jci63

Citizen loses much defending himself against MDNR misconduct!

The writing is by John Ingersoll, and the facts of the case are documented by him.

"I would like to share my experience about my unusual harvest and the problems that incurred. I would like to start with educating others on the legal and genetic definition of albino deer, white deer and piebald deer."


"If by some chance, someone reads this and can help resolve these issues or maybe you yourself have experienced a horrific experience by the MDNR e-mail John at [email protected]

___________________________*********______________ __

Does the DNR Condone misconduct by Officers?
I have been a hunter for over 25 years, but never in my years of hunting, have I ever experienced such an unusual sight as the one I did in Emmet County on December 19, 2004.

It was an 8 point, 98 % white whitetailed deer! Now before we get off track, this deer was a legal piebald deer. It was partially white and did not have pink eyes like an albino deer would exhibit.



I would like to share my experience about my unusual harvest and the problems that incurred. I would like to start with educating others on the legal and genetic definition of albino deer, white deer and piebald deer.

The Wildlife Conservation Act Order states - 3.100(2) It shall unlawful for a person to take or possess, at anytime, an albino deer, being a deer with all white or colorless hair, or a deer with a coat of all white hair similar to an albino deer. Piebald, or partially white deer, may be taken under the provisions of this order.

Legal Description

• Albino – a deer with all white or colorless hair (pink eyes)

• White – a deer with all white or colorless hair similar to an albino deer. (brown eyes)

• Piebald – a partially white deer (brown eyes)
Genetic Description

• Albino
“True albinism is due to lack of pigment. A true albino deer will have all white hair, grayish hooves and pink eyes. The eyes appear to be pink because, in the absence of pigment, the blood can be seen coursing through the blood vessels.” (The deer of North America by Leonard Rue 3, pg 182)

• White
“The Seneca Army Depot in New York State has an entire herd of white deer. Although their coats are white, their eyes are brown and not pink, as in true albinism.” (The deer of North America by Leonard Rue 3, pg 182,183)

• Piebald
“Partially white, or piebald, deer are the color mutation hunters are most likely to see, being far more common than melanistic, albino or all white deer. Piebalds tend to be highly variable in color patterns, ranging from a few white spots to mostly white with a trace of brown. In albinos, none of the cells can produce melanin. In piebald’s, at least some cell can produce pigment. This causes a spotting of coat colors, with some area appearing normal and others white.” (John Ozoga’s Whitetail Intrigue, Scientific Insights for White-tailed deer hunters, pg 142,143)

Below is a time table of events regarding the unlawful action of three MDNR officers (“Lieutenant”, “Sergeant” and “CO”).

12-19-04 John Ingersoll harvested an 8 point piebald deer.

12-21-04 John Ingersoll voluntarily took the piebald deer to the MDNR Field Office in Indian River.
• Confirmed piebald deer by 3 DNR biologists




1-06-05 MDNR confiscated sections of deer hide for testing




http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=la58a7e480a5bd90c74929fvs9.jpg



• MDNR had no warrant


• MDNR damaged hide due to seizure


1-12-05 MDNR aged the piebald deer
• The deer was aged at the Rose Lake Lab as a 2.5 year old male.

1-20-05 MDNR testing results Necropsy Record (see below)

• The deer’s eyes were pigmented – which by definition eliminates this as being an albino deer.



2-19-05 MDNR testing results Toxicology Report (see below)
• And hair tested negative for petroleum hydrocarbons. We did not find any manmade chemicals on the skin.


7-11-06 DNR “Lieutenant” Deposition
• Testified under oath that the deer Ingersoll shot was an albino


• “Lieutenant” under oath refused to answer questions and was uncooperative


8-22-06 DNR “Sergeant” Deposition
• Testified under oath the deer Ingersoll shot was an albino
• Testified under oath that an albino deer is legal to kill under certain circumstances


• Testified under oath that John Ingersoll’s case was reviewed by the Cheboygan County Prosecutor for possible prosecution.


12-01-06 Civil Lawsuit filed by Ingersoll in Cheboygan County was dismissed

• Dismissed due to the false testimony of “Lieutenant” and “Sergeant”

Now that we have a time line of events, let’s talk about some document facts. How MDNR officers violated my Constitutional Rights, perjured themselves and obstructed justice….
__________________________*******_________________ __________
Constitutional Rights

I feel my Constitutional rights were violated by the MDNR due to the fact that they had no warrant to confiscate and destroy my property.

MDNR position
Their response to this allegation was MDNR has the authority to do routine inspections at any taxidermist.

