# No recourse for stolen trail cams in Montmorency



## Nostromo (Feb 14, 2012)

Downriver Tackle said:


> My guess is that it's about the costs. Having spent quite a few days there at the courthouse as a witness in an assault case, I can't tell you how many times I heard costs to prosecute or jail someone came into play as to how the case did or did not proceed, or what the sentence was. The prosecutor (different one)was actually arguing against jailing or probation because the county could not afford it in many cases.


Cost is certainly a consideration.


----------



## yooper Bob (Jul 11, 2016)

Nostromo said:


> Say, isn't that Bob from Skandia?


Ya, you betcha its me.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

If it was a wildgame nations product, they didn't get much.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

I question the validity of this entire thread. Sounds like a bar story to me. If the prosecutor said the value was too small or something like that It might be more believable. To say a crime committed on state land is ok is BS. I don't believe a prosecutor would be dumb enough to say that. Stealing a tree stand or any other item would be no different than a trail cam.


----------



## Lumberman (Sep 27, 2010)

Too busy writing BS tickets to worry avoid your camera. 

I don't understand why you're surprised.


----------



## Nostromo (Feb 14, 2012)

Lumberman said:


> Too busy writing BS tickets to worry avoid your camera.
> 
> I don't understand why you're surprised.


Don't be a hater. The Roller's are just doing their job.


----------



## Downriver Tackle (Dec 24, 2004)

DirtySteve said:


> I question the validity of this entire thread. Sounds like a bar story to me. If the prosecutor said the value was too small or something like that It might be more believable. To say a crime committed on state land is ok is BS. I don't believe a prosecutor would be dumb enough to say that. Stealing a tree stand or any other item would be no different than a trail cam.


LOL! Question away. I have full confidence in the source and far from a bar room story. Speculation here, but I'd assume for crimes committed on state land, part of the fines go to the state, making it even less enticing to prosecute in a county strapped for cash.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Downriver Tackle said:


> LOL! Question away. I have full confidence in the source and far from a bar room story. Speculation here, but I'd assume for crimes committed on state land, part of the fines go to the state, making it even less enticing to prosecute in a county strapped for cash.


For the record I am not questioning you. But I would question your source. I have a few friends in law enforcement as well as some distant relatives. There are plenty of sherrif out there capable of spreading bar rumors or misconstruing a story they heard around the office.


----------



## stockrex (Apr 29, 2009)

Maybe the prosecutor and the thief are romantically involved?


----------



## Downriver Tackle (Dec 24, 2004)

DirtySteve said:


> For the record I am not questioning you. But I would question your source. I have a few friends in law enforcement as well as some distant relatives. There are plenty of sherrif out there capable of spreading bar rumors or misconstruing a story they heard around the office.


 If it wasn't his case to handle, then you might be on to something. My guess is that it's all about the $$. Just like when a city cop gives you a ticket on an interstate, the city gets less money from the fines than if it was issued on a city street, which is why many cities do not post officers on interstates.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Downriver Tackle said:


> If it wasn't his case to handle, then you might be on to something. My guess is that it's all about the $$. Just like when a city cop gives you a ticket on an interstate, the city gets less money from the fines than if it was issued on a city street, which is why many cities do not post officers on interstates.


I have to retract my statements. After watching the two presidential candidates argue like 1st graders in the debate last night it is completely plausible that an elected prosecutor in a local county make a ridiculous judgement......I am not sure what I was thinking!


----------



## Dormin (Sep 7, 2004)

Downriver Tackle said:


> Just had an interesting discussion with a Montmorency deputy about trail cams on state land. We were discussing leaving them out on state land and he said there is no recourse if they are stolen in Montmorency County. He said earlier in the year, they got a report of a stolen cam and the owner had a second cam out pointed toward the first, which captured the thief's picture real good. They knew who it was and were able to positively ID him. Made the arrest and ran the charges through. The Montmorency prosecutor decided that because the trail cam was on state land, she was not going to prosecute the case. In desperation, the police turned the case over to the DNR to have a crack at it. Same result. Prosecutor refused to follow through because it happened on state land. Just a heads up if you think a second cam to catch the thief is going to result in an actual prosecution. Sad. Caught red-handed and allowed to get away with it.





Downriver Tackle said:


> Just had an interesting discussion with a Montmorency deputy about trail cams on state land. We were discussing leaving them out on state land and he said there is no recourse if they are stolen in Montmorency County. He said earlier in the year, they got a report of a stolen cam and the owner had a second cam out pointed toward the first, which captured the thief's picture real good. They knew who it was and were able to positively ID him. Made the arrest and ran the charges through. The Montmorency prosecutor decided that because the trail cam was on state land, she was not going to prosecute the case. In desperation, the police turned the case over to the DNR to have a crack at it. Same result. Prosecutor refused to follow through because it happened on state land. Just a heads up if you think a second cam to catch the thief is going to result in an actual prosecution. Sad. Caught red-handed and allowed to get away with it.


----------



## Dormin (Sep 7, 2004)

Get a non-working trail cam, put a sponge in the battery compartment.
Pour skunk scent on the sponge.
Leave the trail cam in a likely area.
Laugh to yourself as you picture the thief's coat pocket getting soaked.


----------

