Feds Seek Info on Manatee Crime

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by SeanPatrick

Right after I posted that, I realized it was poorly worded and might be taken to imply that I meant the manatee law was outdated, etc. That's not what I meant and I apologize if it came off that way.

However, I believe you may have also missed the point of the rest of my post. Which was that something does indeed need to be done, but it needs to be a reasonable response.

Agreed. My first comment on this thread was that this was a silly prank pulled by an immature mind. It deserves to be treated that way.

The law is clear, and the potential legal penalties are already spelled out. There is the typical large sentencing range, meaning if the person is found and convicted, they will hopefully face a slap on the wrist, which I think is appropriate in this case.

I'm quite sure this case has received far more attention than it deserves. Had something non-political been scrawled on the animal's back it probably wouldn't have been noticed out of the local media. But these are obviously not normal political times in the USA. And we're all the poorer for it .

Nuff said (I hope).

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Ringmaster

It does matter if the facts are reported incorrectly. You must work for CNN or MSNBC. Everyone knows that a law was broken but making it more dramatic by lying about it doesn't make it more criminal.

No one is makeing this more dramatic or lying. The photographs show the word "Trump" outlined by scratch marks or cuts.

This is not, as you might wish to liken it, fake news. It is observable fact that we all saw from the photo.

[AKA-None]

Does anyone know the exact words relayed to the reporter?

[capn_billl]

Originally Posted by AA3JY

Unfortunately these animals are killed/maimed by props of boats failing to slow down in known areas where these slow moving animals exist..

https://www.thedodo.com/boats-injure...368810374.html

I've often thought about this issue.

Not only are manatees harmed by props, but also humans, and other sea life.

I think the risk could be reduced substantially with shrouded props.

Not only that but it would also protect the props from grounding, and crab pots.

And with the proper design increase efficiency, and fuel mileage.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Cute, but also irrelevant. According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission:

It is utterly irrelevant what was scrawled across the animal's back. It could have been a rendition of the Mona Lisa for all the law cares. Obviously in these dark days of your republic the choice of "Trump" has attracted added attention, but as the courts keep showing, they are above politics. The law is clear.

And in case people are unclear on the definition of "annoy, molest, harass, or disturb," the Commission website spells it out in plain language:


https://myfwc.com/education/wildlife...ng-guidelines/

Very much relevant to the point...this story was intentionally manipulated to stir up political vitriol. If it had been presented accurately, it would have been considered cute...in a stupid way but there wouldn't be all the histrionics.

Back in the real world, something like this would have received a citation, a stern warning from the judge not to do it again and a few hundred dollar fine...but because of the political angle, we have posters literally suggesting we take a knife to the "perps" back.

The media is protected with good reason but that also comes with responsibility.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by wingssail

No one is makeing this more dramatic or lying. The photographs show the word "Trump" outlined by scratch marks or cuts.

This is not, as you might wish to liken it, fake news. It is observable fact that we all saw from the photo.

Yes, this is much more dramatic and serious than when a Manatee gets chopped up by a non-political propeller.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Stress Recess

No matter, it is against the law to in any way harass a manatee. This person, if caught, needs to be made an example of.
John

So much for everyone is equal under the law.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Very much relevant to the point...this story was intentionally manipulated to stir up political vitriol. If it had been presented accurately, it would have been considered cute...in a stupid way but there wouldn't be all the histrionics.

Again... irrelevant. Unless you deem your police and courts to be hopelessly politicized, the "perp" will be subjected to the already established legal sanctions. I'll quote them again:

Anyone convicted of violating this state law faces a possible maximum fine of $500 and/or imprisonment for up to 60 days. Conviction on the federal level is punishable by fine of up to $50,000 and/or one year in prison. The State of Florida can pursue prosecution under federal law in circumstances of extreme harassment, resulting in the death or injury of a manatee.

"Possible." "For up to." "Up to." In other words, the courts have the necessary discretion to treat the case as severely as they deem it warrants. Again, unless you are claiming these courts are unable to make a fair and reasonable assessment of the case, then I see no relevance to the continued references to political overtones.

