Mammoth man attacked woman, went after Steve Searles

(News Release)

Brian Stacy Macklin

Brian Stacy Macklin

On Thursday, April 24 at approximately 5:30 p.m., Steve Searles, the Wildlife Specialist for the Town of Mammoth Lakes, also known as the “Bear Whisperer,” was parked in his marked truck on Frontage Road in front of Schat’s Bakery. Mr. Searles was parked so that he could make a phone call on his mobile phone. While on the phone, he was approached by Brian Stacy Macklin, age 46 and a resident of Mammoth Lakes. Macklin tried to open the locked passenger door and when unable, went around to the driver’s side and was unsuccessful in opening the locked driver’s door. Macklin then began punching the side window and kicking the door while yelling obscenities to Searles and complaining about him using his cell phone.

Mr. Searles broadcast over his Town radio that he needed assistance. Simultaneously, a local Mammoth resident, Amber Dessert, observed Macklin punching and kicking Searles’ vehicle. Ms. Dessert also notified the Police.

Officer Daniel Hansen responded and upon arrival, Macklin turned his attention to the officer and aggressively approached him with clenched fists. When the officer attempted to handcuff Macklin, he became physically and aggressively resistive. After a struggle, Officer Hansen, with the assistance of Wildlife Specialist Searles, handcuffed Macklin.

Ms. Dessert then told the officer her observations. She parked near Searles’ truck and while still in her car, was approached by Macklin who reached into her car and attempted to take her cell phone from her. She leaned away and Macklin said, “Did you see that cop on his cell phone? He’s gonna get brain cancer?” Macklin again reached into Dessert’s car and grabbed her hair and hit her on the side of the head. Macklin then went to Searles’ truck and tried to enter, and began punching and kicking it.

There were no injuries. Macklin was arrested for Attempt Felony Vandalism, Attempt Robbery, Resisting Arrest, Misdemeanor Battery, and Drunk in Public. He was booked at Mono County Jail with a bail of $100,000.



, , , ,

26 Responses to Mammoth man attacked woman, went after Steve Searles

  1. Joe April 25, 2014 at 4:04 pm #

    They live amongst us…. and they vote!

    • Wayne Deja April 26, 2014 at 7:37 am #

      Joe…..and the Presidential elections in both 2000 and 2004 prove what you say to be true !!!

  2. sugarmagnolia April 25, 2014 at 4:53 pm #

    sounds like a mental break…such a shame. Dealing with people not in their right mind is difficult. I hope Angela wasn’t hurt badly.

  3. ferdinand lopez April 25, 2014 at 6:02 pm #

    gee,he looks perfectly normal……….

  4. Man from Mammoth April 25, 2014 at 6:33 pm #

    It seems as if Steve Searles is a magnet for strange people.

  5. able body April 25, 2014 at 8:05 pm #

    I thought Mammoth was completely safe. Probably should make public safety more of a priority.

  6. able body April 25, 2014 at 8:06 pm #

    Hey Joe, some of them not only vote but are candidates for council or have been on the council.

  7. Wayne Deja April 26, 2014 at 7:36 am #

    Got a question….and hoping Chief Watson sees this and can respond….Isn’t it true if someone (allegedly) tries to gain entrance into your vehicle while it is occupied you have the right to use deadly force to keep it from happening ?…I know it is in Oregon,with a big problem of car-jackings in the area I used to live in…treated more or less the same way as if someone tries to break into your home and rob or cause you bodily harm ..

    • Trouble April 26, 2014 at 11:18 am #

      Wayne ,just don’t shot a bear and you won’t get charged.

    • Dan Watson April 26, 2014 at 11:18 pm #

      No, Wayne. That alone isn’t enough to justify the use of deadly force. It’s also not true that if someone breaks into your occupied home, you can automatically use deadly force. It all depends on the circumstances. They may warrant the use of deadly force if your life or someone’s else is in jepordy, but short of that, you could be facing serious charges.

      • Wayne Deja April 27, 2014 at 12:08 pm #

        Chief Watson…..Just out of curiosity,what are some of the circumstances that would warrant deadly force ?….I’m keeping up with that trial,I think in Minnesota,where that 65 year old “war hero” shot and killed the two teen-agers that broke into his home,while he was hiding and waiting in the basement….with two firearms……and when they made their way down the basement stairs,he shot them both…including what he called a extra “kill shot”….and it’s not even “allegedly” in this case…..he had a video camera going and showing it all…..39 minutes of tape….and then told investigators about the “kill shot” he told the teens he was going to do just before he did it………SURPRISE to him…..he’s facing first-degree murder charges…..thank goodness it wasn’t in Florida…or he’d soon be found not guilty and making millions tracing pictures and selling them on E-bay….and showing up at gun shows as an honored guest.

