Predator hunter killed in Lunenburg County Va. Monday night
- Thread starter 1trkyhntr
- Start date
Rock Knocker
Well-known member
Do binoculars have a tapetum that reflects light? This whole eye reflection started from a DNR shot from bino reflection, no animal tapetum involved. Some google AI search is how wild sceptics like this start and, "Hey its eyes shine, lets shoot, that cant be human!" Think harder than a google search...i just googled it and every article or link i saw said "human eyes do not reflect light at night because they lack the reflective layer that animals have. if we had that layer we could see in the dark like they do.
I WIN
There are countless images of human eyes reflecting light from flash. You are promising me, that an IR illuminator can not do that and you are promising me that NVG isnt going to exaggerate that in perfect conditions? Ive got IR and PVS14, just no camera to film and test shining IR in my face. One of you said human eye glow from camera flash had something to do with being stoned, some here are clearly confused.
Last edited:
Rock Knocker
Well-known member
I POSTED PICTURES. You said you did a google search.................
spotstalkshoot
Well-known member
Safety is the excuse in Canada but with population density not a real reason.
limbhanger10
Well-known member
...cell phones video.
bohunr
Well-known member
that is 100% correct...you posted pictures and i did a google search. i still never promised anything.
I totally agree with all you said.
1trkyhntr
Well-known member
Copied from the local newspaper;
The sister of a well-known outdoorsman, who was shot and killed while predator hunting at night, has filed a $10.35 million wrongful death lawsuit in Lunenburg Circuit Court.
Brandy Gaulding Roque of Lunenburg is the sister of William “Bug” Gaulding, 54, of Victoria, and executor of her brother’s estate. She’s demanding a trial by jury.
‘Bug’ Gaulding was fatally wounded shortly after 10:30 p.m. Monday night, Feb. 17th in the Keysville area of Lunenburg. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
Gaulding was alone and hunting bobcats and coyotes on land where he had permission to do so.
Two other men, including defendant Jonathan A. Bailey of Mecklenburg County, also were hunting the property — and also had permission — but weren’t hunting with Gaulding.
Bailey hasn’t been charged with a crime in the incident, which remains under investigation.
Ms. Roque’s eight-page lawsuit claims Bailey possessed and was using a thermal scope on his .243 rifle, and that the scope “is designed to detect heat signatures and clearly distinguish between human figures and animals — even in darkness.”
Ms. Roque’s suit claims that Bailey’s scope “would have revealed that Bug Gaulding was a human and not an animal” and that Bailey “negligently discharged his firearm in Gaulding’s direction without properly identifying his target.”
The suit claims that additionally, Bailey “negligently shot in the direction of the road, creating additional risk to the public and violating fundamental hunting safety principles.”
The state Dept. of Wildlife Resources has not yet disclosed the distance between Gaulding and Bailey, but there have been some reports that the distance was approximately 400-450 yards.
The week of the incident, DWR said Bailey and his companion remained on the scene until EMS and authorities arrived on the scene, and that they cooperated with the investigation.
Ms. Roque’s lawsuit alleges that Bailey “violated multiple cardinal rules of hunting safety, including: the rule requiring positive identification of the target before shooting; the rule requiring awareness of what lies beyond the target, as defendant Bailey negligently shot in the direction of a road; the rule against shooting at movement, shapes, or sound without positive identification…”
The suit further alleges: “The thermal signature of a human is substantially different from that of a bobcat or coyote, making defendant Bailey’s failure to distinguish between them evidence of a conscious disregard for safety protocols….Defendant Bailey chose to hunt in an area where he knew — or should have known — that other hunters might be present without taking adequate precautions to ensure their safety.”
The suit seeks $10 million in compensatory damages including: compensation for expected loss of income of the decedent; compensation for services, protection, care, and assistance provided by the decedent; compensation for sorrow, mental anguish, and solace, including society, companionship, comfort, guidance, kindly offices and advice of the decedent; compensation for the reasonably expected loss of income, services, protection, care, and assistance of the decedent that would have been received by his statutory beneficiary; and reasonable funeral expenses.”
An additional $350,000 in punitive damages also is being sought.
The plaintiff, Ms. Roque, is being represented by Wind Law in Richmond. Defendant Bailey has 21 days to respond to the suit, which was filed this past Monday, April 28th.
The sister of a well-known outdoorsman, who was shot and killed while predator hunting at night, has filed a $10.35 million wrongful death lawsuit in Lunenburg Circuit Court.
Brandy Gaulding Roque of Lunenburg is the sister of William “Bug” Gaulding, 54, of Victoria, and executor of her brother’s estate. She’s demanding a trial by jury.
‘Bug’ Gaulding was fatally wounded shortly after 10:30 p.m. Monday night, Feb. 17th in the Keysville area of Lunenburg. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
Gaulding was alone and hunting bobcats and coyotes on land where he had permission to do so.
Two other men, including defendant Jonathan A. Bailey of Mecklenburg County, also were hunting the property — and also had permission — but weren’t hunting with Gaulding.