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Back in the real world, something like this would have received a citation, a stern warning from the judge not to do it again and a few hundred dollar fine...but because of the political angle, we have posters literally suggesting we take a knife to the "perps" back.

I still believe we operate in the real world where courts make rational decisions. I think your courts have proven this in recent months in the face of incredible political and physical pressure. I commend them, and see this case as laughably simple, with no sign they will do other than you suggest.

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The media is protected with good reason but that also comes with responsibility.

Agreed in spades. The media in general has advocated so much of its privileged position by failing to act responsibly. Sadly, the media are not the only ones. Fundamentally, it comes down to each citizen acting responsibly. Too many can't seem to understand that with rights come responsibilities.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Again... irrelevant. Unless you deem your police and courts to be hopelessly politicized, the "perp" will be subjected to the already established legal sanctions. I'll quote them again:

"Possible." "For up to." "Up to." In other words, the courts have the necessary discretion to treat the case as severely as they deem it warrants. Again, unless you are claiming these courts are unable to make a fair and reasonable assessment of the case, then I see no relevance to the continued references to political overtones.

I still believe we operate in the real world where courts make rational decisions. I think your courts have proven this in recent months in the face of incredible political and physical pressure. I commend them, and see this case as laughably simple, with no sign they will do other than you suggest.

Agreed in spades. The media in general has advocated so much of its privileged position by failing to act responsibly. Sadly, the media are not the only ones. Fundamentally, it comes down to each citizen acting responsibly. Too many can't seem to understand that with rights come responsibilities.

The police and their political overseers often do bow to political pressure. Seattle is a good recent example. Rather than taking swift and strong action when protests turned criminal, we got "defund the police" and "mostly peaceful protestors". Some illegal activity is allowed based on political grounds and others are strictly enforced based on political grounds.

By the time it gets to the courts of the damage is done. You can bet the media will operate under a guilty until proven innocent stance with this case and broadcast it for political points (not to save the manatee). You can count on him losing his job long before he gets his day in court. So even if he's found innocent in court, he will be punished anyway.

As far as "possible" or "for up to", sure but again, that's not until the courts get involved. In the mean time, we have posters on this very thread making threats of bodily harm when they don't appear to understand what even happened...because the media distorted the story.

The media may not be the only ones...but they are the ones who distorted this story for political gain. So they don't get off the hook because an "everyone has imperfections" argument. The media claim a higher standing as the defenders of free speech and the rights that come with that...they should therefore be held to a higher standard. This is not a one off case where a rouge reporter wrote a distorted story. It's an ongoing systematic process. We'll never reach a perfect unbiased media but as best we can, we should call out biased media abusing free speech.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The media may not be the only ones...but they are the ones who distorted this story for political gain. So they don't get off the hook because an "everyone has imperfections" argument. The media claim a higher standing as the defenders of free speech and the rights that come with that...they should therefore be held to a higher standard. This is not a one off case where a rouge reporter wrote a distorted story. It's an ongoing systematic process. We'll never reach a perfect unbiased media but as best we can, we should call out biased media abusing free speech.

For Pete's sake, when will people grow up? Newspapers, television news, and now news websites tilt and juice their stories to increase readership/viewership/clicks. Remember 'If it bleeds it leads!'? Was that a vast right wing conspiracy to exaggerate crime statistics? It may have that unintended effect, but that was not the motivation. The fundamental motivation for this is to sell papers/advertisements. It is just childish to suggest that 'gouged' vs 'scratched' (or whatever it was) comes within a mile of 'abusing free speech'.
Read your news sources with a skeptical eye. If it is NYT, doubt its fawning over revered lefties. If it is Fox, doubt its fawning of the outgoing President. See through the hype and think critically.
Much righteousness and chest pounding on the evils and irresponsible nature of the media. Why not a little more emphasis on the responsibilities of citizens to actually use their brains and think critically?
It's not that hard and far, far better than having the thought police punishing the media for some trivial exaggeration.
The serious danger are those who constantly yell 'fake news'! The media have a lot of flaws, but we all (right, left, and center) would be much, much worse off without them. By catastrophizing these issues with the media, truth is being eroded. Anarchy and dictatorship is the end of that path.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by lestersails

