Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[PlateauNDN]

It's serious, the difference between my opinion and others is reality of the situation.  I posted from the beginning I didn't nor do I condone the actions, but knew it would end up as a mere blip on the radar. Despite the facts it will still play out to very little and his final conviction and sentence will not please everyone. I worked for many years in l.e. and seen my fair share to know it's going to be light. I simply choose to not take this particular incident as serious as others.  Oh and I'm employed full time.

[Dan-o]

Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me??

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

I don't think that poaching is funny either.   Not even a little.

The difference between me and some fo you is that I also don't think that a lynch mob is very funny.

I'm kind of a fan of due process, and internet Kangaroo Courts ARE A JOKE, whether you jurors think so or not.

I don't know the guy from Adam.   I wasn't there.   Neither were you armchair lynchers.

If he's guilty, throw the book at him.

BUT, until that is determined in court, I think the guy deserves the same benefit of the doubt that I'd give you guys.

Now, please continue with your internet inquisition.......

[mfswallace]

Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me??

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

I don't think that poaching is funny either.   Not even a little.

The difference between me and some fo you is that I also don't think that a lynch mob is very funny.

I'm kind of a fan of due process, and internet Kangaroo Courts ARE A JOKE, whether you jurors think so or not.

I don't know the guy from Adam.   I wasn't there.   Neither were you armchair lynchers.

If he's guilty, throw the book at him.

BUT, until that is determined in court, I think the guy deserves the same benefit of the doubt that I'd give you guys.

Now, please continue with your internet inquisition.......

While I might have thought the other 3-4 times you have made these comments were tiresome but at least when it was getting to be speculative this time there was no lynching as the thread was dead and then revived with actual "due process" stuff happening...

[Dan-o]

I will grant you that.

And in the spirit of a harmonious hunt wa, I will try to refrain from sidetracking this thread.

I will try....

[Dan-o]

P.S.    I truly do hope that this state starts taking poaching prosecution and sentencing more seriously.

If you're found guilty, the punishment should hurt.

[mfswallace]

I will grant you that.

And in the spirit of a harmonious hunt wa, I will try to refrain from sidetracking this thread.

I will try....

That's all any of us can do

[jkthomps]

Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me??

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[popeshawnpaul]

Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me??

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It's very obvious that the constant, all the time, frequent posts indicate one is going back to this thread over and over to ask, "wait, was an elk shot?" and then there is 2-3 pages of BS responding. Most people don't have the time to do that, hence, my jab indicating isn't there something more important or productive to do than mess a thread up?  When one comes back to this thread for information on what is going on or substantive opinions on the issue, you have to wade through pages of BS to find the info people want to find.  Now the response is they essentially don't like the thread because they think we should all be waiting for due process before discussing the merits of the case and the likely outcomes.  It gets frustrating, hence, the jab.  If you don't like the thread, it's easy to not look at it and not post. 

Some of us are interested in the legal process, motions, and nature of the prosecution and defense.  I get constant PM's from people that don't post but want insight on issues or what is happening.  That's why I try and post so that people can have the info.  Then I have to read another post asking, "what type of elk was it?" and it gets annoying.  Sooner or later you swat at the mosquito buzzing around your head.  Being an attorney doesn't give me special power to be patient and accept the gnats.

[Rainier10]

Sounds fair enough to me. 

I really appreciate the insight that you have provided on this matter.

[JDHasty]

It is my opinion that this sidetracking is deliberate and done in order to frustrate people who are interested in keeping current on what is happening with this case.

[Alchase]

Pope, my opinion of this whole legal process is very jaded because from the start, this "accused poacher" has been handled with kid gloves and seemingly treated very different then say the average hunter.

It just seems so wrong for a judge to "allow" a hunter who has broken hunting laws in the past, been charged, and in the middle of another hunting law violation trial be given the "privilege" to hunt while in the process of the proceedings!

In your experience, is this typical?

[jkthomps]

Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me??

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It's very obvious that the constant, all the time, frequent posts indicate one is going back to this thread over and over to ask, "wait, was an elk shot?" and then there is 2-3 pages of BS responding. Most people don't have the time to do that, hence, my jab indicating isn't there something more important or productive to do than mess a thread up?  When one comes back to this thread for information on what is going on or substantive opinions on the issue, you have to wade through pages of BS to find the info people want to find.  Now the response is they essentially don't like the thread because they think we should all be waiting for due process before discussing the merits of the case and the likely outcomes.  It gets frustrating, hence, the jab.  If you don't like the thread, it's easy to not look at it and not post. 

Some of us are interested in the legal process, motions, and nature of the prosecution and defense.  I get constant PM's from people that don't post but want insight on issues or what is happening.  That's why I try and post so that people can have the info.  Then I have to read another post asking, "what type of elk was it?" and it gets annoying.  Sooner or later you swat at the mosquito buzzing around your head.  Being an attorney doesn't give me special power to be patient and accept the gnats.

Okay, so your comment about one’s employment was a jab at someone(s) specific, and it had nothing to do with the value of the thread. Except to try and get an already derailed thread back on topic. Got it. I guess I read that as being too generalized of a backhanded comment. It was before my coffee and I must have misunderstood this morning. Sorry about that.

With that, I understand where your frustration is coming from… I am watching and following this situation closely and one of the few who are interested in ”the legal process, motions, and nature of prosecution and defense.” I agree with your metaphor, but I am trying focus on the positive side of the bs posts; the fact that many people are paying attention to this case, even if they don’t have anything of value to contribute, they are interacting and know what is going on. Whether they will admit it or not, I bet those who are posting a ton of banter probably know the current details on this case, and it will be interesting to see the comments when the case is closed. All the “I told you so” or “our system is messed up” or “he got what he deserved.” We all know that no matter what the outcome is, someone will have a comment that will not add any value to this thread…

Kinda like my most recent comments haha. 

Anyways, back to the topic at hand.

Have a good weekend!

[dscubame]

Wow.

[popeshawnpaul]

Pope, my opinion of this whole legal process is very jaded because from the start, this "accused poacher" has been handled with kid gloves and seemingly treated very different then say the average hunter.

It just seems so wrong for a judge to "allow" a hunter who has broken hunting laws in the past, been charged, and in the middle of another hunting law violation trial be given the "privilege" to hunt while in the process of the proceedings!

In your experience, is this typical?

It's unusual to lift the "no hunting" condition.  It's typical to have on poaching cases.  I had an arraignment on another poaching case and the judge ordered "no hunting or fishing".  I was upset at the fishing condition as it had nothing to do with the hunting type violation.  In fact, the hunting violation didn't even include hunting but was a charge under RCW title 77 which is the hunting statute.  Had my client cared, I would have filed a motion to lift these conditions.

The judge in this case was just filed on as being biased and asked to recuse himself on this matter.  Perhaps the lifting of the hunting condition was a consulation as he knew the defense was already trying to pressure him to remove himself from the case as biased.  We will never know and that is speculative.  I think this opens up a lot of options for the defendant in this case.  He can now push the trial out until that expensive tag is filled and then take the good deal, knowing he won't hunt for a year, starting in maybe October or November of 2016.  The deal will essentially continue the prosecution and in a year will be dismissed.  There will be no jail and he can hunt the latter part of the 2017 season and not miss a hunting season.  No conviction or loss of hunting this or next season.  This seems like a win win and a no-brainer legally.  I'd advise him to take this in October after he has filled his tag, have the charge dismissed next October, and hunt another expensive tag the end of next season.

[PlateauNDN]

It's setting precedents for sure.