I am interested in finding out about cruelty to animals cases prosecuted across the state, both success stories and failures.

I'll go first. When I was a baby prosecutor in another county, I helped draft a search warrant for an older woman's home. Animal control led by Captain Bugg (no kidding) found and removed over 150 animals, alive and dead, from two houses. Initially the neighbors were upset that this generous animal-loving woman was being investigated, then as the animals continued to be brought out, they began to understand.

I don't remember what happened to her case(s). Somebody else must have prosecuted them. But it seems that animal cases always make the news.

Tell me about your cases and results.

Back around 1997, a friend of mine defended a kid (11 yoa?) in juvenile court. He had thrown a fishing net over a duck at the city park and beaten the bird to death with a stick. The prosecutor valiantly tried to establish through a park and recreation employee that "all of the citizens of the city" owned the bird, however, the employee was unable to tell the court the bird's name. This assertion didn't fly; the judge granted my friend's motion for directed verdict based upon the state's failure to prove the duck was "owned by another." If we wanted to prosecute this kind of foul play perhaps we should have charged the little darling with hunting out of season...or violation of the Migratory Bird Act!

[This message was edited by BLeonard on 06-03-03 at .]

I had a case IN ANOTHER JURISDICTION where it was alleged that the owner of several cows wasn't feeding them. One of her cows died from starvation, and it laid there on the ground for several days dying, digging itself a hole as it kicked to try to get back up. The photos were awful. Several other of her cows were in bad shape, too. The neighbors said they never saw her bring hay out to the property. SPCA vet said the cow died from starvation, and that lack of food was the only reason it died. That vet seemed sort of skittish, though. Well, we later found out that there was another vet, not related to SPCA, that SPCA had examine the cow, one of these large animal specialists, and that doctor said, "That was the oldest cow I'd ever seen. That cow was so peggy-mouthed (teeth worn down) that it couldn't eat." Case dismissed.

In my career I've gone to trial on two animal cruelty cases, and I'm batting .500. Both trials were here in Ellis County. The most recent was just a couple of weeks ago.

In the first case, a misdemeanor, a guy was starving about 200 emus on his property. This was in 1999, at the tail end of that emu investment fad. Well, the bottom fell out of the market so he just stopped feeding the birds. They were so hungry that they were cannibalizing their dead. We know that because the vet found feathers in the stomach of the one on which she performed a necropsy (That's an animal autopsy. I didn't know, either, until that case.) There was a lot of TV news coverage when the birds were discovered, so we had some great video to use at trial. The atrocity was compounded by the fact that a mere 80 yards or so from the birds' pen was a barn that contained a small mountain of feed. The jury found the guy guilty of ten counts of animal cruelty for failing unreasonably to provide necessary food, care, or shelter. We took one of our photographs that showed a number of birds, both dead and alive, numbered several birds 1-10, then made that photgraph an official addendum to the information. The judge punished the defendant with 30 days in jail and a fine of $40,000. He actually paid it off just last week!

The second trial was a state jail felony -- as a result of the recent Loco Law enhancement. The defendant had a long-running dispute with his neighbor, who frequently complained to the Sheriff's Office about the defendant's dogs running loose. Defendant came home late one night, and he learned from his roommate that the neighbor had called the Sheriff yet again. So, to send a message to the neighbor he took his pellet rifle, grabbed the first puppy he could find, and he shot it in the top of the head. Then he carried the puppy 150 feet to the neighbor's property, tossed it over the fence into her driveway, and screamed, "Is this what you want!! Why don't you leave me the @#&* alone!" Evidence in the trial showed that the puppy (defendant claimed it was 8 weeks old, but it appeared older in the photographs) lived for anywhere from 45 minutes to possibly 3 hours after it was shot. "Gasping," and "gurgling" are words that were used to describe it. I charged the defendant with intentionally or knowingly torturing the puppy by shooting it in the head. I knew it would be a close case from the outset, and the jury found him not guilty. Defendant said his intent was to kill the dog, not torture it, and that's what the jury bought. And killing your own dog is not a crime.

I was disappointed in the verdict only because this defendant was an absolutely frightening individual. And someone needs to keep an eye on him. The jury even agreed with that sentiment because a couple of them said they, "wanted to find him guilty of SOMETHING." Defendant even admitted that he did virtually the same thing a couple of years ago, but that time he used a borrowed handgun to shoot the dog.

The thing that would have most helped the State in that case would be to broaden the available mental states for the offense. Had we been able to pursue the case with a mental state of recklessness it would have been a slam dunk.

Those are my animal tales.

JK McCown -- Please see separate post entitled Animal Cruelty.

Recently we had two unusual episodes. In one, a man mowed to death a puppy that was bugging him, but since it was his puppy and there was no evidence that the dog "suffered"...

In another case, an elderly woman decided she couldn't handle an Akita, and, because she couldn't get the dog in her car, she tied it to the rear bumper with the intent of "idling" to the pound. The dog was dragged and so badly injured that it had to be destroyed. She subsequently pleaded guilty and received a max fine and probation, but I had e-mail petitions from around the world suggesting that she should be dragged to death also.

