WHO GOT THE REWARD???

Vanilla,

You are %100 full of crap. On the last thread you were specifically arguing that you could convict these guys with nothing more than testimony of people who claimed to see the deer after Oct. 27th. In your words that alone was "a strong case". Most people just chew their food and quit talking while they eat crow.
 
>Correction again, circumstantial evidence is just
>that...evidence. In fact, often a
>jury instruction is used in
>Utah that specifically instructs a
>jury they are legally able
>to convict a person based
>upon circumstantial evidence alone. That
>is a common misconception out
>there, but a misconception nonetheless.
>
>
>Not saying anything about this case
>specifically. I'm maintaining a strict
>policy to only educate when
>I see erroneous statements of
>the law, and not pass
>judgment on what actually happened
>here.

True.
Erroneous? Doubtful. 4 months later an we aren't even to the first step . Hasn't even been a charge yet. I'm not on either side of this matter, BUT I am a realist. Assuming the shooter did commit an infraction, the mountain of circumstantial hasn't meant diddly thus far. At some point it will be pointless to keep the fingers crossed.
 
Maybe it's time for money bags to up the ante to say 10k? Or 20k sounds more provocative. Or, donate the money to DWR and they can match it... I doubt he'll up his offer since the DWR has nothing. Seems like Hunt50 watches wat too much Columbo.
 
Damn it vanilla, next time you write a post
Please clear it with tritroll first. Ha Ha!!'


"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
"Maybe it's time for money bags to up the ante to say 10k?"


Interesting post YBO. Before the last thread got nuked I stated he should hold out for more money.



Wiley wapiti,

I own you. The only reason you got on this thread was about me. Your welcome.
 
Tristate said-

"Vanilla,

You are %100 full of crap. On the last thread you were specifically arguing that you could convict these guys with nothing more than testimony of people who claimed to see the deer after Oct. 27th. In your words that alone was "a strong case". Most people just chew their food and quit talking while they eat crow."

No, I said that COULD be a strong case, and that I would take it to trial with confidence if I had multiple credible people saying they say the deer after the hunt ended. I did say this COULD result in a conviction, in contrast to your baseless claim that testimony of those people alone could never be enough. I specifically stated, multiple times, that there are no guarantees in my world, but you are too big of a blabbering idiot to read what anyone says. You just fly off the handle on what you think you want to hear. Try a single criminal case and then I will give a very small measure of credence to your opinion on this. Until then, stick to taxidermy and saying stupid things on the internet.
 
Tri, you ain't smart enough to own a chihuahua.




"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
"No, I said that COULD be a strong case,"


Oh really. You said it just like that? No punk you said it like this.

"But if I have multiple witnesses that can testify under oath under the penalty of perjury that they saw THIS deer after the season closed, that's a strong case. I would be very confident in the outcome on that."

You and your boy Wapiti can think I am stupid all you want but I am no liar and I have enough brains to remember what I write which is more I can say for you.
 
Wow Tritip. If you spent that much time going back looking for that quote just to prove Vanilla wrong I think you are the one who is "owned". Slow day huh?


[font color="blue"]I don't make the soup, I just stir it.[/font]
 
I'm not sure why Hunten50 is catching so much flack for what he is doing. The DWR encourages assistance with poaching cases. He believes the deer was poached. If you guys firmly believed you had information on a poacher, wouldn't you pursue it to the best of your ability? I hope so. I believe it is our duty as sportsmen. From what I have read and seen, there is enough there to say the situation is at least suspicious. No, I'm not ready to claim he is guilty. And if the hunter is innocent, he has nothing to worry about. If it was me and I was being wrongfully acused, I would submit a pic, make the dude pay me my $2,000 and tell him to shut the hell up. Unless of course I had a deal with a magazine that was worth more. Then I would just tell him to shut the hell up and wait for the article to come out...
 
To find the quote took less than one minute. I actually have a very good memory. It took about three posts and I pegged it. As for how busy we are the stress is relentless right now. We are putting together another lion right now. Have to finish seven more game-heads too before the end of the day tomorrow. I pull a 10.5 hour day every week day. My job owns me.
 
Why don't you go pull all the quotes so we have the proper context, Sparky. I am very aware of what I posted over there and the conversation that was taking place. You may have a good memory, but your reading comprehension is terrible. You are not a stupid person, that is evident. (Only circumstantial evidence, of course.) You just get off on saying insanely stupid things, over and over and over and over again on the internet. I guess if you repeat yourself enough you figure you can convince yourself you actually believe this garbage?
 
LongRangeBangin' has it exactly right! This supposedly was the most watched deer in the entire history of all deer EVER and yet nobody has a picture of this deer after the season closed despite claims that people saw him (or at least his back forks).

Maybe Vanilla will correct me if I am wrong but wouldn't the shooter's attorney advise against him posting up any kind of photos or "evidence" to a website to get a reward until after the DWR has completed their investigation?

Why would huntin50 put a time limit on his reward offer? I would like to see him have the balls to keep that offer until after the investigation is over. What do you say huntin50? Why the time limit?
 
Most defense attorneys espouse the belief that the less you can say about your case the better. In most situations I tend to agree with that.

But hypothetically, if I had killed this buck legally and I was being accused of poaching, and a picture could help prove my innocence AND get me 2 grand and a chunk of my mount? I might talk. Then again, I might not. I'm not in the position so it's tough to say.
 
You just can't admit you forgot your own stupid words? Who could honestly say those posted sentences mean anything else but exactly what they mean.

Yes I believe you wrote that garbage. At least come up with a better idea than "Tristate can't comprehend your words". How about, "Kids hacked your MM account". Or "I was having a diabetic fit". I would cut you some slack. But this junk of telling lies to cover your butt ain't ever going to work.
 
