Another Mt. Lion Is Murdered

[troutfiend1985]

I sent an email to MDC last night. I would post it, but I'm not sure that would be ethical. I was surprised to see a response email, although the email sent to me was boilerplate at best.

Outside is right on point here, it is surprising how crummy of a response the MDC has to this as there is no apparent plan in place.

Randall, what fact or set of facts makes you think that there is not enough evidence to convict? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just want an answer from someone who sees these facts differently than I do.

Usually, an affirmative defense, such as self defense, is the defendants burden to prove. So I would think that the state would be well within its powers to prosecute. But, I don't make the decisions.

[Justin Spencer]

Anyone else find it interesting where on the head the cat was shot. Just to add to speculation, it looks like it was shot down through the top of the head. Shooter had to be higher than cat (maybe deer stand), I don't think the cat could have been looking at shooter when shot, if they were at same level I'd say it had it's head down sniffing along ground not in a position that would seem to indicate the shooter was in danger. On the other hand, if the cat knew the shooter was there and had an easy escape route, I would have expected it to turn tail and run quicker than someone could get off that accurate of a shot (so maybe he was in danger). Hope we get some details from the shooter himself, but I'm sure he's lawyered up.

[troutfiend1985]

Anyone else find it interesting where on the head the cat was shot. Just to add to speculation, it looks like it was shot down through the top of the head. Shooter had to be higher than cat (maybe deer stand), I don't think the cat could have been looking at shooter when shot, if they were at same level I'd say it had it's head down sniffing along ground not in a position that would seem to indicate the shooter was in danger. On the other hand, if the cat knew the shooter was there and had an easy escape route, I would have expected it to turn tail and run quicker than someone could get off that accurate of a shot (so maybe he was in danger). Hope we get some details from the shooter himself, but I'm sure he's lawyered up.

I noticed that too. And it is a very curious fact. I was wondering how that could have happened, but I thought maybe I was just noticing too much. To me, it looked like the person was either shooting from an elevated position, or the cat had its head down. The reports seem to say that this was some sort of Coyote hunt, and I'm not sure how people do these as I have never been on one.

[Randall]

I sent an email to MDC last night. I would post it, but I'm not sure that would be ethical. I was surprised to see a response email, although the email sent to me was boilerplate at best.

Outside is right on point here, it is surprising how crummy of a response the MDC has to this as there is no apparent plan in place.

Randall, what fact or set of facts makes you think that there is not enough evidence to convict? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just want an answer from someone who sees these facts differently than I do.

Usually, an affirmative defense, such as self defense, is the defendants burden to prove. So I would think that the state would be well within its powers to prosecute. But, I don't make the decisions.

I don't see you as being argumentative at all, I think our back and forth is one of the more respectful I've seen on this forum.

In a criminal case, the burden of persuasion rests with the state. At the point where the state meets the burden and shows the elements of the offense, the burden of production shifts to the defense, but the burden of persuasion does not. I think the defense has enough evidence to satisfy its burden of production to establish a cognizable self-defense claim and the state does not currently have evidence to rebut that assertion.

Based on the evidence available, we have a mountain lion that was shot once in the head and that certainly should raise a red flag. Then we have one guy who shot it and would be the only defendant. The other 11 are witnesses. If they all say that the lion was a threat, there is a really good argument that a reasonable person would feel threatened and the shooting was justified. At the point where you have 11 witnesses supporting the defendant's claim that the cat was aggressive, the defense has carried his burden of production. My argument is that MDC needs to investigate this incident, interview these guys individually and see if they can cross them up or otherwise show that the cat posed no threat. The state could then introduce evidence in the form of the witness statements that the defendant is lying (or was unreasonable in his assessment) about the threat posed by the cat and support a conviction. As the facts have been presented to me, it does not look like the state can rebut the statements by the witnesses. It is true that a fact finder is free to disbelieve every one of the defense witnesses but I don't have the opportunity to be present when any of these guys speaks, so I'm basing my judgment on a written record without the chance to judge their credibility.

I don't think I would believe these guys, but based on the facts in front of me I cannot say definitively that they are lying and the cat posed no threat. I want to know why the cat posed no threat but have not heard why it didn't; all I know is that 12 men say that they either felt threatened or would have in the shooter's position. That to me is reasonable doubt and the reason I would enter a judgment of not-guilty. If there were evidence that, for example, the cat was stalking a decoy or that the hunters had not made their presence known to it, I would change my opinion, but that evidence has not been presented.

