TexasCHLforum.com

Posted: **Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:46 am**

No comment except for a few highlights:

WILKESBORO - A state wildlife-enforcement officer will not face charges for fatally shooting a turkey hunter in April, authorities said Thursday.

Officer Mark Minton was patrolling in Wilkes County on April 11, the first day of turkey hunting season, when the confrontation occurred. Minton shot and killed Clyde Hill Coffey, 76, of Lenoir. An autopsy showed Coffey was shot once through the heart.

Wilkes County District Attorney Tom Horner said Thursday that Minton's actions "were reasonable and appropriate in response to the perceived use or immediate use of deadly physical force by Mr. Coffey."

Horner said a criminal prosecution of Minton was not warranted.

Faye Coffey, Clyde's wife, said Minton should not have killed her husband, and she believes Minton should be punished in some manner. She said her husband had no intention of shooting Minton, because his shotgun was not cocked for firing.

Investigators and Coffey's family said Coffey had lost his hearing, and that may have contributed to his actions during the incident.

Gordon Myers, the executive director of the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, said his agency is investigating the shooting and declined to comment further.

In a statement, Horner provided details about the shooting.

Minton told investigators he approached Coffey, who was in a tree stand on Coffey's property off Cane Creek Church Road in Wilkes County. Minton was investigating a report that someone was hunting turkeys illegally.

Minton then tried unsuccessfully to get Coffey's attention. At one point, Minton identified himself as a "game warden," and then Coffey stood up and demanded Minton leave his property.

Coffey didn't comply with Minton's orders, and Minton radioed other wildlife-resource officers for help, but they were several miles away.

Coffey then got down from the tree stand with his shotgun in his arms. Minton told investigators Coffey then approached him with his shotgun pointing at Minton.

Minton ordered Coffey several times to stop, and Minton then moved away from Coffey. However, Coffey pursued him, pointing his shotgun at Minton.

After Minton again ordered Coffey to stop, Minton drew his handgun and fired one shot at Coffey, hitting him in the chest. Minton then radioed for paramedics and tried unsuccessfully to revive Coffey.

State law allows law-enforcement officers to defend themselves when making an arrest, Horner said.

http://www2.hickoryrecord.com/content/2 ... ng-death-/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

Posted: **Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:27 am**

Well, as someone somewhere said, "...dead men tell no tales..." or something like that.

Posted: **Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm**

AndyC wrote:
seamusTX wrote:
...She said her husband had no intention of shooting Minton, because his shotgun was not cocked for firing
And Minton would have known that how, exactly? Some feller points a gun at me, it's not a game and it's going to be his problem if he didn't cock it.

But the question is did Coffey know he was a game warden? If he was hard of hearing then he wouldn't know unless the game warden presented himself in a visual manner, was he wearing a uniform? Did he present his ID? We'll never know because he's not telling his side of the story. So whether or not the game warden was right will never come to light, and Minton is off the hook, rightfully so or not.

Posted: **Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:14 pm**

AndyC wrote:
seamusTX wrote:
...She said her husband had no intention of shooting Minton, because his shotgun was not cocked for firing
And Minton would have known that how, exactly? Some feller points a gun at me, it's not a game and it's going to be his problem if he didn't cock it.

Probably because the gun was laying on the ground after the homicide and it's condition was taken in as evidence.

Just a guess...

This entire thing stinks.

Posted: **Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:33 pm**

AndyC wrote:"After the shooting" - my point exactly; that's a little bit too late as you have to go with what you know at the time.

You trust that the hunter knew the game warden was an official and not a trespasser? Or trust the game warden on his word that the hunter pointed his gun at him? You trust the idea that the game warden did not jump the gun and shoot before a time when it was necessary?

I think the game warden may be in the right, but you cannot forget the fact that the only one telling anything is the shooter, and the shooter would not say anything to harm himself.

Posted: **Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:49 pm**

If a shotgun has external hammers, you can tell if it's cocked or not. That's the only type of shotgun for which the termed cocked is meaningful, AFAIK.

The aspect of this story that really bothers me is that it occurred on the dead man's property. I understand that game wardens have more latitude than other LEOs when it comes to enforcing hunting regulations on private property, but ...

- Jim

Posted: **Sat Jul 04, 2009 6:43 pm**

AndyC wrote: I'm not forgetting that at all, and you're absolutely right - we don't know without doubt who was really right or wrong.

However, I'm saying that the wife's mentioning that the firearm was uncocked is irrelevant assuming that it was pointed at the warden - and we have no other choice to take the warden's word as fact (unless the investigation uncovers something else, of course). That's just how it is, right or wrong - just as possession is 9/10ths of the law, so is the survivor's story (again, unless the investigation uncovers something else).

It's the same as a kid pointing a toy gun at a cop and getting shot - can't blame the cop for not knowing that it wasn't capable of firing.

Me too - I don't like that all.

True the position of the hammer is irrelevant to the position of the barrel. But the most important aspect (I think) is whether or not the property owner knew at the time of the incident that the game warden was in fact a game warden. Which is basically impossible to tell now, unless somehow the game warden is telling nothing but lies and everything found at the scene is different than what he says, that would make his word of less value.

I agree on the last part, I really despise the fact that this took place on the man's personal property, and I think confronting a hunter in a tree while hunting is probably one of the worst ways to confront a problem, there seems to be other ways that puts both parties in a non-confrontational mode. But what happened happened, and I hope the facts come forward and the game warden is either arrested and charged or completely innocent.

Posted: **Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:14 pm**

I haven't heard anything about any other reason why the game warden would have shot the man unless he had pointed his shotgun at him.

Other questions I wonder about are:

1. Did the game warden know he was on this man's property?
2. Did these two men know each other at all?
3. While the game warden may have know he was on private property, did he know it was "this" man's?

And, like has already been said, we'll probably never know the real answers to these questions if they would negatively impact the game warden's freedom.

Posted: **Sun Jul 05, 2009 3:13 pm**

Dressing in camo during hunting season doesn't sound like a good idea. I don't give much credibility to anonymous sources on the internets, though.

Here is a much more detailed report:

According to investigators' reports, the game warden went to the property to investigate a suspicion that someone was illegally baiting turkeys. Bait was reportedly found later. Also, the incident was investigated by the State Bureau of Investigation, not the officer's own agency.

http://www.journalpatriot.com/fullstory.asp?id=1463" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

Posted: **Mon Jul 06, 2009 4:37 pm**

Officer Mark Minton was patrolling in Wilkes County on April 11, the first day of turkey hunting season, when the confrontation occurred.

Minton was investigating a report that someone was hunting turkeys illegally.

It was the first day of the season and the game warden was already investigating complaints? Wow! I wish we had law enforcement in these parts that respond that quickly to minor offenses.

Here are some of my lessons learned.
1. It's good for law enforcement to wear recognizable uniforms and don't be afraid to show ID.
2. Don't point a gun at someone unless you're ready to shoot.
3. Hearing aids are not merely conveniences. They can save yor life.

Posted: **Mon Jul 06, 2009 4:45 pm**

AWB09 wrote:It was the first day of the season and the game warden was already investigating complaints? Wow!

They take hunting seriously in North Carolina.

- Jim

TexasCHLforum.com

NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified

Re: NC: Game warden shooting hunter ruled justified