Rancher/Sheriff Idaho shooting

[PaulB47]

It's not demonstrations they fear; that's just people blowing off steam. It's a bullet through the windshield that makes 'em nervous. Most murders are solved because there are only a very few likely perpetrators. When a whole town is gunning for you, you are going to be killed and that's it.

I suspect the deputies are going to vamoose shortly, finding employment in another town PD. The sheriff will lose his next election. And that's it.

Well, one other thing might happen. A lot more people will become apostates from the Government Religion. Look at the bright side...

 

[Riot]

thanks for the follow up . I hope you folks in Idaho are up to speed because these cops are whacked and need an bubblegum whoopin and fired ASAP! That video was sickening how he disrespected that old guy and was obviously just a control freak issue . The exact opposite of serve and protect. And there is no law that says you must get back in your car ?

I feel as if I have to post this since some people jumping on the "f- the police" bandwagon...

1) When you are pulled over for a traffic offense you are detained due to the traffic offense you have allegedly violated and are subject to questioning, providing proof of proper identification and must obey all lawful orders by the officer(s) until you are no longer detained. There may be loopholes as to being a passenger of the vehicle as to how these rules may apply to you, but not the driver. Remaining in the vehicle, stepping out of the vehicle, moving the vehicle, shutting off the vehicle...these are all lawful orders. The real question comes as to "why?" the officer is telling you to do something, not "well there is no law that says I have to get back in my car". Technically there is no law that says when you're under arrest that you have to place your hands behind your back, either...but if you resist when a cop tries to put your hands behind your back, you have resisted arrest. This subject in the video is being passive resistive...he is refusing to leave or go somewhere as verbally directed and is, thus, refusing to allow the officer to safely perform his duties. The order must be reasonable and necessary to do so. There is nothing unreasonable for instructing an individual to step back into his car in this situation and it can be articulated that for the safety of the officer to return to his vehicle, it was prudent for the subject to return to his.

2) Just because the charges may have been dropped doesn't mean that anyone was innocent. Many mitigating factors go into actual prosecution. The offender's age, political ties to the community and an election year probably had a lot more to do with the deciding factor than the actual offense.

3) Just because money was paid to anyone doesn't mean that the agency admits fault. People sue all the time, that is the world we live in. Many agencies (State, Federal, County, etc.) pay out settlements to avoid costly court fees, overtime for officers, investigators reviewing and redacting paperwork/video, lawyer costs, etc. Even current incarcerated inmates (people that have been judged and sentenced by a jury of their peers for committing a crime punishable by no less than one year of prison and are still serving said sentence) still sue (and often times win money) for settlements. Some are people surprisingly very good at suing, while on the reverse, a small rural county might not be good at defense against a class action lawsuit. I, for one, was recently mentioned in a lawsuit. If I didn't submit an articulated, written statement refuting every claim, slander and accusation the inmate made involving me and my actions, the inmate would have probably have been given a settlement for his claims since they weren't rebutted. This doesn't mean he would have been right, it would have just made me culpable and lazy.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Christmas eve and still nothing from the authorities. Week after week goes by and absolutely nothing. Is this really what we expect from an investigation?

It seems common now that they'll often sit on body cam footage for a year plus now.
The first thing a good lawyer does is buy time.. and the biggest union in the United States has good lawyers.

 

[mjbskwim]

I feel as if I have to post this since some people jumping on the "f- the police" bandwagon...

1) When you are pulled over for a traffic offense you are detained due to the traffic offense you have allegedly violated and are subject to questioning, providing proof of proper identification and must obey all lawful orders by the officer(s) until you are no longer detained. There may be loopholes as to being a passenger of the vehicle as to how these rules may apply to you, but not the driver. Remaining in the vehicle, stepping out of the vehicle, moving the vehicle, shutting off the vehicle...these are all lawful orders. The real question comes as to "why?" the officer is telling you to do something, not "well there is no law that says I have to get back in my car". Technically there is no law that says when you're under arrest that you have to place your hands behind your back, either...but if you resist when a cop tries to put your hands behind your back, you have resisted arrest. This subject in the video is being passive resistive...he is refusing to leave or go somewhere as verbally directed and is, thus, refusing to allow the officer to safely perform his duties. The order must be reasonable and necessary to do so. There is nothing unreasonable for instructing an individual to step back into his car in this situation and it can be articulated that for the safety of the officer to return to his vehicle, it was prudent for the subject to return to his.

