Mdc Investigation Of Ray Co. Mtn Lion Killing

[Trout Commander]

I know that this subject has already been through the wringer and beat to death, but after the response and documentation I received from the MDC I feel a little better about the whole thing and I think some others may as well.

I still think they believe the whole story, but I can see where they don't have evidence to go further and I still feel that they could have handled the press release(s) better.

I have had this material for nearly a week now, sorry I was so slow in sharing.

(e-mail shared with senders consent)

Mr. Carroll,

I certainly do appreciate and respect your opinion and input on this issue, but our investigation ultimately determined that a citation was simply not warranted/justified in this particular situation. What you are privy to in the various media/news reports is not an accurate portrayal of the incident that actually took place on the date in question - the coon hunter that physically shot the mountain lion was actually alone in the woods when he encountered the mountain lion. His companion had remained back in the truck. Their dog (single dog) didn't tree the mountain lion. The shooter was actually on his way to harvest a coon that had been treed by his dog at another location when he inadvertently encountered the mountain lion perched in a tree above his current location. I believe that the mountain lion froze in the tree when the light was shinned on it, as you would expect for most wildlife to react; whereby, it probably was not very difficult to shoot given its proximity to the shooter. The shooter actually fired multiple shots at the mountain lion before finally killing it.

The shooter is being portrayed in the media as having a low IQ, but this has nothing to do with the fact that this individual was physically shaken and reportedly ‘scared to death’, as I would imagine that most folks would be, upon looking into the eyes of a known predator such as a mountain lion. It is hard to pass judgment unless you were there in the shooter's shoes (self defense). Thus, he was not found to be in violation of any of the provisions of the Wildlife Code of Missouri.

The investigation had been on-going as no physical evidence was ever discovered at the scene of the initial report. Upon receiving additional information from the public Conservation Agents were finally able to garner credible information from the cattle rancher that lead a Conservation Agent to a location which contained hair in a tree and blood on the ground which is believed to be that of the mountain lion in question (tests will ultimately confirm or deny this information). The three involved individuals ultimately came clean and admitted to what actually occurred and this information substantiates the physical evidence collected at the scene.

Had these three individuals told the truth from the beginning, the actual killing of the mountain lion would have been better justified since you can make a case for self defense. However, their claim that the cattle rancher killed the mountain lion was not a valid reason in and of itself since the Wildlife Code specifically states that the mountain lion would have had to have been physically attacking or killing their livestock or domestic animals in order to justify shooting it. Thus, I don’t know why they lied in the first place, other than the fact that they were probably not familiar with the law and were scared of potential charges.

Unfortunately, as much as I wish that we could charge folks for providing false information to Conservation Agents we simply do not have a State Statute or Charge Code that would allow us to hold folks accountable and charge them accordingly. Considering that Conservation Agents and law enforcement personnel are lied to everyday, I can certainly see why we do not have such a Statute. Our courts would be over-run with violators of this Statute alone. That being said, Conservation Agents certainly don’t like being lied to, but they can’t allow their emotions to influence the integrity of their investigation.

I would be more than happy to discuss the case in greater detail if you like. I can be reached at (contact info removed by me, not by his request, he can be contacted through the MDC website, but I didn't feel right posting his direct number on an open forum), or if you prefer I would be more than happy to contact you directly if you wish to provide a phone number.

Thanks for taking the time to correspond.

Sincerely,

Dean C. Harre

Protection Division Field Chief - Ozark Unit

mountain lion Danner L info 011311.pdf

mountain lion Danner Voluntary Statement 011311.pdf

mountain lion incident report 011311.pdf

mountain lion Littleton R info 011311.pdf

mountain lion McElwee J info 011311.pdf

mountain lion McElwee Voluntary Statement 011311.pdf

[Stoneroller]

still leaves the unanswered question of why criminal charges aren't being brought against all 3 for Obstruction of Justice. They all admittedly LIED, they all amittedly covered up information during an investigation. I'd offer that the simple fact that they tried to cover it up proves they knew what they had done was illegal. Why try to hide it and make up such an elaborate lie, involving others, if it were really a justified shooting. They were SOOO scared they went and got the 'rancher' to kill it?? really? i mean how much BS is the MDC willing to belive? They claim they don't have a law that allows them to press charges when people lie to investigators? are they out of their freaking minds???? OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!! it's plain and simple. MDC is clearly falling all over its self to cover all this up and sweep it under the rug. Pathetic that our wildlife have a dept so blind to 'watch' over them.