My Position
Although it is correct that the DNR regulates the Taxidermist businesses and is able to inspect said Taxidermist specimens at any time. The law does not provide an avenue to confiscate ones property without a warrant. Which the DNR did not have! It is also a severe problem that the deer was thawed out and refrozen, causing damage to the hide that was non-repairable. This term is called slippage and is defined as hair falling out of the hide.

1. Taxidermist – Records and Inspection Law – 3. A person issued a taxidermy permit shall keep a copy of the identification tag (PR9418) for each specimen disposed of for one year after disposal of any specimen. This record and all specimens in possession of the taxidermist shall be available for inspection at any reasonable time of day by the Director, the Director’s designee or any conservation officer.
It has also been stated in a deposition that “Sergeant” told the taxidermist to destroy my documentation. Even though the law states above that he must obtain his records for one year.

MDNR Officers perjured themselves

MDNR position
“Lieutenant” testified under oath that the deer had pink eyes and was an albino deer and my case was reviewed by the Cheboygan County Prosecutor for possible prosecution.

My position
The DNR Incident Report concluded the deer was a piebald deer. Examined hands-on by two biologists and verified by a biologist at the Gaylord Operations Office.

The MDNR Necropsy Record clearly stated “The deer’s eyes were pigmented- which by definition eliminates this as being an albino deer.”

“Sergeant” testified that the deer had brown eyes.


Pictures of the deer’s eye color were taken and filed at the MDNR showing the deer’s eye color as brown.


The Cheboygan County Prosecutor Office has no record of any case being reviewed by their office regarding this piebald deer.

Through a Freedom of Information request, I received the daily activity reports of both “Sergeant” and “CO”, none of these officers were even at the Cheboygan County Building in the time frame of the investigation.
MDNR position

“Sergeant” testified under oath that the deer was an albino deer and my case was reviewed by the Cheboygan County Prosecutor for possible prosecution. Also testifying that it is legal to kill an albino deer under certain circumstances.

My position
The DNR Incident Report concluded the deer was a piebald deer. Examined hands on by two biologists and verified by a biologist at the Gaylord Operations Office.

The MDNR Necropsy Record clearly stated “The deer’s eyes were pigmented- which by definition eliminates this as being an albino deer.”

The Cheboygan County Prosecutor Office has no record of any case being reviewed by their office regarding this piebald deer.

Through a Freedom of Information request, I received the daily activity reports of both “Sergeant” and “CO”, none of these officers were even at the Cheboygan County Building in the time frame of the investigation.

The MDNR Wildlife Conservation Act Order clearly states “It is unlawful for a person to take or possess, at anytime, an albino deer.”

MDNR Officers Obstructed Justice

Due to the direct false testimony of these DNR Officers a Civil Lawsuit filed by myself in Cheboygan County was dismissed on 12-01-06. Honorable Judge Scott. L. Pavlich in the Cheboygan County Court based his ruling on the testimony of these DNR Officers.

This action has caused me and my family severe hardship! Due to the actions of some corrupt officers I have lost my business, spent thousands of dollars in expenses, maxed out all our credit, sold everything of value including my deer rifle and many, many sleepless nights.

I have gone though the proper channels, I have tried to resolve all the items listed above to no prevail….

Attempted Resolution of Issues

8-23-07 - Contacted the Officers directly

8-23-07 - Contacted the Officers Supervisors – Chief Alan Marble / Captain Kurt Bacon

8-23-07 Received meeting request form - Attorney Generals Office / Denise

8-23-07 Talked with Barbara Schmidt –Attorney Generals Office

8-28-07 Sent Retraction Letters to the Officers certified mail

8-31-07 Received call from - Attorney Generals Office / Barbara Schmidt

9-18-07 Contacted the Attorney Generals Office / Barbara Schmidt

9-20-07 Contacted my State Representative Gary McDowell Office / Dan

10-16-07 Met with Acting Chief of Law Enforcement / Rodney Stokes

2-5-08 Mailed meeting request to DNR Director Rebecca Humphries Office / certified mail

2-5-08 mailed meeting request to Attorney General Office / certified mail

2-20-08 Contacted my State Representative Gary McDowell / Jennifer

2-21-08 Contacted the U.S. Attorney’s Office

2-22-08 Contact Governor Granholm’s Office

2-28-08 Contacted the U.S. Attorneys Office

2-28-08 Received Correspondence from Governor Granholm’s Office

2-28-08 Contacted DNR Director Rebecca Humphries Office

2-28-08 Contacted NRC Board member/ J.R. Richardson

2-29-08 Contacted my State Representative Gary
McDowell / Dan

2-29-08 Contacted by DNR Director Rebecca Humphries Office / Mary Dunstan

3-06-08 spoke at NRC meeting in Lansing

Does the MDNR Condone misconduct by its Officers sworn to uphold the law? How does an average citizen settle questionable unlawful actions by an officer sworn to uphold the law. Well, at this time, I am sad to report, I do not have an answer yet!