        • Dan Watson April 27, 2014 at 7:36 pm #

          Thanks for the question, Wayne. Some people believe the myth that if an individual breaks into your home, you are automatically justified in using deadly force. That’s not accurate. Each situation is judged independently based on the totality of circumstances and what is in the mind of the person who used the force. The person must be able to reasonably articulate why they were in fear of their life or the life of another. A determination would be made if there were any other alternatives to deadly force. Looking at it another way, would a reasonable person in the same position be in fear of their life and have no other option?

          Any time this happens, the circumstances are very carefully reviewed by the police and prosecutor.

          I’m not familiar with the case in Minnesota you mention. It will be interesting to see what the final outcome is.

          • Wayne Deja April 28, 2014 at 5:26 pm #

            Chief Watson…The trial I mentioned is taking place in Little Falls,Minn…Byron Smith shot these two teen-agers back in 2012,and finally going to trial.Those covering the trial are saying he’d have a better chance of being found not guilty,or maybe even no charges filed at all if he had limited his shots to maybe one,and definatly not video taped the shootings…with audio… and how he was talking to the injured kids when he was crouched over them saying “You are going to die now”…and then talking of his “clean kill-shots” to the head…..The defense rested today….closing arguements start tomarrow….surely,a verdict sometime this week…I will post when it comes down…..

          • Wayne Deja April 29, 2014 at 4:33 pm #

            Chief Watson…….The jury is back with the verdict in that case I mentioned…in less than 5 hours….Byron Smith was found guilty of murder… in prison…Can’t help but think his big,stupid mouth,as well as his actions that day drew very little sympathy from the jury….apparently having found out maybe a break-in at his house planned by these kids….hiding his truck….loading his two guns…sitting in the basement waiting for them …..laying tarps out so his floor wouldn’t get too bloodied up…setting up video cameras in his house so he knew when they made entrance…and video taping all of the confrontation…with audio,calling the kids “venem” as they were wounded from the first couple shots,and then telling them they were gonna die before he made his “clean kill-shots” to the head….and then rolling them up in the tarps to keep the floor clean….you can’t make this stuff up….I ,for one,agree with the “stand your ground” law in some states IF it is properly used….and feel a person should be able to use lethal force against a burglar IF your life is in danger…but neither applies in this case….Byron Smith got what he deserved….life in prison…

        • Gistine April 30, 2014 at 8:43 pm #

          Sorry, but if someone breaks into my house, they aren’t walking out. They aren’t there to have tea and crumpets with me, obviously. I’m going to use whatever force is necessary to protect myself and my loved ones. I have a stalker, so I don’t have the luxury of weighing out intent- I wouldn’t anyway. An “alternative to deadly force” with an intruder in my home? Methinks not.

          I took a CCW class with a retired FBI agent and he told me I had the right to protect myself using whatever means necessary. He also warned our class to not “be the hero” and detain the person so you can guess what his solution was. The fact the perpetrator breaks into a private residence is not my problem, but his. Frankly, it will most likely be the last problem he ever has, too.

          • Wayne Deja May 1, 2014 at 10:24 am #

            Gistine….Personally,I agree with you on most of what your saying..but,like Chief Watson stated,each case is looked at differently…and I’m betting in most of those cases,if a homeowner is surprised by an intruder and uses deadly force against the threat,it might go before a grand jury to see if you should be indited…but, I’m thinking chances you wouldn’t be…but in the Minnesota case I mentioned,a whole different ballgame there…without going into it too much again,you should google “Byron Smith trial” and check it out and you’d see what I mean.His own stupidity,his big stupid mouth,and his bravado is what got him in trouble….AND setting up the video cameras to document his actions,thinking it would help him,turns out it came back to bite him in the butt….one shot….maybe two,to disable the person and remove the threat…then call 911……not roll out the tarps,talk to the injured parties,and execute them with a head shot as they are begging for their lives.

          • RAM May 1, 2014 at 11:48 am #

            Especially if you live in a rural area where law enforcement response could take more time then you have.

