More than 300 charges were eventually filed against members of the group in state, federal and international jurisdictions.
This was no longer a simple case of an individual hunter violating a hunting season.
It had become a sprawling wildlife investigation.
Part 4 — The Trophy Bucks
One of the most disturbing aspects of the investigation involved the way the deer were allegedly killed.
According to Lawrence County Prosecuting Attorney Don Trotter, many of the deer were trophy bucks taken illegally, frequently at night.
The animals were often targeted for their heads and antlers.
The remainder of the carcass was left behind.
That distinction mattered.
Legal hunting in Missouri is regulated through seasons, limits and other rules designed to manage wildlife populations.
Poaching ignores those restrictions.
And when someone repeatedly targets large mature animals, conservation officials are concerned not only about individual deaths but also about the broader impact of removing animals from managed populations.
The Missouri Department of Conservation emphasized that illegal wildlife taking is fundamentally different from regulated hunting.
Legal hunting is used as part of wildlife management.
Poaching operates outside those management systems.
In the Berry investigation, officers found evidence suggesting that the animals were not being harvested primarily as food.
Instead, the heads and antlers were frequently retained as trophies.
Smithsonian Magazine reported that Missouri conservation officials believed the motivation appeared to involve “greed and ego,” rather than ordinary subsistence hunting.
Investigators ultimately estimated that several hundred deer had been illegally taken by the main group over a period of years.
The exact number remains uncertain.
That uncertainty is important.
The Missouri Department of Conservation explicitly stated that investigators could not determine precisely how many deer had been illegally taken.
Agent Andy Barnes said it was nevertheless safe to conclude that the number was several hundred.
Part 5 — The Evidence Inside a Cellphone
Perhaps one of the most remarkable aspects of the investigation was how much evidence investigators eventually recovered from digital devices.
After obtaining search warrants, investigators examined Berry Jr.'s cellphone.
The device contained photographs, communications and location information.
Each photograph could potentially contain a timestamp and location.
That information allowed investigators to reconstruct events.
But the process was extraordinarily labor-intensive.
A photograph alone might not prove whether a particular deer was taken legally or illegally.
Investigators had to connect photographs with messages, locations, dates and other evidence.
They reportedly spent months examining communications and following connections between individual incidents.
One photograph could lead investigators to a text message.
That message could lead to another person.
Another conversation could establish where an animal had been killed.
Eventually, the investigators had to piece together hundreds of individual allegations.
According to the Missouri Department of Conservation's later account of Operation Geronimo, approximately 100 state, federal and Canadian wildlife officers became involved at the height of the investigation.
Investigators ultimately developed cases involving multiple suspects and wildlife violations extending into Canada, Nebraska and Kansas.
What had started as scattered tips had become a complex international investigation.
Part 6 — The Lacey Act Connection
The case also demonstrated why crossing state or national borders can dramatically change a wildlife investigation.
The United States has long maintained federal laws governing the transportation of illegally harvested wildlife.
One of the most important statutes involved in cases like this is the Lacey Act.
In the Berry investigation, the alleged transportation of an illegally harvested Kansas deer into Missouri created a potential federal violation.
That meant the case could no longer be treated solely as a matter of Missouri hunting regulations.
Federal authorities became involved.
The investigation also uncovered wildlife violations connected with other jurisdictions.