Rich dentist poaches a lion and ruins his practice

[xBiffx]

The law has dealt with him; http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cecil-t...lly-killing-lion-convicted-in-2006-bear-hunt/

Who knows how many other animals he has hunted illegally that haven't been made public.

He was never charged with poaching. Let that sink in to the rage-aholics' brains. I won't hold my breath.

That story, as well as others about the bear shoot tried to paint him as a poacher after the fact. Well, he wasn't charged with poaching. He was charged with giving false statements. They didn't have enough evidence to charge him with poaching. For all we know, it could have been an honest mistake, just like here, only then he wasn't truthful about his location. In this case, no one tried to hide anything.

But don't let any of that stop you rage-aholics.

 

[xBiffx]

I share this opinion on this "sport." But that doesn't mean I'm okay with ruining (or even taking as some have suggested) a man's life if he prefers to take trophies. Hunters have been doing that since the dawn of man, deal with it.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled ragefest.

 

[manimal]

this is why i hate social justice warrior vigilantes.

so he fucked up, let the law deal with him.

thank you for confirming to the rest of us.


Yup


your a douche

 

[Genx87]

He was never charged with poaching. Let that sink in to the rage-aholics' brains. I won't hold my breath.

That story, as well as others about the bear shoot tried to paint him as a poacher after the fact. Well, he wasn't charged with poaching. He was charged with giving false statements. They didn't have enough evidence to charge him with poaching. For all we know, it could have been an honest mistake, just like here, only then he wasn't truthful about his location. In this case, no one tried to hide anything.

But don't let any of that stop you rage-aholics.

And what do you call killing an animal on restricted land like he did in WI? Whether or not he was charged or plead out a deal to another crime. What he did in WI was poaching. He bought the permit and went outside the permitted zone to kill a bear. Then took it back within the permitted area and tried to get away with it.

 

[xBiffx]

And what do you call killing an animal on restricted land like he did in WI? Whether or not he was charged or plead out a deal to another crime. What he did in WI was poaching. He bought the permit and went outside the permitted zone to kill a bear. Then took it back within the permitted area and tried to get away with it.

Funny thing is, he wasn't charged with poaching. Wonder why that is?

He was with a group of people who took the dear to a registration station. There they lied about where they shot the bear. It would appear that killing it outside the permitted zone was a mistake but then they did wrong by trying to cover that fact up. He was charged appropriately and accordingly it seems.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/c...-james-palmer-has-bear-related-felony-n400226

Palmer had a permit to hunt bears within a certain area near Phillips, in the north of the state. But on September 1, 2006, he was part of a group of people who killed a black bear 40 miles outside this permitted zone, according to the court documents from April 2008.

Realizing what they had done, the group agreed that "if any authorities were to ask where the bear had been killed, they would say" it was hunted within the correct area, the documents added.

They transported the carcass to a registration station where they certified the animal had been killed legally, the documents said, adding that the body was later taken to Minnesota, where Palmer lives.

Palmer was charged with knowingly making false statement to an agent of the Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, having "falsely stated that he thought the bear had been killed legally" during interviews with officials the next month.

 

[Genx87]

Funny thing is, he wasn't charged with poaching. Wonder why that is?

We have already established he wasnt charged with poaching. That is irrelevant as to whether he actually poached that bear. And it is clear he did by killing it in a restricted area 40 miles outside the area he was permitted to hunt. It isnt like he was a few feet or even a mile outside the zone. He traveled 40 miles outside the permitted hunting zone.

 

[Genx87]

Funny thing is, he wasn't charged with poaching. Wonder why that is?

He was with a group of people who took the dear to a registration station. There they lied about where they shot the bear. It would appear that killing it outside the permitted zone was a mistake but then they did wrong by trying to cover that fact up. He was charged appropriately and accordingly it seems.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/c...-james-palmer-has-bear-related-felony-n400226

Sexual harassment, fishing without a license, poaching a bear, killing a lion illegally.
Guy is a real model citizen.

 

[xBiffx]

We have already established he wasnt charged with poaching. That is irrelevant as to whether he actually poached that bear. And it is clear he did by killing it in a restricted area 40 miles outside the area he was permitted to hunt. It isnt like he was a few feet or even a mile outside the zone. He traveled 40 miles outside the permitted hunting zone.

Ignoring facts makes you irrelevant. He's never been found guilty of poaching.