Thanks for pointing out how smart you are tri,
Guess I missed it.


"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
Does anyone think it's possible that the hunter can't post a field photo because the authorities are in possession of the camera?

Eel
 
Please dont cloud this thread with common sense Eel........

Bill

People who work for a living are quickly being
overwhelmed by people who vote for a living.
 
>Does anyone think it's possible that
>the hunter can't post a
>field photo because the authorities
>are in possession of the
>camera?
>
>Eel


Brilliant ,I never thought about that.
 
Hey Pig, If you weren't wasting time running back and forth checking MM every 15 minutes for someone to argue with you wouldn't have to work 10 1/2 hour days.
Life must really suck these days huh? What a loser.
 
Deerlove, he could have willingly given it to the authorities, or the authorities could have gotten a search warrant and seized it as possible evidence. It doesn't mean guilt or innocence either way.

Eel
 
Precisely the reason I am calling for huntin50 to keep his offer of $2,000.00 open until the end of the investigation. Sadly though, his little competition (witch hunt) seems to be over and he probably thinks he has proven that the buck was poached by nobody claiming the prize.

Come on huntin50! It is a very valid point that perhaps the DWR has the camera so that the shooter isn't able to post pics so why do you want to run away so soon?
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-14-14 AT 04:49PM (MST)[p]CAfork and other critics,

One reason why I did the contest for 5 days, because I thought with too much time some may try to photoshop pictures, and make fun of the hunter. Also, the kill picture should already have been shared like the pictures of the hunter hoiding the buck on Nov 1st, 6 days after the hunt, still not caped out, with 60 degree temps in the afternoons.

I also did this post, because some of the hunters friends had a "in your face" attitude of show me a picture of the buck after the hunt. I personally, and others believe the buck was shot tuesday or wednesday night after the hunt, near the canal where it had been hanging out for days prior to its disappearance. Again, I'm not sharing evidence or statements that were passed on to the DWR.

The DWR like on other suspious activity/cases have asked sportsmen to send info or statements to them as grizzly stated. Since I know quite a few sportsmen and have family in the area, I like OTHER'S told people if they have accurate info and are willing to testify to it, about this buck, send it to the DWR.

I have simply said if the hunter or a friend would show a kill picture of the buck in a legal area above Hyde Park, that would help him with his story, and show evidence against his critics, it would be very helpful. The hunters friend Butts,said there was a phone at the kill scene. Probably at least two.

It is very interesting to me as an observer, that Butts said at least the "defense has A picture" I would think if things were done legally the hunter would have many kill pictures given to family and close friends, like the KSL bucks.

I'm willing to bet that if any of hunters who have their pictures on the KSL link would gladly accept 2K for a picture if I promised I wouldn't put it on the internet. After all they ALL allowed there pictures to be posted, probably for free.

The hunter or friend can send a daytime picture of the buck killed on the face to the DWR officer: [email protected] for the next 5 days and still collect now 3K from me. I will get a hard copy picture from officer Schulze. That is plenty of time to email a kill picture to the DWR, and get paid for doing it. I can arrange cash to be at a Tremonton business.

If the hunter has a deal with a magazine he can still do it, and get now 3K.

I put the ball in the court of the hunter, or friends on a tee. I can't make it any easier.

I'm not rich, I have five kids, one on a mission, I work two jobs, just trying to possibly help resolve things.

Some thoughts:
1. Why have things been so secrete?

2. Why does someone need a cash reward to offerd for a picture if things were legal?

3. Why was the buck not caped out for at least 6 days after the hunt. If I had shot a monster buck it would have been done the same day or the next day. The picture that Butts said that was taken on Sunday Oct 27th at noon, just a few hours after it was shot, did not change from the November 1st picture that the hunter was holding, except a foot or so of the bucks neck was cut off. That is a little strange to me.

I could list more than 15 very strange things about this buck missing, but readers get my point.

I don't know any details about the DWR case. Normally you would have friends and family who had kill pictures of this monster buck. I'm sure the DWR didn't go around and collect everyones pictures. LOL.

I'm pretty sure NO DAYTIME kill pictures were taken, especially on the face of Hyde Park in a legal area.

Please let's act like grown ups and be civil. Again, this has nothing to do with the DWR case.

Thanks,

Greg
 
So, you offered a reward for a picture to help convict this guy? Why didn't you just say so from the beginning instead of trying to deceive your motives? Deny it if you will but a lot here won't be buying.

Are there any pictures of this Buck alive after the season closed?

Must not be and i keep wondering why that is with all the people watching this buck, why aren't those pics being shared openly or not unless no proof exists.

There are easy answers to all your questions. Among them, I don't cape my own deer, never have, but i'll throw the head in the freezer and wait until my pard, who does cape, can get the time to come over and do it. A week is nothing, might be months!

Again, After being accused here, especially if the buck was taken on the up and up, the taker of this buck owes you or us NOTHING!!!

Also again, if it is found and proved that the guy took this buck unlawfully, i hope he gets jail time, loss of hunting privileges forever, and a huge fine. I just don't like the witch hunt and i don't believe that a investigation like this going on in these pages is going to encourage people here posting up pic's of their adventures.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Easy Sage,

I never once said that I WOULD NOT send a copy of the picture to the DWR. I said I'm doing this by myself and the DWR has nothing to do with it.

I don't know what the DWR has for evidence, I just know what I have passed on, which must be pretty good for me to offer 3K for a kill picture on the face.
 
Easy? How about you going easy and letting DWR do their job?

