This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes
If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Field Notes at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes.
Discussion Topic: Felony vs. Hunting Accident
From Syracuse, New York's, The Post Standard:
A 60-year-old Utica man was accused of firing a 12-gauge shotgun loaded with birdshot in the direction of his fellow hunter, a 27-year-old man also of Utica.
Oneida County Sheriff's deputies accused Paul C. Betzenhauser of first-degree reckless endangerment -- a felony -- after he sprayed hunting partner Wyatt T. Henderson with shot, injuring his face, head and torso, police said.
Henderson was treated at St. Luke's Hospital and released.
Sound familiar? Should the shooter (whether or not he holds a political office) be charged in these situations?
There has to be more to this story than what is being show.
Did the older guy not realize the man was there?
What was the reason for the charge?
Posted by: jstreet | January 14, 2008 at 01:02 PM
Either there's something important not being said -- an argument or something and then a shot fired -- or else this is a prosecutorial overreach.
Posted by: Mike Diehl | January 14, 2008 at 02:16 PM
I don't think anyone wants to charge a friend or hunting partner, that may be more of an aquaintance, with a felony in a case like this.
Surely, there is more info, and a trial may be needed; if an altercation actually took place prior to the man's grill being sprayed with birdshot.
(The above would be great to see on the officer's report.)
So the question remains...if you are hunting, and a person of your knowledge, accidentally blasts your beak, should they even possibly face criminal charges?
Good question.
There could be issues of coverage for the medical expenses. There could be a "peppered" past of firearm neglect by the shooter, there could be alot of extenuating circumstances that may warrant charges besides an altercation on the spot of the latest beak re-arrangement.
As in most cases - it would have to handled case by case. A felony MAY be "prosecutorial overreach", or it may not be.
Posted by: Tommy S. | January 14, 2008 at 02:41 PM
Here we go again, accidents happen. The problem is the accident happened with a gun, fortunately no one was killed. One does need to consider all the facts before passing judgement. Was the other hunter wearing blaze orange? Were they in the same party or unknown to each other? Was there alcohol or other drugs (even prescription or legal OTC medicines can leave some people foggy)? Weather, distance, number of shots fired? All need to be carefully weighed. I certainly hope the officer writing the report and filing the charges did, and I hope the jury gets to hear all before the verdict.
The good news here is that hunting accidents are rare enough to make news! Let's all do our part to keep it that way!
SA
Posted by: SilverArrow | January 14, 2008 at 03:12 PM
The whole story is not being told here. I would not form an opinion on this matter based on what the press is saying. What the Bible has to say is gospel, the press, entertainment.
Posted by: as moeggs | January 14, 2008 at 04:29 PM
If there is not more to this story then, this guy should not have been charged. Careful as we all should be and as unfortunate as this accident was. It was an accident and not a crime.
Posted by: Jason | January 14, 2008 at 05:33 PM
All of the above plus the final crime the suspect will be charged with is up to the District Attorney. The incident may not fulfill all the elements of first degree endangerment. I think there is more to this than reported. I don't know how many times I have been showered with birdshot on opening day of dove season. Of course the shot was falling from high shots across a large field and I wasn't injured.
Posted by: John R | January 14, 2008 at 06:40 PM
We are not getting the full story so how can we make any determination about this? Was he shooting at him? Was it an accident? One is a crime one is not.
Posted by: GREG | January 14, 2008 at 10:00 PM
It is hard to tell in this particular case from the limited info. However, if hunters are lined up, in a field, in the classic pheasant hunting line, and a hunter in that line hits another hunter outside of his field of fire, that is reckless endangerment at the least.
If you are in a line and pivot 90 deg. and shoot someone in the head, that is no more an accident than hitting another car driving the wrong way on the freeway.
Posted by: Patrick | January 14, 2008 at 10:03 PM
The shooter's name is officially being changed to 'Dick Cheney'.
Posted by: Blue Ox | January 15, 2008 at 09:04 AM
There goes the coffee all over my keyboard!! Stop it! Good one Ox
Posted by: GREG | January 15, 2008 at 09:08 AM
I'm really happy to see all the folks here withholding judgement without seeing all the facts.
Far too often these forums and blog discussions succumb to the "dog pile effect", where suddenly everyone wants to pass judgement and condemn the accused before so much as a single extenuating circumstance can be provided.
Sounds like a bad deal, and dangerous gun handling resulted in yet another hunting incident (not an accident...accidents are not preventable, incidents are).
Worthy of felony prosecution? I dunno. There must be a line somewhere, but from what little we've read here there's not enough to draw on.
Posted by: Phillip | January 15, 2008 at 11:22 AM
That was my goal, GREG.
Posted by: Blue Ox | January 15, 2008 at 12:07 PM
thanks blue ox,now i need to mop up the mess.good thing i have a good screen cleaner.
don
Posted by: don mitchell | January 15, 2008 at 02:19 PM
any one that shoots a gun should get a felony charge... they should ban all guns all together
Posted by: mike oxlong | January 15, 2008 at 05:58 PM
mike oxlong
If you really believe that, why do you read blogs like this?
YooperJack
Posted by: YooperJack | January 15, 2008 at 07:01 PM
Where the hell did this yahoo come from, Yoop? I think hes lost.
Posted by: GREG | January 15, 2008 at 07:43 PM
ya dat der feller is fartin in the wrong toilet if ya know wat i mean..
Posted by: mike hunt | January 15, 2008 at 07:53 PM
if it were me gettin shot and I knew my buddy fkd up and shot me on accident.most likly it was both of our faults I should have watched where I was at and my buddie should have checked the back-ground before shootin so I would call it even and pay half the bills and let him pay the other half.I would not press charges unless it was on purpose and I had reason to believe it may have been on purpose.
Posted by: Trae B. | January 15, 2008 at 08:09 PM
well mike oxlong just to follow your wishes when we jump you for baggin on guns we'll get you with bows and spears,and clubs.
Posted by: Trae B. | January 15, 2008 at 08:14 PM
Note where it happened: NY State. When Cheney's accident happened, local comments indicated he would have been lucky to avoid a felony charge if the same thing happened in NY State.
Posted by: Dan | January 16, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Note where it happened: NY State. When Cheney's accident happened, local comments indicated he would have been lucky to avoid a felony charge if the same thing happened in NY State.
Posted by: Dan | January 16, 2008 at 11:28 AM
I think whoever this oxlong tag is, he is just jerking your chain.
Posted by: WA Mtnhunter | January 16, 2008 at 11:37 AM
I think you are right WAM. I bet its someone we know on this blog. Thats why im not biting to hard.
Posted by: GREG | January 16, 2008 at 11:42 AM
I'm sure the site admin knows.
Posted by: Blue Ox | January 16, 2008 at 11:50 AM