Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[greenhead_killer]

And part two of the question, would the 'guides' be held under these same laws if the charges are ruled as guilty verdict? They would essentially be accomplices to this whole event so I'd assume (?) that they would be dealt with accordingly as well or is this restricted solely to TR? Would they also have to potentially forfeit anything that was used for the taking or just a fine? Thanks for the link to rcws.

[NOCK NOCK]

IMO,  could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.

[bobcat]

True. Isn't it normally the case that if one person helps another person poach, that both people are equally accountable, regardless of who pulled the trigger?

[greenhead_killer]

@ nock nock, that's what I have been thinking too. Why a few new members have been so adamant to set up a smoke and mirrors campaign. I've been following this thing from the beginning and just sat and observed. If people are really the way they portray themselves from behind a keyboard, I can tell you who I would enjoy being around and who I wouldn't give a min of my time to. Now it's just a waiting game.

[JJB11B]

IMO,  could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.

I am more worried about whether I should buy more worms before I head to Moses Lake on Wednesday.

[bigtex]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

[M_ray]

Kiti, You selectively answer only the questions you want and most often with answers that don't even match the question???

 For instance your answer to #6 does not answer the question directly. We all know it was moved, and I've yet to hear anyone dispute the fact that we all know a request to gut somewhere else by a landowner is a reasonable one. Now answer the real question...

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site?      

This isnt an answer either???

Why even be in the unit in the first place ? Obviously knowing it was illegal , hence why the call was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The game department didn't seem to think there was a problem with it at the time.

Of coarse the game dept isnt going to have a problem with it, hell I could call them and tell them I'm in the 334 and looking at elk in Dec. they would probably say "Ok good for you"  Because there is a Master Hunter cow hunt going on!!!  But if I tell them I have a muzzy and I'm standing 25yrds from a Branch bull that is laying in a field and not even afraid of me and I'm about to shoot it I think they might have a different answer.  There is a big difference between the dept being ok with you being there AND Shooting a bull there. This doesn't tell us that the Dept was ok with TR shooting a bull if the right question was asked for all the Dept officials know they were there to shoot a cow with a master hunter tag. Which br ings up another question I'd like to know ...

"Does TR posses a master hunter certificate?"

The problem that people have with the defense of your friend being in the 334 is that this is not a new rule, it's been around for all of the other Auction tags TR has had over the years. If TR is as smart as the defenders of him say then I'm sure he would have done what ALL of us do as soon as we draw a good tag. We go over the boundaries of that tag to make sure we know where we can scout, TR is 74 and has been doing this for a lifetime so its pretty simple and I'm sure something that he has done and read a thousand times.

I can agree with you that there CAN be some confusing explanations in the game pamphlet but you insult everyone's intelligence on here when you try and say that the outline of this explanation is too hard to comprehend. It is one of the easiest description's in the pamphlet to understand, really simple and straightforward ... 334 is not open to the taking of branch bulls with any tag so?

"Why was he in there in the first place?"

And finally you never answered this question ...

What Was the question when calling?

"What weapon can I use in 334?"
                or
"Can I shoot this bull in 334?"

Everyone here can agree that the first question can fall within the lines of a grey area or a way around the law. But in no way does it mean that the person asking has full WDFW approval to shoot a branch bull if given the go ahead to use a muzzy.

If you want to clear things up as you first stated then answers to these will go far in achieving your initial goal. And I'm ok with "I don't know" cause I think everyone is tired of the smoke and mirrors trick. 




 

[Alchase]

IMO,  could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.

 This is so blatantly obvious
I believe this is probably the most truthful post in the last 49 pages, Besides JD Hasty's play by play before the threats started.
 

[bearpaw]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

IMO,  could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.

I was kind of curious about that also...
The conversation that I have been eavesdropping (this one) really reminded me of a couple of "guides" that I have met that really take advantage of the fact that WA does not require a guides license unless it is fishing.
All you need is a few good pictures, then use the internet to set up your "business"
Then hide behind accusations of slander to protect your reputation when you are accused of anything.
Ego before ethics...
 