[Trout Commander]

still leaves the unanswered question of why criminal charges aren't being brought against all 3 for Obstruction of Justice. They all admittedly LIED, they all amittedly covered up information during an investigation. I'd offer that the simple fact that they tried to cover it up proves they knew what they had done was illegal. Why try to hide it and make up such an elaborate lie, involving others, if it were really a justified shooting. They were SOOO scared they went and got the 'rancher' to kill it?? really? i mean how much BS is the MDC willing to belive? They claim they don't have a law that allows them to press charges when people lie to investigators? are they out of their freaking minds???? OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!! it's plain and simple. MDC is clearly falling all over its self to cover all this up and sweep it under the rug. Pathetic that our wildlife have a dept so blind to 'watch' over them.

This is why, I guess:

Unfortunately, as much as I wish that we could charge folks for providing false information to Conservation Agents we simply do not have a State Statute or Charge Code that would allow us to hold folks accountable and charge them accordingly. Considering that Conservation Agents and law enforcement personnel are lied to everyday, I can certainly see why we do not have such a Statute. Our courts would be over-run with violators of this Statute alone. That being said, Conservation Agents certainly don’t like being lied to, but they can’t allow their emotions to influence the integrity of their investigation.

Oh and I just want to point out that I was right with my hypothetical rhetoric between the PA and rancher

However, their claim that the cattle rancher killed the mountain lion was not a valid reason in and of itself since the Wildlife Code specifically states that the mountain lion would have had to have been physically attacking or killing their livestock or domestic animals in order to justify shooting it. Thus, I don’t know why they lied in the first place, other than the fact that they were probably not familiar with the law and were scared of potential charges.

This does bring the question of why charges were not filed by the rancher BEFORE the (accepted as) real story came out?! :IveBeenDuped!: (<---we need this emoticon!)

[troutfiend1985]

HB 2037 -- Obstruction of Justice

Sponsor: Bringer

This bill creates the crime of obstruction of justice when a

person, with the intent to prevent the apprehension or obstruct

the prosecution or defense of any person, knowingly:

(1) Destroys, alters, conceals, or disguises physical evidence;

plants false evidence; or furnishes false information;

(2) Induces a witness with information on the subject at issue

to leave the state or conceal himself or herself; or

(3) Possesses information on the subject at issue and leaves the

state or conceals himself or herself.

Anyone committing the crime will be guilty of a class A

misdemeanor unless the person obstructs the prosecution or

defense of a felony in which case he or she will be guilty of a

class D felony.

Problem is Missouri hasn't passed this yet, which really blows my mind.

[ness]

Geez TC! Way to clutter up the forum with actual first-hand knowledge and supporting documentation.

[Trout Commander]

Geez TC! Way to clutter up the forum with actual first-hand knowledge and supporting documentation.

Sorry, Ness I look around for a category for such posts but couldn't find one?

[Smalliebigs]

Nice work Jason!!! finally something on here that is not some sort of hear say and speculated opinions. I don't agree with shooting of the Mountain Lion but I wasn't there. I can totally accept the MDC'c decision in this case and I will go on with my life. It's hard to say whether I would give a Mountain Lion a sporting chance to charge me from that range, even if I am armed. I know I wouldn't turn my back to it. I still think the MDC needs to address the issue of Mountain lions in Missouri and start the education blitz on them very fast.

Thank you Jason for posting actual accounts from the investigating party and explanations from them directly....I can't stand all the speculation.

[flytyer57]

HB 2037 -- Obstruction of Justice

Sponsor: Bringer

This bill creates the crime of obstruction of justice when a

person, with the intent to prevent the apprehension or obstruct

the prosecution or defense of any person, knowingly:

(1) Destroys, alters, conceals, or disguises physical evidence;

plants false evidence; or furnishes false information;

(2) Induces a witness with information on the subject at issue

to leave the state or conceal himself or herself; or

(3) Possesses information on the subject at issue and leaves the

state or conceals himself or herself.

Anyone committing the crime will be guilty of a class A

misdemeanor unless the person obstructs the prosecution or

defense of a felony in which case he or she will be guilty of a

class D felony.

Problem is Missouri hasn't passed this yet, which really blows my mind.

I guess maybe that is because the lawmakers all know they are guilty of it.

[Trout Commander]

Also, I will have the ones from LaPlata posted asap (they aren't available yet).

[Stoneroller]

screw it then, i'm lying to every law enforcement officer i see from now on. and if a conservation agent tries to enforce a non wildlife code violation on me, i'll be making sure to point out that he's overstepping his jurisdiction.

haven't they ever heard of refering a case to the State's Attorney's office for prosecution? seems to work on NCSI miamilachicagonewyorkwestplains...