"I never once said that I WOULD NOT send a copy of the picture to the DWR. I said I'm doing this by myself and the DWR has nothing to do with it."

That statement right there is what us old timers call, "being deceitful".

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Sage,

I said all along only a few people would need to see it. I wouldn't know if it was a legit picture or not if one was emailed to me. I could guess. Butts, the hunters friend said he had a legit picture of the buck caped out and in his hands Sunday Oct 27th at noon. However, more than a dozen people saw this buck Sunday morning, afternoon,evening, Monday and Tuesday.

A Kill picture would help one way or the other.

Thanks,

Greg
 
Huntin50, dude you are obsessed with this. Either move on or ante up out of the chump change mode. I think 20K would be appropriate. If Butts buddy took your measly 2/3 grand, I will guarantee you he will have to hire an attorney for more than what you are offering. If the picture even looks half ass suspect...he is toast. Let the DWR do it's job! Oh that's right,they have nothing and you know they have nothing. You are being very deceitful.
 
YBO,

Why would someone need to hire an lawyer for collecting 3K on a picture of a Buck killed legally, that would add support to the hunter?

I'm confused with your reasoning.
 
I talked with a friend who works at Kents. They are in no way helping in this investigation, and have nothing to do with this case, nor do any of their employee's.

I just used their business name as an example that a business could hold the reward money.

Thanks,

Greg
 
Greg---

For hell's sake man........

You have already dug a freaking 6 ft deep hole on this------

Why on earth do ya keep digging it deeper??

Let it freaking go will ya ~~

Robb
 
Huntin50, Though may argue different, i don't believe that you could possibly be move evasive and unforthcoming.

You win a early nomination for Drama Queen of the year, Congrats!!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-14-14 AT 08:51PM (MST)[p]You know, when I was a kid my older brother used to bug the crap out of me. My mom used to always say, "If you would just ignore him he will leave you alone."

I laugh that so many people are yelling at hunt50 to 'let it go' yet they can't let it go themselves. Drama.....hey pot, this is kettle, and you're black!

Only one person in this 'drama' has put his money where his mouth is. Just sayin...
 
Vanilla and trophyM, Both you guys been in on this witch hunt and deceit from the start! In this case, even if you find and convict a witch, doesn't mean that you should have brought your hunt to these pages.

Read my posts, there is nothing stupid about requesting due process. There came a point where even the Owner of this site requested you guys to quit yet you guys chose to argue and ignore his request.

My whole point of even joining in on this conversation is that this stinking pile of laundry should not have been washed in this way or this machine!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
I challenge you to find one post of mine on this website where I say this hunter did anything against the law.

Have I formulated my own opinions on what happened here? Absolutely. Have I said anywhere what those opinions are? Not even close! My posts have never even a single time accused the hunter of illegal activity and I haven't delved into the 'witch hunt' you speak of. When I talked about the pot calling the kettle black, I was talking specifically about you, Sage. Guys like Tristate come and argue this stuff because they are trolls. You continue to throw gas on this fire, and obviously don't have a friggin clue if you've lumped me into any side of the accusations or defending here.
 
Vanilla, i didn't say that you did! I said you have been in on the witch hunt and deceit.

You said, " If you have a phone capable of dropping a pin, you have a camera. The chances of having a smart phone on location and no pictures of the buck in the field are zero. I don't care what anyone claims about not taking field photos. You shoot a 240 inch mule deer and you have a camera, you take pictures. Period. So let's stop with that bologna. You just sound stupid if you keep beating that drum."

Calling for "innocent" pictures here along with Huntin50's, "nothing to do with the DWR investigation" is deceit, lumps you in with the rest in my book. Also, you seem to come running every time the guys here ask you few to knock it off.

Finally, don't compare me to tritate. He could care less about this site and only loves to play games of people. Throwing gas on the fire or not, I will continue to call for due process and the witch hunt, the vigilantism to end.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-14-14 AT 10:05PM (MST)[p]Come on Vanilla, you have offer $3k or some won't bother looking.
 
12 guys saw him after the season AND NOT ONE of them took a picture. Just doesn't sound like the most photo taking bunch either.
Those that have claimed they saw the buck after the season and the ones that say it was killed in season, One thing for sure one side or the other will be eating crow. The sad part is if neither side is proven right. What then.
More she said he said crap.
DWR will have the final say, Not any group on MM.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
Sage,

That quote was directly to those saying he may not have had a camera. The statement made by his buddy refutes that. Nothing more, nothing less. Not an allegation of illegality even in the slightest.

I have said here more than once this hunter owes the interwebs nothing. He doesn't have to prove his innocence here. I just simply want to see the pics, that's why I have said post them up. I legitimately and sincerely hope this deer was harvested legally. I am on no online witch hunt.

A good secondary factor for me, if I had been the one to shoot this deer, aside from getting $3k and a portion of my mount paid for would be sticking it in peoples faces. That is why I have said he should post them up. But again, for about the tenth time (hopefully this one is clear enough for you) he owes the Internet forums nothing. It is his choice to pass on huntin50's deal if he wants. And if he does pass, that doesn't make him guilty. Just means I don't get to see field photos. But then again huntin50 changed the game to say it doesn't have to be posted here so I wouldn't get to see them anyway. Therefore I care substantially less if he produces the photos or not.
 
>Some people are soon to look
>really stupid on here
>"I've hunted almost every day of
>my life, The rest
>have been wasted"

As long as I don't look as stupid as the idiot who "sports" corn rows, wounded a pet buck, chasing it thru the streets of north Logan, an now has a problem with others trying their hand at killing town pet deer.
But as far as being wrong on my thoughts after reading all the comments an pure speculation on 5-6 different threads over the last 4 months. I'll be ok. Still looks like a mountain of circumstantial too me. So please tell us enlightened one.........
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-14 AT 09:14AM (MST)[p]Yall can call me a troll all you want but this little drama has hit a few nerves and finally there is this one. Vanilla posted this.

