Support Democrat Ernestina Cruz.

Or get a concussion.
Your choice.

The homeowner would not support Democrat judicial candidate Ernestina R. Cruz in Taos.
So they beat him bloody.

Officials with the Taos Police Department say they are still working to get to the bottom of the alleged beating of a Taos landowner over the removal of political signs from in front of his property.

In an interview with The Taos News Friday (May 25), property owner Roy Cunnyngham and his wife Joni recounted the events when they returned home, across from Casa los Córdovas May 1.

“I don’t know how many people hit me,” Cunnyngham said of the incident.

According to the police report filed the same day, Eighth Judicial District Court judge candidate Ernestina Cruz was having a “meet and greet” event at Plaza de Colores. At the same time, across the street, Cunnyngham and his wife were returning home from dinner to find several of Cruz’ campaign signs in front of his property.

As in the police report, Cunnyngham confirmed that three men approached him and demanded that he replace the signs where they’d been staked. Cunnyngham said he resisted.

“We were setting them in the car and we’d planned to call whoever they belonged to,” Cunnyngham said. “I told them I thought it was very distasteful to put these signs in front of my property.”

At that point, a younger man came across the street and again told Cunnyngham to put the signs back. When Cunnyngham refused, the man “pounded me in the chest,” Cunnyngham said.

While Cunnyngham says he knows a few of the people involved, The Taos News’ policy is not to identify alleged offenders until they have been charged or implicated by law enforcement.

At the time of the incident, Cruz denied having any knowledge of anyone involved in the incident, saying that it was “unfortunate” that Cunnyngham removed signs that “did not belong to him.”

What followed was far from a fair fight, the Cunnynghams say. Cunnyngham was later checked out by a doctor who treated him for cuts and bruises, injuries to his mouth and a concussion, Cunnyngham said.

“They just attacked him, all three of them,” Joni Cunnyngham said. “Someone was keeping me and my son from getting to them.”

 

Did Obama Help ISIS?

 

Disable Refresh for 30 Days

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled for your setting to be saved.

1 2 3 6

`
  1. A Black Eye is the Union Label

  2. It’s what they have left. Lies and assaults. Expect to see a helluva lot more until Nov.

  3. and yet another reason to carry conceal…there would be 3 less thugs

  4. Cruz denied having any knowledge of anyone involved in the incident, saying that it was “unfortunate” that Cunnyngham removed signs that “did not belong to him.”

    This actually was spoken by someone wanting to be a district court judge.Removing signs is illegal because they do not belong to the property owner?

  5. Attempted murder is reason for deadly force in response. Folks better be prepared to bring a gun to a union beatdown.

  6. If attacked on your own property is it justified to use lethal force to defend oneself in Taos?

  7. The thugs are definitely wrong for getting violent and, perhaps, the signs should not have been there. However, the headline says “signs in his yard”. The text of the story twice says the signs were “in front of his property”…key words being “in front of”. That’s not clear enough for me to discern that the signs were posted legally. Maybe they weren’t even on the couple’s property and were legal.

    Regardless, violence in this situation is childish.

  8. I’d put up the signs. And then I’d make sure that they were properly defaced……

  9. I went through something similar with a real estate agent advertising the adjacent property with signs in my yard. He obviously didn’t know where the property marker was. I moved the signs to the next property several times, but kept coming home from work to find them right back on my property. Finally, I cut the signs up into little chips and dumped the pile on the next property. That was the end of it.

  10. On a second note, I way past sick and tired of politicians calling things “unfortunate” and “disappointing”.

    I hope I someday get the chance to ask somebody like this genius why “unfortunate” was the best word to describe this situation. Whose fortune is she referring to when she calls it “unfortunate”. Shouldn’t “unfortunate” be left to acts of nature/God/whatever is out of our control?

    It’s the mealy-mouthed language of the left, and it’s sickening.

  11. This is going to be common practice in the coming months. Get use to it or make a stand.

  12. Why do you always put “It Begins” in the title when this kind of crap has been going on forever?

  13. If the signs were on the parking strip in front of his house then he had the right to remove them. Regardless of whether he had that right or not, the felony assault by the three thugs should get them some time in jail and a felony conviction.

    At least in a state that respects the rule of law. NM is rather blue, right? Then there is no chance of any legal repercussions.

  14. We used to have a corner lot with a fair amount of traffic. So it was constant battle to keep unasked for political (and other signs) out of the corner. The city attorney told me that it was possible that I could be charged with violating 1st amendment rights if I removed them or ticketed if there was “undue” clutter on the terrace corner. So I called the various campaigns, those that were polite and offered to remove them I let stay. Those campaigns that got “snarky” the signs were removed (one was a nice large masonite board that cut up and recycled into some storage boxes).

  15. Cruz said ‘…it was “unfortunate” that Cunnyngham removed signs that “did not belong to him.”’

    On property that did not belong to her. No comment whatsoever condemning assault and battery on the homeowner. That’s at least 6 felony counts she chooses to ignore, not including trespassing.

    And this fool is running to become a judge?

  16. If the signs were on his property, he had the right to remove them and throw them in the trash, if he so desired. If the signs were on Taos city easement in front of his house, it is illegal to place campaign signs on public property, and he should have called the police to have them removed. So the onus falls on the candidate to make it clear to her campaign workers that her campaign signs CANNOT be placed on public property.

    I hope he presses charges not only against the thugs that beat him, but against the Ernesta Cruz campaign, as well.

  17. BTW the most disturbing thing about this story is the comment from the Judge “wannabe”. She (or her surrogates) can do what she likes with his property, but he is due a beating for destroying hers?

    Wrong, wrong, wrong…… Did she have Obama as a “professor”? a first year law student (a failing one at that) could do better and she thinks she’s judge material?

  18. Edward1960, you city attorney is an idiot. Campaign signs cannot be placed on private property without the approval of the property owner. And campaign signs cannot be placed on a public easement, although that easement adjoins private property.

  19. When dealing with leftists and their hanger-ons such as the welfare class (esp. when it involves members of the left’s “favored” minorities), following the Derbyshire Rules,

    http://takimag.com/article/the_talk_nonblack_version_john_derbyshire/#axzz1wqIeUDIE

    is good policy. Basically you need to pick your fights.

    Here this homeowner should have used a little more common sense. He should have seen that something was going on across the street and have made the causal connection between it and the signs. Just wait it out. There is no sense in needlessly seeking confrontation, esp. when the left is involved. Like their totalitarian soulmates, the Muslims, the left regularly employs force.



1 2 3 6


`

© Copyright 2014, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions