I have read this whole thread including attachments and commentary. A few thoughts. I think a lot of the people who are outraged don't understand how Rogers v State changed the way night hunting violations were prosecuted. Under Rogers, the State did not have to prove you were hunting. Literally it only required the State to prove you were riding around in Deer country with a gun and a light!! Let me be clear, if I was the Judge I would have found these boys not guilty. But when you understand the Rogers case and how little evidence it took to make a prima facia case of night hunting you realize it's not the scandal this site is making it out to be. Frankly, I think more than a few of you fellers owe the Judge an apology. Any Judge deserves respect even when you think he made a bad decision but especially a Judge who is also an established Aldeer member. How many Judges in this State would have had the nuts to comment at all??? Much less be an actual contributor to Aldeer. Keep in mind that the court of Criminal appeals agreed with both the District Judge and the Circuit Judge. The only way the Supreme Court reversed their decisions was to change the law!! And by the way I have never stepped foot in Lowndes District court and have never met any of the people involved. Congrats to the OP and boys for changing a bad law! That's really something to be proud of.
After reading it all I agree with you. Glad the boys were found innocent but I don't believe most are going to read the opinion and discover how the reversal came about and why.
I don't think it was the initial decision that is receiving such scrutiny. It is the judges own admission that he didn't know who exactly, if any, were guilty, so he just charged them all. That shows poor judgment at worst and good ol boy corrupt politics at its worst. Why do you think the judge deleted his admission? He knows what he did, he just didn't think us bunch of rednecks would recognize it.
Just to clarify, who did what is not necessary in criminal cases. There can be guilt by aiding. What I mean is that if a group of gang bangers drive by and you witness a hand come out and shoot someone. If the cops stop them down the road and find a gun but all refuse to talk then they can all be charged. Just because they don't know exactly which one did it does not mean they just let them go. Same as if a car gets pulled over with a kilo of cocaine but nobody owns up.
Poor comparison when there was no evidence anyone had even fired a gun, no deer and no witnesses. The judge deleted his comments for a reason. He, and most others, know why.
"Political debate: when charlatans come together to discuss their principles" - Bauvard
