You know something, I think you make some important points here about Morrow - he COULD have lied about that to firm up the conviction for *something* (I'll address that below), and he didn't. So yeah, some credit to him on that.

It wouldn't surprise me if the man had heard a lot of night shots over the years in the area where he lives and was obviously tired of it and just made a lot of assumptions about the 3 boys that night in question and basically just lost it.

But here is the insane part, and it is not just Morrow and the Distric Judge AJ and Circuit Judge TB who screwed up **royal** -- BUT WHERE IS THE PROSECUTOR in all this???

Seriously, there is NOT ONE THING involved here that had **anything** to do with hunting or wildlife whatsoever. Any lawyer with a pea brain could see that, and you have the prosecutor and two judges (who are also lawyers) who failed to see that obvious fact. IF ANYTHING, meaning looking at the matter from the perspective of Morrow the complaining witness and in a light most favorable to his side of things, there was an attempt to destroy public property, i.e, a stop sign (that obviously didn't happen).

How in the world does a case where the complaining witness Morrow claims they shot at a stop sign become a case where there are three **hunting** related charges??? That part is just insane and I don't see how any lawyer/judge would not immediately pick up on that and say no to the three hunting charges that Morrow swore out. Under Morrow's version of what happened it was an attempt to shoot a stop sign and had nothing to do with hunting/night hunting/etc and the prosecutor and two judges should have nixed the hunting charges in the bud, really the prosecutor himself.