It would appear that they didn't realize that they went outside the permitted area. It's not like there are signs all over the forest to tell you where exactly your permit allows you to hunt.

You make it seem like a concerted effort on the part of the hunters. How do you know this for sure? Again, if that was the case, surely he would have been charged with more than he was. He only got 1 year probation and a pocket change fine.

 

[John Connor]

And ISIS kills how many people? Babies are being aborted? No outrage?

I don't support sport shooting animals though unless you're gonna eat it.

 

[xBiffx]

Sexual harassment, fishing without a license, poaching a bear, killing a lion illegally.
Guy is a real model citizen.

I think I remember saying that the guy might be an asshole. But don't let that stop you.

Does the word alleged mean anything to you?

Pft, fishing without a license? Scraping the bottom of the barrel there aren't you? Why didn't you mention that he is over 30 days late on his library book?

 

[SSSnail]

Hey biff, just because he wasn't found guilty of it, doesn't mean he didn't do it. Get it through your skull.

As much as I hate mob mentality, your insistence on him "not found guilty" equals to "innocent" is equally annoying.

And ISIS kills how many people? Babies are being aborted? No outrage?

I don't support sport shooting animals though unless you're gonna eat it.

many are outraged about that, as with any other perceived or real injustice on this earth. What's your point?

 

[Genx87]

Ignoring facts makes you irrelevant. He's never been found guilty of poaching.

It would appear that they didn't realize that they went outside the permitted area. It's not like there are signs all over the forest to tell you where exactly your permit allows you to hunt.

You make it seem like a concerted effort on the part of the hunters. How do you know this for sure? Again, if that was the case, surely he would have been charged with more than he was. He only got 1 year probation and a pocket change fine.

Are you capable of critical thought? You keep saying because he was never charged or convicted of poaching means he didn't poach the bear. Seriously?

Anyways, as for the concerted effort on the part of the hunters. Driving 40 miles outside the zone and then trying to cover it up is the very definition of concerted effort.

This shitbag has been skirting the system for years as evidenced by your own article. He needs a lesson in humility. If losing his business does that great. If not, maybe some jail time in an African prison will help.

 

[xBiffx]

Hey biff, just because he wasn't found guilty of it, doesn't mean he didn't do it. Get it through your skull.

As much as I hate mob mentality, your insistence on him "not found guilty" equals to "innocent" is equally annoying.

True, but if it was so egregious and such a concerted effort on his part then it begs the question, why not? Pretty much pokes holes in people's version of events as well.

People are trying to convict him again on what they think happened. Trying to throw the book at him on what they think happened. Well, what they think happened before isn't substantiated so what makes it so this time?

 

[John Connor]

many are outraged about that, as with any other perceived or real injustice on this earth. What's your point?

Yet it all continues. No going to Iraq and Syria and wiping their ass out of there and no end to the butcher shop Planned Parenthood. But god help us if a lion is shot.

 

[xBiffx]

Are you capable of critical thought? You keep saying because he was never charged or convicted of poaching means he didn't poach the bear. Seriously?

Anyways, as for the concerted effort on the part of the hunters. Driving 40 miles outside the zone and then trying to cover it up is the very definition of concerted effort.

This shitbag has been skirting the system for years as evidenced by your own article. He needs a lesson in humility. If losing his business does that great. If not, maybe some jail time in an African prison will help.

Are you? The guy doesn't deserve to have his life ruined over any of this. But that requires critical thought to say that. I'm leaving my feelings at the door. I love animals as much as anyone. I already posted what I think about this "sport" but I'm not letting my feelings get the best of me.

To the bolded: You have anywhere that says they specifically drove 40 miles outside the zone? Again, sensationalize much? The story said they "realized" what they had done. That would indicate that it wasn't a concerted effort to kill a bear outside the permit zone.

 

[SSSnail]

Yet it all continues. No going to Iraq and Syria and wiping their ass out of there and no end to the butcher shop Planned Parenthood. But god help us if a lion is shot.

So what are YOU doing about any of it, other than crying on the internet just like the people you're raging against?

I don't want to get into a debate about political theaters, or why abortion is a necessary evil, but people have the right to care about things that they feel they should care about. And that isn't just one thing, it could be many things.

Some of you are just ridiculous.

 

[SSSnail]

True, but if it was so egregious and such a concerted effort on his part then it begs the question, why not? Pretty much pokes holes in people's version of events as well.

People are trying to convict him again on what they think happened. Trying to throw the book at him on what they think happened. Well, what they think happened before isn't substantiated so what makes it so this time?

