Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
12-11-2002, 12:58 AM
#91
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 1997
Location: Cheasapeke and Delaware Bay Region
Posts: 10,485
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
A well done to everyone. I would like to see a response from the Druey people here on this forum since they have the link to it after all is said and done. Natty, save me a spot.
Edited by - mdbohuntr on 12/11/2002 04:07:46
Edited by - mdbohuntr on 12/11/2002 04:07:46
12-11-2002, 01:48 AM
#92
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,862
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
I am surprised, I think, that the majority here have failed to see the specific purpose of my opposition to silent's initial and public condemnation of David Foret and Drury Outdoors and the "rush to judgement" by readers, that immediately occurred and rapidly grew.
Am I the only person here that firmly believes that you do not arrest and convict someone and then go look for the hopeful existence of evidence of the crime for which you have already tried a person for, and found them guilty?
If silent personally had facts to support his claims, or knew where supporting and incriminating information could be found, such as what CharlieP uncovered, why didn't silent indicate such in his opening post? What someone else tells you without providing supporting information, is nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay. You may personally know or believe things about someone, but if you cannot produce proof of your claim(s), is just an allegation sufficient to convict the accused?
Have you stopped to think that maybe silent's lack of any information beyond hearsay and "I just know," is what the Drury representative intelligently and justly reacted to when [if] silent contacted Drury Outdoors? Would you want to be pulled in by your employer and interrogated every time an unknown person called and accused you of an offense, for which the caller could not provide, or direct to, some degree of substantiating information to justify an investigation?
Based on my personal experience in such matters, I would wager that the representative that silent talked to intended not to ignore the information and was going to pass the information on to the powers to be, but was competent and knew that the final call was not his, and that it was also not his place to assure the caller that Drury would, indeed, investigate the matter.
Is it possible that the representative considered, that whatever he said to silent would be posted on the forum? Therefore, he (representative) realized he only had a few seconds to respond in a manner that would not mislead silent, who (silent) might mislead others, and that an intended investigation would be obstructed before one could be initiated, or that David Foret would first read on the Internet, or be apprised by someone who read it on the Internet, that he was being investigated by Drury.
If silent knew how to process such matters in a professional and competent way, he would have delayed his public condemnation and his suggested boycotting of Drury until 1) the facts on Foret were uncovered and disclosed, 2) that it was confirmed that the David Foret at Drury's was the same David Foret named in the article, and 3) it was verifiable that Drury Outdoors knew that their David Foret was the same David Foret who had prior convictions and they were not going to take appropriate action.
Now, there is much rejoicing because it appears that David Foret might be the same David Foret that has hunting violation convictions, and that the apparent corroboration of certain allegations and the termination of Foret validates everything that was said and done leading to the conclusion. I said, 'certain allegations,' because I have not yet seen any credible information that confirms the other accusations that silent made about Foret. Oh hell, excuse my stupidity! Because it appears that Foret did commit certain illegal acts, he must be guilty of the rest of the allegations …and any in the future.
I always delighted in assisting and/or enabling the apprehension and punishment of lawbreakers, but more so because I gave my best to adhere to the rules of fair play. Maybe, regarding fair play with a person's and a business' reputation, I am in the minority in this place. I tend to forget, fair play is only applicable to wildlife.
Make damn sure of your shot on an animal and that the shot is ethical. If the animal drops following a poor and/or unethical shot, the shooter was lucky and the shot remains a poor and unthical shot. However, feel free to recklessly and unethically fire away at a person and a business. If either or both drop, the poor and unethical shot now becomes a skilled and ethical shot, and the kill was righteous. Give me a break!
I have a question, what if silent's accusations were never confirmed? Would just his saying he knew his information to be factual have been enough for all of you to follow suit in his condemnation of Foret and Drury? Better yet, what if he had been wrong? What if he had had the wrong David Foret? What if he misinterpreted or misreported what the Drury representative told him? Oh, I forgot, ...again, all of that type of supposition is now moot.
MQ1Shooter
Being you have a BS degree in journalism, you should be someone who should have readily recognized the early flaws in this release, aside of any arguments concerning libel. Obviously, you did not, or you are more concerned with being liked than adhering to the "first rule" of journalism
I used to tell journalists; that it was my opinion and experience that many journalists are careless, incompetent, and biased, and that most seemed to have the propensity (sometimes, I believe, intentional,) to screw up and misreport, in just a matter of minutes or hours, what usually took me weeks or months to compile and report in the most accurate and credible manner possible.
