Skip to comments.Starved-dog case ends with misdemeanor (German Shepherd Does Not Get Justice)
Posted on 08/15/2011 1:36:52 PM PDT by chrisinoc
NORWALK Kimberly Nizato, the woman accused of nearly starving her dog to death, was sentenced Monday to a misdemeanor count of animal cruelty.
Defense attorney Andrew Stein successfully argued to Judge Robert J. Higa that the District Attorney Office's case did not meet the standard for a felony conviction.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Sadly, anyone can own a dog.
(Dogs don't have human rights, nor should they.)
German Shepherds should have animal rights, which might ensure that an animal is not tortured or starved.
In that day I will make a covenant for them with the beasts of the field and the birds of the air and the creatures that move along the ground. Bow and sword and battle I will abolish from the land, so that all may lie down in safety. (Hosea 2:18)
No, animals should not have rights whatsoever. It is reasonable, however, to criminalize human behaviors regarding mistreatment of animals. This is a very important distinction.
See my #8 reply.
Sadly, too, anyone can become a parent. No restrictions whatsoever.
“She died at 17 in her sleep with her toy fish nursing as she wrapped around it. Good Dog.”
Yes, unfortunately, the only requirement for parenthood is genitalia.
Good Dog indeed!
Beyotch needs hangin.
Hopefully your coworker’s abusive girlfriend never owned another dog.
They are beautiful, sweet dogs. My son and DIL had a wonderfulle Aussie named Belle. they lost her a few months ago, she died suddenly. I think it gave my son the shingles...
Heart breaking! The bitch didn’t look like she had missed any meals.
Touching story...Our reward is their undying love.
“Pets” have formed a bond with humans, that puts them above “other “animals.
Try to hurt a K-9 and see if you get just a misdeameanor, they are considered “police officers”.
I will repeat myself for the 10000th time...for the uneducated and ignorant:
The MAIN reason we have animal cruelty laws is not just becuase we love animals.It is because there is a strong correlation between animal abuse and child or domestic violence. the laws were enacted so that we can identify those distrubed people and force them through the justice system ( our community values) to either get rehabilitation for their behaviors or punishment to get them to realize their behaviors are sadistic or at best, detached from ‘normal” caring human behaviors. It also gives the courts permission to explore further any possible human abuse by this person.
Moreover, our society’s Christian and other spiritual values condemn this type of behavior.
Hunters, for example, do not sadistically torture or abuse their prey. They kill them for food, possibly sport, but hunters of all cultures have respect for the animals they hunt.
Me too! Animals should NEVER have rights in a court of law as do humans. EVER!
It is perfectly reasonable to have strict laws regarding animal abuse. The difference if VERY important.
So..are we playing word games over the word “rights”?
Animals do not have the right to marry, to sue in a court of law, nor do they have the “right to remain silent and a court atty will be appointed if you can’t afford one”..(though usually they bark.)
The State has the right to prosecute our animal abuse laws in the name of society..just as The state prosecutes other criminal cases. The owner has the right to sue in a court of law should there be a civil case.
We protect animals from animal endangerment or abuse. We have hunting laws (limits, etc) and the proper slaughter of animals ( which also protects our food supply ).
Wonderful reminder of God’s care for ALL of his creatures. Yes, justice is for all — not just the two-legged.
Judge: “You nearly starved this German shepherd to death? Well, I believe this dog ought to be the one to mete out whatever punishment it deems fit for one such as you. Lock courage in a room with this woman, and restrain her so that she cannot do Courage any further harm.”
What? That wasn’t the sentence? Surely you jest.
FTA: The perp was working as a full time kennel assistant when she surrendered her personal dog (German Shepherd) which had been reduced to 37 lbs and which had been eating rocks and dirt.
Certainly her sentance should have included the proviso that she should never own another pet, nor should she work in animal care.
This is a concept with which we cannot afford to play games. Animals must not have "rights" in the same context as people. People merely need to be expected to behave by humane rules, and taken to task when they do not.
