Infamous Idaho Killer Dallas to Be Freed

[Hawkeye6]

Infamous Idaho Killer Dallas to Be Freed

February 05, 2005 7:44 PM EST

OWYHEE COUNTY, Idaho - Idaho's most infamous outlaw, Claude Dallas, killed two state officers in a remote desert 24 years ago in a crime that brought him notoriety as both a callous criminal and a modern-day mountain man at odds with the government.
Now a bespectacled 54-year-old, Dallas is to be released from prison Sunday after serving nearly 22 years for the execution-style slayings of Conley Elms and Bill Pogue, officers for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

The case has been among the most polarizing in Idaho history, with some expressing disgust at how Dallas has gained a measure of folk-hero status among those who rally against the establishment.

Some compared him to Gordon Kahl, a tax-evader killed by U.S. marshals in Arkansas in 1983; to Randy Weaver, the protagonist in the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff; or even to Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber.

"Those cases always end up getting connected after the fact," said Jess Walter, the Spokane, Wash.-based author of a book about Weaver. "But at the time, they were just having trouble with law enforcement."

Dallas' 1986 jailbreak only heightened the legend perpetuated by his friends, that his rugged lifestyle got crossways with a heavy-handed U.S. government. Dallas hid for nearly a year before he was caught and sent back to prison. He was charged in the escape, but acquitted by a jury after he testified he had to break out because the prison guards threatened his life.

"It's sure an emotional issue, and his release has heightened those emotions," said Jon Heggen, head of the Fish and Game Department's enforcement bureau. "There's been a lot of tears shed the last two weeks."

Dallas' 30-year sentence was cut by eight years for good behavior.

He was convicted of manslaughter in 1982 for shooting the officers, who had entered his winter camp on the South Fork of the Owyhee River, one of the West's least-populated regions, to investigate reports of illegal trapping.

Jim Stevens, a friend of Dallas who was visiting the camp, witnessed the killings.

According to evidence at the trial, Pogue, who had drawn his own weapon, was hit first with a shot from Dallas' handgun. Dallas then shot Elms two times in the chest as the warden emerged from the trapper's tent, where he'd found poached bobcats.
Dallas then used a rifle to fire one round into each man's head.

The 28-day trial made national headlines, with Dallas claiming the game wardens were out to get him. A group of women - who became known as the "Dallas Cheerleaders" - gathered daily to support him.

A jury of 10 women and two men acquitted Dallas of murder, finding him guilty of the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter instead.

"We remain horrified somebody could have gotten manslaughter for cruelly killing our people, and then following it up with shots from a .22 rifle," said former Fish and Game Director Jerry Conley, who testified at Dallas' sentencing.

But one of Dallas' lawyers, Bill Mauk, still sees Dallas as a victim: He fired on the officers after his privacy had been violated and after he was threatened by government agents enforcing game laws he didn't believe applied to him.

Jury foreman Milo M. Moore, a retired shopkeeper, said Dallas might have been freed outright if he hadn't used his .22 caliber rifle. Moore said testimony about Pogue's reputation as a tough-guy lawman influenced the verdict.

"We felt it was self-defense up to a certain point," Moore said in a recent interview. "Had he not shot them in the head, it would have been a different verdict."

Moore said Pogue had come "gunning" for the poacher, and said Pogue was on trial in some jurors' minds more than Dallas.

Dallas' story inspired a television movie, and writer Jack Olsen chronicled the crime in a book called "Give a Boy a Gun."

"Claude Dallas," a ballad written by singer-songwriters Ian Tyson and Tom Russell, and sung by Tyson, romanticizes Dallas' lifestyle and life on the lam, saying: "It took 18 men and 15 months to finally run Claude down. In the sage outside of paradise, they drove him to the ground."

Kevin Kempf, the warden at the Idaho Correctional Institution at Orofino, where Dallas has been since Jan. 15 when he was moved from a Kansas prison, won't say where Dallas will be released.

"He's prepared," Kempf said. "It doesn't appear he's going to be leaving our facility without any direction or without a plan."
Dallas did not respond to interview requests from The Associated Press.

Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

[Classicvette63]

You can count one of Clude Dallas's supporters right here. That jerk pogue thought he could push folks around without repercussions. He found out different. I guess that azzhat never heard of the saying "If you're gonna talk the talk, you better be able to walk the walk." Since I'm having a Super Bowl party tonite, I'll raise a glass to you Claude. Cheers.

