Wolf shooter turns down deal, Rathdrum man opts for jury trial

[bearpaw]

Wolf shooter turns down deal
Rathdrum man opts for jury trial

COEUR d'ALENE - The man who shot a wolf on Rathdrum Mountain turned down a plea deal offered by Kootenai County prosecutors that would have had him pay a $200 fine in exchange for a guilty plea.

He has opted instead for a jury trial.

"I said, 'Nope,'" Forrest Mize said shortly after his arraignment Tuesday morning. Prosecutor Barry McHugh confirmed the offer was made.
Mize is representing himself on the misdemeanor charge of possessing a wolf without a tag. He doesn't plan to hire an attorney at this stage.

"It's going to be really hard to find a jury in North Idaho that finds me guilty for shooting a wolf to save my stinking dogs," he said.

Mize, 53, shot the wolf Dec. 30 while he was out hiking in some fresh snow with his three dogs, all Labs, named Maggie, Jenny and Katie.

He was carrying a gun - a Kimber .22-caliber Hornet - with him for protection when he spotted the wolf, which he said looked like it was about to pounce on his pets. The dogs were 100 yards in front of him.

When he shot the wolf in the side through its heart, his three dogs were all close enough to be visible within the picture of his gun's scope, he said.
He bought a wolf hunting tag later that day for $11.50 at a Rathdrum pharmacy. He is not a trophy hunter, he said, but wanted to keep the pelt.

read more: http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_820326b1-aa8f-53ca-b1d6-692f105debc1.html

[Sitka_Blacktail]

He's "not a trophy hunter" but he wanted to keep the trophy.

He's not going to be convicted for killing the wolf or "trying to protect his dogs". Hes going to be convicted for trying to possess something he didn't have a license to possess. Had he immediately called Idaho F&G and turned it over, he wouldn't be in this mess.

[pianoman9701]

I think the guy is screwed. He handled it wrong by trying to buy the tag without contacting IDFG. Not that I think he should, but he'll likely lose.

[jamesfromseattle]

Just out of curiosity: anyone know how law enforcement caught him?

[jasnt]

He opened his mouth to the wrong people and was turned in

[jackelope]

Well. That was kinda dumb.

[jasnt]

Loose lips sink ships

[whacker1]

I found his response rather intriguing

"It's going to be really hard to find a jury in North Idaho that finds me guilty for shooting a wolf to save my stinking dogs," he said.

I am not saying he is wrong, but when you put it into context, he has a valid argument.  The public sentiment in North Idaho is pretty anti-wolf.   The stupid part even if you believe he is right, is that he doesn't plan to hire an attorney.  It is one thing to represent yourself for a traffic citation or possibly in small claims court, but it takes someone that is relatively learned in the process of going through Jury selection to handle a jury selection.  You need to be able to ask the right questions and know when to compromise and know when to dismiss potential jurors.  The prosecution has the advantage in this piece of the process. 

I would also suggest the Jury has to follow the law whether they like the case or not, so he is putting himself at some extreme risk.

I look forward to seeing how this plays out

[jasnt]

The guy doesn't seem too bright. I don't see it turning out well

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I found his response rather intriguing

"It's going to be really hard to find a jury in North Idaho that finds me guilty for shooting a wolf to save my stinking dogs," he said.

I am not saying he is wrong, but when you put it into context, he has a valid argument.  The public sentiment in North Idaho is pretty anti-wolf.   The stupid part even if you believe he is right, is that he doesn't plan to hire an attorney.  It is one thing to represent yourself for a traffic citation or possibly in small claims court, but it takes someone that is relatively learned in the process of going through Jury selection to handle a jury selection.  You need to be able to ask the right questions and know when to compromise and know when to dismiss potential jurors.  The prosecution has the advantage in this piece of the process. 

I would also suggest the Jury has to follow the law whether they like the case or not, so he is putting himself at some extreme risk.

I look forward to seeing how this plays out

Do they even use jury trials in Idaho for F&G violations? Or do you just go before a judge?

[idahohuntr]

This has nothing to do with a wolf.  He didn't follow the license laws of the state.  Lots of folks would like to only buy a tag after they harvest something    This isn't the kind of case where he will find a sympathy in N. Idaho...if the state was arguing it wasn't self defense or something...I could see it working for him.  The circumstances of this case...he will lose badly, as he should.

[Curly]

Yep.  He should have taken the deal and been done with it.  The guy doesn't sound too bright. 

I'm also surprised about the adjective he used for his dogs......"stinkin'".

[pianoman9701]

The guy doesn't seem too bright. I don't see it turning out well

Yeah, he should've taken the $200 fine.

[pd]

I would also suggest the Jury has to follow the law whether they like the case or not, so he is putting himself at some extreme risk.

Not completely accurate.  His best defense is to appeal to the jury that the underlying statute(s) are unenforceable.  This is called "jury nullification," as has long been part of the English common law heritage.  See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

To be clear, the bench will be very hostile to any attempt to inform the jury of their prerogative to nullify the law!  The American justice system (both at the federal level and the state level) jealously guards against jury nullification.  New Hampshire alone specifically allows the defense to notify the jury of this traditional right.

I, too, will watch this with interest.  My best advice for him?  Tell the truth, all of it, and ask the jury to acquit.  If the judge is flexible, she will allow the defendant to make his case--and NOT tell the jury that they MUST find guilty if they believe he committed the crime.  Under the concept of jury nullification, even if the jury believes him guilty of the crime, they do not have to find him guilty if they believe his actions were justifiable.

[Special T]

I will be following this...

I would bet given the area that this will be used as a push back against the wolf issue choked down peoples throat. I bet he represents himself as an additional slap.

Do you wonder why the $20k reward has not caught the wolf "Poacher" in the NE? How do you think the farmer that shot the wolf Near Pullman is going to work out? 2 can play the "Game"