"I challenge you to find one post of mine on this website where I say this hunter did anything against the law."


This is a person that claims he could already prosecute this man with just the testimony of the guys who state they saw the deer after the season end. He even states he has convicted people in the past with this little "evidence". What is wrong with a person that will not have the testicles to state what he believes to be the truth but is willing to bring forth the full weight of the government into ruining a man's life? Vanilla has lied on these threads I have quoted him and proven it. But that doesn't stop this childish game that he wants to play here because he is fully comfortable crapping on others.
 
Hey trollstate, there may indeed be people alive that care what you think. None of them are on this forum. Keep spitting stupidity and PROVING things all you want. No sweat off my back. The amount of credibility you bring to your posts is equal to that of OJ when he says he's not a murderer.
 
If someone posts a field photo, so what still doesn't prove innocence, still won't stop the witch hunt here, there will just be more questions and accusations.

Is that really Sunday morning?

Is that really on the face?

And so on and so on..............................

Vanilla you are soooooooo full of chit. You in your mind have this guy guilty. You have said you could prosecute him as the evidence stands. We'll if you can then he must be guilty or you are what's wrong with the system, people who can prosecute those who are not guilty and people who can defend those who are guilty IMO have loopholed a great system into something less.

LongRangeBangin, please expound on this cornrowed pet killing story, I think I remember but I didn't remember who it was.

If this was huntin50 I am kinda surprised as I figured the witch hunters to be people who were against killing tame deer. But instead I'm starting to think it is JEALOUSY alone that drives them. Very sad.

Tristate, no chit Vanilla has lied, he's a lawyer. Not all of them are liars but you can quickly tell the ones who are. So much double talk.

Bill

People who work for a living are quickly being
overwhelmed by people who vote for a living.
 
I can tell you this Vanilla. My evidence that you are a liar is a lot stronger than the evidence you claimed you would convict this man with AND THATS A LOT MORE CREDIBILITY THAN YOU WILL EVER HAVE.
 
Bill, you are a moron. I never said I could convict this guy based upon the evidence that is available. Don't put words in my mouth. What I did I say is if there are multiple people willing to come forward and testify that they saw this deer after the season ended that it could be a strong case. That was simply a direct reply to the moron Trollstate's statement that you can't get a conviction based upon somebody's eyewitness testimony alone. You can, and prosecutors do, every day. You can bash me or the system all you want. I honestly couldn't care less what your opinion of me is. But what I won't stand for is you putting words in my mouth that simply aren't true! Quit trying to mix two completely different conversations to suit your own nefarious intentions.

Again, I have said nothing about if this guy in particular is guilty. I have no idea if there is a single person willing to testify in this case or not, let alone if there are multiple people as I hypothesized about on the other thread. I have no idea if anyone actually saw the deer after the season ended. I have no idea what evidence is there or if any actually exists at all! So how on earth could I say 'I could convict this guy on the evidence available right now'??? That is asinine. You either completely misread what I have been saying this entire time, or you are a flat out liar. You can decide which one is more appropriate. Either way, you don't have a clue what you're spouting off about. So it doesn't matter to me. Carry on beating this dead horse. Trollstate can keep telling everyone how much smarter he is than the rest of the world, and my life goes on the same it always has. You guys think MM is the epicenter of the world.
 
Vanilla do you just keep hoping people won't see the lying piece of dirt you are. You can't even keep the lies straight in your own head anymore. Now you start with all this junk about "Trollstate can keep telling everyone how much smarter he is than the rest of the world". You are just pissed and hope no one will recognize that you have been lying and dancing as close to slander as you possibly can. You are a disgrace to attorneys everywhere and I seriously doubt you should be in the position of a prosecutor. For you it is easier to lie and swing a broad sword of "justice" than it is to admit you might have made a mistake, AND THAT IS EXCEPTIONALY DANGEROUS.
 
I will readily admit I am NOT. The smartest guy and I am not a lawyer or expert in law, but moron? Haha, I'm crushed that a double talking lawyer would say such a thing. Haha.

I never said you said you could convict, I said you said you could prosecute. So. Much for putting words in someone's mouth.

As for eyewitness testimony, I agree that a case can hinge on it. If there were several eyewitnesses saying they saw a suspect shoot this buck out of season or on a piece of property that was not legal, then yes. But in this case (at least how it's been carried out here) there is only stories of people saying they saw the deer after season closed. Very different.

As has been pointed out in the many threads on this deer eyewitness testimony is brought into question without any physical evidence. Such as, is it possible that when you say you saw that deer on Tuesday it could have been the Tuesday before that? Since there was NOTHING REMARKABLE about seeing this deer to make you recall which Tuesday it was.

Whereas if you saw someone shoot the deer in city limits (SOMETHING REMARKABLE) you would recall a date or if season was closed etc.

My reading comprehension is fine and as for being a liar, I have lied, something I think just about everyone has done. But in this case I did not lie but if you must name call to attempt to talk your way out, then that's your burden not mine.

Thanks Long Range. I forgot about ol' Thophy's little adventure in pot calling the kettle black. Haha.

Bill

People who work for a living are quickly being
overwhelmed by people who vote for a living.
 
I hope I haven't made a call on this person's innocence or guilt. I don't think I did. I'm sure Shittaste will run and check since he loves me so. So here is what I believe. Once you share a secret with even one person it's out of your control and no longer a secret. So IF, and that's a huge if, the buck was taken illegally the way this "circumstantial evidence" MAY result in a conviction is that someone who knows the secret will buckle under the pressure, roll over and spill their guts. If the buck was taken legally then the circumstantial evidence will be easily disproven and all will be fine. Only time will tell.