[gspsonny03]

I'm not crazy about pushy law enforcement people, but if you break the law, you have to expect punishment. How did he figure the law didn't pertain to him? I just hope they don't release him in Wyoming. Don't need him here. I don't care who you are, if you have to kill someone in self defense, that's one thing, but to finish them off with a shot to the head, that's something totally different. JMO

[Classicvette63]

Sustinance hunting is not poaching, so what law was he breaking? As for the .22 coup de grace, do you think the game warden would have let him live if the tables were turned? Not a chance. The game warden didn't follow the most basic and simple law there is. If you don't want to get dead, don't pull guns on people and start pushing them around. Pretty simple and straightforward common sense. The only sympathy I have for pogue is in the dictionary, right between scat and syphillis.

[gspsonny03]

So, in other words, if you go out and kill an animal out of season, you can justify it by saying your sustinance hunting? Frankly I don't think there is a Game and Fish Dept in the USA that will buy that one. Was he eating all those bobcats that he had the pelts for? I doubt it. And I won't even try and justify Pogue, you have people like that everywhere. But the fact remains that he killed both officers, so if his problem was with Pogue, why did he kill both of them. He has the drop on the second one when he came out of the tent. He could have tied him up and left the country, he didn't have to shoot him. The man should have been fried, end of story.

[tooldummy]

I wish 20 years ago I would have seen a post on here (to bad we didn't have internet back then) "CPO BLOWS AWAY POACHER". I read all about it in an outdoor magazine back then, and saw the movie a couple of times. The only simpathy I have is for the two CPO's, pushy or not. This was murder. He should have fried.

[royinidaho]

Classicvette,

I deleted what I was going to post, it had something to do with the sun not ever setting on your butt in Idaho.......

You know not of what you speak. Nevertheless I pray that we never meet.

[fishdoggydog]

Dallas has spent 22 years in prison, the American justice system has said that will be it if he stays cool. I hope he is sorry for the pain he caused, and I hope the rest of us know life can change in an instant, and be thankful we were not there that day.

[Classicvette63]

Roy, Did you know any of the folks involved personally? I'm not being a smart aleck. If you did, please fill us in on some of the particulars. I never met any of the particulars, so I am going by what I've read. Like most people I came to conclusion based on that.

I know how the game wardens can be because I was in a similar situation. When you are armed, they are civil to you. Once unarmed they treat you like crap. It's amazing how many g.w.'s don't think to look for a backup piece.:rolleyes:

Facts are:

1: I do not have a problem with someone living of the land. If a person decides to say screw y'all and head for the hills like Jerimiah Johnson, more power to him.

2: Having a badge does NOT give you the right to push people around. PERIOD If you do that long enough you'll come across someone who is going to push back, so don't complain about the consequences.

3: If a LEO has a reputation for being a prick, well there is a saying, where there is smoke there is fire. pogue's superior's decision not to intervene or reign him in is the root cause of this situation.

4: The .22 coupe de grace was over the top. Doctors can debate all day long what kind of physical shape those two were in after the intial gunfight. However, it couldn't have been too good of shape. So basically they were dead or dying. The jury said if it wasn't for the .22, Dallas would have walked.

5: If Dallas was some bloodthirsty maniac, why did he surrender his pistol instead of just opening up upon sight of the two leo's? The circumstances tend to lean toward someone cooperating until the leo's crossed the line somewhere.

[tooldummy]

Classicvette63, I did not know any of those involved either. But, like you, going on what I read and saw in the movies, I do not think those two officers deserved being gunned down in cold blood.
I don't know how many other murderers have used the "prick defense" for justifying homicide. Probably a lot. If that was a feasable defense, I'm sure others would have by now. And maybe even for shooting a prick like me.
If I remember correctly, one of the CPO's was almost blind. And both close to retirement. And this fine outstanding mountain man had been reading books about and practicing fast draw techniques. I think he also said he would never be taken to prison or arrested or something to that nature. He took them by surprise is all. Most times conservation cops apprehend sportsmen without anything happening. Then there are times they run into a someone ready to kill for any reason they can find. I wish they had been more prepared.