            Better to be judged by 12 than carried by six

      • sugarmagnolia April 29, 2014 at 6:27 pm #

        Basically the law leaves you hanging. One can’t know what weapons an intruder has. You can’t confront them for that reason.

        I would expect to be able to shoot an intruder coming into the room that I have taken refuge in.

        Add to that, if they have a weapon (which you have no way of knowing) and you have just wounded them, you are still at risk for being attacked, so one shot really isn’t going to be enough, unless you can retreat further without going near them. IF you are cornered and they are wounded and in the same room as you, you pretty much have to shoot them again.

        • Wayne Deja April 29, 2014 at 8:13 pm #

          Sugar Magnolia…..Not so sure about the law leaving you hanging….I think more so just common sense…In the case I mentioned above,Byron Smith fired multiple shots at and into the two teenagers.And then finished them off with a shot to each of their heads….all the while knowing this was going to happen before it did….planning it out,to the extent he was convicted of two counts of first degree premeditated murder.Now if he had been sitting in his bedroom watching television and heard the break-in,armed himself and confronted the kids,and shot them,I think he would have had a good chance of not even getting charged with a crime,and certainly not a planned-out murder…This case goes WAY beyond anything he had a legal right to do…..and tapeing and talking about what he planned to do, and did, sure didn’t help his cause for a self defense.I’m betting with the scenario you describe in your post,taking refuge in a room and maybe still feeling threatened,a good defense lawyer would get you walking away without a charge.

        • Gistine April 30, 2014 at 8:48 pm #

          I couldn’t agree with you more, sugar magnolia.

  8. Desert Tortoise April 27, 2014 at 9:33 am #

    This is the legacy of Ronald Reagan’s governorship of California, closing the state mental hospitals and throwing the disabled out on the community. Bet we all saved a lot of money over the years. Right?

    • Ken Warner April 27, 2014 at 2:53 pm #

      Yeah, but we made the money back with grazing fees. You know, like what Bundy is not paying…

      By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in order to provide for establishment of appropriate fees for the grazing of domestic livestock on public rangelands, it is ordered as follows:

      Section 1. Determination of Fees. The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior are directed to exercise their authority, to the extent permitted by law under the various statutes they administer, to establish fees for domestic livestock grazing on the public rangelands which annually equals the $1.23 base established by the 1966 Western Livestock Grazing Survey multiplied by the result of the Forage Value Index (computed annually from data supplied by the Statistical Reporting Service) added to the Combined Index (Beef Cattle Price Index minus the Prices Paid Index) and divided by 100; provided, that the annual increase or decrease in such fee for any given year shall be limited to not more than plus or minus 25 percent of the previous year’s fee, and provided further, that the fee shall not be less than $1.35 per animal unit month..

      • Wayne Deja April 28, 2014 at 2:34 pm #

        Read somewhere that this Bundy made some really bad racist remarks….bad enough to where even a FOX NEWS reporter objected to it,and how his remarks weren’t a topic when other FOX NEWS reporters were telling the story…I’ll have top follow up on the story to see what it’s all about,but it’s gotta be really bad if someone from FOX NEWS is calling him a racist.

    • Tony Cumia April 28, 2014 at 8:21 am #

      Wow! Going back almost 50 years to blame Reagan for this p.o.s.?Who was in the state assembly and who ran the commitees back then?. Just curious.
      This guy wasn’t alive then. Id say blame it on the so-called progressives[you know, the ones who have the monopoly on state sponsored “compassion”] that have controlled this state’s budgets for so long [for too long?].

      . San Francisco is a great example of how the left handles the mentally ill…..and you can smell their success all over that city.
      With Brown’s policy of releasing violent offenders to ease over crowding. In ’50 yrs’. I wonder who will get blamed for violent crime that happens

      . What completely silly statement.

      • Benett Kessler April 28, 2014 at 8:42 am #

        It’s a legitimate statement. Reagan’s policy set the tone for how we deal with the mentally ill and troubled into the present. We’re not doing a very good job of it. But, go ahead and take politics out of it and consider what is best for people? The ongoing string of school killings seem to say we need to focus on mental well being more than we have, as a society. Benett Kessler

  9. GCW April 28, 2014 at 3:29 pm #

    The article says he was charged with several crimes, including being drunk in public. Since when does being drunk and unruly mean mental illness?


Leave a Reply

KSRW · 1280 N. Main St. Suite J · Bishop, CA 93514 · 760-873-5329
Positive Projections Web Design