In the meantime what was an interesting topic has become a playground brawl. If H50 wants to put a reward out for a picture its his business. If sageadvice and Shittaste want to stomp their feet call other people liars that's their business. Personally I think in preschool several folks would be in time out now.

I hope the buck was taken legally. It's bad for hunting and all of us if it was not. Actually the killing of bucks like these high profile town bucks, in and of itself, is bad for hunting. But if it's done legally at least it's more palatable to the general public.

[font color="blue"]I don't make the soup, I just stir it.[/font]
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-14 AT 01:55PM (MST)[p]NVB, stomping feet and calling people liars? Good one!

There has been exposed a certain amount of deceit here, that and a good dose of Vigilantism. If you are good with that fine, i'm not.

As far as your comment, "I hope the buck was taken legally. It's bad for hunting and all of us if it was not. Actually the killing of bucks like these high profile town bucks, in and of itself, is bad for hunting. But if it's done legally at least it's more palatable to the general public."

i agree with you 100% and only hope that i've made that point clear all along within the rest of my comments.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
No problem huntindad. This whole thing has me laughing hysterically. I guess I've spent to much time following all 4 or 5 threads about this damn deer. All the frigid posts about people seeing this buck clear into THANKSGIVING an then all the sudden a picture appears of the buck being caped out NOV 1. So let's all wipe our asses with the thought we "thunk" we saw him on Thanksgiving , an wonder why the picture of the caped deer is surfacing 6 days after he supposedly shot it.
Now, if there more credible evidence then what's posted in any of the 4-5 threads that proves the shooter broke the law, hallelujah! But everything posted THUS far is crap. I really think there are 2 identical deer running around because there are so many nutmongers that saw a buck like his waaayyyy after nov 1. What the hell happened to those that posted that hogwash anyway?
 
I've read through most of this stuff.
I was going to comment.
It's off season right, This is all NUTS I mean REALLY NUTS!!
Both sides, get a life. :)
 
>Stupidest thread of the year.....so far.
>mtmuley

Hey mt!

Don't You Dare Call My Thread the Stupidest Thread of the Year!:D

I asked a Simple Question!

And I'm getting about every Answer other than the one I was looking for!:D:D:D













[font color="red"]From My Smokin Cherry Red Hot Barrel & My Dead Cold Hands I Shall go down Fighting for American Pride & Rights!
I Know I'm Out Numbered by Pusssies & Brainwashed Democrats that'll Throw Their Hands in the air & I know I can't Lick the U.S. Military by Myself when they Turn on us but I'll make
you one Guarantee,They'll be Enduring a Situation where I Hope to Hell All Americans become True Americans once again & Stand up for their Rights!
 
The verdict is in. The Dwr officer in charge of the case has just declared the the case is being thrown out due to "lack of evidence." Case is now closed unless substantial evidence comes forth. Apparently a few buddies testimonys stating they saw the buck dead on the last day is more substantial than the testimony of those who saw him alive after the season ended. That's what the judge decided.
Case closed.
He got away with it. That's the way the system works I guess.
I know what I personally saw, reguardless of what the judge says.
Sad day. Time to move on.
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"
 
I will be the 1st to say....CONGRADS to the hunter. apparently all you guys who claimed the buck was watched, filmed and petted every day WAS killed legally. or else a picture of him would have surfaced.....I say the only right thing to do would be to donate the 2K to primary children's in honor of the hyde park buck. also a public apology is in order from those who KNEW he was guilty and had PROOF
 
Congrats for what? Leaving no evidence?? I will apologize for nothing. I know what I saw and I saw him alive after season regardless of what a judge says. I guess the moral of the story is leave no evidence and get away with poaching!
IMO it's absolute bull.
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"
 
Did I read somewhere that the DNA where the buck was shot was actually on legal grounds? Maybe the hunter and his buddies packaged all the evidence up and relocated it to a different location. Wait, how can that be when the buck was spotted after the hunting season was over.
 
LMAO! Idiots! Apparently the Judge doesn't agree with Topgun's or Vanilla's claim that a few people seeing this buck after the season closed is evidence enough to prosecute. Let me guess Topgun and Vanilla, the judge is wrong right? LMMFAO! Retards!
 
I got to admit that I was laughing like hell when the verdict (decision) came out. What a cluster pluck. Guys even claiming they saw the buck alive right before Thanksgiving! Congrats to the hunter, however he pulled it off.
 
Trophymuley says,
"Some people are soon to look really stupid on here."

Man did you call that one. HAHAHA funniest thing I have ever read on this entire forum. I do have to give you credit for being right on one thing during this "investigation". Even though it was calling yourself stupid, congratulations!!! YOU EARNED IT!!!
 
You obviously missed the point of who I was referring to there.
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"
 
I like the statement is closed, the judge threw out the evidence. The system doesn't work that way. The only way a judge could rule on the advisability of evidence is in a trial. There is only one way a judge is involved prior to an arrest and charges and that is the application for a search warrant. The affiant has to list all of the probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the judge has to believe there is objective and subjective probable cause and if so authorizes the warrant. The burden of proof for the application for a search warrant is probable cause, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

The warrant is authorization to search for evidence of a crime. It does not mean someone has or will be charged.

So your statement doesn't hold water unless the judge did not believe PC existed for a warrant at the time of application. That doesn't mean additional evidence comes forward that would tip the scales to PC. This isn't over.