2) Just because the charges may have been dropped doesn't mean that anyone was innocent. Many mitigating factors go into actual prosecution. The offender's age, political ties to the community and an election year probably had a lot more to do with the deciding factor than the actual offense.

3) Just because money was paid to anyone doesn't mean that the agency admits fault. People sue all the time, that is the world we live in. Many agencies (State, Federal, County, etc.) pay out settlements to avoid costly court fees, overtime for officers, investigators reviewing and redacting paperwork/video, lawyer costs, etc. Even current incarcerated inmates (people that have been judged and sentenced by a jury of their peers for committing a crime punishable by no less than one year of prison and are still serving said sentence) still sue (and often times win money) for settlements. Some are people surprisingly very good at suing, while on the reverse, a small rural county might not be good at defense against a class action lawsuit. I, for one, was recently mentioned in a lawsuit. If I didn't submit an articulated, written statement refuting every claim, slander and accusation the inmate made involving me and my actions, the inmate would have probably have been given a settlement for his claims since they weren't rebutted. This doesn't mean he would have been right, it would have just made me culpable and lazy.

Not sure WTF you are talking about with this thread.

 

[Riot]

You tell me WHY this cop pointed his dash cam AWAY from the old man's car?

Dash cams are generally centered in the front of the vehicle and the angle cannot be adjusted without tools.

Because he didn't want a video of the possible outcome.

It can be argued that he wore the audio recorder because he wanted to ensure that the encounter was recorded.

There's nothing threatening that the old man did.

An agittated individual outside his car during a traffic stop, refusing to obey verbal directives to get back in his car may not be "threatening" but it is definitely cause for concern.

The cop had a right to hand him a ticket, wish him a nice day and drive away.

The public also has a right to travel on the roadway safely. The officer also has a right to be safe during traffic stops...what's your point?

...but apparently the cop's dept. and the mayor/city council realized this pile of garbage with a badge over reacted. Otherwise why would they pay nearly $15 large in a settlement.I respect 98% of cops, it's the 2% scum buckets like this one give the good ones a bad name and because the system protects the bad apples more and more of society questions crap like this. You tell me other than a LE job where a person can abuse an old man who is 80 and no threat and getaway with this? If you think this cop did nothing wrong then you have a twisted set of morals. Remember this LEO was charged and likely fired for poaching/ illegal firearm possession previously reported.

brutus Out

See above post about litigations.

 

[Riot]

It seems common now that they'll often sit on body cam footage for a year plus now.
The first thing a good lawyer does is buy time.. and the biggest union in the United States has good lawyers.

I, too, would like to see the video/audio of this incident...it seems like cooler heads could have definitely prevailed in this situation. I've been following this story since it was first posted here and I've got a lot of questions.

The department called the owner of the bull and let him know of the issue. Surely the officers on the scene are the ones who requested this and should have known a farmer would have arrived with a firearm. Everyone's priority should have been to the safety of others before the bull. Firefighters, EMT, the occupant(s) of the vehicle in the wreck...this bull is property and we get that it is the farmer's livelyhood and was suffering. Who escalleted this? Why did the officer lay a hand on the farmer?

I'm glad the FBI and Idaho State Police are investigating it instead of the Sheriff...but if it comes out that none of these guys were operating issued recording equipment (body cameras) then I will be extremely pissed...whatever comes of the investigation and public backlash is on them at that point.

 

[PaulB47]

The highwayman has a right to be safe during his robberies...

"Rights" are so much fun; you can prove anything you want with them.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I, too, would like to see the video/audio of this incident...it seems like cooler heads could have definitely prevailed in this situation. I've been following this story since it was first posted here and I've got a lot of questions.

The department called the owner of the bull and let him know of the issue. Surely the officers on the scene are the ones who requested this and should have known a farmer would have arrived with a firearm. Everyone's priority should have been to the safety of others before the bull. Firefighters, EMT, the occupant(s) of the vehicle in the wreck...this bull is property and we get that it is the farmer's livelyhood and was suffering. Who escalleted this? Why did the officer lay a hand on the farmer?

I'm glad the FBI and Idaho State Police are investigating it instead of the Sheriff...but if it comes out that none of these guys were operating issued recording equipment (body cameras) then I will be extremely pissed...whatever comes of the investigation and public backlash is on them at that point.

I give it three years and medals for all!

