Google is your friend.
So you can then pretend its not real? Sure.
EUGENE, Ore. – Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Dwight Hammond, 46, both residents of Diamond, Oregon in Harney County, were sentenced to five years in prison by Chief U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken for arsons they committed on federal lands.
A jury sitting in Pendleton, Oregon found the Hammonds guilty of the arsons after a two-week trial in June 2012. The trial involved allegations that the Hammonds, owners of Hammond Ranches, Inc., ignited a series of fires on lands managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), on which the Hammonds had grazing rights leased to them for their cattle operation.
The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.
Quick search turns up the following.
Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property.
Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson.
The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations.
So a few things, I don’t know how credible the witnesses were, or what, if any, charges they were trying to avoid by testifying. But I find the last sentence interesting. Because as far as I know, fires don’t typically leave no evidence behind when a human body is burned and I don’t see how deer would be different. A slaughtered herd of deer and no scrap of them left after the fire?
This is about humans burned in arsons but I don’t see why it wouldn’t hold true of deer.
from Body burners: The forensics of fire -- Science & Technology -- Sott.net
Bone takes longer to burn, so by the end the skeleton is usually laid bare like a charred anatomical model, coated in the greasy residue of burned flesh.
That is unless someone agitates the bones (which have become brittle though heating) to break them up, which helps them continue burning. Still, there is usually something left - often teeth or fragments of bone - that gives the game away. “In most cases something survives,” says DeHaan.
I can see why they reduced the sentence. Six months and a fine would have been better.
and thanks for the links…
So you oppose mandatory minimums now? Will Trump be issuing pardons for others subjected to mandatory minimum sentences?
So you just want the judge to ignore the law as written?
I’ve always been against them, let the judge decide. 5 years for burning a few acres scrub brush, and killing a deer is too much.
That’s what Judges do.
Hero arsonists.
Maybe we should throw them a parade too.
a give them the medal of freedom to boot.
Allan
Another member of the old gang is back. 
Good to see you.
They weren’t ranchers.
They wanted water.
Great idea!
And they had access to it-but in order for EVERYONE to continue to have access, they had to share, and the Hammonds didn’t want to share.
Oh no. That’s not it at all. But you believe whatever you want.
Free! Free!
We get it. You love the old west where cowboys threatened and used dirty tactics to get there way. The Hammonds would have been big players if the year were 1875, but it’s no longer the great American frontier.
Did they not have access to the federal courts to air their complaint? Was the issue literacy or they just didn’t like the answer they got? If I don’t like the answer I get when airing a complaint in federal courts am I free to “burn it down”?
