Ant, I think the ruffled feathers over the state's definition of hunting at night was the smaller issue in this instance. I think what caused the most heartburn was that the state didn't seem to meet the burden of proof. Hearing a noise but not being sure where it came from hardly constitutes "beyond a reasonable doubt". The fact that a guilty verdict was handed down and then upheld all the way to the Supreme Court is downright sickening. It's supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and that did not seem to be the case here. There was no proof, only suspicion. It's a painful reminder that those who often cannot pay to defend themselves properly can easily get railroaded. Maybe it doesn't cause you heartburn because you can't envision yourself ever being in that boat. A lot of us live in that boat.
But under Rogers v Sfafe the only thing the State had to prove was 1. You were in an area where deer were 2. You had some light 3. You had a gun. I personally think the law was bullshit but given ALL the facts this is nof a story of some out of control Judge. And how many members on here could identify a rifle shot 140 yards away????
This defines all of South Alabama...... In other words.....anyone who drives through the area and their car backfires is a target......
Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves...
