Split decision in falcon case

COEUR d'ALENE - Patti MacDonald is guilty of pursuing a protected bird.

But she's not guilty of beating or harassing an animal, a Kootenai County jury ruled Thursday.

MacDonald, 60, was accused of attacking Scott Dinger's falcon, Hornet, when she encountered the raptor attempting to complete a lawful kill of a duck near a corn maze attraction in Hauser. She was charged with the two misdemeanor offenses in connection with the Jan. 7 incident and, after more than two hours of jury deliberation, she was found guilty of one.

After the verdict, Dinger told The Press that he just wanted to see MacDonald face a jury, and that he was pleased with the result.

"We fought the good fight and got our story out there," Dinger said. "Now it's up to the judge."

During the two-day trial, multiple witnesses testified that MacDonald told them she beat the falcon in order to save the duck. Others testified that the Hauser woman was wearing, or told them she was wearing, a beaded scarf and used that scarf in her efforts to save the mallard.

However when MacDonald took the stand, she testified that she only used the phrase about beating the falcon after witnessing Dinger wring the duck's neck. MacDonald also told the jury of three men and three women that she doesn't own a beaded scarf and was wearing a light, black scarf when she exited her Jeep on Beck Road behind the two birds struggling.

Michael Palmer, MacDonald's defense attorney, told the jury that what happened in the case was an unfortunate example of confabulation - a psychological term used to describe the production of fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memory about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive.

Palmer said the witnesses who gave testimony conflicting with MacDonald's version of events had already read media reports about the incident and talked with others about what had happened. He said even if his client did say to co-workers that she beat the falcon, Palmer questioned the intent of the statement.

"Is that her telling them she did that, or is it her describing an unusual incident that happened to her on the way home from work?" he asked the jury.

Finally Palmer told the jury that his client acted without malice and was simply doing the only thing she thought she could do when she came upon a bizarre situation on Beck Road.

"This isn't done to punish the falcon," Palmer said. "This is done to protect the duck."

Prosecutor Art Verharen was given a chance to respond to Palmer's closing remarks. He immediately told the jury there was no need to think about whether or not MacDonald acted maliciously.

"What was going on in her head is exactly what she said she did," Verharen said.

The prosecutor also questioned Palmer's claim that confabulation occurred prior to the trial. Verharen said none of the individuals who gave testimony had anything to gain from refuting MacDonald's version of events.

"These people are all consistent," Verharen said. "They're all consistent because she said the same thing to them."

"She's not being charged with being a mean person," he concluded. "She's just being charged with these two offenses, and even good people make mistakes once in a while."

MacDonald is scheduled to be sentenced on July 28 by Judge James Stow in Kootenai County District Court.

The charge carries a maximum sentence of six months of jail time, $1,000 in fines, and MacDonald could lose her ability to purchase a hunting or fishing license for as long as three years.