![[Deleted]](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/iconimages/bowhunting/deleted_ltr.gif)
[Deleted]
09-29-2008, 06:25 PM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manassas, VA
Posts: 3,612
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
Does the state have to show some sort of "overwhelming" evidence to contradict the hunter's statement that he shot the buck with a bow? I see no evidence that would allow the state to confiscate his buck.
I guess anonymous informants are a powerful breed in today's society.
I guess anonymous informants are a powerful breed in today's society.
09-29-2008, 06:32 PM
#4
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Hughesville, PA USA
Posts: 18,322
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
I'll be straight up, if I take a buck of any recognition the very first thing I'm going to do is call a local warden and have him come out and confirm it was all legit. I'll show him the stand, the blood trail etc...
The jealousy of people never seizes to amaze me.
The jealousy of people never seizes to amaze me.
09-29-2008, 06:47 PM
#6
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 223
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
The things that article neglected to mention were all the evidence against him. It only listed the evidence for defense. Seems like a biased article, and impossible to tell what the real story is.
the third article states "In a hearing that took less than 10 minutes, Armando lost that appeal as well after one of the two judges present insinuated that each of Armando's three witnesses had lied under oath about tracking and recovering the buck.", and the only evidence listed that was given at the original trial was that some nobody biologist suggested that the arrow wound was done after death.
If in fact this is all the evidence that was against him, those judges should be disbarred. But there is no way in hell they convicted him just on that. There is much more to this story.
the third article states "In a hearing that took less than 10 minutes, Armando lost that appeal as well after one of the two judges present insinuated that each of Armando's three witnesses had lied under oath about tracking and recovering the buck.", and the only evidence listed that was given at the original trial was that some nobody biologist suggested that the arrow wound was done after death.
If in fact this is all the evidence that was against him, those judges should be disbarred. But there is no way in hell they convicted him just on that. There is much more to this story.
09-30-2008, 11:43 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 345
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
Man that just sad. Again there are some people that need to have their butts kicked. You don't do this to someone. But the system is corrupt to the core and there is really nothing we can do. I think that is what is such a crime. You will never get the government to say they were wrong. Never. And that's what it comes down to.
09-30-2008, 01:38 PM
#8
Spike
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 34
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
ORIGINAL: shrewbeer
The things that article neglected to mention were all the evidence against him. It only listed the evidence for defense. Seems like a biased article, and impossible to tell what the real story is.
the third article states "In a hearing that took less than 10 minutes, Armando lost that appeal as well after one of the two judges present insinuated that each of Armando's three witnesses had lied under oath about tracking and recovering the buck.", and the only evidence listed that was given at the original trial was that some nobody biologist suggested that the arrow wound was done after death.
If in fact this is all the evidence that was against him, those judges should be disbarred. But there is no way in hell they convicted him just on that. There is much more to this story.
The things that article neglected to mention were all the evidence against him. It only listed the evidence for defense. Seems like a biased article, and impossible to tell what the real story is.
the third article states "In a hearing that took less than 10 minutes, Armando lost that appeal as well after one of the two judges present insinuated that each of Armando's three witnesses had lied under oath about tracking and recovering the buck.", and the only evidence listed that was given at the original trial was that some nobody biologist suggested that the arrow wound was done after death.
If in fact this is all the evidence that was against him, those judges should be disbarred. But there is no way in hell they convicted him just on that. There is much more to this story.
09-30-2008, 06:43 PM
#9
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 114
RE: What a horrible thing to do to someone.
Funny... in NY state confidential informants are frowned upon in court, you need secondary witness' and other circumstantial evidence for a conviction. There has to be more in this case the papers and media aren't sharing. Bummer though, especially if it was taken legally!
);self.focus();)
);self.focus();)