ShareThis Page
Fayette pair’s hunting licenses suspended |

Fayette pair’s hunting licenses suspended

Two Fayette County men accused of poaching two deer for a Super Bowl XLV party had their hunting licenses temporarily suspended and will pay $6,000 in fines.

Christopher Scott Layman, 21, of 123 Bethelboro Road, Uniontown, and James Richard Donaldson, 35, of 725 Penn Ave., Lemont Furnace, were charged last month with two counts each of unlawful killing or taking of big game in connection with the shootings of two whitetail deer on the day before the Super Bowl.

Jason D. Farabaugh, a wildlife conservation officer who conducted the investigation into the out-of-season killings, said the offenses were reduced from misdemeanors to less serious summary offenses.

The charges were reduced as part of a plea deal negotiated on Wednesday at the office of North Union District Judge Wendy Dennis.

“They made a mistake,” Farabaugh said. “They weren’t bad guys by any means, but they knew they did wrong.”

According to criminal complaints, Layman told Farabaugh that he, Donaldson and a male juvenile decided to shoot the deer on Feb. 5 for a Super Bowl party.

One deer was shot along Elliottsville Road in North Union and the other near a quarry on Jumonville-Coolspring Road, according to the complaints. The deer were butchered in a garage in Lemont Furnace.

Farabaugh investigated after receiving a tip, according to the complaints.

Terms of the plea agreement call for Layman and Donaldson to pay fines of $3,000 each, for a total of $6,000. Farabaugh said Donaldson’s hunting license was suspended for five years. Layman’s was suspended for eight years.

Charges against the unidentified juvenile are pending in juvenile court, Farabaugh said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.