• Help Support TNDeer:

C J Alexander Pleads Guilty

You want to fix this problem? Allow the landowner to sue in civil courtroom and recover damages directly from the poacher based on what the landowner feels value is.

Poacher gets the criminal charges and fines, then he has to go to civil court. 'He killed my 200in buck i have been watching for 3 years, I need $200,000 pain and suffering the loss of bucky'. Get some quarter of a million dollar judgements against poachers, and it will slow down real quick.
 
megalomaniac said:
You want to fix this problem? Allow the landowner to sue in civil courtroom and recover damages directly from the poacher based on what the landowner feels value is.

Poacher gets the criminal charges and fines, then he has to go to civil court. 'He killed my 200in buck i have been watching for 3 years, I need $200,000 pain and suffering the loss of bucky'. Get some quarter of a million dollar judgements against poachers, and it will slow down real quick.
Click to expand...

A little hyperbolic but your point has merit. Furthermore I believe a landowner can sue for damages. It wouldn't be difficult to provide receipts for monies spent on habitat enhancement and a reasonable cost for time/labor. You would need to convince the judge of potential lost trophy same way a business shows potential lost revenue, but it could be argued in court. With a decent lawyer i suspect you'd easily win, especially given that most dirt bag poachers can't afford their own lawyer. And once one case is won the precedent is set for others to follow.
 
megalomaniac said:
You want to fix this problem? Allow the landowner to sue in civil courtroom and recover damages directly from the poacher based on what the landowner feels value is.

Poacher gets the criminal charges and fines, then he has to go to civil court. 'He killed my 200in buck i have been watching for 3 years, I need $200,000 pain and suffering the loss of bucky'. Get some quarter of a million dollar judgements against poachers, and it will slow down real quick.
Click to expand...
I can't believe it hasn't been done. Its probably been done for private operations.
 
megalomaniac said:
You want to fix this problem? Allow the landowner to sue in civil courtroom and recover damages directly from the poacher based on what the landowner feels value is.

Poacher gets the criminal charges and fines, then he has to go to civil court. 'He killed my 200in buck i have been watching for 3 years, I need $200,000 pain and suffering the loss of bucky'. Get some quarter of a million dollar judgements against poachers, and it will slow down real quick.
Click to expand...
Great idea, until the wealthy gentleman that owns and pours money into his large plot of land starts suing the guy that hunts his 5 acre spot beside him and kills the buck he's after even if it's legal.

Don't act like it wouldn't happen, because it would.
 
How about taking the value off of the antlers on a deer that has been poached? I know that it doesn't make headlines but I guarantee this isn't the first deer that this guy has poached. It seems that these only become noteworthy when it's a big buck. And oftentimes the laws (like in Ohio) tie heavier fines to antlers, which I believe totally misses the point. Allow the landowner to sue based upon other criteria and for the criminal to feel pain before they get to the point of getting experienced enough to feel that they can take out a big, recognizable buck.

But it will likely never happen in TN as long as judges who have to oversee these cases do not make the criminals pay. MAYBE some laws that give the ability to file more civil suits for losses on value of hunting property and maintenance and upkeep would change some judges' minds on poaching being a victimless crime and then they would start enforcing the criminal side of it. But I still believe that a lot of that ties back to small town politics and elected judges, too
 
There is a very disturbing number of poaching convictions with these TV/Social media "celebrity" hunters. They're willing to break all sorts of game laws to keep that content feed rolling. Just another reason that social media is the worst thing to ever happen to hunting.

And he named the deer "megatron" lol. Why does it seem that people who name deer are the biggest douchebags in the sport of hunting? There are exceptions, but it's definitely a valid stereotype.
 

Alexander's sentencing is scheduled for Wednesday, Dec. 11. Maximum sanctions could include $13,750 in fines, community control, a five-year hunting license suspension, and restitution for both bucks. The larger buck's antlers have 18 scorable points, and the final restitution has been calculated at $35,071.73. The final restitution for the second buck, with eight scorable points, is $4,625.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of a landowner or leaseholder suing over a deer that they do not own with no way of knowing who, when, and where someone would have had an opportunity to shoot that deer had it not been poached. I like the fines for restitution by the state. There should be a way to increase the fines that is not necessarily tied to the size of the antlers. Maybe there is leeway for increasing amounts which would be great for repeat offenders and there probably are other fines and jail time that get increased as well. A lot of poachers would never be worried about getting sued even if it was something done on a regular basis.
 
DayDay said:



I don't like the idea of a landowner or leaseholder suing over a deer that they do not own with no way of knowing who, when, and where someone would have had an opportunity to shoot that deer had it not been poached. I like the fines for restitution by the state. There should be a way to increase the fines that is not necessarily tied to the size of the antlers. Maybe there is leeway for increasing amounts which would be great for repeat offenders and there probably are other fines and jail time that get increased as well. A lot of poachers would never be worried about getting sued even if it was something done on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
Good points, and I also did not follow this case enough to know that there was another deer involved. Supported my earlier point, though.

I DO like the idea of civil penalties if a deer is poached on someone's land, as that can be tied back to landowner expenses for the pursuit of that game, but agree that you can't squeeze blood from a turnip.

The deer can travel from place to place freely, and the NAM states that the animals belong to all of the people, not just the land of the person whose feet that they are touching. I definitely don't want to see hunters get to the point of claiming deer and suing someone because "their deer" stepped across property lines and someone else shot it. That is where trophy hunting is steering us, unfortunately
 
DayDay said:



I don't like the idea of a landowner or leaseholder suing over a deer that they do not own with no way of knowing who, when, and where someone would have had an opportunity to shoot that deer had it not been poached. I like the fines for restitution by the state. There should be a way to increase the fines that is not necessarily tied to the size of the antlers. Maybe there is leeway for increasing amounts which would be great for repeat offenders and there probably are other fines and jail time that get increased as well. A lot of poachers would never be worried about getting sued even if it was something done on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
If it was leased ground or the landowner could prove they were in discussion of leasing to a client, I think they could sue for lost revenue. They'd have to prove the value of the lease went down or they lost clients because the deer was killed - which likely wouldn't be tough to do.

Can't believe he's not looking at jail time.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top