Edited by - c903 on 12/11/2002 03:05:20
Am I the only person here that firmly believes that you do not arrest and convict someone and then go look for the hopeful existence of evidence of the crime for which you have already tried a person for, and found them guilty?
If silent personally had facts to support his claims, or knew where supporting and incriminating information could be found, such as what CharlieP uncovered, why didn't silent indicate such in his opening post? What someone else tells you without providing supporting information, is nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay. You may personally know or believe things about someone, but if you cannot produce proof of your claim(s), is just an allegation sufficient to convict the accused?
Have you stopped to think that maybe silent's lack of any information beyond hearsay and "I just know," is what the Drury representative intelligently and justly reacted to when [if] silent contacted Drury Outdoors? Would you want to be pulled in by your employer and interrogated every time an unknown person called and accused you of an offense, for which the caller could not provide, or direct to, some degree of substantiating information to justify an investigation?
Based on my personal experience in such matters, I would wager that the representative that silent talked to intended not to ignore the information and was going to pass the information on to the powers to be, but was competent and knew that the final call was not his, and that it was also not his place to assure the caller that Drury would, indeed, investigate the matter.
Is it possible that the representative considered, that whatever he said to silent would be posted on the forum? Therefore, he (representative) realized he only had a few seconds to respond in a manner that would not mislead silent, who (silent) might mislead others, and that an intended investigation would be obstructed before one could be initiated, or that David Foret would first read on the Internet, or be apprised by someone who read it on the Internet, that he was being investigated by Drury.
If silent knew how to process such matters in a professional and competent way, he would have delayed his public condemnation and his suggested boycotting of Drury until 1) the facts on Foret were uncovered and disclosed, 2) that it was confirmed that the David Foret at Drury's was the same David Foret named in the article, and 3) it was verifiable that Drury Outdoors knew that their David Foret was the same David Foret who had prior convictions and they were not going to take appropriate action.
Now, there is much rejoicing because it appears that David Foret might be the same David Foret that has hunting violation convictions, and that the apparent corroboration of certain allegations and the termination of Foret validates everything that was said and done leading to the conclusion. I said, 'certain allegations,' because I have not yet seen any credible information that confirms the other accusations that silent made about Foret. Oh hell, excuse my stupidity! Because it appears that Foret did commit certain illegal acts, he must be guilty of the rest of the allegations …and any in the future.
I always delighted in assisting and/or enabling the apprehension and punishment of lawbreakers, but more so because I gave my best to adhere to the rules of fair play. Maybe, regarding fair play with a person's and a business' reputation, I am in the minority in this place. I tend to forget, fair play is only applicable to wildlife.
Make damn sure of your shot on an animal and that the shot is ethical. If the animal drops following a poor and/or unethical shot, the shooter was lucky and the shot remains a poor and unthical shot. However, feel free to recklessly and unethically fire away at a person and a business. If either or both drop, the poor and unethical shot now becomes a skilled and ethical shot, and the kill was righteous. Give me a break!
I have a question, what if silent's accusations were never confirmed? Would just his saying he knew his information to be factual have been enough for all of you to follow suit in his condemnation of Foret and Drury? Better yet, what if he had been wrong? What if he had had the wrong David Foret? What if he misinterpreted or misreported what the Drury representative told him? Oh, I forgot, ...again, all of that type of supposition is now moot.
MQ1Shooter
Being you have a BS degree in journalism, you should be someone who should have readily recognized the early flaws in this release, aside of any arguments concerning libel. Obviously, you did not, or you are more concerned with being liked than adhering to the "first rule" of journalism
I used to tell journalists; that it was my opinion and experience that many journalists are careless, incompetent, and biased, and that most seemed to have the propensity (sometimes, I believe, intentional,) to screw up and misreport, in just a matter of minutes or hours, what usually took me weeks or months to compile and report in the most accurate and credible manner possible.
Edited by - c903 on 12/11/2002 03:05:20
12-11-2002, 02:03 AM
#93
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey USA
Posts: 1,279
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
Silent suggested a boycott of Drury based on what he knew, others read his post and did some research to uncover the articles. Not sure who was "recklessly fire(ing) away at a person and a business".
"We do not inherit our wildlife from our fathers, we only borrow it from our children."
"We do not inherit our wildlife from our fathers, we only borrow it from our children."
12-11-2002, 02:09 AM
#94
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey USA
Posts: 1,279
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
Oh yeah, and Natty Bumpo, I got a video camera and can meet you on the Eastern shore anytime you are ready, as long as I get second shot
"We do not inherit our wildlife from our fathers, we only borrow it from our children."
"We do not inherit our wildlife from our fathers, we only borrow it from our children."