[PJgunner]

For those of you who wished the game wardens had done Claude Dallas in, you don't know the whole story. :mad:
First off, Dallas had good reason to fear Pogue. Second, regardless of what was said about his poaching bobcat hides, that a pile of BS.
Now, before you go off and flame me, I knew both antagonists personally. Not in an what one would call a close personal knowledge, but I was aquainted with them.
There was intense hatred of Dallas by Pogue. Pogue, who used to be an LEO, chief of police, I think, before he was more or less run out of town, for what reason, I haven't a clue. However, knowning how the hierarchy was run in Winnemucca, I'll bet he picked on a member of one of the ruling families.
Anyway, more than once, I personally have seen Pogue when he came to visit friends of relatives while drinking, swear that if he ever caught Claude Dallas out in the boonies, he would shoot him down like a dog. BTW, that was sworn to in court. Dallas would have gotten away, if that's the proper term, with justified self defense if he had not given the two wardens finishing shots to the head.
As far as the movie that protrayed the incident and what led up to it; that was pure out and out BS! Since when does Hollyweird get anything right.
As far as Conley Elms being shot, after Dallas shot Pogue, Elms was drawing his weapon.
Anyway, there is a hell of a lot that has never come out about all this, and probably today, Dallas is the only one who really knows what it was all about.
I find it strange, that if Claude Dallas was such a bad guy, why did so many people from paradise Valley, Paradise Hill, and Winnemucca go out of their way to help him evade capture?
Do I condone what he did? I'm not sure. I think that if I was out in the boonies, and a game worden who bragged about killing me if he caught me out in the hills showed up and pulled a gun, I'd be inclined to do what Claude did.
FWIW, those "poached" bobcat hides has nevada tags on them and bobcats were legal to be taken in Nevada at the time of the incident. His camp was in Idaho, because that was the nearest available water.
I lived in that area for a bit over ten years, and left due to a job transfer shortly before all this went down. Now that I'm retired, if I could afford to move back up there, I'd do it so fast smoke would fly.
My point is, don't pass judgement by what was shown by the media and Hollywood. They never gave the full story.
Paul B.

[fabsroman]

Wow, this is a tough one not knowing all the facts. I can tell you that I do have nightmares of LEO's that are out to get me, but I also know plenty of LEO's that are nice guys. I have run into nice LEO's and bad LEO's; however, none have ever drawn a gun on me.

The shot to the head was definitely over the top and he deserved time for that. The self defense issue is one that goes to state of mind. The only person that really know what was going through Claude's head when he pulled the trigger was Claude himself. A bunch of circumstantial evidence was probably used to justify the self defense motive.

Whether or not the LEO's "got what they deserve" depends on what they were actually thinking of doing. Maybe they were drawing weapons to protect themselves and actually had no intention of killing Claude. Of course, we will never know what they were thinking. However, I have a pretty good guess about what the second LEO was thinking. He was probably thinking "Holy Crap this guy is going to kill me" and he instinctively tried to draw his weapon. If somebody shot the guy next to me and I was with that guy, I think I would be pretty afraid of losing my own life.

These situations suck. I wish we were able to read people's minds and talk to the dead. Granted, a lie detector test of Claude might be nice, but they can't be introduced into evidence anyway so it wouldn't have helped with the trial.

Let's hope that this guy learned his lesson by losing 22 years of his life in a prison. 22 years that he will never get back. Kind of ironic that 22 years matches the caliber bullet used to shoot the officers in the head. Anyway, I hope that he doesn't kill anybody else and actually stays out of trouble. Only time will tell.

[PJgunner]

Fabsroman said, "A bunch of circumstantial evidence was probably used to justify the self defense motive."

I wouldn't call it circumstantial. There were too many incidents that Pogue made the threats. usually he'd been drinking and maybe it was all noise and bravado, and maybe he was serious.
However, out in the boonies with a guy with a gun in his hand who made the threats, how would you react if the threats, real or not had been made at you.

I don't doubt that Mr. Elms, seeing Pogue being gunned down would have drawn his weapon. Dallas would have had no choice but to react in the way he did. Conley Elms just had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I never knew him, so I have no idea of what kind of a person he was.

FWIW, the sheriff that arrested Claude the first time, when he was wounded by one of the deputies was a close neighbor, living only two doors down from me. I noticed that the movie made him into somewhat of a country bumpkin. He was far from that.

I suppose everyone will have an opinion of one kind or another in this matter. Seems to me, Claude may have been just as much a victim as the two wardens. You can believe what the media says about it, or you can form your own conclusions. Was he the "bad guy"? Or was he the victim of a rogue game warden? We'll never know.
Paul B.