[Wayne SW/MO]

I have a problem buying in to a scenario where 12 armed people feel threatened by a cat and only one shoots. How did they arrive at who would shoot? Was the shooter the only one who felt threatened? !00 hunters after coyotes would sound like a drive with stationary hunters at locations. If that's true then one would assume the cat was trying to sneak away from the threat to itself and would be coming at anyone concealed.

It still has no truthful ring to it. Absolutely none of the story fits the facts known about the cats.

If you do a little research on lion attacks in the US and Canada, 2 attacks within a few months here either means an especially aggressive bunch of cats are coming in or something isn't quite right in the stories. I know that in the 13 years that I lived in Oregon, which has a resident population all over the state numbering in the thousands, confrontations were rare, very rare.

[Randall]

Those are some of the questions MDC should be asking these boys.

We don't know how the cat was behaving. Who's to say that an individual cat wouldn't break away from the ordinary behavior and become aggressive. As far as only one shooting, if he was quick on the draw and put it down quick, I see no reason for the others to shoot.

The cat could have been trying to sneak away from the drivers (assuming it was a drive, which we also don't know), became aware of the stationary hunters and became aggressive in self-defense. Again, we don't know.

The point I want to make before I quit procrastinating is that I want to see MDC investigate this incident, make it known that it was investigated and bring a criminal action if they are able to uncover evidence to rebut the threat claim. I would also like to see new regulations promulgated to deter future shootings. Now to the stuff I have to do but don't want to.

[jdmidwest]

All right, all of you have wore me down to where I see the point and probably the truth of the matter.

The MDC law enforcement division has acted unethically against the oath they took for the sole purpose of..

Allowing individuals to shoot mountain lions that really don't exist in this state as they pass thru illegally for the sole purpose of...

Collection of a number of carcasses that can be processed into taxidermy mounts paid for by our tax dollars for the sole purpose of..

Placing the mounted carcasses into all of the local area offices with a sign stating "this is what we traded our turkey's for this year".

Makes sense, I really think the corrupt agency that provides us with all of our outdoor entertainment is capable of such a conspiracy just to fool us. And it explains what happened to the flock of turkeys that disappeared from my hunting area, I was beginning to think someone might have dumped some old DDT out there.

The first head shot was taken because the light was shining on his eyes and you aim between them. The second head shot was taken because the cat was poised still in a prone position waiting to pounce on its prey, like cats do. Give it a break or apply to become an agent.

[Buzz]

I'm sure no one on this forum knows, but how many sightings had been reported in the areas of the two mountain lion kills? How many of these sightings actually had MDC boots on the ground to investigate them? Were there ever any reports of livestock kills?

I've read this entire thread and I keep coming back to this. If these people had made reports of sightings, but only got the standard answer, "It's probably just a big dog", did they feel the need to prove it by killing the animal? Was the big coyote hunt just a front to kill this cat?

I have a lot of questions, but I'll stop there for now.

[flytyer57]

A bald eagle going after a stringer of fish is a little different than a mountain lion acting aggressively toward a person or stalking children. An eagle can't kill you, a mountain lion on the other hand is a pretty one-sided fight no matter who you are. When it comes right down to it, human life is worth more than the life of an animal, period.

The point I was trying to make here is that the MDC would be very suspicious of anyone killing an eagle. Why are they not treating this in the same manner? A protected species is a protected species no matter if it's an eagle or mountain lion.

All they are doing by not pressing any charges is giving every nut with a gun the go ahead to kill a mountain lion and let them claim self defense. They have just set precedence with these two cases.

[jdmidwest]

I'm sure no one on this forum knows, but how many sightings had been reported in the areas of the two mountain lion kills? How many of these sightings actually had MDC boots on the ground to investigate them? Were there ever any reports of livestock kills?

I've read this entire thread and I keep coming back to this. If these people had made reports of sightings, but only got the standard answer, "It's probably just a big dog", did they feel the need to prove it by killing the animal? Was the big coyote hunt just a front to kill this cat?

I have a lot of questions, but I'll stop there for now.

As far as the first few questions, only someone in the MDC knows, feel free to call or email, they are normally more than happy to answer any questions.

I really doubt if they killed it to prove a point. And the nature of people that kill things illegally is that they don't report what they did to a local agent.

The coyote hunt is a big thing this time of year, the recent snow makes them come out to feed more in the daylight and they contrast more against the snow so they are easier to spot. I have several friends that hunt them this time of year mainly because they are one of the only open species to hunt and it is the best time to hunt them. After the snow Thurs, we spotted several on the farm and the tracks that night revealed several more.