Sleezeball award goes to...

We're still talking about this?

Don't we have better ways of making use of our time?

I've carried fish on my PA for people who hit limits of WSB on an Outback and couldn't handle the capacity. Consider me guilty of possession laws.

I can think of two people right now that I know have gone out on a Monday and caught limits of WSB, then again on Tuesday during that wide open June bite. You're telling me you don't know of anyone... wink wink? Those people "ate" or "gave away" 30# of filets in 20 hours?
That's a violation of the law, but I don't see them on blast.

You've admitted you've witnesses him fish through limits, but never seen him keep more than limits.

Originally Posted by GregAndrew

And I have personally witnessed this guy keep fishing WSB right through his limit, although not witnessed him keeping overlimits.

I will CnR all day through a good bite after limits. Ever hit a loaded paddie that won't turn off? I'll fish it until my elbows are swollen.


The day someone catches him breaking the law, I vote for full on street justice, but until then, you're bordering on the line of defamation if you label this guy a poacher with no real evidence. (Not directed at you Greg)


defamation (of character) n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime having a feared disease, or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se or slander and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.

As I said, you're bordering on it because it might not be "Intentional" but the internet if a powerful thing, and once something is on the internet it's pretty much there for good, at least the impact it has had on the viewers of the thread is.

This guy might be a kook, a weirdo, a general piece of shit... but if you're putting him in the category of being a law breaker without any sound evidence, you are in fact breaking a law of it's own.

This man owns a business, and these "rumors" or "accusations" could potentially effect that business which launches him well within the realm of being able to consider pursuing charges of defamation.

If it were me on the other end, I would take you to court and fuck you six ways from sunday.


Delete this post and lets all move forward.