 

[Sgt Nambu]

My last interaction with a LEO was for speeding, yes I was. 9:30 PM, dark and I wasn't sure why the stop at first. Turned on the interior lights, rolled down the window, put my hands on the STW and waited. We interacted, I never moved until I told him where my paperwork was and then let him watch me get it. He told me I was speeding, didn't realize it but I was, back to his car, checked me out, came back, gave me my paperwork back, requested that I not speed and be safe and sent me on my way with a verbal. I believe the out come of this situation was due to me making him comfortable, feeling safe and respected and fortunately for me I got my respect at the end. If I would've received a ticket I would have accepted it, said sorry and went home pissed at myself for not reading the signs like a professionally trained driver is supposed to do. I tell my kids, if you have to talk to LEO, you lose, whether you get a ticket or not, just the stress and irritation of knowing that I did something to let them into my space just pisses me off, same thing at work with management, straight and narrow, CYA and don't let them in. Blaze away Mr. Baze, good luck.
I didn't think the officer was out of line at all in the video, but what ever happened out there in the dark with the rancher I don't think is going to turn out well for the LEO, that rancher shouldn't be dead, no way.

This is my SOP! It's never failed me, I've been written up a couple of times but sent on my way with a warning many more times! Been a number of years since my last ticket!

 

[Jamie6.5]

I thought this needed a bump. With all the hullabaloo about the Burns ranchers, we mustn't forget about Jack Yantis and his family.

 

[Steve Baze]

Just BHO and crew?

Who lied to us about the Iraq war?

Bush

Who put in place the Patriot Act?

Bush

Who started (or at least greatly escalated) the "war on drugs"?

Reagan

Who escalated the war in Vietnam?

LBJ

Politicians lie.

Voters elect politicians because politicians tell them the lies they want to hear.

Don't pretend it is just the party or politician you don't like that does this - they all lie, they all grab more power, they all want to take our rights away from us.

I agree on all points and have written about it in great length ! I trust none of them, red or blue.

 

[Jamie6.5]

One more bump,...
From their GoFundMe page this morning:
https://www.gofundme.com/g78dcfa4

UPDATE #7
3 DAYS AGO

Today, we still wait on a decision about the horrible death of our dear friend, neighbor, relative, dad, and the husband of Donna Yantis. I promise, once we hear something, I will post. Thank you all for your continued love, support and prayers. The family and friends of Jack and Donna appreciate it. God Bless you all.

 

[CoastRange57]

Another thread that goes pages based upon speculation only and very little facts.

I was raised around cattle and have experience with range and contained bulls. The supposition that a familiar face or person may calm the bull is false. The only thing these bulls care about is the next cow they get, and that no other bull is in their territory, and nobody is messing with them. Range bulls care nothing about familiar human faces.

We had contained Angus bulls in pens, and I fed them every day. As long as they were contained by their fence we were good. You turn your back on them in the open and they will nail you in a heart beat. You stress them out with a car wreck or chasing them around and they will go after anything they see.

In order to capture or contain an aggravated bull, you will need at least 6 mounted experienced cowboys on experienced horses, and sh*t can still go very wrong and people and animals will get hurt.

If the bull was specific seed stock and a high value animal, you would have suitable insurance on it. The car owners insurance would also pay off, even if it was put down. I was involved in attempt to contain some escaped bison. We tried herding them back to containment and that failed. We kept them contained on owners property for almost 4 hours. He said if we ca wear them down and move them back fine. If they leave the property and head towards other property or town then drop them right away.

He did not like dropping animals that were about 6 months shy of harvest weight, but his concern was for other people, and rightly so. We ended up dropping 5 of them, and then butchering all of them.

There was also a case last year when one of those bat shot crazy Mexican fighting bulls escaped a pasture here locally. The sheriff allowed the owners to try and capture this animal, but they were idiots and scared of the bull. The bull ventured into a residential area and terrorized the neighborhood. SO Sergeant ordered the first safe shot to take it. He ended up dropping it in an adjacent field. Took 3 fast AR rounds to put it down.

Safety of first responders and victims has to the first priority in any situation. Deputies sound like they used restraint in not dropping the bull right away. As to the rest of what happened who knows.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Another thread that goes pages based upon speculation only and very little facts.
-snip-
Safety of first responders and victims has to the first priority in any situation. Deputies sound like they used restraint in not dropping the bull right away. As to the rest of what happened who knows.

B____ S___. How about the safety of innocent civilians? Any thought for that?

This isn't a matter of "who knows(?)." There were multiple witnesses as to what happened, how the deputies shot the bull multiple times attempting to kill it and botching it, causing an increasingly dangerous situation for everyone by enraging the bull.
Then shooting rancher Jack Yantis as he was trying to put the bull out of its misery.

