I think it's been fairly well established that Chuck didn't give or sell the snake to the deceased. What is actually happening here is a two-pronged investigation into one incident. As is usually the case, the media is not making a distinction between the two different aspects of the investigation. Chuck was arrested when authorities searched the home of a friend he was staying with. The search was related to the snake-bite death. Chuck was in Tennessee on his way home from the Repticon show in Atlanta, where he had given a few venomous snake presentations. He went to his friends' house in Tennessee so he could attend the funeral of the bite victim. Because he had done the presentations in Atlanta, he had some native venomous snakes with him. When the authorities searched the home of Chuck's friend, they found Chuck's snakes. The charges against Chuck aren't really related to the snake bite death; they stemmed from a general search for information about the bite. The manslaughter charges that are mentioned in the article have nothing to do with Chuck. He has not and will not be charged in connection with the actual bite. It is kind of confusing and Chuck is being punished due to the hysteria around the bite -- something with which he had nothing to do. I am relating this based on information Chuck has posted on his Facebook page. I hope I have accurately related the gist of his posts. If I am incorrect, please, someone correct me.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]