Transcript
Discussion (0)
Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Friday, February 24,
2023. It's about 3.35 in the afternoon here on the east coast of the United States. George
Allen Kelly, that's the Arizona rancher, the case that we've been covering.
Remember, he's sitting in his farmhouse.
It's in a desert.
It's got 170 acres that are his.
His property abuts the Arizona-Mexico border.
When he hears a commotion outside and he hears gunshots, he goes out with his shotgun and sees a gang of people approaching his house
in fatigues, and he fires over their heads, and they take off, and they run towards the Mexican
border and disappear over the border. Later on, he's gathering his horses to bring them into
his barn, and he sees someone who appears to be dead. He calls the police. The police come.
He's charged with first degree murder. First degree murder is planned, plotted murder. If you
planned and plotted to kill somebody, you're not going to call the police yourself when you come
upon the body. But this was the government's theory. He was arrested and held on a million dollars bail. This is a retired rancher
whose property is not worth anywhere near a million dollars, and the court refused to lower
the bail. After the government had an opportunity to examine the evidence in its possession,
and after defense counsel had an opportunity to challenge that evidence, the court held a hearing. At the end of the hearing, the court didn't believe the government and reduced the
bail to zero. All he had to do was pledge his property, meaning he can't secretly sell the
property, but he doesn't have to pledge money. He doesn't have to get a bond, an insurance policy,
and he's free to go home. As someone who has set bail in thousands of cases,
I can tell you what that means to the judicial mind. It means that the government's case is not
as strong as the government claimed. Okay, all of a sudden, out of nowhere, the government found
two witnesses who will say not that Mr. Kelly fired his shotgun above the crowd to scare them away,
which is perfectly lawful, but that in fact he was hunting them down and shot the dead guy
in the back. Where did these two people come from? There are two of the illegal immigrants who
crossed the border attempting to enter the U.S. illegally or trying to turn state's evidence to the
government in return for being allowed to stay here illegally. This was an organized gang of
people that entered Kelly's property, and when he legally fired above their head, he was absolutely
within the law, under Arizona law, under the local law, and under federal law. Here is what his lawyer had to say
about this. Testimony is something that is bought and sold by drug traffickers the same way that
drugs and people are bought and sold. 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 anyone 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 will come to stand against you.
Brianna Larkin, lawyer for George Kelly. So basically she's saying the government bought this testimony.
The government buys testimony all the time. It will give a benefit to the witness. In this case,
you can stay here legally, even though you came here illegally, or we won't prosecute you as a
human or drug trafficker, even though that's what you were doing. We won't prosecute you for trespassing,
even though that's what you were doing, if you'll tell us what we want to hear against Mr. Kelly.
Here is a recently retired, though he's still a young man, Border Patrol agent in that very part
of Arizona describing exactly what he believes was going on. Take a listen.
Everything that I'm seeing, my professional experience would tell me that that guy was either a scout or an actual
guide for a group. With the radio, much more likely he was probably scouting out in advance
or the front man, if you will. But that type of activity and behavior doesn't take place out there
unless it's part of the cartel. The person he's talking about, that guy, of course, is the person who was killed, the body
that George Kelly found on his property when he was searching for his horses and when he himself
called the police. One would think that this would be a simple case of the trajectory of the bullet, and did that bullet come from Mr.
Kelly's rifle? Now, the government has the rifle. The government has the bullet. If the government
had evidence that the bullet came from that rifle, wouldn't we know about it? Why doesn't the
government tell that to the court? That tells me, even if I were neutral in this case, even if I were the judge in the case,
it tells me that the government does not have the goods,
that either this guy was shot in the back by somebody else or he wasn't shot in the back.
He was killed by somebody else and not by Mr. Kelly.
They've had Kelly's, I could be proven wrong, but they've had Kelly's rifle for a month. They've had the bullet
that entered this guy for a month. If the bullet came from Kelly's rifle and if that bullet entered
his back, wow, I would think that evidence would be front and center in a courtroom and it isn't.
Head scratcher. What is the government doing?
Who is it protecting? More as we get it. Judge Napolitano, have a great weekend.
Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.