Jay Gregory tells story of being intentionally shot by poacher

It's a long video (16 minutes) but it was well done and I found it fascinating. I've never watched this guy's show that I can remember and never heard this story. Long story short, he was scouting turkey on an acquaintance's land for the first time, and he encountered a poacher.

http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/2017/01/0...onally-poacher/

Thanks for sharing.

Wow, great story thanks for sharing.

The DA/law enforcement in that jurisdiction let him down by not obtaining an attempted murder conviction.

I'm glad I took the time to watch this -- it held my interest 100%.

I recognize this guy from the hunting channel but never knew anything about his background.

You can cut out the first 4 minutes, 4.5, and skip to the event.

Interesting that two of the newspapers shown in the video indicate that Gregory had crossed onto Walker's land and was confronted and shot by Walker. Not justification for the shooting, but just pointing out that Gregory, apparently was not where he was supposed to be. Not so much shot by a poacher, but by a landowner of a property where Gregory should not have been.

Didn't look that close. That may explain the lesser charge.

I am guessing is that you have a he said/he said conflict of stories. You have Gregory's claims and you have Walker's claims. Gregory could only prove he had been shot, not that he had been threatened or that it was intentional. Plus, he was apparently on Walker's land.

With that said, it sounds like the charge is appropriate based on Gregory's own description.

From http://www.missouri-criminal-defense.com/assault/


The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th conditions could all potentially apply. The charge sounds appropriate. Based on the lowest news article in the video, it was the last (recklessly caused physical injury of another by discharge of a firearm) that was the charge. That is probably all that they could prove happened and not the particular circumstances of the event, which sounds like it would still be assault in the 2nd.

Very interesting story and agree with DNS that is sounds like it might have been prevented had this guy known his property boundaries. I am always aware of my property boundaries and make sure I don't cross them or shot over them...nothing good comes from either of those scenarios.

Still, good story.

I didn't notice the newspapers. Good catch. I can't find any reports from the time it happened. If he was on the wrong property himself, that changes things. It even makes me question the rest of how things actually occurred.

I don't agree with the shooting, either, but I feel misled by the poacher aspect of it. My bad.

Just remember all story's like this have three sides...his, the assailant and the truth...but no doubt its a bad deal!

Does anyone have a link to the newspaper article about this case?
The pic below was copied from the video

Notice it says "probably crossed over onto another owner's land".

Keep in mind that it was spring, prior to turkey season and this guy was hunting over bait with a rifle. Regardless if it was his own land or not, he was poaching, so the moniker fits.

Great video either way.

Well, you didn't write the headlines, right, so no worries. Walker may have been poaching, just poaching on his own land, assuming Gregory's information is accurate and that bait wasn't allowed to be used for hunting back in 1991 in MO.

Gregory tells a good story, but it seemed just too pat. I was trying to Google the story from 1991 and not coming up with anything when the news print showed on the screen and I stopped the player to find more information to Google, but found some interesting information as well, some of which was just sort of left out of the monologue.

Looks like Gregory may have shaded it a little bit. But, I'll give a guy who was shot and dang near killed with a high powered rifle (for at most accidentally crossing a property line unarmed) a break. The shooter's son's apology speaks volumes. He was an idiot who lost his head and finally realized it after he almost killed a man.

Would Forrest Waker (the land owner) be allowed to bait hogs back in 1991?

This is from the Missouri gov. web site:
"Feral hogs have been roaming some Missouri counties since the days of open range.
The situation took a wrong turn in the 1990s when hog hunting for recreation began
to gain popularity. "

Would it be considered poaching if Mr. Walker was hog hunting?
I thought baiting for hog hunting was allowed back then in Missouri .

Good detective work. I wish we could find links to these articles.

Who cares if the guy was legally hunting over bait for hogs or whatever, bottom line sounds like he had a bad temper, and a weak mind.

I don't poach or trespass but one of my biggest fears is running into someone that does and having a confrontation. Be safe out there.

I agree the owner sounds like he had a bad temper. He probably had issues with poachers and trespassers in the past so I have no doubt he yelled at Jay. My point is , if the shooter was a poacher/trespasser and then shot Jay, then the shooter should be spending the rest of his life in jail. That is not what happened in this case. Looks like Jay was the trespasser and the land owner thought Jay was a poacher. I'm not saying the land owner was right to shoot but it does explain why the land owner did not get a stiffer sentence in a court of law.

I know there are 3 sides, but Jay with no gun, shot in the back running away, sounds like attempted homicide. I'm no lawyer.

I cited the law above. Second degree assault qualifies for any of several aspects of this situation. The law does not have any statements about where the shot entered the body, so whether shot in the back, front, side, top, or bottom is not salient. The charges are appropriate as per MO law.

All Jay knows is that he was shot. He doesn't know if it was accidental or not. He didn't see the shot occur, by his own admission. As such, the charges and conviction are appropriate.

Remember, we only have Jay's side presented here, and a bit of information from the news articles that seems to indicate some shortcomings of his story. We don't have the shooter's perspective of the event. There were no other witnesses.

I'm not sure of all of the intricacies of Missouri law, but in Texas Attempted Murder and Aggravated Assault With a Deadly Weapon are the same level offense but Agg. Assault is much easier to prove. With that charge you only have to prove the defendant shot the victim. With Attempted Murder you have to prove he shot the victim AND he intended to cause the victim's death. It can sometimes get very dicey trying to prove someone's intent. With this case, I would think the defendant was more willing than most to accept a plea deal so it's probably going to be a very easy decision for the D.A. I suspect it' probably very similar in Missouri.

I would posit that a confident prosecutor would believe that the "I'm going to kill you!" statement takes 'accidental' off the table.

If Jay is not lying, the shooter's perspective would be irrelevant if I were the prosecutor in this particular case.

Three things, just because there was a threat doesn't mean the discharge was intentional. Second, there is NO proof that threat was ever made. There is the claim that it was made, but unless backed up by Walker (and it apparently wasn't), there is no proof. There are no other witnesses or recordings of the event. You are down to he said/he said. Third, because of the he said/he said aspect, how do you know if Jay is lying or not. That is a HUGE 'if' about Jay lying, or anybody in a similar situation. How do you as the prosecutor determine of all aspects of Jay's story are true with no other witnesses? You have the GSW evidence, but that does not prove anything about intent. It certainly is not unheard of for a hunter to be unintentionally shot in the back.

So what are you going to take to the jury? Are you going with an unwinnable case that the defense will readily shoot down about how your client, "Honest Jay," never lies and never mispeaks and that the jury should only listen to what he says? Or are you going to take a winnable case that Jay was injured by the firearm of Walker?

I never go to the woods ect with out a gun