For Pete's sake, when will people grow up? Newspapers, television news, and now news websites tilt and juice their stories to increase readership/viewership/clicks. Remember 'If it bleeds it leads!'? Was that a vast right wing conspiracy to exaggerate crime statistics? It may have that unintended effect, but that was not the motivation. The fundamental motivation for this is to sell papers/advertisements. It is just childish to suggest that 'gouged' vs 'scratched' (or whatever it was) comes within a mile of 'abusing free speech'.
Read your news sources with a skeptical eye. If it is NYT, doubt its fawning over revered lefties. If it is Fox, doubt its fawning of the outgoing President. See through the hype and think critically.
Much righteousness and chest pounding on the evils and irresponsible nature of the media. Why not a little more emphasis on the responsibilities of citizens to actually use their brains and think critically?
It's not that hard and far, far better than having the thought police punishing the media for some trivial exaggeration.
The serious danger are those who constantly yell 'fake news'! The media have a lot of flaws, but we all (right, left, and center) would be much, much worse off without them. By catastrophizing these issues with the media, truth is being eroded. Anarchy and dictatorship is the end of that path.

Oddly, when someone supports the agenda, they tend to overlook the issues and imply anyone questioning it is juvenile. This is part of the problem. The media vilifies anyone who is not in support of the agenda and encourages others to do the same. It appears to be working.

As far as "gouged" vs "scratched"...are you purposely trying to manipulate the story line to prove your point? The word used was "carved". Sounds like you are trying to soften the tone to distract from the obvious. When it's Thanksgiving, do you "carve" your turkey with bare hands? Most people I know get out a big knife...and that's exactly how the original story was written. Only a fool would think that word was not chosen with great purpose.

As far as "fake news", the media has long since learned not to lie outright but to twist and imply, so the desired agenda is pushed forward. Then they can "fact check" their stories and claim it's not "fake news".

I agree, freedom of the press and free speech is critical for a democracy. That doesn't mean they get a free pass when purposely sowing political strife by purposely disseminating misleading articles. Anarchy and dictatorship...look at WWII for the playbook on using the media. The Germans never shut down the media...the subverted it for their own purposes. So yes, there is a point where if the media is getting out of control, they should be pulled up short and be reminded that freedom of the press is not the same as running a propaganda mill (and yes, I do think we are approaching the point where the press is more about propaganda than news reporting).

[brantleychuck]

Originally Posted by wingssail

No one is makeing this more dramatic or lying. The photographs show the word "Trump" outlined by scratch marks or cuts.



This is not, as you might wish to liken it, fake news. It is observable fact that we all saw from the photo.

Really, some one on here asked that “ balls be cut off”. Sounds pretty dramatic to me! A observable fact you failed to see.

[brantleychuck]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Oddly, when someone supports the agenda, they tend to overlook the issues and imply anyone questioning it is juvenile. This is part of the problem. The media vilifies anyone who is not in support of the agenda and encourages others to do the same. It appears to be working.



As far as "gouged" vs "scratched"...are you purposely trying to manipulate the story line to prove your point? The word used was "carved". Sounds like you are trying to soften the tone to distract from the obvious. When it's Thanksgiving, do you "carve" your turkey with bare hands? Most people I know get out a big knife...and that's exactly how the original story was written. Only a fool would think that word was not chosen with great purpose.



As far as "fake news", the media has long since learned not to lie outright but to twist and imply, so the desired agenda is pushed forward. Then they can "fact check" their stories and claim it's not "fake news".



I agree, freedom of the press and free speech is critical for a democracy. That doesn't mean they get a free pass when purposely sowing political strife by purposely disseminating misleading articles. Anarchy and dictatorship...look at WWII for the playbook on using the media. The Germans never shut down the media...the subverted it for their own purposes. So yes, there is a point where if the media is getting out of control, they should be pulled up short and be reminded that freedom of the press is not the same as running a propaganda mill (and yes, I do think we are approaching the point where the press is more about propaganda than news reporting).

