[The Shadow]

This answers how the case was made.
Or did the author just make it up?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/....column?page=1

[redwitch]

midge already put a link to the WHOLE article, not just sections. Plus, parts of this article are grossly inaccurate (it was 4 years of investigation, not 18 months, for a start). Morse's political ties and donations in Florida are totally irrelevant.

Look, most of us agree what was done was heinous and, if found guilty, Morse, Rainey, et al. deserve whatever punishment they get (plus some). So, your point is?

[The Shadow]

Originally Posted by redwitch

midge already put a link to the WHOLE article, not just sections. Plus, parts of this article are grossly inaccurate (it was 4 years of investigation, not 18 months, for a start). Morse's political ties and donations in Florida are totally irrelevant.

Look, most of us agree what was done was heinous and, if found guilty, Morse, Rainey, et al. deserve whatever punishment they get (plus some). So, your point is?

It must be my accent, my one and only point was made in my one and only line I wrote.

This answers how the case was make.

I found it interesting.

I think the law breaking was over 4 years the investigation was 18 months. Does that sound right?

[redwitch]

According to Montana papers, the investigation began 4 years ago; an officer went undercover about 2 years ago. So, no, the article is wrong (no big surprise -- it is a Ritchie piece and integrity and honesty is not her forte). My point was this article was already posted, so why the new post on it? This article doesn't even come close to explaining how the investigation was done. There's no mention that the officer also was guilty of hunting out of season with the Morse/Rainey group. There's no explanation as to why it took so long to bring charges. There is a tremendous amount of "he said" and a lot of emphasis on the Morses' political viewpoints. It is a typical smear of the Morse family, nothing more. Copying just part of it is like copying a cake recipe but forgetting to mention the amount needed of each ingredient and then adding garlic because YOU like garlic.

And do remember I am not a Morse fan. I admire TV and their ability to have it built, including the business acumen required to accomplish this thing of wonder. I do not admire how they run the day-to-day operations and their need to have a finger in every pie in TV. I flat out resent their unwillingness to let other viewpoints into TV -- if it ain't Republican, it has to be behind closed doors and told about after the fact; if it's Republican, it's the Town Squares and non-stop stories in the Sun.

But this smearing of Mark Morse (and trying to taint all of the Morses with these charges -- does anyone even know if Gary Morse hunts?), is getting tiresome. Let's wait until more FACTS (not smears nor praises) are truly known and I'd be seriously hesitant in using the Sentinel as any basis of fact for any Morse/TV issue.

Well said Redwitch

[BobKat1]

I think this whole topic needs a few more new threads (as if 4 or 5 aren't enough) - To reach the same conclusion. There won't be any agreement on it.

[Bogie Shooter]

And the new threads should have very clever titles to be sure to capture ones need to look and see.

[Ajack]

This time I actually agree with redwitch. I think shadow has a vendetta.

[The Shadow]

Originally Posted by redwitch

According to Montana papers, the investigation began 4 years ago; an officer went undercover about 2 years ago. So, no, the article is wrong (no big surprise -- it is a Ritchie piece and integrity and honesty is not her forte). My point was this article was already posted, so why the new post on it? I knew that how? This article doesn't even come close to explaining how the investigation was done. There's no mention that the officer also was guilty of hunting out of season with the Morse/Rainey group. There's no explanation as to why it took so long to bring charges. There is a tremendous amount of "he said" and a lot of emphasis on the Morses' political viewpoints. It is a typical smear of the Morse family, nothing more. Copying just part of it is like copying a cake recipe but forgetting to mention the amount needed of each ingredient and then adding garlic because YOU like garlic.

And do remember I am not a Morse fan. I admire TV and their ability to have it built, including the business acumen required to accomplish this thing of wonder. I do not admire how they run the day-to-day operations and their need to have a finger in every pie in TV. I flat out resent their unwillingness to let other viewpoints into TV -- if it ain't Republican, it has to be behind closed doors and told about after the fact; if it's Republican, it's the Town Squares and non-stop stories in the Sun.

But this smearing of Mark Morse (and trying to taint all of the Morses with these charges -- does anyone even know if Gary Morse hunts?), is getting tiresome. Let's wait until more FACTS (not smears nor praises) are truly known and I'd be seriously hesitant in using the Sentinel as any basis of fact for any Morse/TV issue.

When airplanes went into the twin towers which news paper did you believe? Don’t forget no trial has taken place. Who was really responsible?

[The Shadow]

Ignore the content attack the messenger.

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by The Shadow

Ignore the content attack the messenger.

[Uptown Girl]

Or, we could ignore the messenger.....

[Ajack]

Originally Posted by Uptown Girl

Or, we could ignore the messenger.....

[Taj44]

Sorry Ajack, but ignorning the messenger won't make the Morse's troubles go away. I think people are missing the point - this is not about The Villages, its about the Morse's criminal activites and really about the people of Montana. Number one, if a guy can cut corners on getting something as simple as a hunting license, where else has he cut corners?

Number two, the people of Montana have spoken - these were their actual comments:

This man's company is as shady as they come. Anything less than 500 million dollars is a simple slap on the wrist for this man...Its nice to see them do something about poachers...the wildlife of montana belong to the people of montana, not non-resident hunters;...

These people should lose their property and be givin to the people of Montana. These kind of crimes make me sick....... hope those people see their day in court and pay for stealing from the tax payers in Montana...This is a demonstration of the wealthy who believe they are above the law...

...I do not have any problem with people who poach wildgame if they need the meat to feed thier family. In this economy with so many people out of work Montanans should be able to kill a deer to feed their family. But kill a doe and leave the bucks and bulls alone. Shooting animals just for thier horns is b.s.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by The Shadow

It must be my accent, my one and only point was made in my one and only line I wrote.
This answers how the case was make.

I found it interesting.

I think the law breaking was over 4 years the investigation was 18 months. Does that sound right?

Shadow, thanks for posting the link to the Sentinel article. The matter is of interest to Villagers. However, for some reason, the Daily Sun has buried the story.