Hunting Shooter Identified as State Trooper
Off duty State Police Officer shot Norton resident, calls in incident.
State Police have confirmed that the shooter in the hunting accident on Dec. 31 was Norton resident John Bergeron of the Troop C Central Massachusetts State Police.
Bergeron, 50, fired from a heavily wooded area in the vicinity of 98 Oak St at approximately 4:55 p.m. New Year's Eve. The victim, Cheryl Blair, age 66, of Norton, was walking her two retrievers on a path when she was shot in the torso. The shooting occurred a few minutes prior to the end of the season for use of a black powder weapon.
Upon immediately realizing what had happened, the trooper called the incident in himself and administered medical aid to the woman until EMS arrived. The woman was transported to Rhode Island Hospital with injuries not believed to be life-threatening at this time. The shooting was investigated by the Bristol County State Police Detective Unit. The trooper is not facing charges and not facing any internal investigation.
“I am not prepared to say with certainty today that the shooting occurred within the reserve where hunting is allowed. It appeared that way to investigators, but the area was not marked with signs, so I cannot say for certain that it was in the hunting reserve,” said David Procopio, spokesman of the Massachusetts State Police.
Investigators said the area of the incident was approximately one quarter mile into the wooded area off Oak Street and a safe distance from any buildings.
According to a press release by State Police, Bergeron is an experienced hunter who lives in the area. He did not see the woman and mistook the tails of the two dogs as the tail of a deer he had seen earlier in the afternoon. Investigators said the shot that hit the victim was the only one he fired all afternoon. He had all proper gun and hunting licenses.
“The investigation is ongoing, but we have determined it was accidental and based on what is known at this time the shooter faces no criminal charges,” Procopio said.
“Our hopes are for a full and speedy recovery for the victim,” Procopio said.
Mike
6:46 pm on Sunday, January 1, 2012
Wow. So apparently all you need is a hunting license to shoot somebody legally, as long as it was an accident and you are a cop. This is criminal negligence regardless of intent. Does this sound absurd to anyone else? Imagine if all laws were interpreted by the intent of the accused. Everyone would be innocent. I don't think he did this on purpose, but he should be held accountable for his actions. Are we safe to hike in the woods anymore? Any hunter could kill me and get away with it if this is the precedent we are setting. The way this is being handled is a disgrace and this cover up needs to be investigated.
John
2:13 am on Monday, January 2, 2012
All good hunters will know what they are shooting at, they will Not blindly shoot at women and dogs and small children in the dark. Or threw bushes thinking they saw something or I saw a dear earlier in the day that must be it let me shoot blindly into the brush. Some people should not own guns or be allowed to hunt and this clown is one.
John
2:03 am on Monday, January 2, 2012
What a dope, typical state trooper move. Identified your target before you pull the trigger "stupid". I feel much better with dopes like this on. All i can say is Bergeron pull your head out of your ass.
Bruce
8:22 am on Monday, January 2, 2012
From all the other coverage it sadi that he shot her with a shotgun which is not a legitimate firearm for this time of year. so either the press got it wrong or he was not within the law. Sounds like maybe she got hit with a buckshot pellet? The other and worse thing is that he obviously did not know what his target was and did not identify it. FIRST RULE OF HUNTING ~ "KNOW YOUR TARGET" Since when does an experienced hunter shoot at Deers tails?? WTF not on;y wrong but very un-ethical. This whole story id begining to sound like a fish tail..........
DJ
8:34 am on Monday, January 2, 2012
This is a travesty. According to today's reports, there will be no criminal charges, but no one can say for sure where the incident actually precisely took place? Just goes to show how ridiculous the 500 foot setback law is. This area is completely surrounded by homes and given the setback, would only allow for a few hundred feet of "legal" hunting. Any another thing......why is hunting allowed in a "wildlife preserve" anyway?
I hope this lady recovers then sues the bejesus out of this moron in civil court. The only thing I want more is to be sitting on the jury!
paul
8:50 am on Monday, January 2, 2012
Anyone else would already have been charged with assault with a deadly weapon. He should loose his job for being so trigger happy. The first thing you learn at the range in boot camp is know what you are shooting at. If you or I shot some lady in the woods the cops would have searched the house and taken every gun in sight. Double Standard!