[gspsonny03]

I wasn't going to get back into this, but here goes. If
Dallas was such a victim, why is it that Mr. Elms was shot in the back? Dallas and Stevens had both been relieved of their weapons and neither officer had their guns in hand. Dallas had a hideout gun. Elms had went into the tent and came out with Two bobcat pelts aand was kneeling down to look at them, Dallas asked Pogue if he was under arrest, Pogue said yes, Dallas pulled the hideout gun, shot Pogue twice and the turned and shot Elms twice. By the way this was reported by Stevens who was Dallas's friend. They took Pogue loaded him on a mule hauled him to Stevens blazer, went back for Elms, but he was so much bigger the mule wouldn't haul him, so they dumped him in the river. They drove Pogue into Nevada, buried him in the desert. Course this all took place after he shot them in the back of the head. It don't sound to me like he was so innocent and pure. Everyone who was called for witness said that Pogue was a stern but fair man with the exception of one who said the Pogue gave his wife a ticket and was very rude and crude, but when they checked on the ticket it was wrote by someone else. Now I never met the man and don't know anything about either one, all I'm saying is Dallas had other avenues he could have taken.

[Nulle]

Well I hope he don't settle in SD either and really don't care what kind of "excuse" you can come up with as to why he Broke the Law and killed .

[tooldummy]

Maybe there were extenuating circumstances I don't know about. But killing a law enforcement officer, whether a detective, street cop, meter maid, or game warden just doesn't seem right.

[fabsroman]

Killing anybody just doesn't seem right, doesn't matter whether it is a LEO or not.

There are already conflicting facts on this thread. Was the second officer shot in the back, or was he shot while attempting to draw his gun? Shooting him in the back would have made it really hard for Claude to win on a self defense motive. Personally, I would think the shots to the back of the head, or the head in general would have made this murder in the first degree. At least that is the law in Maryland.

Once the threat has been neutralized, deciding to kill somebody is no longer self defense, but murder. By switching guns, Claude had the time to think, which would have put this in the first degree muder category because the LEO's deaths were premeditated when he pulled the trigger on the .22 and shot them in the head.

You also have to realize that his friend, the only eye witness to this whole thing that was still breathing, other than Claude that is, would have probably received a deal from the State's Attorney's office because he was an accessory to murder after the fact. I am sure that he didn't want to go to jail either so he would have probably been telling the State's Attorney whatever he wanted to know.

These cases are tough and they suck, but I think I would have locked the guy up for life or fried him because of the .22 shots.

[Hawkeye6]

Guess this is why we try people by a jury of local people (peers). They determined what the facts were and set the punishment.

The rest of us are just speculating based on incomplete knowledge.

[fabsroman]

Hawkeye,

You beat me to it. I was going to write that the problem with this thread is that it is influenced by a lot of unknows and incorrect "facts." Even at a trial, you don't get all the facts and sometimes one witness contradicts another witness, so a jury has a tough job of figuring out who to believe and who not to believe and deciding guilt or not based upon testimony the receive about what happened that night and other incidents.

I am willing to bet that most of us have heard OUR story via word of mouth, and anybody who has played telephone as a kid knows how badly that can get distorted, or we have heard the story through the TV or newspaper, and we all know how much we can trust them to tell it as it is.

So, we can all sit here and argue about whether Claude is a good guy or a bad guy, but we aren't going to get anywhere.

Personally, I think that the game warden would have shot Claude on the spot if that was what he really intended on doing. Why take away their guns and then look through the camp to see if you can find any incriminating evidence before you shoot a person if you really intended on shooting that person anyway. I just believe that if the LEO's really wanted to kill Claude, he would have been dead before he had the chance to shoot back. I also think he got away with murder.

Of course, I am basing my opinion on "facts" that I have read on this thread. Who knows if the game wardens actually took the guns away from the men. I am sure Claude and his accessory had plenty of time to work on their story while they were hauling and burying the bodies.

[Hawkeye6]

Fabs:

That's right.

Presumptively, justice was done here. Twelve good men and true found facts and reached a verdict. I'm sure the State and People of Idaho were represented by adequate counsel. I don't know who or how, but Dallas seems to have been adequately represented as well, especially as it seems pretty certian he was indigent.

