Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

But if Whittington were to die, local district attorney Carlos Valdez said there could be a more-thorough investigation, including possibly a grand jury probe that might end up issuing criminal charges such as negligence or reckless behavior.

Isnt that what I said? post #55 I think a case could be made. Maybe you didnt realize this because you didnt know all the facts.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

yes, that was already known.
The weird thing is, it sounds like Cheney had a knee jerk reaction and didnt take time to aim??? Out of curiosity, what do you mean it "thickens the soup?"

Well, the earlier reports were that Cheney was following a covey with the gun, which usually involves a steady turn to allow for the tracking. This new report used the word "whirled," which to me suggests Cheney jumped up, hurriedly turned around and discharged his gun without first looking behind him. The latter is clearly negligent and probably reckless behaviour as opposed to the former. I hope that made sense.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Isnt that what I said? post #55 I think a case could be made. Maybe you didnt realize this because you didnt know all the facts.

Well, that is puffing and it could also be the law in Texas that a grand jury is required in a death like this. Also, a grand jury can be convened for anything and a pissed of DA can indict a baked potatoe

But, there will be no case made here because the primary witness and the victim will say it was his fault and every witness to the accident will testify that Cheney did nothing wrong and did not act in a reckless or grossly negligent manner - again, accidently shooting someone does not automatically equate to recklessness or gross negligence (whether it should is another argument for another day). So, unless those "facts" change, there will be no indictment. I mean how is the prosecution going to make its case with no witnesses and a victim who refuses to press charges?

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, the earlier reports were that Cheney was following a covey with the gun, which usually involves a steady turn to allow for the tracking. This new report used the word "whirled," which to me suggests Cheney jumped up, hurriedly turned around and discharged his gun without first looking behind him. The latter is clearly negligent and probably reckless behaviour as opposed to the former. I hope that made sense.

well, all we can go by is the news stories we get. I happened to see this on CBS nightly news. I think there's also a big deal made of the fact that the incident happened a day before the White House even said anything! The news was first broken by a newspaper/station in Texas based on a report by the owner of the Ranch where Cheney was hunting. She even told him she was reporting it and he didnt seem to object which is interesting seeing as how he doesnt want to talk about it. I think the man knows he did a stupid thing and doesnt have the brass to admit it. and he's letting others talk for him. talk about head in sand!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

well, all we can go by is the news stories we get. I happened to see this on CBS nightly news. I think there's also a big deal made of the fact that the incident happened a day before the White House even said anything! The news was first broken by a newspaper/station in Texas based on a report by the owner of the Ranch where Cheney was hunting. She even told him she was reporting it and he didnt seem to object which is interesting seeing as how he doesnt want to talk about it. I think the man knows he did a stupid thing and doesnt have the brass to admit it. and he's letting others talk for him. talk about head in sand!

I agree the waiting period was assinine and that is where the meat of this is. I do think though that Rove is very smart and there was a reason for that 24 hours. We need to know that reason. My guess is money changed hands and documents were signed to ensure cooperation.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, that is puffing and it could also be the law in Texas that a grand jury is required in a death like this. Also, a grand jury can be convened for anything and a pissed of DA can indite a baked potatoe

But, there will be no case made here because the primary witness and the victim will say it was his fault and every witness to the accident will testify that Cheney did nothing wrong and did not act in a reckless or grossly negligent manner - again, accidently shooting someone does not automatically equate to recklessness or gross negligence (whether it should is another argument for another day). So, unless those "facts" change, there will be no inditment. I mean how is the prosecution going to make its case with no witnesses and a victim who refuses to press charges?

IM not saying there should be an indictment, or that there will be one. If Whittington dies because of this, I think it is a clear case of negligence. whether gross or not, is for a judge/jury to decide.

besides, you can factor in contributory negligence into the charge or the sentence. that doesnt negate Cheney's actions. Sure it was an accident.
there are such charges as involuntary manslaughter ya know!

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree the waiting period was assinine and that is where the meat of this is. I do think though that Rove is very smart and there was a reason for that 24 hours. We need to know that reason. My guess is money changed hands and documents were signed to ensure cooperation.

Now THAT is a scary prospect! can you say COVERUP boys and girls? yet ANOTHER coverup. lessee: Downing Street memos, OOPS! Katrina negligence OOPS! Cheney shoots fellow hunter, OOPS! How many OOPS's is it gonna take before people wake up?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

IM not saying there should be an indictment, or that there will be one. If Whittington dies because of this, I think it is a clear case of negligence. whether gross or not, is for a judge/jury to decide.

besides, you can factor in contributory negligence into the charge or the sentence. that doesnt negate Cheney's actions. Sure it was an accident.
there are such charges as involuntary manslaughter ya know!

Who is going to testify as to the negligence and the victim almost assuredly will not press charges? Thus, all you have left is the fact that Cheney accidently shot someone, which is not enough to convict him (if it were, he would be under arrest now) - esp. when every single witness will likely testify Cheney did nothing wrong and the victim will likely testify it was his fault. Thus, the only conclusion in that scenario is no case will be made.