Because that's how our legal system works, you understand that, right? It's not perfect, but in trying to protect the truly innocent, sometimes the bad guy gets a freebie. Look at OJ.

Joking aside, many people were never convicted of their crimes, due to technicalities, doesn't mean they're innocent. Someone as intelligent as yourself surely can understand that point, right?

 

[Genx87]

Are you? The guy doesn't deserve to have his life ruined over any of this. But that requires critical thought to say that. I'm leaving my feelings at the door. I love animals as much as anyone. I already posted what I think about this "sport" but I'm not letting my feelings get the best of me.

To the bolded: You have anywhere that says they specifically drove 40 miles outside the zone? Again, sensationalize much? The story said they "realized" what they had done. That would indicate that it wasn't a concerted effort to kill a bear outside the permit zone.

Drove, walked, who cares. 40 miles is no small distance.

 

[dawheat]

And ISIS kills how many people? Babies are being aborted? No outrage?

I don't support sport shooting animals though unless you're gonna eat it.

I really do dislike this type of argument. Just because there are worse things in the world doesn't mean people shouldn't care. It's not a zero sum game - you can be outraged over ISIS and this.

It's the same thing as the morons that say - "THIS is bravery" just b/c someone who didn't charge into bullets and lose a limb is being praised.

It's a small-minded view - that unless something is the most outrageous, most brave, most XXXX, then people shouldn't be praised or care.

 

[z1ggy]

The dude posed for a picture with the lion. Not a good way to stay low key, lol.



http://heavy.com/news/2015/07/walte...rhino-leopard-panther-pose-photos-pictures/2/

Here are some other pictures. He's fucking posing with a goddamn rhino, which are going extinct?

I have nothing against hunting, but why hunt endangered species? And isn't letting your prey go for 40 hours while they bleed out a pretty fucking against basic hunting ethics?

This. Hunting for food I'm totally okay with, or if need be trying to cull an animal ruining that local ecosystem. But hunting a freaking endangered animals, and beloved lions? Plus, the fact he let the damn thing suffer like that...What a piece of shit. I don't get people who kill any type of creature just for fun. I hope his life gets ruined.

 

[xBiffx]

Drove, walked, who cares. 40 miles is no small distance.

And? There also isn't a map on the permit or signs in the forest. Hunts can span that distance easily, especially when going for big game.

 

[xBiffx]

Because that's how our legal system works, you understand that, right? It's not perfect, but in trying to protect the truly innocent, sometimes the bad guy gets a freebie. Look at OJ.

Joking aside, many people were never convicted of their crimes, due to technicalities, doesn't mean they're innocent. Someone as intelligent as yourself surely can understand that point, right?

Nowhere have I said he was innocent. I said he wasn't guilty of poaching. There is a difference. That's why you aren't found innocent in court, you are found not guilty.

 

[SSSnail]

Nowhere have I said he was innocent. I said he wasn't guilty of poaching. There is a difference. That's why you aren't found innocent in court, you are found not guilty.

So the fact that the guy ADMITTED to killing a bear 40 miles away from the designated zone does nothing for ya? Have you ever heard of plea bargains? Reduced sentence for first offenders, etc...? I don't know the specifics of that case, but don't you think it's possible the judge let him off easy because he might have come across as an upstanding citizen at the time?

Seriously, where the hell do we get these people? Must be the internet.

And? There also isn't a map on the permit or signs in the forest. Hunts can span that distance easily, especially when going for big game.

OK, now I know for sure the type I'm arguing against. He doesn't know, and there are no signs, yet he has the wherewithal to move the carcass 40 miles. 🙄 I will cease.

 

[skyking]

And? There also isn't a map on the permit or signs in the forest. Hunts can span that distance easily, especially when going for big game.

I believe they can, when hunting out of the window of your truck 😀

 

[yuchai]

And? There also isn't a map on the permit or signs in the forest. Hunts can span that distance easily, especially when going for big game.

Dude...40 miles. If he didn't realize he's out of the permitted zone he's equally guilty for being negligent. At some point you have to say it was clearly intentional.

Where do you draw the line? Let's say he was 80 miles away. Does that change your mind?

By the way, in this lion situation he was less than a mile away from the perimeter. Are you so gullible as to believe that in the bear case he was innocently unaware of being 40 miles away yet in this case he clearly had intention of doing it just outside the perimeter?