12-11-2002, 02:27 AM
#95
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,862
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Silent suggested a boycott of Drury based on what he knew <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
How did you know what he said he knew, was a fact? Because he said so?
Care to interpret what this statement of fact indicates?
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>...others read his post and did some research to uncover the articles.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
How did you know what he said he knew, was a fact? Because he said so?
Care to interpret what this statement of fact indicates?
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>...others read his post and did some research to uncover the articles.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
12-11-2002, 02:43 AM
#96
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Right now Drury Outdoors is employing a man named David Foret(pro staffer). David Foret has been convicted of spotlighting in Illinois and tresspassing in Tennessee(not sure what else) and was a suspect in several other cases where deer were shot and caped. I have personal knowledge of his poaching exploits<font color=red>(I have known him for 15yrs)</font id=red> and have turned him into the game wardens on several occaisions before he ever hooked up with Drury Outdoors. One of his favorite pasttimes was putting in on the Mississippi River when it was flooded and shooting deer that were pushed up on to the ridges. I have contacted Drury to inform them that they are portraying a notorious convicted poacher as one of our "Industry Representatives". However, they are making no plans to even investigate the accusations to see if they are true or not. I personally will be boycotting Drury Outdoor products until they part ways with the poacher.
<font color=red>PS Game Convictions are a matter of public record so anyone here can verify that the information that I am giving you is true.</font id=red>
Protect your hunting rights, "Spay or neuter a liberal."
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
He pretty much covered all the info needed and backed it up with his parting sentence in reference to "public record". He knew what he was posting was true and it was easily verified.
Right now Drury Outdoors is employing a man named David Foret(pro staffer). David Foret has been convicted of spotlighting in Illinois and tresspassing in Tennessee(not sure what else) and was a suspect in several other cases where deer were shot and caped. I have personal knowledge of his poaching exploits<font color=red>(I have known him for 15yrs)</font id=red> and have turned him into the game wardens on several occaisions before he ever hooked up with Drury Outdoors. One of his favorite pasttimes was putting in on the Mississippi River when it was flooded and shooting deer that were pushed up on to the ridges. I have contacted Drury to inform them that they are portraying a notorious convicted poacher as one of our "Industry Representatives". However, they are making no plans to even investigate the accusations to see if they are true or not. I personally will be boycotting Drury Outdoor products until they part ways with the poacher.
<font color=red>PS Game Convictions are a matter of public record so anyone here can verify that the information that I am giving you is true.</font id=red>
Protect your hunting rights, "Spay or neuter a liberal."
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
He pretty much covered all the info needed and backed it up with his parting sentence in reference to "public record". He knew what he was posting was true and it was easily verified.
12-11-2002, 03:34 AM
#97
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jax beach Fl. usa
Posts: 4,031
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
C903,
I've been here for what, 4 years now? One of the things I've learned is who can be trusted. It appears there are other people who know whom can be trusted. There is also the respect factor. Please let it drop, OK?
Silentassassin has respect and trust, that is why so many people jumped in the wagon with him.
If you'd notice, the info he gave WAS true!
FOOLPROOF?
Never underestimate the power of a fool!
What if the "Hokey Pokey" really is what it's all about?
I've been here for what, 4 years now? One of the things I've learned is who can be trusted. It appears there are other people who know whom can be trusted. There is also the respect factor. Please let it drop, OK?
Silentassassin has respect and trust, that is why so many people jumped in the wagon with him.
If you'd notice, the info he gave WAS true!
FOOLPROOF?
Never underestimate the power of a fool!
What if the "Hokey Pokey" really is what it's all about?
12-11-2002, 05:52 AM
#98
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blossvale, New York
Posts: 21,199
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
Someone ask for a reply from Drury. If I were them I'd stay out of it at this point. They don't normally visit this site or any site as far as I know. They found out, they dropped him and GOT OUT. The last thing they need at this point is to have every other word scrutinized on a heated topic thread. I would also suspect their attorney would suggest against it. If in fact, they had to break some kind of agreement with this yahoo they have to watch what they say about it/him. I think they did say something... you just weren't listening hard enough....."The Yahoo is GONE"! Mighty swift, kick in the butt, strong words to me. Can you believe all the reads this topic has gotten. SILENT: You may have a record breaker on your hands.<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
12-11-2002, 06:09 AM
#99
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Memphis TN USA
Posts: 3,445
RE: Drury Outdoors is Employing a Poacher
Thank You to everyone that came out to support me and right the wrong that was being done.
Protect your hunting rights, "Spay or neuter a liberal."
Protect your hunting rights, "Spay or neuter a liberal."