Anyone who campaigns for animal rights does so at the peril of an already malfunctioning judicial system.
I don't have a problem with someone being sentenced severly for cruely to animals. My problem is with the notion of "animal rights". Animals can be protected sufficiently without granting them equal citizenship or standing in the courts.
I’m not here to argue animal rights. I’m here to argue decency to animals and compassion. The perp in this case should lose HER right to impose her will on a poor, defenseless dog — especially since whe was working in the field at the time of her offense. It’s not as if she were a tiny child who had never been taught that you have to feed your dog!
Her offense is even more grave when you know how she earns her living.
AMEN!! Let’s hope the clinic where she worked has enough sense to terminate her employment there immediately. (I went to the organization’s site and she is not listed as staff, so I would imagine they are aware and have probably given her the boot. One can only hope.)
And the lowest level of unskilled labor on this planet, I might add.
Not equating dog and human rights. If this was the case, the woman would likely have received life imprisonment.
The rescue representing Courage simply wanted a stiffer sentence than she got.
Abuse of an animal, can lead to an abuse of a human.
You are ‘champion” of our Justice system? The current one we have? The one that lets rapist, and murderers out because of over crowding?
When our Justice system is worthy of the belief that you are putting in it, then I will listen to your arguments about Animals not having rights in our Courts
GERMAN SHEPHERD PING LIST
This is a low-volume list so dont worry!
(Please Freep-mail me if youd like to be on or off the list.)
I imagine her posterior pains her every time she hears a bark.
I definitely get what you are saying GingisK. I’m a caretaker of animals, but I understand the distinction you are trying to make and agree. I can’t remember what board it was, but many years ago I came across a conservative group that distinguished itself from the animal rights movement. They were called the Animal Welfare Movement or something similar. There is a distinction and the animal rights movement is very left and radical. Peter Singer is/was? part of the animal rights movement so that should tell any conservative what they need to know right there. As much as I care for all my animals, they aren’t human. Still, I would hope that someone doing something inhumane to an innocent animal would receive the max sentence and from what you are saying you seem to share the same view.
Good to know! :)) And good for them!!
You are a perfect example of the "reading impaired" people who vote poorly because they understand little of what goes on around them.
See response #38. That felloow can read with comprehension.
That’s scary. Wonder what the dogs in the kennel looked like after her “care.”
That’s not what the term “animal rights” is used to mean. You can be for animal welfare, but the term “animal rights” as it is used by the people who are in a position to make laws means you don’t get to have a pet, eat a steak or a lot of other things we all take for granted.
I read the first article and was puzzled because there seemed to be no rhyme or reason for what the perp did, so I clicked on the earlier article. Still have no clue what on earth this person had as a motive for her awful behavior, but there is a nice video of the dog if you scroll down and it’s worth watching, just to see this very lovely dog. It really pulled on my heart strings. And brought tears to my eyes, and I’m pretty tough.
I wish the article had more info. A horrible story, but what on earth could the motive have been. As you said, it sure doesn’t look like they couldn’t afford to feed the dog. I’m really baffled. Not that it matters but I really want to know why she would do such a thing (and apparently she has a child, which bothers me now).
How do you imagine they could uphold a sentence that she never own another pet?
In case you missed it, go check out the video on this page of Courage, very sweet boy! You have to scroll down a little.
Thank you thank you for making the distinction. AR is making huge footholds in many places and still people don’t get it.
for so long would remain. "We'll never really know the why," he said.
Mystery? My guess? The owner was an evil lowlife ...
I have no idea, but many sentences handed down are never carried out in our judicial system. Look at all the restraining orders that are broken every day. A sentence, such as “she could never own another pet”, could be turned into a jail term if she were caught abusing another animal. It would be a warning to others. I believe it wouldn’t be a first, either. I think that I’ve heard of such sentences imposed on people who starve horses.
I’d also like to see her prohibited from caring for children too, but that would be much harder to impose. She is one sick puppy — no pun intended.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.