Today's miscarriage of justice...

[cb1000rider]

To be clear, don't blame the officer here (at all), I blame the dog owner:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/nati ... dog/nmFhq/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"She pressed charges for criminal trespass. It was not an arrest made by the deputy's own volition. The woman pressed charges for breaking out the window of the car, and the deputy did what he had to do,” Chief Deputy Lee Weems said.

[ScooterSissy]

I suspect all he has to do is ask for a jury trial, and it will either be dropped, or he'll get cleared. No one, except maybe the dog owner, is going to want this prosecuted; and she won't have the ear of the prosecutor.

However, I won't be at all surprised if the city sticks her with the top end of the fine for the citation.

[Excaliber]

I suspect all he has to do is ask for a jury trial, and it will either be dropped, or he'll get cleared. No one, except maybe the dog owner, is going to want this prosecuted; and she won't have the ear of the prosecutor.

However, I won't be at all surprised if the city sticks her with the top end of the fine for the citation.

The concept of competing harms comes into play here, and I can't say the deputy used good judgment.

The better course of action would have been to tell the unhappy car owner to take it up with her car insurance company or the district attorney.

[Excaliber]

I suspect all he has to do is ask for a jury trial, and it will either be dropped, or he'll get cleared. No one, except maybe the dog owner, is going to want this prosecuted; and she won't have the ear of the prosecutor.

However, I won't be at all surprised if the city sticks her with the top end of the fine for the citation.

The concept of competing harms comes into play here, and I can't say the deputy used good judgment. There was no obligation to arrest here.

The better course of action would have been to tell the unhappy car owner to take it up with her car insurance company or the district attorney.

[C-dub]

Maybe they should charge her with animal cruelty and then negotiate the terms of surrender from there.

[Charles L. Cotton]

If Georgia has a "Necessity" defense as in Tex. Penal Code §9.22, then the defendant should be fine. It's unclear to me if the woman got the DA to accept charges, or if she did it at the sheriff's dept. If it's the latter, then I agree with Excaliber about the wisdom of not referring her to the DA. If the DA accepted charges, then he/she is an idiot. Either way, I suspect the defendant will be fine.

As a side note, I'm as tired of people playing the "veteran" card as I am the "race" card. Rarely does one's service in the military have anything to do with their acts as a civilian, either good or bad.

Chas.

[cb1000rider]

Maybe they should charge her with animal cruelty and then negotiate the terms of surrender from there.

They (animal control) did charge the owner.

Apparently this is a case where the officer doesn't have a choice.. At least as indicated by the media. Hope social media picks this one up.


Charles: According to the State of Texas, dogs are property. Can a "Necessity" defense work with property?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Maybe they should charge her with animal cruelty and then negotiate the terms of surrender from there.

They (animal control) did charge the owner.

Apparently this is a case where the officer doesn't have a choice.. At least as indicated by the media. Hope social media picks this one up.


Charles: According to the State of Texas, dogs are property. Can a "Necessity" defense work with property?

Yes. For example, if a wildfire is coming toward you, you could set a backfire to a neighbor's yard to prevent the destruction of your home. The key to §9.22 is that the harm you seek to prevent by violating some law is greater than the harm the law seeks to prevent. If your backfire destroyed your neighbor's home while saving yours, then §9.22 wouldn't be a defense.

Chas.

[ScooterSissy]

Maybe they should charge her with animal cruelty and then negotiate the terms of surrender from there.

They (animal control) did charge the owner.

Apparently this is a case where the officer doesn't have a choice.. At least as indicated by the media. Hope social media picks this one up.


Charles: According to the State of Texas, dogs are property. Can a "Necessity" defense work with property?

Yes. For example, if a wildfire is coming toward you, you could set a backfire to a neighbor's yard to prevent the destruction of your home. The key to §9.22 is that the harm you seek to prevent by violating some law is greater than the harm the law seeks to prevent. If your backfire destroyed your neighbor's home while saving yours, then §9.22 wouldn't be a defense.

Chas.

So, just for the sake of discussion (because I don't believe for a minute this case will ever see a jury), the guy would need to show that the dog is more valuable than the cost of the window that was broken?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Maybe they should charge her with animal cruelty and then negotiate the terms of surrender from there.

They (animal control) did charge the owner.

Apparently this is a case where the officer doesn't have a choice.. At least as indicated by the media. Hope social media picks this one up.


Charles: According to the State of Texas, dogs are property. Can a "Necessity" defense work with property?

Yes. For example, if a wildfire is coming toward you, you could set a backfire to a neighbor's yard to prevent the destruction of your home. The key to §9.22 is that the harm you seek to prevent by violating some law is greater than the harm the law seeks to prevent. If your backfire destroyed your neighbor's home while saving yours, then §9.22 wouldn't be a defense.

Chas.

So, just for the sake of discussion (because I don't believe for a minute this case will ever see a jury), the guy would need to show that the dog is more valuable than the cost of the window that was broken?

If it were in Texas, yes but that would be quite easy. It's not just the monetary value of the dog, it the suffering it would experience. Remember, it could be a felony in Texas. (I love animals, but felony animal cruelty laws are utterly absurd.) I don't know about Georgia law.

Chas.

[cb1000rider]

If it were in Texas, yes but that would be quite easy. It's not just the monetary value of the dog, it the suffering it would experience. Remember, it could be a felony in Texas. (I love animals, but felony animal cruelty laws are utterly absurd.) I don't know about Georgia law.

Chas.

How do you value suffering on a piece of property? Texas values dogs on replacement cost as property, which (best case) is some replacement of breed quality and maybe some level of associated training. ( I assume that makes a cat worth about $0.01. :-) )


Seriously though, I don't mean that to sound harsh.. I've worked with rescue for years and even though we have an on-staff (volunteer) attorney, most abuse cases are shut down as long as the owner is following local statutes for care (which are minimal) and not intentionally causing harm. All because Texas considers dogs property. Literally, food, water and dog house.. That's about all the care you're required to provide regardless of the resulting outcome.

The defense (if it was in Texas) seems to be justified if the harm you're doing is less than the harm that would happen if no action were taken..

Personally, give the guy that broke that window an medal.

[Charles L. Cotton]

If it were in Texas, yes but that would be quite easy. It's not just the monetary value of the dog, it the suffering it would experience. Remember, it could be a felony in Texas. (I love animals, but felony animal cruelty laws are utterly absurd.) I don't know about Georgia law.

Chas.

How do you value suffering on a piece of property? Texas values dogs on replacement cost as property, which (best case) is some replacement of breed quality and maybe some level of associated training. ( I assume that makes a cat worth about $0.01.

You can go to prison for burning your dog or cat, but not your sofa. Both are technically property. Yes, animals are chattel, but they are treated differently in terms of criminal law.

Chas.

[carlson1]

( I assume that makes a cat worth about $0.01. :-) )

I will assume you are going to get a lot of PM's over this one statement.

[anygunanywhere]

( I assume that makes a cat worth about $0.01. :-) )

I will assume you are going to get a lot of PM's over this one statement.

I for one have finally found something I can agree with cb1000rider on. Wonders will never cease.

[carlson1]

( I assume that makes a cat worth about $0.01. :-) )

I will assume you are going to get a lot of PM's over this one statement.

I for one have finally found something I can agree with cb1000rider on. Wonders will never cease.

I have no opinion. I have found by accident especially among the female gender you can expect the wrath of God for just using the word cat in the wrong sentence.