Rich
 
Now I foretold this was coming (HERE the he said SHE said deal), Where is the innocent until proven guilty. Guess it was proven in court. But in the weak minded folks they will still beat that drum (I'm Right and the rest of the world is wrong)
Could it be that you was mistaken on what you saw that night in the dim light, You saw a Piece of a back fork. YOU are willing to put a man's life and family on trial because you really can't see beyond I'm right because, IT HAD TO BE THIS WAY it couldn't happen any other way. Dude You really need to get a grip and I don't mean on your Johnson. I hope like hell You get to live in the same town as he does and you have to look him and his family in the eye day in and day out. Knowing he was proven innocent by the judge. I wonder how those that claim to have seen this buck after the season closed feel about their reputations, knowing that they wasn't believed by the court. That include some of the MM crowd.
"Some guys are going to look stupid on here sure does ring a bell" That sure was a truthful statement.
I always said one side or the other would be right and when it was done and DWR would be the one that would say who was innocent and who wasn't. Now some wouldn't believe it and still be arguing they was right even if wasn't proven in their way of innocent or guilty.
My daddy use to saying( "They would argue with a fence post for the sake of arguing")

I wonder if it will end here, maybe he has a court case against some of people who are to remain nameless.

Who stirring the pot now.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
So what if a publication bought rights?
The hunter has plenty of pics and proof of a legal kill.
All this going on while some silly guys on the internet are offering pocket change for pics.
Funny, dumb, but funny.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-14 AT 06:13PM (MST)[p]>I like the statement is closed,
>the judge threw out the
>evidence. The system doesn't work
>that way. The only way
>a judge could rule on
>the advisability of evidence is
>in a trial. There is
>only one way a judge
>is involved prior to an
>arrest and charges and that
>is the application for a
>search warrant. The affiant has
>to list all of the
>probable cause to believe a
>crime has been committed and
>the judge has to believe
>there is objective and subjective
>probable cause and if so
>authorizes the warrant. The burden
>of proof for the application
>for a search warrant is
>probable cause, not beyond a
>reasonable doubt.
>
>The warrant is authorization to search
>for evidence of a crime.
>It does not mean someone
>has or will be charged.
>
>
>So your statement doesn't hold water
>unless the judge did not
>believe PC existed for a
>warrant at the time of
>application. That doesn't mean additional
>evidence comes forward that would
>tip the scales to PC.
>This isn't over.
>
>Rich


Rich---I'm glad to see that at least one or two people on this thread have half a brain, rather than just posting a bunch of baloney like most have on this thread! What you stated is dead nuts on and there obviously has been no trial for a Judge to rule on anything and declare it over or most of the people interested in this case that live there would know there was a case filed in court. A Judge might have turned down a DWR request for a search warrant with the belief that there wasn't enough probable cause to issue it, but that would be the only way a Judge would enter into this situation until the case was filed through the DWR by the Prosecutor whose jurisdiction an alleged crime was said to have occurred. Then it would go through the usual judicial process with a number of steps that could take months to complete. If it actually went through to the trial stage the defendant and his attorney would make a decision as to whether he wanted a trial by Judge or Jury. Has anyone heard the fat lady sing yet?, LOL!
Now before anyone from CA says anything in response to this post, I'm hereby stating that I'm still only referring to the various legal steps in the judicial process and it has nothing to do with whether I think the guy is guilty of anything or not!
 
>So what if a publication bought
>rights?
>The hunter has plenty of pics
>and proof of a legal
>kill.
>


WHO would want to read the story?????? A how to article on methods and equipment used to kill a barnyard tame deer???? WTF would read that sh!t??? Whether it was poached out of the park or legally killed above the magic line, I cannot say it's a "hunting story". If a magazine pays for that story they're wasting their money.


[font color="blue"]I don't make the soup, I just stir it.[/font]
 
Rich (lostinoregon)is absolutely right on this one.

Which also means Topgun is actually right on it too! He didn't just stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Bill

People who work for a living are quickly being
overwhelmed by people who vote for a living.
 
Hey Bess, the posts ain't gettin smarter. Or smarter the posts ain't gettin. We ain't gettin smarter posts. mtmuley
 
Lost, For the life of me i can't figure why you would misquote or/and take out of context the statement that you are referring to but you did. Here is the actual statement,

"The verdict is in. The Dwr officer in charge of the case has just declared the the case is being thrown out due to "lack of evidence." Case is now closed unless substantial evidence comes forth. Apparently a few buddies testimonys stating they saw the buck dead on the last day is more substantial than the testimony of those who saw him alive after the season ended. That's what the judge decided."

So you see, Nothing about the judge until the end there, substantially different from what you came up with and explained in detail. And i wonder why? Actually, i wasn't going to bring it up at all as part of what you were getting at is correct, further evidence can reopen this case in a heartbeat, if there is further evidence.

That said, when Topflop with his admitted, "half a brain" jumped on and told you how right on you were, well, because of the filthy fowl mouth PM's i regularly get from the guy, i'm never ever going to miss a chance to show right here on the open forum that he doesn't even have half a brain, doesn't know what he's talking about, and would probably do himself a favor by keeping his mouth shut. Lost, you weren't right on or "dead nuts" and Tospun once again proved he is the idiot that he is...

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
I think trophymuley is just confused with his legal terminology.

I take it the law enforcement investigators don't feel that they have enough evidence to present a case to the DA, at least at this time. That could change if new evidence is discovered.

If there was a verdict of not guilty in a court,(by a judge or a jury) then the case would be closed forever for that defendant. No double jeopardy.

Eel
 
>Hey Bess, the posts ain't gettin
>smarter. Or smarter the posts
>ain't gettin. We ain't gettin
>smarter posts. mtmuley

Ya!