If the tables were turned and any citizen was accused of half the stuff these officers have been accused of, immediate attention would be given. A private citizen should not have to obtain an attorney and file a lawsuit to have their basic rights exercised.

If by some chance, someone reads this and can help resolve these issues or maybe you yourself have experienced a horrific experience by the MDNR e-mail John at [email protected]

www.savemymichigan.com.
**********
Our Local Newspaper, The Petoskey News.com
"Some readers will recall the controversy over another white buck that was shot in the area a few years ago. The great debate was over whether or not the deer was a rare and protected albino or a not-so-rare and not protected piebald."

www.petoskeynews.com/articles/2007/12/16/outdoor/outdoors98.txt

This is why I continue to fight. In our small community 3 years later, it is still unclear if I am a criminal, by shooting a rare and protected albino deer. I am a husband and father along with an avid sportsman. I will continue to fight until my name and reputation are cleared.
**********
What type of person is John Ingersoll? Here's just a little peak. www.michiganyouthhuntprogram.com , please read all 5 sections, Home Page, Program Info, How to enter, 2008 Hunts & Sponsors and Archives.

As a sportsman I believe we have responsibility to pass on our hunting heritage to the next generation. We need to teach them by example how to keep our sport alive by being a good sportsman or sportswoman.

Where are my legislators, fellow sportsmen, Hunting & Fishing Organizations in the heat of this battle? Please find someway to help resolve this issue! You could be next..............
**********

HOW DID THE ALBINO LAW GET PASSED?
"It has been illegal since 1990 to kill an all-white or albino deer in Michigan, but there is no biological reason not to shoot one. The state Natural Resources Commission imposed the ban at the behest of the late Joe Mack, a powerful legislator from the Upper Peninsula. Mack asked for the no-shooting rule to placate a constituent, who was upset because someone killed a white deer he had been feeding. Mack’s district included Marquette County, where a number of semi-tame piebald, albino and white deer live in Presque Isle Park. - J.I."

Letter from MDNR Director
REBECCA A. HUMPHRIES
March 13, 2008

Mr. John Ingersoll
7170 Tuscarora Circle
Indian River, Michigan 49749

Dear Mr. Ingersoll:

This letter will respond to the documents received by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) on February 6, 2008. On February 28, the Governor's office forwarded your e-mail to me and asked that I respond to it on behalf of the Governor.

In both the e-mail and from the documents you have provided, I have determined that you contend the following three things: 1) your Constitutional rights were violated, 2) that DNR Law Enforcement personnel intentionally and willfully provided misleading and false testimony resulting in the dismissal of your civil action, and 3) that the DNR's role in these events damaged your reputation.

Let me establish at the beginning, that I have undertaken this review with no prejudice as to the outcome and with an open mind in an effort to provide you with a fair opinion and response to the issues you have presented.

Violation of Constitutional Rights
In your e-mail to Governor Granholm, you allege that your Constitutional rights have been violated by the DNR. In reviewing the documents pertaining to the collection of the hair and hide sample, I assume you believe that those materials were collected illegally as a violation of the 4th Amendment.

Q: "Well, don't you think that that's a 4th amendment search and seizure violation, without a warrant?"
Acting Law Enforcement Chief, Rodney Stokes, addresses this question in his December 13, 2007 e-mail, to which I refer in part:

"It was “Sgt” decision to obtain a small hide sample from the taxidermist shop. Since it was at a location where no expectation of privacy was expected or requested, and it was a business that is regulated under DNR laws where we do routine inspections, the DNR did not believe a search warrant was necessary."

While I do not personally have a working knowledge of the various investigative protocols in this case, the actions taken by these officers do not seem unreasonable. The collection of the hide and hair samples proved to be instrumental in determining that the deer you harvested had naturally occurring brown spots. This was critical in concluding that this deer could legally be harvested.
I must disagree that these actions were inappropriate, considering how they supported your assertion that this was a legal deer.

Obstruction of Justice and intentionally providing False Testimony

In the written documents you provided, and in addition to your testimony at the March 6, 2008
Natural Resources Commission meeting, you accuse two current and one former Law Enforcement officers of obstruction of justice and perjury.

Based upon the very serious nature of these allegations, I paid particular attention to the testimony given by the officers in question. From the materials provided, which did not include the full text of each deposition, I do not agree that these officers intentionally provided false testimony. My review of their testimony simply did not reveal this intentional and coordinated effort to mislead.
However, if you believe that these accusations can be proven, I would recommend that you notify local law enforcement or your county prosecutor's office. These officers should have an opportunity to formally respond to these allegations.

