Outrage throughout the internet and within Indiana communities have followed news that an Indiana police officer and his nurse wife have been charged with the crime of illegal possession of a deer. The crime is a Class C Misdemeanor within the state of Indiana, subjecting the couple to up to sixty days in jail and a five hundred dollar fine.
The public anger has been generated by facts that have come out within the case indicating that the couple’s actions were those of compassion in rescuing a young deer they were nursing back to health. As the criminal statutue is one intended to uphold the humane treatment of animals, questions posed on a statewide scale have been directed at the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) and why their limited taxpayer resources have been used to further criminal prosecution in this matter.
The couple is comprised of a Connersville Police Officer and a Nurse who relate that their actions were motivated by a desire to save a deer that had turned up on their seventeen acre farm. The couple states that the deer was afflicted with maggot infected puncture wounds ravaging its body; to turn the deer away and do nothing was against all of their moral beliefs even if returning the deer back to the wild is what the statute apparently orders Hoosiers to do.
Despite a law enforcement background the couple asserts that they had no idea that Indiana law required them to return the injured deer back into the wild. However, had they known of such a law it would not have altered their conduct as returning the deer in the manner Indiana law suggests would have amounted to a “death sentence” to the injured deer.
As it stands now, the couple has stated that despite a legal expense that will exceed the potential fine, they are determined to fight the criminal charges out of principal.
From the perspective of an Indiana criminal defense attorney, it is refreshing to learn of an engaged public willing to assert itself into the arbitrary and illogicial decision making process of public officials. These arbitrary decisions are no surprise to most defense attorneys who practice criminal law on a statewide basis.
The enforcement of laws are only as credible as the individuals empowered to make such decisions on behalf of society. While there are many conscientious prosecutors offices, there are inevitably others that fall short of their civic obligations to restrain their enforcement power where facts of a specific case warrant.
Unfortunately, it often takes sensationalized fact patterns wholly devoid of logic or reason to once again alert the public as to the absolute need to be vigilant to the arbitrary actions of law enforcement; actions that have the capacity to inflict great cost not only to individuals but to the general principals and belief systems held by a compassionate society.
“Just following the law,” is simply not an acceptable position to advance in favor of prosecuting all criminal allegations. It is incumbant upon state prosecutors to fully investigate the validity of criminal charges and use discretion before putting into action the state power of government on behalf of principals we as a society value fighting for and preserving.
While it is the Indiana Department of Natural Resources who have thus far born the brunt of criticism for the prosecution, I would suggest that this anger at the IDNR, though justified, is somewhat misplaced.
It is the attorneys within the Fayette County Prosecutor’s Office responsible for the investigation and filing of criminal cases who deserve scrutiny. While IDNR officials arguably should not have even taken the time to compile a report to submit to prosecutors, it is the prosecutors who filed the case who should bear the blame if the facts prove not to conflict with the couple’s assertions.
Already the latest news suggests that the IDNR in the wake of mounting public criticism has now publicly advocated for prosecutors to dismiss the criminal charges in the case.
What such haphazard action suggests is the reality that in truth, an insufficient investigation took place in the matter such that the validity of charges in this case were likely never fully investigated.
How many other such criminal cases are filed each year within prosecutor’s offices nationwide for whom the term discretion is secondary to the assertion of misdirected power and authority for its own sake?
Only when full and complete criminal investigations are commenced can prosecutorial discretion be properly implemented. In so doing, embarrassing episodes like this one can be contained and properly disposed of before reaching a criminal courtroom.
With IDNR’s public backtracking on the issue of prosecution, the ball has been placed squarely within the hands of prosecutors. Already the game of face saving has begun as the Decataur County Prosecutor has now been assigned responsibility for the continued prosecution. This action of prosecutorial re assignment has been conveniently taken due to the alleged contact between the police officer/Defendant in question and the Fayette County Prosecutor in the man’s role as a Connersville Police Officer.
Reading the tea leaves it should only be a matter of days before the Decataur County prosecutor takes action to dismiss all charges in the case; criminal charges that should never have been brought in the first place.