New Info On The Mt Lion Shooting Has Surfaced

[troutfiend1985]

I'm just wondering why these two idiots didn't just leave the lion? It would seem that it would be a hard case to prove that these two guys were indeed the individuals that killed the mountain lion but for them admitting. I don't know, low intelligence + a gun = nothing good IMO.

I can't see why the MDC isn't doing anything about this. You know, I used to defend the MDC somewhat, but lately they have lost every ounce of credibility and trust that I have of them. Too bad that our tax money goes to this agency, and too bad they lack the courage/backbone to enforce their own regulations. These guys who shot the mountain lion are criminals in my books and I don't see anything that would convince me otherwise. And if it were upt to me I would charge the guy who was trying to take the fall for this with obstruction of justice.

This is one big black eye for the MDC, and I won't be forgetting about it anytime soon.

[eric1978]

I'm just wondering why these two idiots didn't just leave the lion?

'Cause ya see when Donnie Lee and Billy Joe Bob are down at the Dew Drop Inn having their Stag and telling their stories, no one's gonna believe 'em if they didn't produce a corpse. Might as well take the gamble with the gubment and be bonafide local celebrities than to be just two more hillbillies with another tall tale of rural heroism. We might even get our pictures in one a them newspaper thangies Joe Bob! Don't forget the comb!

[troutfiend1985]

'Cause ya see when Donnie Lee and Billy Joe Bob are down at the Dew Drop Inn having their Stag and telling their stories, no one's gonna believe 'em if they didn't produce a corpse. Might as well take the gamble with the gubment and be bonafide local celebrities than to be just two more hillbillies with another tall tale of rural heroism. We might even get our pictures in one a them newspaper thangies Joe Bob! Don't forget the comb!

I guess. I've never been hunting for raccoons, but it sounds like there was some drinking involved in this situation, if not drug use. Gosh, one idiot meets up with another and next thing you know a whole town looks horrible.

[podum]

The MDC's biggest problem here is a Ray County jury. Very unlikely that a jury out there would convict. The false statements to a law enforcement officer charge is another matter. Not sure why these aren't pursued since letting this go in such a publicized case would seem to encourage persons in a tight spot in the future to lie in order to see if the story floats. That is a bad decision.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I just typed out a little story for the Chief, who found the story that proved him not guilty a few days back before he changed his story.

NO. The story did not prove he was not guilty. Choosing not to charge an individual doesn't prove one innocent.

I can't see why the MDC isn't doing anything about this. You know, I used to defend the MDC somewhat, but lately they have lost every ounce of credibility and trust that I have of them. Too bad that our tax money goes to this agency, and too bad they lack the courage/backbone to enforce their own regulations. These guys who shot the mountain lion are criminals in my books and I don't see anything that would convince me otherwise. And if it were upt to me I would charge the guy who was trying to take the fall for this with obstruction of justice.

This is one big black eye for the MDC, and I won't be forgetting about it anytime soon.

Before you go throwing punches, the MDC decided not to file charges due to the fact that the retard can still use self defense. The possibility was still there that the cat could have attacked him or his dogs. I don't buy it but, all you need is a jury of his friends which is exactly what would have happened. I don't think there was anyway for them to win. But I do think they should have tried.

But on the flip side, what local relationship damage could have been assessed against the MDC? It is a tight rope walk and the MDC was in a lose-lose situation. Arresting a local hero can have very damaging effects for any cooperation the MDC may seek with local land owners in the future. I am not happy with the situation and I think it should have been further investigated from the start. Too many things didn't make sense to me in JD orignal "it was legal" thread. That is why I call BS!

[denjac]

On a lighter note : Northern Minnesota 1978 . One nights hunt . We treed a bear that night too.

[Al Agnew]

The part about the near impossibility of getting a conviction is probably the biggest reason MDC didn't prosecute. All of us know that the guy was in no danger from the lion. It's a real good possibility that the guy himself knew he wasn't in any danger. But convincing a jury of his peers that he was in no danger AND KNEW he was in no danger, when you have only the word of him and his buddies as to what went down, was going to be well nigh impossible. So while at first glance I am very disappointed in MDC on this issue, I can understand their "behind the scenes" thinking.