What NVB doesn't realize is:

Bucks = Big Bucks here in TARDville!

Rather if be a Hogle Zoo Buck!

The Hyde Park Buck!

Or the Antelope Island Buck!

It's all Money Related one way or the other!

Like I said!

I have nothing but Hear/Say which I'm not going to Repeat cuzz I have No Idea what's True & what Ain't?












[font color="red"]From My Smokin Cherry Red Hot Barrel & My Dead Cold Hands I Shall go down Fighting for American Pride & Rights!
I Know I'm Out Numbered by Pusssies & Brainwashed Democrats that'll Throw Their Hands in the air & I know I can't Lick the U.S. Military by Myself when they Turn on us but I'll make
you one Guarantee,They'll be Enduring a Situation where I Hope to Hell All Americans become True Americans once again & Stand up for their Rights!
 
+1 Eel that Trophymuley dude spends way to much time over in legal to suck-n-blow Colo.!! he brought nothing to the table but back stab yap---what happened to his after the season alive photo's??

Sooooooo........

$FW/Huntin50 never spent a dime of their big shot 'reward' $2k after all.....

Robb
 
Hello all,

This is my first post on the forum and I am not quite sure how it works. I apologize if this does not end up where it is supposed to. Anyway, many of you knew me under the same name over on Utahwildlife.net. I asked for my account to be disabled over there because my brother-in-law's name was being dragged through the mud over an animal that was NOT poached. I was disgusted by the number of people who were willing to jump right in and declare guilt where they literally knew NOTHING of the person nor the situation of his hunt.

Sooo...I decided to join up here and let this post be my first. I had heard a lot about this Hyde Park buck and I had followed the threads off and on. Then I popped by here for some reading today and saw the photo for the first time. Ironically, I have known the guy in the photo with the deer since the day he was born. It's not like we're best friends or something, but we have hooked up for a few bird hunts.

I haven't seen him for over a year and I can't comment as to his innocence or guilt. One thing I can say is that this guy does not have much of an online presence. He has a little bit of a history with tanning his own hides and doing his own taxidermy. The last time I was at his house he showed me some of the work he had done and he had actually done a nice job. A photo in the garage a few days after the alleged kill date would not surprise me at all. He was working in that same garage on a turkey and a deer the day I stopped by his house. I would guess the cape is probably still there being worked on in that same garage (if he hasn't finished the mount yet).

That is all I have to say for now. I'm not willing to play judge and jury with a situation that I know nothing about.
 
You are correct. I'm no genius with legal terminology and was corrected that no judge has been involved just a statement that at the present time there is not enough evidence to prosecute yet. Just an update
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"
 
He's a taxidermist! How did they not get the search warrant? Being a taxidermist is probable cause in itself. Hehehehehe......

Welcome to the asylum Birddogger.
 
This has to get to 200 posts.




"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-14 AT 07:16PM (MST)[p]>Lost, For the life of me
>i can't figure why you
>would misquote or/and take out
>of context the statement that
>you are referring to but
>you did. Here is the
>actual statement,
>
>"The verdict is in. The Dwr
>officer in charge of the
>case has just declared the
>the case is being thrown
>out due to "lack of
>evidence." Case is now closed
>unless substantial evidence comes forth.
>Apparently a few buddies testimonys
>stating they saw the buck
>dead on the last day
>is more substantial than the
>testimony of those who saw
>him alive after the season
>ended. That's what the judge
>decided."
>
>So you see, Nothing about the
>judge until the end there,
>substantially different from what you
>came up with and explained
>in detail. And i wonder
>why? Actually, i wasn't going
>to bring it up at
>all as part of what
>you were getting at is
>correct, further evidence can reopen
>this case in a heartbeat,
>if there is further evidence.
>
>
>That said, when Topflop with his
>admitted, "half a brain" jumped
>on and told you how
>right on you were, well,
>because of the filthy fowl
>mouth PM's i regularly get
>from the guy, i'm never
>ever going to miss a
>chance to show right here
>on the open forum
>that he doesn't even have
>half a brain, doesn't know
>what he's talking about, and
>would probably do himself a
>favor by keeping his mouth
>shut. Lost, you weren't right
>on or "dead nuts" and
>Tospun once again proved he
>is the idiot that he
>is...
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"


***Read what is written SLOWLY and you'll see that the statement said that the "Judge" made the ruling talked about earlier in the paragraph! A first grader should be able to understand that, so I guess logic would say you didn't make it that far in school, LOL! Now the guy who made that post has come back on a few minutes ago and says there was no Judge involved just like lost and I stated. You would argue that the moon is the sun just because it's myself that makes a statement that you don't like! YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN ON THIS ONE!!!
 
Sage,

Wasn't taking sides or saying someone was guilty or innocent. I read the statement that everyone was taking at face value as the end of the case and providing facts about the legal system and trying to educate everyone on the system. Reading what was written about the legal system does not make sense.

The verdict is in- a verdict can only be delivered by a judge or a jury, so in reality that statement on its face is inaccurate.

Officer declared case being thrown out, lack of evidence. The case can't be thrown out if it was never filed and if a case is filled it has to be dismissed with prejudice to stop from future charges.

That's what the judge decided-as I said before the Judge would not be involved in the process except for a warrant.

Just because top gun agrees or disagrees with me doesn't make my statements valid or invalid. I have no experience with angry PM's.

I hope the buck was taken legally because the general public paints all poachers as hunters and makes us all look bad.

I was trying to make the point that based upon that statement I dissected above based upon my experience I wouldn't consider the case closed.