Bailey hasn’t been charged with a crime in the incident, which remains under investigation.
Ms. Roque’s eight-page lawsuit claims Bailey possessed and was using a thermal scope on his .243 rifle, and that the scope “is designed to detect heat signatures and clearly distinguish between human figures and animals — even in darkness.”
Ms. Roque’s suit claims that Bailey’s scope “would have revealed that Bug Gaulding was a human and not an animal” and that Bailey “negligently discharged his firearm in Gaulding’s direction without properly identifying his target.”
The suit claims that additionally, Bailey “negligently shot in the direction of the road, creating additional risk to the public and violating fundamental hunting safety principles.”
The state Dept. of Wildlife Resources has not yet disclosed the distance between Gaulding and Bailey, but there have been some reports that the distance was approximately 400-450 yards.
The week of the incident, DWR said Bailey and his companion remained on the scene until EMS and authorities arrived on the scene, and that they cooperated with the investigation.
Ms. Roque’s lawsuit alleges that Bailey “violated multiple cardinal rules of hunting safety, including: the rule requiring positive identification of the target before shooting; the rule requiring awareness of what lies beyond the target, as defendant Bailey negligently shot in the direction of a road; the rule against shooting at movement, shapes, or sound without positive identification…”
The suit further alleges: “The thermal signature of a human is substantially different from that of a bobcat or coyote, making defendant Bailey’s failure to distinguish between them evidence of a conscious disregard for safety protocols….Defendant Bailey chose to hunt in an area where he knew — or should have known — that other hunters might be present without taking adequate precautions to ensure their safety.”
The suit seeks $10 million in compensatory damages including: compensation for expected loss of income of the decedent; compensation for services, protection, care, and assistance provided by the decedent; compensation for sorrow, mental anguish, and solace, including society, companionship, comfort, guidance, kindly offices and advice of the decedent; compensation for the reasonably expected loss of income, services, protection, care, and assistance of the decedent that would have been received by his statutory beneficiary; and reasonable funeral expenses.”
An additional $350,000 in punitive damages also is being sought.
The plaintiff, Ms. Roque, is being represented by Wind Law in Richmond. Defendant Bailey has 21 days to respond to the suit, which was filed this past Monday, April 28th.
Last edited:
Keith Karr
Well-known member
Appreciate the update Mike. Keep us posted.
Unfortunately the case is still an “active investigation” so nothing new has been released. I can only pray that it will be in the end.
Thank you all for trying to keep the discussion on the topic at hand. I’m not a hunter which is what led me to you guys. I’m searching for answers & opinions just like everybody else. He loved the sport. I don’t want something like this to ever happen again. This is a tough loss for our family. Y’all please be safe out there.
Gentlemen and Ladies,
Please allow me to paint a picture for you.
A fellow has been out at night hunting with his e caller and thermal-many many many times. Never has he had a response or seen a coyote or fox. Now all of the sudden his scanner picks up heat and movement 400 or 500 yards away. It's getting closer, at several hundred yards still distant, there is a small opening. The rifles in the tripod now he's on the scope.....BUT he can't make a positive ID-he's never had a shot before..SO he PASSES!!! Not a thing in this world has changed except the trespassing other hunter is still alive.
He'll get a coyote just not tonight. He may even get to tell the smacked ass he almost got shot!!!
Semper Fidelis
Soup
Please allow me to paint a picture for you.
A fellow has been out at night hunting with his e caller and thermal-many many many times. Never has he had a response or seen a coyote or fox. Now all of the sudden his scanner picks up heat and movement 400 or 500 yards away. It's getting closer, at several hundred yards still distant, there is a small opening. The rifles in the tripod now he's on the scope.....BUT he can't make a positive ID-he's never had a shot before..SO he PASSES!!! Not a thing in this world has changed except the trespassing other hunter is still alive.
He'll get a coyote just not tonight. He may even get to tell the smacked ass he almost got shot!!!
Semper Fidelis
Soup
deerichmond50
New member
You are right! I went off info and the word of a friend of the deceased, now believe it was a accident but still careless and should be held responsible no matter who you are you should be held accountable for your actions!
Spurchaser
Well-known member
I think whoever is looking through the thermal needs to do a serious upgrade on his scope before saying anything to anyone if he can’t tell a difference between human and critter out to 500yds and closer no matter how many times he’s hunted.
I’ve only hunted with thermal two years, and with a lot of success. I hunt with a friend and we both have thermal scopes and scanners. In my view, tragedies like this one are a human issue, not an equipment issue. Either it was intentional ( unlikely) or the shooter shot at something that he had not properly identified. If you have lower end or top of the line thermal equipment, you must KNOW what you are shooting, before you touch the trigger.
spotstalkshoot
Well-known member
No matter our opinion(s) from the peanut gallery, it will come down to an investigation and decision whether to charge for a criminal act.
Spurchaser
Well-known member
4 months in and nothing yet???
spotstalkshoot
Well-known member
7 uniform officers in the cty, case may take awhile.