Boy killed in hunting accident

[HuntingGuy]

A 14-year-old boy from Buffalo died in a hunting accident in Aitkin County, authorities said Sunday.

Brandon Mitchell Lanie was hunting with a group north of Mille Lacs Lake. It was around sunset Saturday night when he was shot in the head by another hunter, the Sheriff said. He died at the scene.

Sheriff Scott Turner said it's believed Lanie was mistaken for a deer. Officials say Lanie was wearing a blaze orange jacket, blaze orange pants and a camouflage hat.

Sunset in the area on Saturday would have been about 4:39 p.m. with twilight lasting until about 5:12 p.m., according to a U.S. Naval Observatory calculator.

A 45-year-old Maplewood man was arrested at the scene and was being held on suspicion of second-degree manslaughter. He was expected to be arraigned in Aitkin County District Court on Monday.

Brandon's family describes him as kind-hearted, a boy who loved the outdoors. He was a freshman at Buffalo High School.

"He loved to hunt and fish. He could fish all day long. He wanted to hunt whenever he could - before school, after school, weekends," says Brandon's mother Debbie Hulett. "It's been the hardest day of my life. I lost my best friend."

(Copyright 2006 by KARE 11 All Rights Reserved.)

I just don't get it!  This is sick.  How could one possibly mistake this kid for a deer?  Step 2 of hunter's safety:  Identify your target and what is beyond.  I don't agree with walking around the woods where rifles are being shot without an orange cap, but Dear God, Man, what were you thinking?  You weren't.  Comments?

[Siskiyou]

That is a lot of blaze orange.  I can pick my buddy out in heavy cover quickly because of his blaze orange coat.  I pick the coat  up before I see the hat.  I wonder if the drew the shooter's blood to see if alcohol or drugs were involved?

Is blaze orange required in Minnesota?

[HuntingGuy]

Yes, straight from the MN DNR Hunting Regulation book:

"Also, you may not hunt or trap during the open season where deer may be taken by firearms (including special hunts, youth seasons, and muzzleloaders) under applicable laws and ordinances unless the visible portion of your cap and outer clothing above the waist, excluding sleeves and gloves, is blaze orange...  Blaze orange uncludes a camouflage pattern of at least 50 percent blaze orange within each square foot..."

Ok, so now leaves the question:  Was he hunting under the regular rifle season in his area?  If so, he legally should have been wearing a blaze cap if he was hunting.

In any case, that is beside the point.. and I hope that the guy goes to prison for the rest of his life for what he has done.  Siski, I agree - it would be helpful to note whether narcotics or alcohol were involved.

[Siskiyou]

Very interesting.  I have owned a number of blaze orange, camo hats in the past.  From the report one does not known if it was an orange camo hat, a green camo hat or some other pattern.  The assumption being the hat was not a orange camo hat. 

A defense attorney may have a tough time introducing the hat into evidence.  Because the hat may have blood and gore on it.  It would bring the death home to a jury, and the kinds heart will hate his guts.  Attorney's hate bloody items of clothing in evidence.   The attorney will also attack any shocking photo's that maybe introduced in court. 

[HuntingGuy]

True, I didn't think about that - we ASSUME it's not blaze camoflauge.. I guess we may never find out.  I don't understand why the boy would NOT be wearing a blaze hat, and he very well may have been like you mentioned.

I'm interested to see what happens in court, hope the hat thing doesn't come up and somehow twist into a favor for the defendant.

[dukkillr]

I doubt seriously if this case ever goes to trial.  Terrible accident, no excuse for shooting something you haven't identified.  This defendants criminal history and tox screen will have a great deal of influence on what punishment he receives.

[oso45-70]

This is the one thing that makes my blood boil, What  terrible waste, inexcusable action by the shooter. As said earlier we are taught to identify our target before we let fly with a shot

[Cookiemann]

One thing that has barely been touched on, here in this discussion.  What were the light conditions when he was shot??  I hunted south of St.Paul this past weekend.  Yes, in the Metro Zone.  The sun is setting in the SW this time of year.  There were open fields and woods in my area and in the woods you could not see well enough to be shooting ANYTHING at 5:00pm.  Aitkin is at least 3 hrs. further north.  What the heck was this guy doing even firing his gun AFTER DARK!!!  Yes, he need to be prosecuted.  Just my 2 cents.