Rich
 
Get off it topdump, i read and understand just fine. I'm wrong again? Where is your conviction? Where is the people claiming they saw the deer after the season that you said was enough to convict. You have been wrong and itching to try an convict from the start.

Also, enough of your filthy fowl mouth PM's!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Rich, no problem with you, never has been.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
>Get off it topdump, i read
>and understand just fine. I'm
>wrong again? Where is your
>conviction? Where is the people
>claiming they saw the deer
>after the season that you
>said was enough to convict.
>You have been wrong and
>itching to try an convict
>from the start.
>
>Also, enough of your filthy fowl
>mouth PM's!
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"


*** All I've been doing is offering some legal tips just like Vanilla and now lost has done. I've made more than one or two posts stating that I was not talking about guilt or innocence and did so again just this evening. Now you're skirting the real issue here and not even talking about what I posted because you dang well know you're wrong regarding the Judge statement! You can call me whatever you want out here and think nothing of it, but don't keep up this crap about my foul PMs to you if you do. The one I just sent had no foul language in it at all and you can post it right out here if you'd like because I have nothing to hide. It's ironic you feel that you can call me anything you want to and then get offended if and when I do tell you that you're nothing but a big internet bully that is dumber than a stump and this last couple posts of yours prove it!
 
>Rich, no problem with you, never
>has been.
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"


***Yea, right, LOL! But when I say exactly the same thing as Rich you have a big problem! What a fuggin hypocrit!!!
 
Yea right, i'm dumb and proved i'm an idiot! Just knock off the PM's, any PMs altogether vulger or not, they are not wanted or welcome! I have asked you several times. What part of that do YOU not understand?

" All I've been doing is offering some legal tips just like Vanilla"

LMAO!!! Right!!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
I'm not going to debate all night with you, you like to jump in on other people's boat. Lost has proven himself time and again to be a very valuable and respected member here. You on the other hand, IMO, are a serious liability, have a filthy mouth, and love to jump in on other peoples view if you feel it popular.

At this point, i believe you're skating on thin ice but i could be wrong and that wouldn't be the first time. Unlike you, i make mistakes from time to time and even giving you any of my time, i'm probably making one now.

Can we get back to topic? Has a official statement been made by the DWR?

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
>Yea right, i'm dumb and proved
>i'm an idiot! Just knock
>off the PM's, any PMs
>altogether vulger or not, they
>are not wanted or welcome!
>I have asked you several
>times. What part of that
>do YOU not understand?
>
>" All I've been doing is
>offering some legal tips just
>like Vanilla"
>
>LMAO!!! Right!!
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"


***Glad you finally admitted your dumb and and idiot, LOL! You don't make the rules on this site and you are proving you're a hypocrit when you keep calling others foul names with bullying remarks and then get your panties in a wad if you get a PM or post contrary to what you want to hear. You knock it off and you'll have no further PMs or posts by myself to you on this site. It's really very simple sp what part of that don't YOU understand!
PS: In case you didn't read that other post by one of our regular members, he also stated that both lost and I were correct, which does make YOU wrong!!!
 
"PS: In case you didn't read that other post by one of our regular members, he also stated that both lost and I were correct, which does make YOU wrong!!!"


Yeah i do and i'll wager he's regretting his saying that about now. Don't forget about the 30 or so posts in a row on the other thread that basically suggested you to go away, STFU, and quit making an ass of yourself.

"Correct" huh? Maybe someday you'll have an original thought instead of jumping aboard on others valid ideas. Maybe someday you won't think of yourself as the authority on everything. Maybe someday you won't use filthy vulgar language at anybody and everybody that disagrees with you. Someday, but i doubt it!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
>"PS: In case you didn't read
>that other post by one
>of our regular members, he
>also stated that both lost
>and I were correct, which
>does make YOU wrong!!!"
>
>
>Yeah i do and i'll wager
>he's regretting his saying that
>about now. Don't forget about
>the 30 or so posts
>in a row on the
>other thread that basically suggested
>you to go away, STFU,
>and quit making an ass
>of yourself.
>
> "Correct" huh? Maybe someday you'll
>have an original thought instead
>of jumping aboard on others
>valid ideas. Maybe someday you
>won't think of yourself as
>the authority on everything. Maybe
>someday you won't use filthy
>vulgar language at anybody and
>everybody that disagrees with you.
>Someday, but i doubt it!
>
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"


***YADAYADAYADA! You don't like me and I don't like you because you're a bullying hypocrit, so what else is knew, LOL!
 
"YADAYADAYADA! You don't like me and I don't like you because you're a bullying hypocrit, so what else is knew, LOL!

"Knew" or new, new to you might be the correct spelling of Hypocrite. That bottle you been working on all night must be getting about empty!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-14 AT 09:32PM (MST)[p]
Sage is right about my original post on this one. I seem to have misinterpreted the email sent out by officer Schultz (Dwr officer in charge of the case) an e mail was sent out but I guess I'm horrible with wording stuff as a lawyer would. I don't know wether it's an "official statement or simply an update but As of now there is not a strong enough case to take it further. (as of yet). That is the basics. My apologies for my misunderstanding.
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_6729.jpeg
244.JPG
Home in the truck.jpg
Whopper Dark-Antlered Beast
IMG-0753 (1).jpg
8552456B-8A0C-441C-9556-0C517734EA8A.JPG
5.jpg
FAD60D12-8EC2-435E-902F-0EF97C48535D.jpeg
B6D659F4-4CF2-4492-8855-642F7D81A0C5.jpeg
4591D9B0-03A3-4C73-99DD-ECD58E0EDBBF.jpeg
IMG_1424.JPG
Sweet Velvet Bull
Back
Top Bottom