At first LaToya Plummer of Greenbelt, Md., couldn’t figure out why her service dog, a Pit Bull mix named Cleo, was limping and bleeding as they left a dog park Sunday.
Because she is deaf, Plummer could not hear the gunshot that sent a bullet into Cleo’s side. It was fired by an unidentified off-duty Metropolitan Police Department officer who claims Cleo, with her teeth bared, aggressively charged her and her small dog.
Plummer finds this difficult to believe. “She is the most calm and gentle of my dogs,” she told WUSA 9 through an interpreter.
The officer immediately reported that she’d shot a dog, but by the time Greenbelt Police officers arrived, Plummer — thinking Cleo had been bitten by another dog — had rushed her injured dog to a vet.
It’s unfortunate that no one witnessed the shooting. Even if Cleo did run toward the officer, it seems both dangerous and unnecessary to fire a weapon at such a public place.
“I think she should be charged with felony animal cruelty,” Plummer told WUSA 9.
Plummer said Cleo was walking behind her when the shooting occurred. She didn’t say why she wasn’t keeping an eye on her or why Cleo was off-leash outside the dog park.
The Greenbelt Police Department is investigating the case and has not yet filed any charges.
As for Cleo, WUSA 9 reports she is a very lucky dog and is making a “remarkable” recovery.
“I love Cleo,” Plummer told WUSA 9. “I cherish my dogs.”
A driver in South Los Angeles was shocked by what he saw Monday in the car ahead of him: Two Huskies poking their heads out of the partially open trunk.
A cellphone video and photos the driver took and posted on social media got the attention of local media.
When contacted by CBS Los Angeles, the unidentified dog owner said she put the Huskies in the trunk because her children were in the backseat. Besides, she was only driving a short distance, so why not?
Believe it or not, the dogs’ owner committed no crime.
California vehicle code 23117 simply requires that any animal that’s transported on highways in the back of a vehicle “in a space intended for any load” (the trunk or bed of a truck, for instance) to be “either cross-tethered to the vehicle or protected by a secured container or cage, to prevent the animal from falling, jumping, or being thrown from the vehicle.”
The Huskies’ owner used a bungee cord to prevent the trunk door from flying open.
Still, the incident is under investigation by the ASPCA and the LAPD Animal Cruelty Task Force, but representatives from both said it’s unlikely the dogs’ owner will face any charges.
“I believe it’s dangerous to have two dogs back there,” Dr. Richard Polsky, an animal behavior expert, told CBS Los Angeles, and I agree with him (as does the driver who took the photos and the dozens of people who commented on them).
However, Polsky cautioned against jumping to conclusions that this was a case of animal abuse.
“We have to get more facts, you have to get more knowledge about the circumstances in the background of these dogs,” he said.
I would like more knowledge about the background of their owner, who put her dogs in an unsafe, albeit legal, situation. Did she really only do this one time, for a short trip? The dogs appear to be very calm — as if they were used to this strange mode of transportation.
The LAPD Animal Cruelty Task Force told ABC7‘s Marc Cota-Robles it is not recommended to drive with your dog in the truck (duh!), and it could be considered a sign of animal neglect.
But since it’s actually legal, the most the Huskies’ owner will get is a warning.
To save the lives of dogs, it’s time to change California vehicle code 23117 and make the transportation of dogs in trunks, with or without bungee cords, against the law.
Before he murdered police officer Garrett Swasey, mother of two Jennifer Markovsky and Iraq war veteran Ke’Arre Stewart at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs Friday, Robert Lewis Dear had a long criminal record.
Among those crimes was a charge of animal cruelty, according to police reports provided to the Daily Beast by the Colleton County Sheriff’s Office in South Carolina.
In November 2002, as a dog belonging to Dear’s neighbor, Douglas Moore, walked down the driveway, “a shot was fired from [a] residence next to his and Douglas’s dog yelped out and ran over to him.”
The dog, who had been shot with a pellet gun, survived.
Dear insisted he didn’t shoot his neighbor’s dog — yet he told the two deputies who responded to Moore’s call, “Douglas was lucky that it was only a pellet that hit the dog and not a bigger round.”
He was found not guilty of animal cruelty.
“These aspects of his personal profile come as no surprise to those of us who are familiar with the established link between violence against humans and cruelty to animals,” wrote Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), on his blog yesterday. (Serial killers Robert Durst, Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy all started out by torturing animals.)