Just for the record, there are lots of folks out there in the woods without proper Blaze clothing on during deer season.  THE NEXT TIME I see someone without the proper clothing on,  I will remind them of this very preventable waste of a human life.

[Zachary]

From a legal perspective (as an attorney myself), the first thing that strikes me is that the boy was wearing a lot of blaze orange. The man is said to be 45 years old.  As such, unless he has glaucoma, cataracts, or any other similar eye disease or problem, he should have seen the boy if it there was a sufficient amount of light.  However, I can tell you that I have hunted hogs at night, under cloudy skies, so it was VERY dark.  I have a very good scope - a Nikon pre-Monarch, which has about 88% light transmission.  On one such hog hunt, I deer came in front of me - about 25 to 40 yards away.  While I could not see the deer in my scope all THAT well, I could definately see blaze orange.

Here is another observation: There is one other important fact that has not been discussed or disclosed - what was the distance between the shooter and the boy?  And was the shooter using a scope or open sights?  As mentioned earlier, I could see the deer in night about 25 to 40 yards away with a good scope.  However, I could NOT see the deer with my naked eye.  Also, if the deer would be further away, I probably would have had less of a chance to see the deer as well as I could at a closer range.

Still, there is no excuse here.  A shooter MUST be careful and KNOW what he is shooting at.  On the other hand, maybe the man shot by accident?  We would like to assume not, but there is a chance that this happened.  Remember, we do not know ALL the facts.

The bottom line is that, in my legal opinion, there is probably less than a 50/50 chance that there will be a criminal case against the shooter.  However, in a civil case for wrongful death, there is a better than 50/50 chance that there will be a civil case and that the plaintiffs would probably prevail.

Zachary

[HuntingGuy]

Update:
Per the 10:00 Channel 5 News, the shooter shot the boy in the head two times and was charged today with second degree manslaughter.

-----

Two times, they say.  I'm speechless and confused.   

[Zachary]

Two times in the head?  Once can be viewed as an accident, but TWICE?  Somethings going on here.

Zachary

[bearfat]

if alcohol or drugs were involved?

Siskiyou had it pegged from the beginning.

All I can say is hit the juice and you cook your goose.

Zachary you would probably like me as a jurist in the shooters defense.

I didn't comment right away because I was waiting for more info and to be honest I just don't have a clear cut opinion anymore regarding how people can be so stupid and make mistakes. I was a mailman for 10 years and though it would seem simple enough to place the right mail in the right mailbox everyday I averaged one misdelivery a week.

And now I work for the railroad and you would think it is simple to run a train down the right track but I work with guys some having over 30 years experience that end up on the ground because they "thought" the switch was lined right for them but it wasn't and they ran through it from the reverse side which causes the wheels to go on the ground.

I have been shot at in the field. I could hear both bullets (.22 caliber rimfire) hitting the leaves in the trees above my head. I was standing on a ridge line and a group of hunters shot up at me thinking I was...? I stepped back out of their view and headed to my vehicle a mile away. I never hunted the area again. I saw the group earlier come into the area driving their car on a road I would not have tackled with a four wheel drive truck, and gun barrels were sticking out of every window. They were of a certain ethnic group common to southeast asia.

It has tainted my experience with them. They scare me.

But so do deer hunting camps with lots of drinking going on at night. I have run into "whiskey breath" hunters right in my cabin yard and tried to direct them away from my buddies only to have them head right to the area I asked them to skirt away from because someone was sitting in a stand 400 yards away.

Thirty years ago I was in a weekend squirrel hunting contest. The losing group had to buy a keg of beer. We were down considerably by 20 squirrels. The pressure was on. I saw a squirrel bouncing along the ground 100 yards away and pulled up the loaded .22 rimfire (safety on) and peered through the 4x scope. Something looked strange about the squirrel. I watched in horror as it turned into the top of my buddies brown head. He was in a ravine walking in the bottom of it and all I could see was the top of his head as he walked.

My 1st year of deer hunting in 1979 I was pumped. I was walking along the Saint Croix River close to some of the apple orchards over there. I had a 20 gauge with iron sights. I had two big old deer wander in from the top of the hill at first light about 100 yards away. As I waited and looked for antlers, to my surprise they turned into two big old Saint Bernard dogs. I was shocked. I was so convinced they had been deer.

