Chesapeake Flyway Forum Sponsors

sean mann baiting????

Discussion in 'Chesapeake Flyway Forum' started by 11-87 killer, Nov 22, 2013.

  1. Bwana1

    Bwana1 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,961
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chestertown
    To clear this up...this applies to the State, NOT Sean. The State charged him, then the State dropped the charges. The State should explain their actions.

    I know Sean well. Have had the pleasure of hunting with him many times, in Canada as well as on the shore. If he says he is innocent, then I believe him.
     
  2. BigUglyGreenBoat

    BigUglyGreenBoat Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    441
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location:
    Bel Air, Maryland
    In today's wonderful world of the internet, it wouldn't make a bit of difference whether DNR posted arrests on their blog. If you've ever wondered about your daughter's boyfriend, your ex-wife's new husband or your next door neighbor, if they were charged or appeared in District, Circuit, Civil or other Court for Maryland its all there in black in white. Check it out sometime if you have a few hours to spare and a little bit of curiosity. And by the way, case dispositions ARE included in the narrative.

    http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/processDisclaimer.jis
     
  3. ih2ofowler

    ih2ofowler Refuge Member

    Messages:
    39
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Location:
    Maryland
    It's easy for you guys to say that Sean should have went for a "not guilty" verdict, but that would have been a lot more difficult. He got the same result without having to defend himself. At the same time, you look at it like Sean "took" a nulle prosequi verdict, however, the state would have had an equally hard time finding him guilty, and offered this to him because they did not have sufficient evidence to find him guilty. Meaning that the state did not have enough evidence, or the resources to go after him and thought they were going to lose.
    As far as I'm concerned, his name is clear with this verdict. The baiting laws are so loose that its up to a judge (who is most likely not an expert in them) to determine whether he was guilty or not. It?s not as cut and dry as someone getting caught on radar doing 20mph over the speed limit. There?s a loose interpretation and different judges, and DNR officers interpret it differently. Therefore, what that judge may say is baiting, another may not have. Not really worth taking that chance if it's your lively hood on the line. Anyone out there that has hunted with Sean knows the type of person he is and whether or not they believe that he is the type of guy that would need to bait to get them birds. Personally, I've never hunted with Sean but I find it hard to believe that a quality guide on the shore would really need to bait in order to get his clients 2 Canada geese.
    I feel strongly that it was more of a DNR officer trying to be a super hero and earn a name for himself. It's sad that these officers exist and they all want to get that "huge bust", but they're out there, and I've heard stories about them trying to swing their big old richard around to try and earn a name for themselves. It?s unfortunate that it has to come at Sean Mann's expense in lawyer fees and wasted time. Personally, my $.02 is that they need to make a more stringent baiting law. There are people out there that are blatantly baiting, and there are times where the law is misinterpreted and taken advantage of by over zealous DNR officers. Some of these officers needs to use better judgment before giving someone a ticket for this type of charge, because as it was stated earlier, ?names get dragged through the mud?, and ?casts a shadow on his name?, and unless it?s blatant baiting these officers need to think twice about the harm they are doing to other people and their lives they are affecting before they write that ticket to try and earn a name in the force for themselves.
     
  4. takumboyz

    takumboyz Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    627
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    Haven seen first hand how this court system is run on the eastern shore and the absolutely insane judges and the cozy relationship between judges and prosecutors, I would have taken that also. I have never seen a more corrupt system anywhere. Not just prosecutors, but the lawyer/prosecutor relationships are also sickening. So, good for him. He got out from the fist of government and is living his life and hopefully moving on.
     
  5. muskrat25

    muskrat25 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,871
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Location:
    Maryland
    First off, Judge Kratovil (former Congressman) is as intelligent and tough as they come. But he is not a hunter. Hard to say if he would place more weight on the conclusions of the DNR officer or if he would have to be convinced even more than usual due to the strict liability nature of the offense.

    But I will add that your statement does not just apply to baiting cases, there is very little guidance and therefore much inconsistency in the way DNR violations are charged, prosecuted (or not) and punished if convicted, from one county to teh next, one court room to the next. There has been an attempt to have a "Natural Resources Court" in Annapolis, specializing in DNR cases with prosecutors and judges that are familiar with the laws. I generally think that is a good idea, but then it still depends on the individual opinion of the particular prosecutor and/or judge.

    The lack of guidance from the Courts is not part of a vast conspiracy, it is simply a matter of how the Maryland Judicial system operates.