[fabsroman]

I believe the PC term would be 12 people since their were more women on the jury than men. Just busting your chops after a tough day of work my friend.

[Nulle]

Well in my State where the person is shot has No bearing on 1st 2nd or 3rd degree . Other elements on the crime need to be met for each one.
This guy has spent time in South Dakota jails before and hope he remembers and stays out of this State.
There was a movie made on this and it was quite interesting and am supprised to say the least he is getting out.

[fabsroman]

Nulle,

I am guessing that you think I think that he is guilty of first degree murder because he shot the guys in the head. Quite honestly, it wouldn't have mattered if he shot them in the head or shot them in the chest after they were already down. The differentiating factor between murder and manslaughter in Maryland is that murder is premeditated. Manslaughter is just a wreckless disregard for human life (e.g., doing 120 mph in a 40 mph zone). A person I know, not a friend of mine, killed an old lady while doing 100+ in a 40 mph zone. He ended up T-boning her while she was trying to cross the intersection in her car.

In Maryland, what Claude did would have been murder or he would have been let of on self defense. Whether it would have been first degree or second depends on certain factors, but it wouldn't have been manslaughter.

[Nulle]

Pretty much the same in this State and hope ya get your nightmares undercontrol = lol
I take it you didn't happen to see the movie ? It was pretty good and interesting . Maybe the killer will get a few $ from it to get a fresh start ?

[Hawkeye6]

Fabs:

1. I genereally don't get accused of being PC. :)

2. Isn't manslaughter a "lesser included offense" in a murder charge in Maryland?

H.

[Valigator]

Oh Fabs you shoulda been a boxer....daze them ...confuse them .....you licensed in Florida...just in case??????

[wrenchman]

I have had a run in with a c.o. but each time you need to remeber
most every one they deal with has a gun so being nice may not be the best thing to do till he knows whats going on.
I would let a c.o arrest me for a bobcat pelt any day and fight it in court then risk life in prison.
I also realize i dont know much on this but wouldnt it look strang
no matter where you are if you have wild life taged frome another state.
just a exampel there are lots of areas here were you could hunt deer and walk into ohio and kill a deer if i used a ohio tag and drag it back across the line and hang it in camp in mi now if a c.o checks it i may have to prove were i killed it.

by the way i did not see the movie

[Nulle]

You know Val to me this killer is no better then the perps. you fight against and we both know how many of these they turn loose ever day. Guess I should have a cold glass of OJ and forget it lmao.

[fabsroman]

The justice system in this country isn't perfect. I think we can all agree to that. I think we can also agree that it is one of the better systems on the planet.


Nulle,

The only nightmares that I have right now are that of my dog drowning under the ice. I don't do much criminal stuff and all of it is assault and battery or less. I have done one assualt and battery in the second degree, a couple DWI's, some DNR violations, and some traffic tickets. Most of the criminal stuff is done for people that are already business clients of mine. The serious stuff I refer out because I don't want to deal with that kind of client and I don't take any new clients that come to me with a criminal matter as their first case.


Hawkeye,

Manslaughter is a lesser included offense to murder (i.e., it has the same elements, but it lacks malice).

I did a little research and figured out why Claude could have been found guilty of manslaughter. In Maryland, and many other states, it is called the imperfect self defense theory. If Claude had proven that he acted in self defense, which would entail a person reasonably believing that they are facing imminent death, he would have gotten off completely. The imperfect self defense assertion mitigates murder to manslaughter. The imperfect self defense assertion is where a reasonable person would not be in fear for his life based upon the circumstances.

The introduction to the case reads like this:

"... when evidence is presented showing subjective belief of defendant charged with murder that use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm, defendant is entitled to a proper instruction on imperfect self-defense, which would enable jury to find defendant guilty of murder if it concluded defendant did not have a subjective belief that use of deadly force was necessary, to find defendant not guilty if it concluded that defendant had a reasonable subjective belief, or to find defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter if it concluded that defendant honestly believed that use of force was necessary but that subjective belief was unreasonable under circumstances..."


Val,

I wish I were licensed in Florida. The fiance's brother is having a little trouble at the University of Florida with a professor, but I can't do a single thing because I am only licensed in Maryland and the District of Columbia. It drives me crazy when people abuse their power.