Also:

MANSLAUGHTER, INVOLUNTARY - In order for a person to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter the government must prove that someone was killed as a result of an act by the person;

Second, in the circumstances existing at the time, the person's act either was by its nature dangerous to human life or was done with reckless disregard for human life; and

Third, the person either knew that such conduct was a threat to the lives of others or knew of circumstances that would reasonably cause the person to foresee that such conduct might be a threat to the lives of others.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m011.htm

Two and three will be hard to prove in this case because of the lack of witnesses.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Who is going to testify as to the negligence and the victim almost assuredly will not press charges? Thus, all you have left is the fact that Cheney accidently shot someone, which is not enough to convict him (if it were, he would be under arrest now) - esp. when every single witness will likely testify Cheney did nothing wrong and the victim will likely testify it was his fault. Thus, the only conclusion in that scenario is no case will be made.

I refer you back to your OWN post wherein the local TX law enforcement say that more serious charges may ensue if Whittington dies. I think a case could be made that if Whittington dies, Cheney is the proximate cause. A dead man is the best witness you can have.

Remember, Cheney is no novice. he's considered an experienced, competent hunter. This was a bonehead move, and not something you'd expect from someone of his skills. That would ALSO be a factor IMO.

PS: Ive got to take my son to the dentist, he's having 5-8 baby teeth worked on (BABY TEETH! WHAT A RACKET!) anyway, back later.

[SomeKindaMother]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I refer you back to your OWN post wherein the local TX law enforcement say that more serious charges may ensue if Whittington dies. I think a case could be made that if Whittington dies, Cheney is the proximate cause. A dead man is the best witness you can have.

Remember, Cheney is no novice. he's considered an experienced, competent hunter. This was a bonehead move, and not something you'd expect from someone of his skills. That would ALSO be a factor IMO.

PS: Ive got to take my son to the dentist, he's having 5-8 baby teeth worked on (BABY TEETH! WHAT A RACKET!) anyway, back later.

Well, Cheney is supposed to speak later, so they're saying.

And if you have a deep cavity in a baby tooth, it can indeed affect the permanant tooth below...or a tooth next to it. Good for you for taking care of his baby teeth!!

Kelly

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

I refer you back to your OWN post wherein the local TX law enforcement say that more serious charges may ensue if Whittington dies . . . .

Actually, that was far more carefully worded that what you assert. It specifically said:

But if Whittington were to die, local district attorney Carlos Valdez said there could be a more-thorough investigation, including possibly a grand jury probe that might end up issuing criminal charges such as negligence or reckless behavior.

The use of "could be" "possibly" and "might" is puffing.

Have fun at the dentist!

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Has this fact been relesed before:

reportedly whirled around to fire at a covey of quail and hit Whittington instead.

I was under the impression the guy was in the periphery and the birdshot got him there. This "new" fact thickens the soup.

Exactly, Cheney acted recklessly by not really looking before shooting. I know it was an accident but he really should own up to his part in it instead of merely blaming the victim, who also made a mistake in not announcing himself. Also, these were tame birds so there was no need to act impulsively, plenty of time to aim!!! Apparently there is a new hunter safety law that has been renamed "Cheney's Law" that has been proposed.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Exactly, Cheney acted recklessly by not really looking before shooting. I know it was an accident but he really should own up to his part in it instead of merely blaming the victim, who also made a mistake in not announcing himself. Also, these were tame birds so there was no need to act impulsively, plenty of time to aim!!! Apparently there is a new hunter safety law that has been renamed "Cheney's Law" that has been proposed.

Well, we have two different accounts of this. If he was steadily tracking and then shot, that is not reckless behavior because he was looking at where he was shooting and this poor guy was in the periphery of the blast. If he spun or whirled around and shot all in one second, then that is reckless behavior because he did not look first. I also think they are not really blaming this guy, but this guy was just in the way and at fault and they are factually stating that.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, we have two different accounts of this. If he was steadily tracking and then shot, that is not reckless behavior because he was looking at where he was shooting and this poor guy was in the periphery of the blast. If he spun or whirled around and shot all in one second, then that is reckless behavior because he did not look first. I also think they are not really blaming this guy, but this guy was just in the way and at fault and they are factually stating that.

I never heard the first account. I only heard the quick turn and shoot story. They said the guy "did not announce himself" but they did not say "Cheney did not look first" or "Cheney turned and quickly fired", an omission that insinuates it was the victims fault.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

I never heard the first account. I only heard the quick turn and shoot story. They said the guy "did not announce himself" but they did not say "Cheney did not look first" or "Cheney turned and quickly fired", an omission that insinuates it was the victims fault.

I got it from the first post in this thread:

Whittington shot a bird and went to look for it in the tall grass, while Cheney and the third hunter walked to another spot and found a second covey.

Whittington "came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn't signal them or indicate to them or announce himself," Armstrong told the Associated Press in an interview.

"The vice president didn't see him," she continued. "The covey flushed and the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And by god, Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty good."
________________________________________________________

Also, it is mostly the victim's fault, though Cheney has some as well. I mean the guy walked into an area where he knew people were shooting I guess I think people are reading too much into this. Then again, maybe I am not