Well I don't know where I'm really heading with all this I just got up from working nights and am trying to have my two cups of coffee and wake up...

[Siskiyou]

Maplewood man charged in boy's hunting death   Page 1 of 2
IStarTribune.com MINNEAPOLIS - ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA!
Last update: November 22, 2006 -11:25 AM
Maplewood man charged in boy's hunting death
The 45-year-old defendant said he mistook the brown hair of the 14-year-old victim for the back of a deer.
Jim Adams, Star Tribune
After spending all of Saturday morning deer hunting with his 14-year-old son, Troy Lanie told the boy he'd go fishing or duck hunting with him that afternoon near their new Aitkin County cabin.
But Brandon Lanie wanted to do more deer hunting and left with a neighbor and friends. His father told the group that he'd have pot roast ready when they got back.
Brandon didn't return, and his father went looking for him, said Nicole Lanie, his stepmother. At their hunting area, Troy Lanie found Aitkin County deputies who told him that Brandon had been shot in the head by their cabin neighbor just north of Lake Mille Lacs.
The neighbor, Steven J. Ferguson, was charged Tuesday with second-degree felony manslaughter in Aitkin County District Court.
The charging papers said Ferguson, 45, of Maplewood, called police about 5 p.m. Saturday after discovering that he had shot Brandon after mistaking him for a deer. Ferguson said he fired twice after hearing leaves crunch and seeing something brown move through the thickets some distance from his tree stand. He said Brandon had brown hair that looked like a deer's back.
In court Tuesday, prosecutor Lisa R. Rakotz said Ferguson admitted to police that he had been drinking alcohol Saturday, which was confirmed by a witness. She said that Ferguson has had several drunken-driving convictions - state records show about five since 1993 - and that his driver's license was conditional upon not drinking.
Judge John Leitner also ordered Ferguson not to contact Brandon's family and not to drink alcohol, hunt, possess guns or leave Minnesota.
Ferguson's attorney, Ryan Garry, said after the hearing that Ferguson, who posted bail, sent his "deepest regards and sympathy to the family" of the victim. "It was a horrific, tragic accident," Garry said.
Troy Lanie of Buffalo taught his son safe hunting skills and is still too distraught to talk about Brandon, Nicole Lanie said. She said Brandon was "an awesome kid" who loved hunting, fishing, his family, and their dogs and cat.
He earned good grades as a ninth-grader at Buffalo High School, where he
http://www.startribune.com/467/v-print/story/826821 .html   11 /22/2006

Another story link   http://www.aitkinage.com/main.asp?SectionID=3&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=24158

You can follow the link for the rest of the story

HuntingGuy and Zachary thanks, these storys make thinking people think.  I sure feel the charging is on the lightside.  I need to research the law in your State. 

[Siskiyou]

I now know why this section was charged.  Subsection (2) spells out the law.  In some states this would be charged as second degree murder.

609.205, Minnesota Statutes 2006
Copyright © 2006 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of
manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten
years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and
consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently
believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or
device; or
(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have
vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run
uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or
endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal
liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.
History: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.205; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11; 1985 c 294 s 6; 1986 c 444;
1989 c 290 art 6 s 5; 1995 c 244 s 14

[HuntingGuy]

In court Tuesday, prosecutor Lisa R. Rakotz said Ferguson admitted to police that he had been drinking alcohol Saturday, which was confirmed by a witness. She said that Ferguson has had several drunken-driving convictions - state records show about five since 1993

*Sigh*.  I had a suspicion this would be the case.  Thanks for posting the statutes, Siskiyou - I looked for it earlier but couldn't find it.

I really hope this incident serves as an awakening for many people who shrug off the 'blaze orange cap' law in our state.  As a matter of fact, I had a customer come in tonight and purchase blaze bibs, jacket, hat, and gloves.  I said - "Getting ready to go hunting?", his reply was "No, actually.  I've already got my deer in the freezer.  But after the story of the boy who was shot, I decided I needed to invest in some good blaze orange.  For many years I've always worn a blaze orange vest and camo hat, but this is a wake up call."

I truly hope that this unfortunate incident will save the possiblity of this happening again in the future.  We just can't take safety for granted.  Be alert, be safe, and be orange.

[Siskiyou]

Have you heard an update on this case, it has been awhile?