-
October 30th, 2018, 12:51 PM
#21
Originally Posted by
sawbill
Its stupidity for sure but its still a hunters obligation to know where he's hunting and whether he's on private property or not.
True dat,but,there's no doubt that there was serious criminal intent. Nobody deliberately tries to kill someone without it. He's just lucky. See post #8
If a tree falls on your ex in the woods and nobody hears it,you should probably still get rid of your chainsaw. Just sayin'....
-
October 30th, 2018 12:51 PM
# ADS
-
October 30th, 2018, 03:49 PM
#22
Originally Posted by
gbk
Pretty sad and stupid story.
Two unknown to me:
If the guy was discharging towards the hunter-would this not be considered attempt to kill?
What is the charge about -possession of firearm in a motor vehicle.Is this something new.???
Intent needs to he proven. There would need to be sufficient evidence that he shot *at* the hunter and not simply into the air.
Re the motor vehicle charge, that's probably s. 94, unauthorized possession in a motor vehicle.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
"The language of dogs and birds teaches you your own language."
-- Jim Harrison (1937 - 2016)
-
October 30th, 2018, 03:58 PM
#23
Thank You Welsh for clarifying things.
-
October 30th, 2018, 04:05 PM
#24
They never changed the laws in N.S. and New Brunswick. No hunting here means no body hunts,not even the owner. On a side note,I’m just waiting to close on a 100 acre hard wood lot which is rare in this part of the country.
-
October 30th, 2018, 07:15 PM
#25
Originally Posted by
welsh
Intent needs to he proven. There would need to be sufficient evidence that he shot *at* the hunter and not simply into the air.
Re the motor vehicle charge, that's probably s. 94, unauthorized possession in a motor vehicle.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
one of the charges is quote "pointing a firearm."
“Think safety first and then have a good hunt.”
- Tom Knapp -
-
October 31st, 2018, 09:14 AM
#26
Sounds like an individual with many other issues besides an annoyance to trespassing. Can't always assume the land you're trespassing on to is owned by a totally stable, reasonable landowner.
-
October 31st, 2018, 09:41 AM
#27
Originally Posted by
G.S.
one of the charges is quote "pointing a firearm."
What if he pointed it at you, establishing the pointing offence, and then fired it into the air?
The charges laid will reflect the specific facts of the incident & what the Crown feels can be proven.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
"The language of dogs and birds teaches you your own language."
-- Jim Harrison (1937 - 2016)
-
October 31st, 2018, 03:35 PM
#28
Sorry, but who would do that? We are talking real life scenarios?
Pointing a gun shows intention to engage (read kill) the indented target.
Add: it was known that the gun is loaded live ammo.
Add: the gun was subsequently fired.
“Think safety first and then have a good hunt.”
- Tom Knapp -
-
October 31st, 2018, 03:40 PM
#29
Originally Posted by
G.S.
Sorry, but who would do that? We are talking real life scenarios?
Yes, real life scenarios.
And the big thing about real life is, the Crown has to prove intent to convict. Thus is reality. When you might expect to see an attempt murder charge, and you don't, it's likely the Crown doesn't have confidence they can prove intent.
The people laying these charges have full knowledge of the evidence. You don't.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
"The language of dogs and birds teaches you your own language."
-- Jim Harrison (1937 - 2016)
-
October 31st, 2018, 06:04 PM
#30
Originally Posted by
welsh
Yes, real life scenarios.
And the big thing about real life is, the Crown has to prove intent to convict. Thus is reality. When you might expect to see an attempt murder charge, and you don't, it's likely the Crown doesn't have confidence they can prove intent.
The people laying these charges have full knowledge of the evidence. You don't.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
Very true.... and don’t go by media reports !!
Reply With Quote
