TexasCHLforum.com

No charges filed against the deputies involved in this tragic case. Both deputies have left the Adams County SO, but not sure if they were terminated or left voluntarily. I think one did leave on his own. I was shocked to see they shot Mr. Yantis twelve times, apparently with rifles. I haven't found any actual evidence that Mr. Yantis ever fired his rifle other than the deputies said he did so. I would consider that a vital fact to state in any announcement on the decisions whether to prosecute or not. Not hard to check for discharged cartridge in the chamber. The deputies stated they were concerned about Mr. Yantis aiming his rifle (at the injured bull) in a manner that could endanger others, but had no problem discharging theirs at least 12 times and who knows how many more. I will reserve my opinion on the incident, but it will be interesting to see how the civil case is resolved. No video even though both deputies wore body cameras because one camera had a full memory and the other one was never turned on. Maybe departments should administer mandatory reprimands/punishments for SO's that don't check and use their equipment.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/stat ... 73452.html

VMI77 wrote:https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress. ... /#comments

Deputies named in Council rancher’s shooting

From a local:

Btw: The two shooters in Council were “outed” today by the Sheriff. One was fired for brutality in McCall in ’13, out of court settlement. The other has had 6-7 different jobs in various ID LEO places over 15 years – wonder why he couldn’t keep a job??? The Sheriff knew all of the dirt before he hired them. Wonder why he was sweating so profusely!

Some open anti-cop bias here....but also a lot of interesting information and some claims about corruption and nepotism in the county.

http://libertyfight.com/2015/Yantis_dep ... named.html

The information on Brian Wood came out in an article I read about a week and a half ago. I didn't post it because the guy that sued (Tom Whaley) seems to be a flake from what I have found, albeit he (Whaley) did receive a settlement and Woods was gone soon thereafter. I didn't want to have it seen as LEO bashing. What I find interesting is Zollman's purposely keeping the identities under wraps. Even with no colored background on the two deputies it leads to all sorts of speculation as to why he didn't identify them right off the bat; at least to me.

VoiceofReason wrote:

puma guy wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:Come on people. It was on a highway, it was charging first responders “as they worked to get the driver and passenger out of the car”.

The deputies get a little paid vacation then back to work and the owner of the bull got what he deserved.

Just got back to reading this thread. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation in the death of the rancher, I believe that's the most callous, cruel and disrespectful statement I've ever read on this forum. I can only imagine your were being sarcastic.

If the road is open range, the deputies might be in trouble.

Idaho does have "herd" districts where animals are required to be fenced. However, I find no herd districts within Adams county where this incident took place. If so the bull had the right to be on the road way and the rancher had the right to protect his property. The car owner would have been liable for any damage to the bull or his or her vehicle.
If this is true and the deputies are ignorant of the law, they should be charged with second degree murder.

If the accident was in an open range county (not all are, some are "herd districts") and not on a federal highway, then the driver of the car involved will likely be liable for hitting the bull, and the rancher (or his estate) not liable for the accident. I just don't see any implementation of an open range law that will put the deputies in legal jeopardy if they deemed the first responders were in physical jeopardy from the bull and they shot it. The most that would have happened is the county paying a civil payment. As to what happened between the rancher and the deputies, whoever can be shown to have used or threatened to use unlawful deadly force against the other will be the ones having a problem. Should wait for more details, but my money is not on the deputies having a problem with this either.

If this proves to be open range then the public is responsible for avoiding the bull not killing it. Where are the ranchers property rights. Don't like the law? Move or change it.

If that’s “the most callous, cruel and disrespectful statement you’ve ever read on this forum then you didn’t read the statements I emphasized above.

At the time of my comment there was discussion under the headline "Rancher defending his bull, dies in deputy shootout". Comments were being made that sounded like the injured people in the car were being blamed and should be punished, and the rancher was in the right defending his bull with deadly force.

My comment was to remind folks that two or maybe four human lives are worth more than any bull, the deputies will not be punished, and if the rancher threatened the deputies with a gun then he got what he deserved.

In my book comparing your comments to others arguing legal theory doesn't compare to stating with virtually no factual information that a man deserved to die at the hands of two, I assume good men who will merely take a little paid time off and then go about business as usual. I stand by my comments and I believe if you stood in front of the officers and the family of the deceased rancher and made those same comments their reaction would be the same. Maybe it's just me. You made your argument and I made mine so I'll leave it at that.

EDITED for clarification: I was framing my comment based on VoiceofReason's post. Just so it's clear; I am not bashing the deputies. I am sure they are devastated by the turn of events and would never treat the taking of a life flippantly.

VoiceofReason wrote:Come on people. It was on a highway, it was charging first responders “as they worked to get the driver and passenger out of the car”.

The deputies get a little paid vacation then back to work and the owner of the bull got what he deserved.

Just got back to reading this thread. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation in the death of the rancher, I believe that's the most callous, cruel and disrespectful statement I've ever read on this forum. I can only imagine your were being sarcastic.

Idaho is a free range state and though no indication of whether it was in the city limits was mentioned the law is on the side of the owner of the livestock outside city limits. It is illegal inside city limits. (see first link). The next two links deal with at large animals. There are not enough details to make any judgment on this shooting. IMHO In a situation such as this I don't know if the owner would be justified in protecting his bull or not.
https://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Ti ... 5-2112.htm
https://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Ti ... 5-2118.htm
https://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Ti ... 5-2119.htm