Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[trophyhunt]

How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?

Im thinking the poll could be," if the Wdfw gave the guy permission, is he guilty of poaching or any crime"?

[huntnphool]

 What poll should ask is "Do you believe Tod Reichert can prove he was given permission by WDFW?"

 Because if he can't, it's a open and shut case!

[mfswallace]

No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

An average joe wouldn't have been hunting in a closed unit but since tod has all the money he needs to keep breaking the law he doesn't give a ....
Keep going 257 but poaching is poaching and as Danderson explained you get very explicit instructions on where to hunt so he should have never hired you and your crew to look in 334 for a branched antlered bull...

[JDHasty]

How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?

I am confident that what I have stated as fact is accurate.  As far as what are my recollections re: the earlier incident that took place in 2007 and wrapped up in 2012 I have made it clear that this is what I recall when I could not link to validation that documented fact I referenced.  As far as the alleged call, I have said:  Given the reputation of the WDFW individual that the "permission" has been attributed to, I am skeptical that explicit permission was granted.  I have also said I am skeptical that that individual's direct supervisor would have signed off as well.   

I do not know this:  There is probable cause to file charges and there was little chance, from day one, that charges would not be filed.     

[Bean Counter]

My word, this is the train that just keeps on wrecking.  Why not let it die for a while until the judge has a say?

We interrupt this regularly scheduled urinating match to bring you an important announcement:



 .... That is all. Thank you 

[PlateauNDN]

Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them.

[PlateauNDN]

I bet, if it was me that shot the pet this wouldn't have garnered 70 plus pages combined.

[JDHasty]

I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired. 

[chester]

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

Higher standard? If this was an average joe you are correct it would have only been a couple pages, because Average joe would have lost his vehicle, weapons, and the bull immediately.
They wouldn't have drug on so long filing charges .
All the defenders I've seen here just seem to for lack of a better way to put it, just assume money makes you above the law.

Closed unit+dead bull= poached . It's pretty a simple.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[257 Wby Mag]

I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???

[KNOPHISH]

I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

[JDHasty]

I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???

I do not see how it gives "hunting a black eye" when it is evident that only a small minority within the hunting community will validate the decision to target and kill this elk.  Fact of the matter is, if a poll were put up It would not surprise me if north of 90% of the people right here on this forum, asking if shooting this animal was a responsible thing to do, it would not surprise me if north of 90% chose no as apposed to yes.  In other words, most hunters would not think this was going to end well.

As far as the legalities go, I am aware of facts that lead me to the decision that it was Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II, if there is anything that exonerates those involved... WDFW and the Kittitas County Prosecutor have not recognized it.  If they had, filing charges would not have been such an easy decision. 

I don't know if there is anything out there to exonerate these folks, but as I have said:  I'm skeptical.  In the first place no one has the authority to "give permission," and secondarily I am not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to individuals who have acted in the manner that those making that claim have acted.     

[HntnFsh]

I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?

[Dan-o]

Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them.

Hmmmmmmm.........    That's a really interesting perspective.

[2MANY]

This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.