Perfectly said

[Mike OReilly]

Val, I don't know why you keep insisting on politicizing this little event. The original story used an inflammatory descriptor*. So what? Get over it.

The real issue -- not the one you want to make it -- is that someone "annoyed, molested, harassed, or disturbed," a protected animal. There is a clear law, and a clear set of consequences for this infraction. The rest is just obfuscation.

* The Buzzfeed story first referenced here uses the term "scrawled" not carved or gouged or scratched. The headline, which is usually NOT written by the reporter, uses the term "Scraped." This silly discussion is a quibble over synonyms.

[GordMay]

Here’s an example of the sensational/hyperbolic reporting, “fawning over revered lefties”, from that veritable font of liberal/commie disinformation, The New York Times:

Someone Wrote ‘Trump’ on a Florida Manatee

State and federal wildlife authorities were investigating after a manatee with “Trump” on its back was spotted in Florida on Sunday.

By Johnny Diaz Jan. 11, 2021

The sighting in Florida this week of a manatee with “Trump” in block letters on its back has prompted an investigation and a plea for help from a nonprofit conservation group.

The Center for Biological Diversity said it was offering a $5,000 reward for information leading to a conviction “for the cruel and illegal mutilation” of a threatened manatee in the Homosassa River in Citrus County, on Florida’s Gulf Coast.

It was not immediately clear what was done to the manatee. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said that the manatee did not appear to be seriously injured “as it seems the word was written in algae on the animal’s back.” The Center for Biological Diversity initially described the writing as having been “carved” into the manatee’s back and said it appeared to have caused “serious scarring.”

“Manatees aren’t billboards, and people shouldn’t be messing with these sensitive and imperiled animals for any reason,” Jaclyn Lopez, the center’s Florida director, said on Monday.

“However this political graffiti was put on this manatee,” she added, “it’s a crime to interfere with these creatures, which are protected under multiple federal laws.”

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission began investigating after the manatee was discovered on Sunday, the center said. The discovery was reported by the Citrus County Chronicle.
Debatable: The sharpest arguments on the most pressing issues of the week.

The manatee was photographed and recorded by Hailey Warrington, a boat captain for a fishing charter company in Crystal River, Fla.

“We don’t typically see manatees harassed like that,” Ms. Warrington told The Sarasota Herald-Tribune, saying that she was observing manatees during a tour at the time. “I started documenting so we could report it. That’s why I have the photos and video in the first place.”

Patrick Rose, the executive director of the nonprofit Save the Manatee Club, said he had seen the photos of the manatee earlier on Monday and was disturbed.

“This is a type of a molestation of an imperiled species,” he said on Monday from Gainesville, Fla. He added that the manatee appeared to be an adolescent.

His alarm was shared by other conservationists.

“This abhorrent action goes beyond the bounds of what is considered cruel and inhumane,” said Elizabeth Fleming, senior Florida representative at Defenders of Wildlife. “I’m disgusted that someone would harm a defenseless creature to send what I can only assume is a political message. We will do everything in our power to help find, arrest and successfully prosecute this coward.”

A beloved unofficial mascot of Florida, the manatee is a species of large, slow-moving mammal. There are about 6,300 manatees in Florida, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In colder weather, they tend to congregate near South Florida power plants, where they bask in the warm water discharge.

They are federally protected under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Manatees are also protected by the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act of 1978, which states that “it is unlawful for any person, at any time, intentionally or negligently, to annoy, molest, harass, or disturb any manatee.”

The animals are vulnerable to scarring, typically from collisions with boats but also from exposure to very cold temperatures.

Mr. Rose of the Florida manatee advocacy group said that writing the president’s name on the manatee’s back “would be a form of harassment and it would be illegal under state and federal laws.”

People who violate the state law can face up to a $500 fine and up to 60 days in jail. A federal conviction carries a fine of up to $50,000 and a year in prison, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Source ➥ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/u...tee-trump.html

Their article seems to answer the “Five W's and an H”, of responsible journalism. Who, what, when, where, why*, & how.*Without a perpetrator to interview, they necessarily can't provide the underlying motivational 'why'.