[Alchase]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Civil forteiture


RCW 77.15.070
Civil forfeiture of property used for violation of chapter.
(1) Fish and wildlife officers and ex officio fish and wildlife officers may seize without warrant boats, airplanes, vehicles, motorized implements, conveyances, gear, appliances, or other articles they have probable cause to believe have been held with intent to violate or used in violation of this title or rule of the commission or director. However, fish and wildlife officers or ex officio fish and wildlife officers may not seize any item or article, other than for evidence, if under the circumstances, it is reasonable to conclude that the violation was inadvertent. The property seized is subject to forfeiture to the state under this section regardless of ownership. Property seized may be recovered by its owner by depositing with the department or into court a cash bond or equivalent security equal to the value of the seized property but not more than one hundred thousand dollars. Such cash bond or security is subject to forfeiture in lieu of the property. Forfeiture of property seized under this section is a civil forfeiture against property and is intended to be a remedial civil sanction.
(2) In the event of a seizure of property under this section, jurisdiction to begin the forfeiture proceedings shall commence upon seizure. Within fifteen days following the seizure, the seizing authority shall serve a written notice of intent to forfeit property on the owner of the property seized and on any person having any known right or interest in the property seized. Notice may be served by any method authorized by law or court rule, including service by certified mail with return receipt requested. Service by mail is deemed complete upon mailing within the fifteen-day period following the seizure.
(3) Persons claiming a right of ownership or right to possession of property are entitled to a hearing to contest forfeiture. Such a claim shall specify the claim of ownership or possession and shall be made in writing and served on the director within forty-five days of the seizure. If the seizing authority has complied with notice requirements and there is no claim made within forty-five days, then the property shall be forfeited to the state.
(4) If any person timely serves the director with a claim to property, the person shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard as to the person's claim or right. The hearing shall be before the director or director's designee, or before an administrative law judge appointed under chapter 34.12 RCW, except that a person asserting a claim or right may remove the matter to a court of competent jurisdiction if the aggregate value of the property seized is more than five thousand dollars. The department may settle a person's claim of ownership prior to the administrative hearing.
(5) The hearing to contest forfeiture and any subsequent appeal shall be as provided for in chapter 34.05 RCW, the administrative procedure act. The seizing authority has the burden to demonstrate that it had reason to believe the property was held with intent to violate or was used in violation of this title or rule of the commission or director. The person contesting forfeiture has the burden of production and proof by a preponderance of evidence that the person owns or has a right to possess the property and:
(a) That the property was not held with intent to violate or used in violation of this title; or
(b) If the property is a boat, airplane, or vehicle, that the illegal use or planned illegal use of the boat, airplane, or vehicle occurred without the owner's knowledge or consent, and that the owner acted reasonably to prevent illegal uses of such boat, airplane, or vehicle.
(6) A forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by a perfected security interest is subject to the interest of the secured party if the secured party neither had knowledge of nor consented to the act or omission. No security interest in seized property may be perfected after seizure.
(7) If seized property is forfeited under this section the department may retain it for official use unless the property is required to be destroyed, or upon application by any law enforcement agency of the state, release such property to the agency for the use of enforcing this title, or sell such property, and deposit the proceeds to the fish and wildlife enforcement reward account created in RCW 77.15.425.

[bigtex]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?

Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.

[rtspring]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?

Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.

In other words, WDFW are thieves!  Why would anyone PAY to get a gun back when they did nothing wrong!  This is what mudt do withing Bigtex's 45 day response he is talking about in the civil part.   And why is there two rules to one crime?

Absolutely double standards!  I hate the WDFW people.  Dont worry I got my stuff back in monetary terms way over what my gun was worth. 

[bigtex]

Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?

#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?

Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.

In other words, WDFW are thieves!  Why would anyone PAY to get a gun back when they did nothing wrong!  This is what mudt do withing Bigtex's 45 day response he is talking about in the civil part.   And why is there two rules to one crime?

If I remember correctly you took a plea deal on the criminal charges.....

I know of many instances where gear was handed over at no charge once individuals were found to be not guilty in the criminal case.

[Alchase]

It seems the forfeiture laws are "subjectively inforced" or is there extenuating circumstances to why the were not enforced in this case.
With so many people involved it would be a windfall for the WDFW, lol