Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[JDHasty]

Would you agree that there still might be exonerating circumstances, or are you so sure that there can't even be the possibility?

I just don't see how anyone who wasn't directly involved can be so certain.

I also can't understand why I keep coming back to this thread for a re-re-re-re-rehashing.

 

I am patiently awaiting the Court's decision.   But that does not mean that I do not have an opinion re: what is known.  If "they" give me something to consider that I am not aware of... you know you will hear it here first. 

[Tbar]

JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?

[257 Wby Mag]

Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...

[257 Wby Mag]

Hell, let ol Tod smoke some Washington wolves he'd be a hero on here!! Grin

[PlateauNDN]

New member or not it does bring another perspective to the discussion. And is that so wrong? So, are you suggesting it's a conspiracy that this and other recent new members came here strictly by the suspect of this topic? I say take the    off and why not be just a bit glad that this site has continued to expand its network and reach.

Hell, a very similar incident occurred at clover springs which brought me here. Was that a conspiracy by those charged and found guilty for me to come here and muddy the waters for them?  Wait, I hear it now, it's the theme song to the x-files playing and special agent fox mulder is sitting here explaining to me the connection between bullwinkle, bigfoot and aliens.

[jackelope]

This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal. 

[Bigshooter]

Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...

 

If the case gets dismissed I think JD might go crazy and just keep repeating himself.....O wait. 

[JDHasty]

JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?

Not at all.  I have not seen anything that mitigates the offense.  That does not mean it is not out there though. 

[kiticaashunter]

This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

[chester]

This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

So is the court defense going to claim that there are reading comprehension issues or possibly illiteracy among the involved party's?
It spells it out exceedingly clearly in the regs and in very simple terms that 334 was a no fly zone.
Glad you showed up to jump in the puddle .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HntnFsh]

 I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

[lord grizzly]

I guess the answer on the other end of the line shoulda been a pretty simple no then huh? I mean if some dumb red neck locals must know then surely a professional at f&g must

[h20hunter]

Not really.

[lord grizzly]

Or should that be part of the narritive? The pro got it wrong too. Who should be held to the higher standard ? The hunter did ask after all. No such thing as a stupid question but there are stupid answers

[kiticaashunter]

I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.