Appeals court hears PETA case

Discussion in 'Dog News and Articles' started by DryCreek, Feb 21, 2008.

  1. DryCreek

    DryCreek New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Great White North
    Can you believe it? :yikes:

    LINKY

    Appeals court hears PETA case
    Pair dumped euthanized dogs in 2005

    Titan Barksdale, Staff Writer

    In a case that grabbed national headlines, 16 dogs were found dead in a Dumpster outside of a Piggly Wiggly in Ahoskie, and police arrested two unlikely people: animal rights workers.

    Adria Hinkle and Andrew Cook, former workers with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, were charged with animal cruelty in 2005. The two have since been cleared of the most serious charges.

    Their attorneys argued Wednesday at the N.C. Court of Appeals that they should get a new trial on their convictions of littering for dumping the dogs.

    Hinkle and Cook drove to Ahoskie after euthanizing the dogs as part of their duties at a Windsor animal shelter. Ahoskie police caught them when they dumped a trash bag filled with the dead dogs.

    At trial, the judge dropped most of the charges. A Hertford County jury convicted them of littering.

    Gordon Widenhouse Jr., an attorney for Hinkle and Cook, said they weren't guilty of littering because the dead dogs were placed in a Dumpster.

    Catherine Jordan, an assistant attorney general, contended that a Dumpster is not covered under the state's litter law, which says that litter must be placed in a receptacle. She said there is a distinction between Dumpster and receptacle.

    "A litter receptacle is smaller than a Dumpster," Jordan said.

    The judges pressed Jordan to further explain the difference between a receptacle and a Dumpster.

    Judge John Arrowood, one of three judges hearing the case, asked whether prosecutors made a mistake by bringing the litter charge against the workers.

    "Didn't the DA [district attorney] try this on the wrong theory?" Arrowood asked.

    Widenhouse said a more appropriate charge would have been trespassing because the former workers didn't have permission to dump the dead dogs in the Dumpster.

    "The word 'receptacle' is perhaps the broadest possible word to say what litter can be put in," Widenhouse said.

    Hinkle and Cook no longer work for PETA, their attorneys said. The attorneys would not comment further about their employment.

    Judges could decide the case in the next few months.
     
  2. noludoru

    noludoru Bored Now.

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    17,830
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    1 Dog
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Home Page:
    No. OMFG.

    Is it not ENOUGH that they they KILLED dozens of adoptable animals, lied to families and children, euthanized animals illegally, and then DUMPED them for someone else to clean up... and got off scot free... no no no, the two pieces of scum now have to have their records cleared of ALL charges on a technicality.

    This just makes me SICK.
     
  3. Sweet72947

    Sweet72947 Squishy face

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    9,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Gender:
    Female
    Occupation:
    1 Dog, Norris!
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Home Page:
    I didn't know dead animal carcasses counted as "litter". I thought they were biological waste, which usually needs to be disposed of certain ways...
     
  4. Psyfalcon

    Psyfalcon Fishies!

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Dog, Dog, Cat, Fish
    Location:
    Oregon
    The cruelty charges never went to the jury, they can be retried. They can be charged with trespassing and illegal dumping (here at least, biohazards are not simple litter).

    Are they sure they want a new trial?
     
  5. Stephanie7

    Stephanie7 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    three dogs, two cats, fish!
    Location:
    california
    Did they have a reason for doing this? Why did they do it?
     
  6. Lilavati

    Lilavati Arbitrary and Capricious

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Way too many!
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Home Page:
    Their theory is that the dogs wouldn't find homes, and so they were better off dead than spending time in a shelter before being put down. At least, that's what they said.
     

Share This Page