idea. I’m just minding my own business.”
I know that.
But it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter at all.
We’re here. Now. And through the southern border, the country is being invaded.
—And now let’s switch to another border story; the kidnapping/murder of four Americans—
Was the drug cartel kidnapping/murder of Americans possibly about drugs?
BBC Mexico correspondent, Will Grant, writes:
…authorities in Mexico have been highlighting the [American] victims’ criminal records in their statements to the media.
We were initially told the Americans were in town for health tourism—a cheap Mexican tummy tuck that went about as badly wrong as possible.
A day later, as allegations began to swirl, a member of the Mexican government forwarded me a story about the victims’ criminal past, specifically that one had a conviction for manufacturing illegal narcotics with an intent to supply.
“Just checking you’d seen this”, went the innocuous comment.
Whether that was part of a concerted push in Mexico to victim-blame or because there is hard evidence to suggest the kidnapping was targeted is again hard to know.
The Mexico Daily Post reports:
At least three of the four Americans kidnapped in Matamoros, Tamaulipas, would have criminal records related to crimes against health, according to [North Carolina] court records.
In addition, federal government sources indicated that it would not be the first time that individuals crossed the border for alleged drug-related issues. The men who died, Zindell Brown and Shaeed Woodard, were linked to drug manufacturing and trade, carrying a weapon, and violent robbery, according to records seen by Reuters on March 9.
For her part, Latavia Tay McGee, a woman who was not injured in the attack, has a history of manufacturing and trafficking drugs, threatening an official, and stealing property, as reported by the El Universal news outlet. It should be noted that Eric Williams is the only one of them who does not have a criminal record.
The Daily Mail reports:
Four U.S. citizens who were kidnapped in Mexico by the notorious criminal and drug syndicate Gulf Cartel have lengthy criminal rap sheets.
Latavia McGee, Eric Williams, Zindell Brown and Shaeed Woodard traveled to the U.S.-Mexico border town Matamoros on Friday when they were caught in crossfire and abducted. Brown and Woodard didn’t survive.
DailyMail.com can reveal that Williams was previously busted for “distributing crack near a school,” while McGee has been slapped with “unlawful conduct towards a child,” when her daughter tested positive for amphetamines.
Woodard was charged with the “manufacturing and possession” of drugs and pleaded guilty, while Brown was also charged for “possession of marijuana or hashish.”
Is it possible these four Americans were traveling to Mexico to engage in drug business—and the “tummy tuck” story was a fabrication?
And if drugs were the reason for the trip, the kidnapping/murder by members of the Mexican Gulf Cartel could have been retaliation for the Americans trying to horn in on Gulf drug territory.
There is more to this story. In a truly astonishing move, the Gulf Cartel turned over five of its members to Mexican authorities—claiming they were the kidnappers and murderers.
A note from the Cartel was also delivered, apologizing for the unauthorized actions of these five men.
It’s clear enormous pressure was exerted on the Gulf Cartel. In the US, millions of people are now aware of, and outraged at, the wide open southern border, where enough deadly fentanyl is coming through to kill every American several times over.
The last thing the Biden administration needs is a lingering story about four Americans killed on the Mexican side. A cap had to be put on the kidnapping/murders. The Gulf Cartel “confession” is that cap.
The Cartel apologized. Now it can go back to business as usual, in the narco-state that is Mexico.
The drug cartels are engaged in a trillion-dollar business. Big banks wash that money. The cartels have bought off and bribed everybody they possibly can—on both sides of the border. That includes politicians and cops and judges.
The PR about humane open borders and huddled masses yearning to be free in America is a cover story, messaged from wall to wall, while the real business of drugs and destruction proceeds.
Never forget: Fentanyl is chemical warfare.
-- Jon Rappoport
“Are Bank Failures tied to COVID Lockdowns and THAT Giant Economic Destruction created over the past three years?” (click here to read it)