Man accused of animal cruelty to be charged with murder

S

smgabe

New member
Waupaca (WFRV) – A man charged with running down deer with his snowmobile is expected to be charged with murder this afternoon.

Rory Kuenzi is also accused of killing someone in a fatal hit-and-run crash from 2004. Officials think Kuenzi hit Kevin Mccoy and then took off.

Rory Kuenzi was sued by Mccoy's family for the incident, but charges were never filed.

Waupaca County's District Attorney said he was waiting on a reliable reconstruction report of the crash before making a decision on whether to file charges.

The Attorney General’s Office says charges are coming today. The Attorney General will release a statement as well.
 
X

xcr440

Well-known member
Just a prime example of a real stand up guy in the community who does NOT represent snowmobilers in any way.
 
O

ohiosledder

Member
I would sure like to hear why it has taken five years to produce a "a reliable reconstruction report of the accident". Its about time.
 
S

smgabe

New member
I hope not... but I suspect this S.O.B. will get off of this charge due to a technicality. Other than testimony, how are they gonna prove he was intoxicated?? Maybe Vehicular Manslaughter may have been more appropriate.
 
F

frnash

Active member
<font color="0000ff">smgabe:
"I suspect this S.O.B. will get off of this charge due to a technicality."</font>
You may be right, and I quote [emphasis is mine]:<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

Count 1: FAILURE TO STOP AND GIVE INFORMATION AND/OR RENDER AID FOLLOWING A VEHICULAR ACCIDENT INVOLVING DEATH OF A PERSON (Kuenzi)

On October 23, 2004, in the town of Farmington, Waupaca County, Wisconsin the above-named defendant, Rory A. Kuenzi, as the operator of a motor vehicle involved in an accident on a highway resulting in death to a person, to-wit Kevin McCoy, and did fail to immediately stop such vehicle and remain at the scene of the accident and give information (to-wit: failed to give his name, address and registration number of his vehicle, and exhibit his operator's license <u>to the person struck</u>) and render aid to any person injured in such accident, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 346.67(1), 346.74(5)(d) and 939.50(3)(d) (2003-04).<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>Well there is now apparently information from one or more witnesses to the fact that Kuenzi did in fact stop at the scene. And who can refute his potential claim that he did indeed give information to the person struck (namely the deceased). He can claim that he 'recited' all that required information to the deceased (perhaps by whispering in his ear — there is apparently no requirement that the required information be 'given' in writing), then proceeded to render aid to the deceased, by moving his body off the road, so it wouldn't be struck by any other vehicles! Case dismissed.
All ya need is a clever attorney.
One (count) down, one to go!
 
J

jpsted

New member
frnash

Of all the counts, this is the one that will stick because it has the most leeway in terms of interpretation. But in no way would a "reasonable person" (in this case a juror) allow for only moving the deceased body off the road without calling for help pass the litmus test for having rendered aid.
 
F

frnash

Active member
Of course if the coroner will testify to the effect that the death was virtually instantaneous, then it could be argued that Kuenzi rendered all the aid that anyone possibly could … for a dead body.

The argument regarding a… <font color="0000ff">"reasonable person" (in this case a juror) </font>… can be avoided by going for a bench trial, no jury! Then it would be in the hands of the judge!
happy.gif


(I'm playin' devil's advocate here, fer shur!)
 
K

kamikaze_bros

Member
frnash,

Count 2: Homicide by Operation of a Vehicle Under the Influence (with one prior OWI). Assuming that the plaintiff (State of Wisconsin) is relying on the testimony of Engel, who identified that he observed Kuenzi consuming at least 5, 12 oz. beers, what other evidence is there that would "prove" that Kuenzi was indeed under the influence of an intoxicant? Engel has already perjured himself (count 3) It appears to me that the second count may be a bit to lofty for a conviction. I am pretty sure they'd be able to get a jury to convict Kuenzi on Vehicular Homicide based solely upon what I've been able to learn in the filing. This is purely speculation but it appears to me that the plaintiff may be inkling towards a plea to the lesser charge on count 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top