[quigleysharps4570]

Originally posted by PJgunner
Anyway, more than once, I personally have seen Pogue when he came to visit friends of relatives while drinking, swear that if he ever caught Claude Dallas out in the boonies, he would shoot him down like a dog. BTW, that was sworn to in court.

I think that if I was out in the boonies, and a game worden who bragged about killing me if he caught me out in the hills showed up and pulled a gun, I'd be inclined to do what Claude did.[/B]

Hellava note ain't it? Having LEO's going around saying that. Guess if Dallas would've pushed it, he could've got the ole boy's job...but...the threats wouldn't of went away and I'm sure it would've just made matters worse.
Sworn out in court? Pretty damning evidence right there.
Like most, I'm relatively sure if someone was saying that about me...I'd hate to see him out in the sticks with his gun drawn. Wouldn't be anything good come out of it. Don't think I'd want to wait and see if he had just been running his mouth. Don't think anyone would.
It's a shame it had to happen, ruined lives for alot of folks.

[PJgunner]

On Accurate reloading.com, there is a thread on this same subject. One of the posts relates an actual encounter with Mr. Pogue. It's in the big game hunting room.
Paul B.

[PJgunner]

This it the post from accurate reloading.

Posted 11 February 2005 22:24
This was posted by a guy over on 24hrcampfire , for whatever it's worth

"Let me tell you about my experience with Bill Pogue. I was returning from an unsuccesfull hunt on Juniper Mt. In southern Idaho. Eighty miles of two track from the nearest hard road, phone or any other type of help, Pogue stepped into the road and stopped me. No game in the open pick up, empty rifle cased behind the seat. After he searched the truck, he seemed angry he had found no reason to arrest me. He began to jab me in the chest with his left fingers while working the hammer on his revolver with his right. As he backed me away from my truck, I remembered the old Viet Nam feeling of "today I will die". He constantly berated me with taunts of "Don't like it, huh boy" and "What are you going to do about, boy" I believed then and believe now he was looking for an excuse to kill me. I made a silent pledge to myself, and never told any one about it, the next time I saw him in the desert I would kill him.

When Dallas shot him, he was working the hammer on his revolver. Over 300 people were prepared to testify to sinliar events.

Remember, when he went after Dallas, he was acting on behalf of a rancher's son who claimed the area as his own, private trapping domain. Remember Stevens never saw what happened with Pogue but did testify when Elms emerged from the tent his revlover was drawn. Remember also, Stevens was never charged with anything even though he admitted to helping Dallas dispose of Elms' body. Dallas should have been nominated for citizen of the year "


What is interesting about this case, there are a few individuals that get all worked up over Dallas getting out after 25 or 30 years and serving his full term for a manslaughter conviction . Yet convicted murderers get out on parole every day , often with less than ten or very few years actually served , and you don't hear so much as a whimper from these same people........"

This give one hell of a good insight into the character of Bill Pogue.
Paul B.

[fabsroman]

Yes, many murders do get out early from prison. Some don't even serve 20 years. However, the distinguishing factor that you are missing is that a LEO was killed. Most killers of LEO's end up getting the death penalty if I am not mistaken. Now, I am neither standing up for Pogue nor Claude, just pointing out that oversite in your post PJ. I would assume that those are your words since they don't contain quotation marks, but if they aren't I apologize in advance. You know what they say about assuming.

[PJgunner]

That post came originally from 24 hour campfire and was posted on accurate reloading. What I know of Pogue was he was at one time an LEO in Winnemucca and tangled with some of the politically powerful in that town. He ended up in Idaho as a game warden. We had a very bad reputation as a bad a$$ hombre in Winnemucca with a rep of doing bad deeds to those he didn't like.
I knew Claude only in a minimal way. He sometimes took odd jobs in Winnemucca, and at least with me was a pleasant enough fellow. I hired him to help me put up a fence around my yard. he did a good job and struck me as a hard worker.
Pogue would come back to Winnemucca at times and party with friends and relatives. On more than one occasion, friends and I heard him spout off that if he caught Claude out in the boonies, he would kill him. LEO or not, I for one figure he got his just deserts.
Now I'm not saying that what Claude did was right. I was not there and was not in that situation. However, considering Pogue's reputation and the factr that he had made threats about Dallas, I'm not to sure I wouldn't have done the same thing if I were in Claudes shoes.
There must be something more to all this, becuase, if Claude was really the bad guy, why did over 300 people want to testify in his behalf against Pogue? Why did so many people in the Winnemucca, Paradise Hill and Paradise Valley area go out of their way to "harbor a fugitive" after he'd killed the two wardens?
I do feel that Claude probably thought he might be "shot while trying to escape.
So, was this a "rogue poaching mountain man" or a bad LEO that was considering doing his own kind of justice?
I don't know, you don't know, nor does anyone else that was not there.
I figure he did the crime, he did the time, leave him be.
Paul B.

