Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Idaho rancher killed by deputies over a wounded bull.

However I would be curious to know how many folks on here have actually sat on a jury in a criminal case, that lasted three days or more,

Yessir!

I have.

I have, a murder trial.

My suspicion is that he never really thought he was going to have to arrest him, but once the bluff is called by "ok arrest me then"..he had to follow through.

Now a question for you.

Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.

Now we come to the crux of the matter. Wood issued a threat to the old man trying to bully him back into the car. The old man called him on it. Wood escalated, then the old man escalated. They both were [bleep], the only difference being that Wood is the [bleep] with the badge and the gun that's paid not to be an [bleep].

The old fart being arrested is not the logical end to the sequence. As a matter of fact, I'll dare to suggest the old fart had a habit of coming out of his car when pulled over, and this was not the first time he had a confrontation with the cops over it.

It's just that Wood was unable, and if I were defense council I'd say unwilling, to achieve compliance without violence.

Now your assignment, compare and contrast with the Yantis case.......

Yes it did, he was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death.

The paid police professional ran out of creativity at "get back in the car," with an implied "because I said so." That was bound to go over well.

Confession case, or other evidence?

I frankly don't believe the cop has to be any more creative than that. Our rights get infringed a hell of a lot more than that every day and nobody does anything about it. That old man needed to get a sense of proportion.

You are lucky you didn't get shot for your disobedience.

Alexander Hamilton included these words in his instruction to his Revenue Cutter Service commanding officers.

While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and
firmness, I feel no less solicitude, that their deportment may be marked with prudence,
moderation and good temper. Upon these last qualities, not less that the former, must depend
4
the success, usefulness and consequently continuance of the establishment in which they are
included. They cannot be insensible that there are some prepossessions against it, that the
charge with which they are intrusted [sic] is a delicate one, and that it is easy by
mismanagement, to produce serious and extensive clamour, disgust and odium.
They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are
impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore,
refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of
haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the
particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the
execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard
to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They
will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate
perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence.


More timeless words of LE value may have never been penned. I never certified a soul to conduct CG LE unless they knew these words and embraced them. They may be more on point today than ever before.

Good post Paul. You seem to be the type of fellow LE needs a lot more of. I encountered a few like myself and yourself during my time in LE but we're certainly a minority. I've impressed those ideals in my son who's currently a USMC MP, I sincerely hope he never abandons them.