Oregon man shot in head while snorkeling

[spoolin01]

This guy should have never been shot and he deserves something for his injuries, but here are some facts that seem to be missing from the newspaper articles...

1) The guy who got shot was diving on private property... he committed a felony by trespassing... the only way he could have gotten where he was is by crawling over the fence around the property.
2) He trespassed with a spear gun, which is also a felony because it is classified as a firearm in the United States.
2) The man watching the ranch who shot the diver was house sitting and he thought the diver was an animal that might threaten the animals on the ranch
3) There were no drugs/narcotics involved except an old pipe found with marijuana residue... who doesn't smoke pot? I mean come on!
4) The firearm itself did not belong to the house owner and was not illegal... The man who owned the house (who was on vacation when this happened) is a respected ex-military man who collected antique guns and had them in his gun cabinet.
5) The gun used belonged to the shooter, who was not supposed to have one in his possession... see next point
5) The shooter has a felony charge from 25 years ago for growing a pot plant and that is why he is not supposed to own a firearm... how many people have grown a pot plant and just not got caught... our new president admittedly grew pots plants at one time!!!
5) The diver is now claiming that he did not bring a spear gun onto the property, however, he has already collected money to replace the spear gun from the shooter.
6) The owners of the property who were not even there when this happened are being sued for millions now... how does law allow this?

Wow. Felony trespassing and speargun possession. You forgot: he only shot him once.

I'm with ya about the lawsuit though - that kind of derivative liability only belongs where there's exceptional negligence.

 

[TheMadDane]

This thread is 2 years old....

2 years 1 Day!

 

[maged_mmh]

another one forked out the crypt

 

[cndscuba]

2 years and 1 day... thank you for the BRILLIANT observation... you do realize that it takes 2-4 years for a case of this nature to reach the federal courts? Hence the reason why people are jumping online now to help defend the family in question that is now being sued and were not even there at the time of the incident... please look outside of yourself and your selfish need to pick apart others online because you are bored and rather look at the fact that these are REAL people facing a possible terrible loss...
TexasFencer, I will be glad to answer your questions…
If I may ask, what is your relationship to this incident and those involved so that we may have context for your information?
I am close to the family and part of the legal team who is helping work on the case.

How would a nutria, whatever his claim was, be a threat to the ranch animals? I ask this because I am unfamiliar with the species.
He never thought it was a Nutria… this is something the media made up.. he actually thought it was a cougar/coyote of some sort and there was a sick donkey on the ranch at that time that needed to be looked out for.

No one accused the house owner of any wrong doing.
The courts are… there is a 3.75 million dollar lawsuit that has just been served against the family.

Even if the felony was for something as innocuous as growing a marijuana plant, it was still illegal for him to own a firearm.
I agree, the problem we are having is how the media has made him out to be a hardened criminal who was running from the law for 25 years… not the case. He actually is a very sweet Man who received a criminal charge 25 years ago for growing a pot plant. He should not have had a firearm in his possession, but he thought he was genuinely doing a good thing at the time... it may have been "dumb", but the fact that the man who was shot was on private property is the issue... think: what the heck was he doing there?

How do you know about the victim's legal and insurance activities?
This is obvious from the first question.

 

[TexasFencer]

Thank you, cdnscuba, I appreciate your taking the time to clarify things for me.

 

[airsix]

Hi Gang, OP here...
It does seem unjust to me that the landowner is being sued for such a large sum. It also seems unjust that a man was shot for swimming in the river by a felon in possession of pot and meth. This is a tragedy going in 3 different directions.

Here are the things I've learned so far:
1. Don't trespass. (victim's big mistake)
2. Don't shoot at something as a means of discovering it's identity. (shooter's big mistake)
3. Don't invite a pot smoking meth head with a gun to house-sit for you. (landowner's big mistake)

 

[TexasFencer]

That pretty well sums it up.

 

[D_B]

what meth?
Must not have had much pot ether ... they didn't find any


... an armed felony trespasser accidentally got shot by an armed felony house sitter ...

tragic, but understandable

 

[Thalassamania]

what meth?
Must not have had much pot ether ... they didn't find any


... an armed felony trespasser accidentally got shot by an armed felony house sitter ...

tragic, but understandable

Yes tragic, yes they are both, 'in the wrong" to a degree, but (at least to my way of thinking) the guy with the gun who shot at something another person without positively identifying his target is way more in the wrong than the trespasser with a speargun.

 

[airsix]

what meth?
Must not have had much pot ether ... they didn't find any

He was in possession of both.

News Report

<name removed>, 60, of Reedsport, was taken to the Douglas County jail Wednesday night on charges of second-degree assault, felon in possession of a weapon and unlawful possession of methamphetamine and marijuana.