Restoration of Your Reputation
Our officers investigated the question of whether or not your deer was a legally killed deer or an illegally killed deer. That investigation determined that it was a legally killed deer. You were not criminally charged, and you were not issued a citation. The fact that you were not charged or ticketed should serve as evidence enough that you legally killed that deer.

As a matter of course, the Department does not publish otherwise legal behavior in the newspaper. It is the duty of these officers to investigate complaints, which in this case they did, and based upon that investigation no further inquiries into the matter were made. Again, you were not charged with a crime, nor were you issued a ticket.

If others, as a result of a media report, believed otherwise, that is unfortunate. If you feel that you have been or are unfairly portrayed in the media, perhaps writing a letter to the editor clarifying that you were never charged nor ticketed would help put the matter to rest. As I indicated in the previous paragraph, the fact that you were never charged with a crime or issued a citation is testimony enough to the fact that the DNR believes this was a legally killed deer.

Conclusion
Your situation has helped reveal to the Department that the rules and regulations relating to albino deer need to be changed. Over 20 years ago, the protections for albino deer were written in statute. As the environmental and natural resources laws were codified in the early 1990s, that law was converted to a regulation in the Wildlife Conservation Order.

I have asked our Wildlife Division to prepare an order for the Natural Resources Commission that would make the harvest of an albino deer legal in the State of Michigan. Truly, in cases whether it is initially difficult to determine whether a deer is legal or not is burdensome to the hunter. Moreover, there is no compelling scientific reason to protect these deer as albinism represents a mutation that is not desirable in a deer herd.

You have obviously gone to great effort to resolve this matter, and I understand the time and resources you have committed to that resolution. The DNR has also committed a great deal of its time and resources to resolving this matter as well. This letter represents the final determination of the Department and, from this point forward, we consider the matter closed. I thank you for bringing the matter to my attention.

Rebecca A. Humphries
Director
517-373-2329

cc:
Governor Jennifer Granholm
Representative Gary McDowell
Natural Resources Commission
Mr. Peter Manning, Assistant Attorney General
Ms. Mindy Koch, Resource Management Deputy, DNR
Mr. Daniel Eichinger, Acting Legislative Liaison, DNR
Mr. Rodney Stokes, DNR

This e-mail was sent to
Governor Granholm's Office (3-20-08):

On Feb. 28, 2008, I received the following e-mail from your office (below), I have since received a letter from DNR Director Rebecca Humphries (attached) "However, if you believe that these accusations can be proven, I would recommend that you notify local law enforcement or your county prosecutor's office. These officers should have an opportunity to formally respond to these allegations."
I have a problem with that solution.

These officers have worked directly with this prosecutor (Conflict of interest)

Cheboygan County Prosecutor refused to give me documentation regarding allegations that the DNR went to them for possible prosecution. Which could have helped put some problems to rest, some time ago!

On 3-6-08, I spoke at the NRC (Natural Resources Commission), after that meeting, I was approached by Mr. Peter Manning, Assistant Attorney General. In our discussions, I was told if I did not get an answer from the DNR Director that was satisfactory to contact his office and they would forward this information to the criminal division of the Attorney Generals Office for possible prosecution. The DNR Director has made their position clear! "This letter represents the final determination of the Department and, from this point forward, we consider the matter closed."

If your office could please contact the Attorney Generals Criminal Division or Peter Manning regarding this situation, I believe this would expedite a resolution. I have already contacted the Attorney Generals office on several occasions, including supplying them with 347 pages of documentation for review. I was told I had to wait for them to get involved, until the DNR had an opportunity to make things right!

Thank You,
John Ingersoll

Original Message:
-----------------
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:08:25 -0500
Subject: Response from the Governor's Office

Dear Mr. Ingersoll,

Thank you for contacting the Governor's Office to express your concerns about the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

To ensure that your concerns are given immediate attention, I have taken the liberty of forwarding your information to Director Rebecca Humphries' office of the DNR for their careful review and consideration.

I have asked them to look into your specific situation and to report their findings directly to you.
Again, thank you for contacting our office on this important subject.
Respectfully,
Monica
Issue Specialist
Constituent Services Division
Office of Governor Jennifer M. Granholm

**********
I would like to thank Bill Moore, Rory Mattson,
Kenneth, William, Mary & Bill, Ronald, David,
U.P. Injustice.com and savemymichigan.com for all your
support, letters of encouragement and donations.
Thank You

John Ingersoll
**********
Please help me continue to fight this battle, we can make a difference!
All donations will benefit a hunter in his endeavor to help protect our hunting rights!

John Ingersoll
7170 Tuscarora Circle
Indian River, MI 49749
www.theoutspokensportsman.net/bureaucraticbs.htm
www.savemymichigan.com