The main reason I don't believe there is any reason for this thread is that it is NOT about Mark Morse, the story is really about Rainey and we really should be careful to not confuse the two. Plus, the title of the thread is as sensational as any found in the grocery store tabloids.
It seems the actions we find most objectionable -- the cutting off the head and leaving the carcass; the dressing of the legs to get a better photo -- were done by Rainey. Morse hunted out of season, he hunted without a license, he fraudulently attributed a kill to another's license. So far as we know, he did not waste any meat. The ranch where the carcasses were found was owned by both Morse and Rainey, so Morse may truly have been innocent of those vile actions.
What I can't understand is why Mark Morse's fines are potentially higher than Rainey's. I get the feeling the whole story isn't out yet. But I want the story on Morse, not Rainey.
__________________
Army/embassy brat - traveled too much to mention
Moved here from SF Bay Area (East Bay)
"There are only two ways to live your life: One is as though nothing is a miracle; the other is as though everything is a miracle." Albert Einstein
|