Attorney Consultation Face-to-Face
At 5pm on April 23rd, I had a face-to-face attorney consultation which Gibbs attended. In the consultation, both Gibbs and I provided our series of events and asked questions. I provided the attorney with images and videos.The attorney was confident no violation occurred. The evidence supported the walleye was hooked in the mouth and because Game and Fish opened the investigation, they would have to provide "direct evidence" proving the walleye was foul-hooked beyond reasonable doubt at the time it was caught or prior to that.
What direct evidence did Game and Fish provide that would prove beyond reasonable doubt my walleye was foul-hooked at the time it was caught and netted?
I still had questions about the investigation and requested the attorney contact Game and Fish to ask what specifically was being investigated. The attorney agreed that would be the next logical step. He stated he would contact Game and Fish in the morning and get back to me.
Keeping a foul-hooked fish in North Dakota is a criminal violation. Because of this, the attorney strongly advised both Gibbs and me not to provide any more statements to Game and Fish. Gibbs said he felt fearful of losing his job if he did not provide a statement because Game and Fish contacted his place of employment and spoke with his supervisor already. The attorney replied to Gibbs that he did not have to provide a statement because no laws were broken, and it would be against his rights as an individual to provide a statement especially since the investigator stated Gibbs could be charged with a crime.
The evidence, and now the attorney's opinion, supported my walleye was hooked legally.
Changes
It was my choice to hire an attorney however, I would not have done so if the regulation was a noncriminal offense. I could have dealt with a fine if it would have been proven my walleye was foul-hooked, but I could have lost my job and future employment opportunities if I received criminal charges.
And because the current regulation is a criminal offense, my attorney advised me not to provide any more statements or information to Game and Fish. Again, I understand it was my choice not to cooperate at this point, but it all comes down to the criminal charges. Someone should not have to be fearful of losing their job for providing information to an investigator when all they did was catch and keep a fish they believe was legally caught.
Because of the potential criminal penalties and the fact that the investigator stated a "violation" occurred, I had to do what I felt was in my best interests.
#northdakotaslargestwalleye #volkswalleye #justiceforthelargestwalleye
Comments
Post a Comment