[gspsonny03]

Maybe you should tell Elm's and Pogue's widow's that what happened was justified. Not only did he commit a crime to them, but to every law-abiding sportsman on these forums. This wasn't his first experience with the law for poaching, and I think that's the point the people are trying to make. He didn't have to live the type of life he did and could have avoided the problems his life created. There is a couple of other points you keep making. If he had 300 people willing to testify for him, why didn't they? You also keep saying that Elm's kept coming out of the tent with gun in hand, now I suppose that's possible, but it was testified in court that his hands had pelts in them, it was also testified by the Idaho state pathologist that Elms was shot in the back, I don't care how else you slice it, that's just wrong. Anytime you kill someone you take everything he is and everything he will be away from him and that's not something to be taken lighly. If this would have been just between Dallas and Pogue most people probably wouldn't care so much about the outcome, but it wasn't.

[TheeBadOne]

Originally posted by gspsonny03
Maybe you should tell Elm's and Pogue's widow's that what happened was justified. Not only did he commit a crime to them, but to every law-abiding sportsman on these forums. This wasn't his first experience with the law for poaching, and I think that's the point the people are trying to make. He didn't have to live the type of life he did and could have avoided the problems his life created. There is a couple of other points you keep making. If he had 300 people willing to testify for him, why didn't they? You also keep saying that Elm's kept coming out of the tent with gun in hand, now I suppose that's possible, but it was testified in court that his hands had pelts in them, it was also testified by the Idaho state pathologist that Elms was shot in the back, I don't care how else you slice it, that's just wrong. Anytime you kill someone you take everything he is and everything he will be away from him and that's not something to be taken lightly. If this would have been just between Dallas and Pogue most people probably wouldn't care so much about the outcome, but it wasn't.
Now don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of a good yarn against the establishment and a martyr in the making. ;)

[fabsroman]

Sheez, I wish we could all sit down, read all the testimony from the trial, look at all the exhibits, and then sit down and discuss this in a nice manner. At the end of the day, I think we might be able to agree on some things. Of course, it would be nice to actually have seen the witnesses testify to see their composure, but I would take reading all the testimony at this point. Even then, we probably would still be missing some of the facts and there would still be contradicting "facts."

[TheeBadOne]

Originally posted by fabsroman
Sheez, I wish we could all sit down, read all the testimony from the trial, look at all the exhibits, and then sit down and discuss this in a nice manner. At the end of the day, I think we might be able to agree on some things. Of course, it would be nice to actually have seen the witnesses testify to see their composure, but I would take reading all the testimony at this point.
http://suddenstrike.4players.de:1035/ssoboard/images/smilies/good.gif

[fabsroman]

Thanks TBO.

I was wondering when you were going to see this thread. I almost didn't look at it myself, but it has turned out to be pretty interesting. Never heard of this guy until I read this thread.

[Hawkeye6]

Originally posted by fabsroman
Sheez, I wish we could all sit down, read all the testimony from the trial, look at all the exhibits, and then sit down and discuss this in a nice manner. At the end of the day, I think we might be able to agree on some things. Of course, it would be nice to actually have seen the witnesses testify to see their composure, but I would take reading all the testimony at this point. Even then, we probably would still be missing some of the facts and there would still be contradicting "facts."

Fabs:

I guess that's why we have jurys, huh? Those are the folks who sat down and did all this work. Their verdict was manslaughter (I think?) not murder and the sentence they imposed was 30 years not death.

Taking into account the little that I know about it, it seems to me that justice has been done for all concerned here.

H.

[quigleysharps4570]

Originally posted by fabsroman
Never heard of this guy until I read this thread.

It was quite a deal. Wish I still had all the articles I saw on it.

[gspsonny03]

I was going to post the website on here yesterday to some of the old articles, so we could stop all of this he said she said nonsense, but couldn't find it. I still have probably a half dozen different articles in my possession, but don't know how I could post them. I just have copies of them.