    For example, there are thousands of cases, with published judicial opinions, that help guide officers, attorneys and judges about whether the seizure of drugs from a person is valid or not. Even with a thousand cases, there is still frequently lots of room to argue.

    For DNR cases, there are virtually no published judicial opinions to help officers, attorneys, judges OR CITIZENS interpret what they are allowed to do. This is because most cases are fine-only, and they are charged in District Court, where a decision, even if reduced to awrtten opinion, has no authority over any other judge. If someone is convicted in District Court, they have an automatic right to ONE appeal up to the Circuit Court for that county.

    There, again, even if the Circuit Court judge files a written opinion, (which happens about 1 out 1,000 criminal cases, and zero out of a thousand DNR cases,) it still is not binding on any other Court.

    So if you are twice convicted, you no longer have an automatic right to appeal in Maryland, which means that you can only ask for permission to appeal up to the Court of Special Appeals. This might seem unfair, but if it were otherwise, every single speeding ticket in the state could be brought in front of the appellate courts, and they'd be ten years behind in no time.

    Meanwhile, there are tens of thousands of criminal jailable cases that are tried for the first time in Circuit Court that are entitled to their one automatic appeal to the CSA. So with the flood of cases they must review, they only publish written opinions in a small percentage of them. Those published opinions have some binding effect on the various judges around the State, but not quite as much as if someone once again asks permission to appeal it to the Court of Appeals, (our "state supreme court"), where the same process plays out.

    So as a result it is very rare for them to voluntarily review a DNR case, and even rarer that it will result in a written published opinion. It would have to be 1) a very compelling situation and 2) a defendant with nothing to lose by pursuing it that far (and possibly spending a small fortune to do so.)

    And that's why we are basically left to try to figure things out for ourselves.

    So that is the only reason I said it would have been helpful for everyone if it had (maybe) gone through the fullblown process, but I don't blame Sean or anyone else for not wanting to be a guinea pig.

    The only thing that could change that would be to make every DNR charge carry a possible penalty of more than 90 days in jail. (That would mean it could start in Circuit Court and get an automatic right of appeal to the CSA). Not sure anyone really wants to see that happen.......
     
  6. nalley1952

    nalley1952 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,036
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Location:
    Maryland


    :z:z:z
     
  7. muskrat25

    muskrat25 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,871
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Location:
    Maryland
    Senior was a Judge over in your neck of the woods. He is now retired but still gets around. Junior was our Congressman and is now District Court Judge for Queen Anne's County. Both father and son bear the nickname "Hammer".
     
  8. honga

    honga Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    740
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Location:
    Maryland
    I had a case once that worked out like this one. I recieved an anonymous complaint of baiting in a pond back in the woods here in Dorchester County. I checked the area out, about 1/4 mile back in the woods, and found Milo on the path into the pond and in the pond. Grain was spilled down the path in several places but pretty sparse in the pond. I charged the two gentlemen hunting it with baiting. They were very upset and claimed they did not and would not bait. They advised that they were told by the landowner that any violations would result in the loss of their lease so they stuck to the law. I asked them about the grain in the path and they said they came in well before daylight. The whole case bothered me so I spent some time and interviewed some folks and discovered several days later that there was a guy who wanted to hunt that property and knew that a violation by those who were hunting it would cause them to lose their lease. He would not "fess-up" but after speaking with him I was convinced that he did it. The end result was that I spoke with the States Attorney and the case was put on the Stet docket for one year.
    Officers in the field must make a decision to charge based on what is in front of them and a complaint complicates the process. You cannot write a compaint report that says that yeah there was bait there but I don't think they did it. There was bait, they were hunting so there was a violation...you have to charge them. The "system" will correctly resolve the charge if the participants are able to add to the facts that support innocence or guilt.
    I think that is probably what happened here with Sean's case. I am not privey to any inside info here..just guessing that further investigation produced evidence that cleared him.
    The Officer that charged him is a good man. I know him and he is not a loose cannon trying to make a name for himself as implied by some here.
     
  9. ih2ofowler

    ih2ofowler Refuge Member

    Messages:
    39
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Location:
    Maryland
    What's he officers name?
     
  10. honga

    honga Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    740
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Location:
    Maryland
    Look on the Maryland Judiciary Case forum. It is mis-spelled there..it should start with a P. He is second on the list but I will add that all the Officers listed are good ones.
     

Share This Page