And then the way they treated Mrs Yantis and the ranch hand, handcuffing them and refusing her treatment, was inexcusable.

The only "speculation" here is yours. Read the numerous articles citing witness accounts of what happened.

 

[CoastRange57]

B____ S___. How about the safety of innocent civilians? Any thought for that?

The only "speculation" here is yours. Read the numerous articles citing witness accounts of what happened.

Innocent civilians like the first responders ?? The ones who came to help those injured and in peril ??OK. I offered no speculation about what transpired with the deputies, and a loose agitated dangerous range bull. Since I have a LOT of experience with those animals in similar situations, that is what I said. I was not there and offered no opinion about if it was a good or bad shoot. I merely offered my opinion and my years of experience in owing and handling and dealing with pissed off range bulls.

And as a former first responder for many years, if I come on a scene and have critically injured patients that we are unable to access because of a range bull, and we have to eliminate that threat to treat the human patients, that bull is going to be dead on the ground real fast before we end up with more patients.

Disagreeing with someone without going to the full on BFS card first thing can be done. But since you want to do that right away, you can go fill in the blank yourself and I will eject from this thread, since it seems like there are a lot of these threads that are going straight to the shi* house real quick like anymore. If I wanted to argue things with a computer screen I could do it in my bathroom mirror.

This place needs a flame room where these kinds of things can be discussed in the proper manner and without the restraint of being "nice" to each other.

 

[CoastRange57]

The likely hood that the deputies could not get in a kill shot on a large animal with .223 rounds is very high. I watched a guy put 4 .223 rounds center mass in a buffalo and it stood here. I put 2 .30-.30 rounds in it and it finally went down. 80 yard shots.

When the deputy shot that Mexican bull, he was a big game hunter and had reservations about using the .223, but put a bunch of rounds in it real fast and it worked, because the situation absolutely had to end right there.

Sometimes situations happen and you have to improvise to solve them.

 

[Jamie6.5]

I guess maybe you should read the newspaper accounts of what happened CR.

The deputies tried using their handguns on the bull IIRC, and then shot the rancher who was preparing to use his .223 on the bull, as the bull laid in the roadway.

And you aren't the only one around here that's dealt with bulls, pissed or otherwise. From the ranch to the kill floor, I've dealt with them too. The idiot deputies that pumped rounds into the bull's body with their .40s were in over their heads.

 

[johnny bob]

I guess maybe you should read the newspaper accounts of what happened CR.

The deputies tried using their handguns on the bull IIRC, and then shot the rancher who was preparing to use his .223 on the bull, as the bull laid in the roadway.

And you aren't the only one around here that's dealt with bulls, pissed or otherwise. From the ranch to the kill floor, I've dealt with them too. The idiot deputies that pumped rounds into the bull's body with their .40s were in over their heads.

Uhhh post #105 said the deputies used their side arms and their .223 and it sounded like a war. It said Jack was prepared to use his .204. Was there a later newspaper account?

 

[CoastRange57]

I guess maybe you should read the newspaper accounts of what happened CR.

The deputies tried using their handguns on the bull IIRC, and then shot the rancher who was preparing to use his .223 on the bull, as the bull laid in the roadway.

And you aren't the only one around here that's dealt with bulls, pissed or otherwise. From the ranch to the kill floor, I've dealt with them too. The idiot deputies that pumped rounds into the bull's body with their .40s were in over their heads.

I am not a big fan of MSM, and newspapers today are seldom a good first hand account, and even if second hand it gets butchered every time. Multiple witness's generally give you multiple accounts of what happened.

Just the situations you put forth contain some differing information that makes it hard to actually understand what happen, as is often the case with news reporting. As for the deputies using their .40's, sometime you have to run what you brung, and if that is the first thing I have to reach for in that situation then that is what it is going to be. Since they are not in the habit of carrying that drop them in their tracks 300 Win Mag, or the 12 gauge with 00 in it, that you would like in that situation, you again use what you have available.

 

[mjbskwim]

Again,the situation was the dispatcher called the rancher to help and put the bull down. The cops had to have know he would have a gun at some point. They let him walk up to the bull with the rifle,let him aim and then they decide to grab him?
WTF did they think would happen if they grabbed a guy with his finger on the trigger?
Now the speculation starts .
And as far as putting the bull down,it sounds like the cops didn't know where to shoot it rather than not have an adequate weapon
Which means the sheriff was lying when he said his officers were familiar with working with livestock