[Hawkeye6]

You gotta remember. Fabs was a mere child when all this went down. :) I remember it, but only vaguely as it was not covered very heavily in Chicago where I lived at the time.

[quigleysharps4570]

Originally posted by gspsonny03
I still have probably a half dozen different articles in my possession, but don't know how I could post them. I just have copies of them.

Do you have a scanner GS?

[gspsonny03]

Yes I do, but the print is so small and hard to read, I'm not sure it would let me print it. Other than scanning it I'm not sure where I need to go from there. I know how to scan it, but I don't know if I can enlarge the print and clean it up any? Any help?

[fabsroman]

Most scanners will allow you to scan an article into a Word Processing program like Word or Wordperfect. You just have to pick the word processing program when you hit the scan button.

Once you scan it into the word processing program, you can go to Edit on the toolbar, hit Select All, and then change the font to a larger size if you need to. Something tells me that the font in the word processing program might just be large enough after it is scanned in. After that, just cut and paste the articles to the thread.

Now, with all that said, a newspaper article is much different than actually sitting in court. There is no way that newspaper articles can accurately sum up days and days of testimony and last I checked some newspapers and reporters biased. With that said, I sure would like to read the articles if you take the time to post them.

By the way, 22 years ago I was 11, and the only thing I was really interested in back then was hunting and soccer. Didn't watch too much TV and definitely didn't waste my time watching the news.

[gspsonny03]

Thanks Fabs. Yes I realize and have been told on a prior thread that the news media has a tendency to sensationalize events, but there has to be some amount of truth. If they lied about everything they printed as you well know they would be liable for slander. Any way this will give everyone the chance to read the articles and they can decide for theirselves. I'm at work today and the scanner is at home, I'll try and get it done tomorrow. Again thanks for the help.

[quigleysharps4570]

After you scan and resize it, I use photobucket.com as my host. It's a free site to store pics and post them in places like here. I've scanned many clippings out of newspapers, books and magazines...works fine. You'll have to play with it until you find the size that's appropriate. On these I could've made them larger and easier to read but didn't want them taking up too much room. Example...this first pic is out of a book.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v381/quigleysharps4570/70-150.jpg

This clipping is out of a Cabela's.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v381/quigleysharps4570/BuffaloBore.jpg

This is a newspaper clipping from the early 70's...my Dad, second from left.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v381/quigleysharps4570/article.jpg

You'll do fine with it GS. Will be looking forward to seeing them.

[gspsonny03]

Thanks Quigley. I'll give it a try.

[gspsonny03]

Sorry folks, I know I promised some articles, but they are just to big to post. I did try. I took quigley's advice and loaded them on Photobucket so if you want to look at them, you can go to www.photobucket.com/albums/v662/gspsonny03 . Thats the only way I know, so that you can see the whole articles without cutting and seperating them all into little pieces. I know these articles won't answer everything about what happened and I didn't put them out there thinking they would, but they do raise some reasonable doubt. Enjoy.

[Evan03]

Roy

i know not of the the details, i wasnt even a year old when all this went down. 22 years ago i was born, for the last 22 dallas has been in prison.

ive dealt with fish and game officers here over very minor matters. but from what ive seen it didnt look very good, abd doenst sound good from all over the state.

i just wish i could be in a fish and game offivers shows for a year, then maybe id come out with hole difrent perspective on things and i also may have difrent opion of what i think of dallas.

but as we stand right now, 22 years ago something happend, maybe wrong by the fish and game, maybe wrong on dallasses part. the outcome was two dead officers and claud spending the better part of his life behind bars.

so right or wrong whats happend has happend, and more then likly will continue to happen here in idaho.


Evan

[Win75]

I have not read all of the posts but my thoughts on this are:

The man was breaking the law. Breaking the law to eat is no defense. Murdering a law enforcement officer is against the law. It is murder, no matter how you look at it. 12 bleeding heart jurors could not gather up the guts to find a murderer guilty of murder. So, now Claude Dallas will be free to go out and 'sustanance' hunt again, break the law again, and kill again while claiming that the law enforcement community is out to get him. H**L yes, they are out to get him. He is breaking the law. But appearently because he is a "good Ole boy", some people around think he is above the law.

Claude Dallas should have fried years ago and saved the taxpayers a lot of money. It would have probably saved someone elses life in the future. Time will tell.