He himself said the lion wasn’t killed until the day after he initially hit it with an arrow.
And he clearly didn’t assure the legality of his hunt despite the operation of illegal poachers such as the guy he hired.
Also, he had previously been caught and let off lightly for having killed a bear in an illegal area, then taken it in to a legal one to claim that he had bagged it there.
From what I’ve read, allowing legal hunts in Africa is helping to preserve these animals at this point, so yes, I suppose I am for that. Doesn’t mean I have to be for this dude, however. Yet, I think he has suffered sufficiently.
First point: No shot is certain. Hunting involves some risk of injuring an animal. I doubt very much whether Cecil thought much about all the animals he has mauled and lost over the course of a lifetime. Not to mention those he ate alive.
Second point: He pays to have the guides (licensed guides) take care of legal issues. That’s why the fees are given. If you want to have a legitimate point, consider the mess of case law here - now imagine it in another country (and a third world country at that).
Third point: What are the facts of his ‘conviction?’ This man is a hunter. Have you ever hunted in heavy cover? Finding the line between legal and illegal terrain is not always as easy as you might think walking city streets. Did he actually carry a 300, 400, 500 . . . 1,000 pound bear elsewhere to claim legality or is this internet say-so? Finally, if he was let off lightly, it weighs heavily in favor of his offense being minor or unintentional. Actual and intentional violators are not let off easily, at least not where I come from.
Forth point: His past game violation in this country has no bearing on the legality, guilt or motives in the pop culture case at hand - except in the court of public opinion. You’ve cast your vote.