I received an e-mail from a person working with an animal organization. Thought some of you might have something to add. The e-mail follows:

I work with an organization, Texas Humane Legislation Network (www.thln.com), that is reviewing the Texas animal anti-cruelty statute with an eye to revising it in the next legislative session. The goal is to remedy some of the shortcomings of the statute. Areas which I've heard described by other prosecutors as problems with or limitations of the statute include: (1) no definition of torture -- juries don't know just how terrible or prolonged an act of cruelty must be before it's considered torture; (2) statute does not protect unowned animals from being killed, seriously injured, or poisoned -- issues seem to arise like in the Waco Queso the cat case where a "stray" is partially cared for but not necessarily owned, so no conviction; and (3) statute allows the owner of an animal to kill it, seriously injure it, or poison it.

Ideally, we would like "To whom it may concern" letters from prosecutors outlining the problems with the statute so that we can better understand the issues prosecutors face and use the letters in discussion of proposed legislative changes.

Any information or assistance you can provide is appreciated. I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Laney Vazquez

____________________
Laney M. Vazquez
Baker & Hostetler, LLP
1000 Louisiana, Suite 2000
Houston, Texas 77002-5009
(713) 751-1600 ext. 1351
FAX (713) 751-1717
E-mail: lvazquez@bakerlaw.com
www.bakerlaw.com

Killing, cooking, eating of baby raccoon draws scrutiny

COLUMBUS, Texas � The killing, cooking and eating of a baby raccoon as part of a class in Columbus has raised animal cruelty questions.

Police Chief Danny Jackson says usually the animals are dead when they're part of a wildlife management and harvesting class at Columbus High School.

Jackson says the October incident apparently involved two students who took a live raccoon to school.

Jackson told KHOU television that the students: "Started stepping and stomping on it, joking they're tenderizing the animal."

He says the youths then skinned that raccoon, cooked it and ate it.

Superintendent Randy Hoyer says a substitute teacher was in the class that day and did not know any better -- but it won't happen again.

Hoyer says with the substitute teacher, the students in essence had permission to process the animal on site.

But student Stephan Zavala says -- it was animal cruelty.

I have prosecuted a couple of animal cruelty cases - one with horses and another with dogs. Both ended in guilty verdicts.

However, I have also become active in watching cruelty and animal legislation around the country. In many cases, the groups sponsoring the research and bills are tied in with PETA and other groups whose purpose is to end animal "ownership" by people. THey would prefer that we were "guardians of those who cohabitate our planet" - a logic which nearly led to California banning all breeding of dogs, including those used for police, military, and service work. THe request for a form letter sounds as though it could have come from one of these groups...

Lisa L. Peterson
Nolan County Attorney

One thing I learned last session is that there can be a big difference between "animal welfare" advocates and "animal rights" activists. A BIG difference.

It ain't cruelty if you go an' eat it.

ps: jes kiddin'

pss: well sorta kiddin'

Two exonerated in feral burro deaths

By ALICIA A. CALDWELL
Associated Press

EL PASO -- A pair of state parks officials have been cleared of wrongdoing in the shooting deaths of nearly six dozen wild donkeys, according to a Texas Parks and Wildlife Department report.

Dan Sholly, a Texas Parks and Wildlife Department state parks deputy division director and Michael Hill, a regional director, were investigated for animal cruelty charges after shooting 71 feral burros found wandering the Big Bend Ranch State Park over the last year.

The investigation was launched in November after a security guard at the West Texas park, about 280 miles southeast of El Paso, forwarded a complaint about the killings of the wild animals.

The guard, Robert Garcia, told an internal affairs investigator for the parks service he had information that Sholly and Hill were shooting the burros and leaving many to "wander off and die."

The rotting animal carcasses were left in the park, Garcia and others told investigators.

According to the 122-page report released earlier this month, Sholly and Hill shot the animals as part of a department plan to rid the park of feral and so-called nuisance animals. Wildlife officials say the burros can carry diseases and often contaminate the region's scarce water holes.

Though several park employees told investigators that the shootings were unnecessary and cruel, it was concluded that Hill and Sholly followed long-established rules for ridding state parks of feral animals.

Scott Boruff, the TPWD's deputy executive director for operations, said Monday that the men followed their training and department practices in shooting the animals and leaving the carcasses in the park.

"These guys have a long history of being good stewards of natural resources," Boruff said.

"Typically when you are shooting those types of animals, those carcasses are quickly consumed by desert animals. It's not economically or practically possible to do anything else with the animals," he went on to say.

Sholly and Hill did not respond to a request for comment Monday. Neither of the men are based at the 300,000-acre park that abuts the Rio Grande.

Boruff said the men began shooting the donkeys after visiting the park as part of an ongoing effort to make the rugged land more accessible to park visitors.

According to the report, Sholly told investigators he and Hill made every effort to track wounded burros and ensure they were killed immediately.

He added that he took no pleasure in shooting the animals.

"Shooting burros is a distasteful thing," Sholly told investigators.

"The first 10 years of my life, I grew up with a burro named Croppy. I grew up riding burros and loving burros and this is an extremely sad and distasteful thing to do," he added.

But, he told investigators, the animals are destructive and cannot be left to roam freely.

Boruff said feral animals, including wild hogs and Aoudad sheep, destroy parts of the "fragile habitat."

"The problem out there is really that water holes are very few and far between and [feral burros] just come and tear them up," Boruff said.

The animals can also carry a host of diseases, he said.

The growing number of wild donkeys -- Boruff estimated that there are many hundreds roaming the park -- can also limit the department's ability to reintroduce the desert bighorn sheep, he said.