Chuck Moitoza
3:24 pm on Monday, January 2, 2012
Wow what a bunch we have here! First attack because he is a police officer,would you all be saying the same if he wasn't? We hear of hunting accidents all the time and that is what this is an accident! Why am I not surprised to also hear the SUE word. Yep sue em and that will fix everything! Yes there were some questionable actions by this hunter,but no worse than most who hope to land a deer. So for you sue him fire him MORONS I only hope you never have an accident and if you do hopefully there will be less judgmental people ready to jump on you!
DJ
3:55 pm on Monday, January 2, 2012
Hey Chuck, perhaps we are indeed collectively moronic if we allow present law to remain, if as you say "these hunting accidents happen all the time". Since you don't get it, I for one brought up suing this hunter because it appears there will be no ramifications and this dingbat, who happens to also be someone in PUBLIC SAFETY shot an innocent human and could have very likely killed her simply because he CHOSE not to be sure of what he was taking target at.
I must say that I am most impressed with the number of hunters who have posted here in a similar uproar regarding antiquated laws and irresponsible hunting tactics that nearly cost a life, but I suppose it was only a matter of time before the dumb down irrational few would chime in.
paul
5:00 pm on Monday, January 2, 2012
If you rear-end another driver, you get a ticket. If I shot another citizen by accident, I would get a summons, have my guns confiscated and hunting license revoked. If my boss found out about it, I would get laid off(the police union would not protect me). A State Trooper should not be shooting first and asking questions later. Desk Duty!
Roxanne Houghton
2:20 pm on Tuesday, January 3, 2012
I dont think that this is being treated lightly solely because the shooter is a State Police Officer, although it is part of it. The other issue is the subject matter of hunting.Raise too much of a fuss and the whole idea of hunting in our cities and towns might come under scrutiny, Many city and towns are too afraid to outlaw hunting because of the "good old boy" network and the "nobody is going to tell me I cant hunt" mentality. The idea that hunting is allowed in any city or town around here is absurd - just think about it. If hunters want to hunt, they need to go up north where "real" woods really exist - not in our neighborhoods. Most cities and towns have a law that states that it is illegal for anyone other than a police officer (in the act of law enforcement) to discharge a firearm.
This woman's life will never be the same, and she is still critical. Of course this matter warrants an investigation and a penalty, not because of who the shooter is, but because the shooter shot and almost killed a human being. The State Police should be handling this in a much different manner - their own deserve better than a "accidents happen". What if it happened to a fellow officer? This is not written with any bias against the State Police. A State Police Officer once saved my life and I have a lot of respect for their ranks - but this is just plain wrong....
Bobby
10:23 am on Wednesday, January 4, 2012
When you are injured on your property your rights are determined by the law of torts.The wording is from old French word that means "wrong" The law of torts can be boiled down to this: When someone is in the wrong and injures you or damages your property,that person must pay you for damages done. Some accidents are truly unavoidable;they happen even though everyone involved was paying attention,and no one was at fault.We have three types of tortious conduct,1-negligence,2-intentional misconduct,and last but not least3-strict liability.
Bobby
10:30 am on Wednesday, January 4, 2012
The most common tort is the tort of negligence.Negligence can be defined simply as carelessness:failing to pay sufficant attention under the circumstances.How can you tell whether the person who hurt you was negligent or not? The standard used is whether that person was exercising a reasonable amount of "due care" under the given circumstances. Speedy Recovery for the victim.
JBC
6:45 pm on Wednesday, January 4, 2012
I have been searching for MA general law language regarding this situation.
Nothing conclusive yet, except the parameters already reported, hours of hunting, dates, etc.
But, for those who are concerned, consider these laws from our neighbor, NH.
207:37-c Shooting Human Beings While Hunting. –
I. Any person, while on a hunting trip, or in pursuit of wild animals or wild birds, or while target practicing, who negligently shoots and wounds any human being, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
207:37-a Negligent Discharge of Firearms, Bow and Arrow or Crossbow and Bolt. – Any person who shall negligently discharge any firearm, ... and at the discretion of the executive director, the hunting license of such a person may be revoked for a period not to exceed 10 years.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xviii/207/207-37-a.htm
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xviii/207/207-37-c.htm