Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If there was a wild fire and you thought by starting a burn back to it would save your home, would you?
Yes, what they did is accepted responses to a fire. Why is this so difficult to understand
You think you are being clever but in reality you are being ignorant.
You are completely misstating the case. Someone else posted the trial and the his own family testified that he passed out the matches in order to cover up poaching. They've had their trial. And now these guys want the government to give them federal land?
Tell you what - I think the Olympic National Park is gorgeous and I'd like to have it. Should we go occupy one of the visitors centers until they give it to me? Because seriously, I would like to have it please.
There is evidence, 4 separate witnesses in fact, testifying to their motivation for maliciously lighting a fire on federal land. This is why they were charged and convicted of Arson. You seem to be conveniently ignoring this fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Without evidence, yes the judge must ignore that. It's how our justice system works.
Originally the group was going to leave because they indicated neither the Hammonds or the town wanted them there, now that just changed. They are moving some NPS equipment to block the roads and the FBI has issued 5 warrants for arrest. Looks like they are going to get their wish.
One of them is a Mormon and the Mormon Church just issued a statement regarding these extremists.
Originally the group was going to leave because they indicated neither the Hammonds or the town wanted them there, now that just changed. They are moving some NPS equipment to block the roads and the FBI has issued 5 warrants for arrest. Looks like they are going to get their wish.
Oh they need to be arrested and put in prison for a long time. Give the prosecutors ten minutes and I'm sure they can come up with a list of charges.
You are completely misstating the case. Someone else posted the trial and the his own family testified that he passed out the matches in order to cover up poaching. They've had their trial. And now these guys want the government to give them federal land?
Well no, the father and son have turned themselves in to serve the rest of their time.
I'm not misstating anything. I'm discussing what they were found guilty of doing.
Quote:
Tell you what - I think the Olympic National Park is gorgeous and I'd like to have it. Should we go occupy one of the visitors centers until they give it to me? Because seriously, I would like to have it please.
People wanted to get home when BLM blocked the streets also. Sometimes protest ain't pretty.
There is evidence, 4 separate witnesses in fact, testifying to their motivation for maliciously lighting a fire on federal land. This is why they were charged and convicted of Arson. You seem to be conveniently ignoring this fact.
I'm ignoring nothing. They were found guilty of starting fires not poaching. Did they unlawfully kill animals? I have no idea but its not what they were found guilty of doing.
Well no, the father and son have turned themselves in to serve the rest of their time.
I'm not misstating anything. I'm discussing what they were found guilty of doing.
People wanted to get home when BLM blocked the streets also. Sometimes protest ain't pretty.
Witnesses told the court they started the fire to cover up the poaching. Even their own family testified. Not sure why you are trying to make them sound innocent.
Do you seriously think the government is going to start doling out federal lands to their pals? This will not turn out well for them.
They were not charged with poaching, so they can't be found guilty of it. However they were charged and convicted of, and again I quote 'maliciously lighting fires on federal land'. This was not a controlled burn on their land that got out of control, but a case of malicious arson. You seem incapable of acknowledging this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
I'm ignoring nothing. They were found guilty of starting fires not poaching. Did they unlawfully kill animals? I have no idea but its not what they were found guilty of doing.
There is evidence, 4 separate witnesses in fact, testifying to their motivation for maliciously lighting a fire on federal land. This is why they were charged and convicted of Arson. You seem to be conveniently ignoring this fact.
If there was any credible evidence that they maliciously set a fire to cover up poaching, the judge would not have ignored minimum sentence, and given one of them 3 months, and the other 1 year. There were in fact many character references presented in the trail attesting to the positive contributions that the Hammonds have may to the community. Again, there doesn't seem to be any credible evidence that the Hammonds maliciously set a fire to cover up poaching.
Oh they need to be arrested and put in prison for a long time. Give the prosecutors ten minutes and I'm sure they can come up with a list of charges.
After all this time I still don't know what they want, what is the point of their protest as the Hammonds are still going to jail and the local people don't want them nor does the sheriff. Might have been better sealing off the road and leaving them there all winter.
Weird because some of the media is trying to interview some of these nuts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.