However, I'm still disappointed with the statement. Why are they basically saying that they totally bought the guy's (second) story? Why not just say that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute, or they didn't feel like they could get a conviction? With the statement they made, they are pretty much saying to go ahead and shoot any mountain lion treed by dogs, or any mountain lion you see that's close enough to shoot, for that matter, because you can always say you were afraid the lion was going to attack.

[stlfisher]

I'd agree with the others it was a lose-lose situation for the MDC and a case that likely would have been difficult to win. Not to mention the cost associated with pursuing charges. Furthermore, the general public probably would rather have mountain lions removed than protected...simply out of fear. Not saying that is right and I don't agree with that, but it might be a case in which it is better to cut your losses. Fight the battles you can win that are worth fighting. Not sure it is worth spending money on a rogue mountain lion kill...even though what these guys did was complete BS.

[troutfiend1985]

NO. The story did not prove he was not guilty. Choosing not to charge an individule doesn't prove one innocent.

Before you go throwing punches, the MDC decided not to file charges due to the fact that the retard can still use self defense. The possibility was still there that the cat could have attacked him or his dogs. I don't buy it but, all you need is a jury of his friends which is exactly what would have happened. I don't think there was anyway for them to win. But I do think they should have tried.

But on the flip side, what local relationship damage could have been assessed against the MDC? It is a tight rope walk and the MDC was in a lose-lose situation. Arresting a local hero can have very damaging effects for any cooperation the MDC may seek with local land owners in the future. I am not happy with the situation and I think it should have been further investigated from the start. Too many things didn't make sense to me in JD orignal "it was legal" thread. That is why I call BS!

Well, self defense would not be as hard to prove as I think we have made here on the forum. Questions like: Did you report this into the local authorities as soon as the incident was over? Did the mountain lion try to attack you? Why would you try to cover up this incident if it was really a self defense situation? Did the mountain lion ever get down from the tree, or did you shoot it while it was in the tree? And I am sure that a reasonable Attorney knowing the facts can find plenty more wholes to punch in a self defense claim. The nail in the coffin is the fact that he went up to his buddy(or whoever this rancher was) to have him take the credit for the shooting. Why else would you do this unless you had knowledge that you did not shoot this animal legally? unless there is something more to this situation then I think a reasonable jury could find that the Prosecution would meet its burden of proof.

Besides these obvious things that a reasonable person would have noticed in the situation, this person has impeached his own credibility through prior inconsistent statements.

Also, you would probably charge him with something equivelant to obstruction of justice, and his buddy with aiding, or whatever the applicable statute has in that territory.

I'm not sure how this is a lose-lose. Yeah, the guy may be a "local hero" in some peoples eyes. But to some this guy is no better than a worthless scum of the earth poacher. How is this a case lost? I see this as an unenforceable law that should be taken off of the books if this is how the MDC will handle these situations. Here, the MDC has now sent a message that if you see one and shoot it dead, it is relativly easy to claim this self defense. The MDC is an agency who is supposed to uphold its own laws, even when doing so may be unpopular. I know there is a political side to what the MDC does, but police departments also operate a political campaign through community policing, yet they still arrest those who violate the law. Law is law, if its on the books then enforce it. If you can't win on that charge, then find a charge that you can prevail on to make sure that people know that there is bite behind these laws.

I would have a hard time seeing self defense as being a ligitimate defense unless the MDC is now saying that Mountain Lions are unreasonably dangerous and you are within your rights to shoot one on sight because they will attack you unprovoked. Surely this is not the message that any governmental agency is wanting to send to its tax base, otherwise we are running back into the 19th century views of large predators. So I guess what I am trying to say is that I really don't feel that I am throwing punches at the MDC, rather the MDC is running into my fist.

[gotmuddy]

If anyone who coon hunts regularly cannot tell the difference between coon eyes and cat eyes they need to lay off the busch lite.

I have never hunted coons but I can easily tell the difference.