“In fact, the investigation and prosecution of crimes against animals is often an important tool for identifying people who may become perpetrators of violent crimes against people,” Pacelle wrote. “When we work with law enforcement on animal fighting crimes, we see plenty of evidence of criminality and interpersonal violence committed by these thugs.”
Next month, Tennessee will become the first U.S. state to have an animal abuse registry. It will contain the names, current photographs and other identifying data of adults who have been convicted of felonies including aggravated animal cruelty, felony animal fighting, bestiality and other offenses.
The registry will make it easier for animal shelters and rescue organizations to identify people who should never have pets. And since animal abusers often move on to violence against people, it could prove helpful to law enforcement.
In September 2014, for the first time ever, the FBI started keeping track of animal cruelty crimes in its Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Although this was too late for Dear’s victims, hopefully it will help save the lives of others, whether they have two legs or four.
By now you’ve probably forgotten about most of the commercials that aired during last February’s Super Bowl game.
…Except for that “Lost Puppy” one with the yellow Lab. That’s right, this one.
The problem is, that commercial — which was voted the No. 1 viewer favorite in just about every poll — probably ended up selling more Kleenex tissue than Budweiser beer.
That’s why, sadly, there won’t be a puppy in the Budweiser commercial that airs during Super Bowl 50 on Feb. 7, 2016.
“Budweiser aired two very different spots in last February’s Super Bowl, and we learned that content focused on the quality of our beer was most effective in generating sales,” said Jorn Socquet, vice president of marketing for Anheuser-Busch, in a statement sent to Adweek.
“Starting with our ‘Brewed the Hard Way’ ad in last year’s game and throughout 2015, our marketing has featured a bold, confident voice that speaks directly to Budweiser drinkers, and sales trends have improved as a result. We’ll continue this tone in Super Bowl 50, and we’re excited to explore new creative territory.”
Borrrr-ing! And what’s especially unfair is that Budweiser has been featuring Clydesdale horses in its Super Bowl commercials for decades — yet the company gave viewers only two measly opportunities, in 2014 and 2015, to establish a connection between cute puppies and buying beer.
I’m fairly certain that if the puppy could stick around for Super Bowls 50 through 60, viewers would successfully make that association and Budweiser beer sales would skyrocket.
So, have those cute Clydesdales been given the ad ax as well?
Nope. They will “most certainly make an appearance,” Socquet assured Adweek. Bless those beer-sales-generating beasts.
I know I’m not alone in wanting the puppy back. In an Adweek poll last month asking if people wanted the puppy to appear in Budweiser’s Super Bowl 50 commercial, a whopping 75 percent answered, heck, yeah.
Many advertising industry experts also disagree with Budweiser’s decision to dump the cute doggie.
“The commercials that usually win the popularity contests are the ones that have recurring characters and an ongoing story,” Scott Davis, chief growth officer at brand consultancy Prophet, whatever that means, told Adweek.
But apparently Anheuser-Busch doesn’t care about what industry experts or we consumers think. For that reason, on Feb. 7, I’ll watch the game (“Puppy Bowl XII,” that is) while enjoying a nice, frosty non-Budweiser beverage.
MARCH 24, 2016 UPDATE: Terrence Cody was sentenced today to nine months in the Baltimore County Detention Center.
After a three-day bench trial, former Baltimore Ravens defensive tackle Terrence Cody has been acquitted of felony animal cruelty charges that he “intentionally tortured” and “cruelly killed” Taz, his Presa Canarios Mastiff, earlier this year.
Judge Judith C. Ensor did, however, charge Cody with five counts of animal neglect, the Baltimore Sun reports.
Before announcing her verdict, the judge said she was aware that not every “morally reprehensible” action is against the law.
Cody was also found guilty of illegally possessing and neglecting an alligator, and convicted of two misdemeanor drug charges.
According to the disturbing details in a February 2015 indictment, Cody and his girlfriend, Kourtney J. Kelley, inflicted unnecessary suffering or pain on Taz; did not provide their dog with nutritious food or proper drink in sufficiency quantity; did not provide proper space; and did not provide necessary veterinary care.
Taz weighed only 50 pounds when he died in January. The average weight for a Presa Canarios Mastiff is about 100 pounds.
Cody was dropped from the Ravens after the February indictment was made public.
In his opening statements Thursday, prosecutor Adam Lippe said Taz “died a horrible, miserable death.” He displayed a photo of Taz’s small cage, filled with feces and vomit, and compared it to a photo of Cody’s shoe room, which was neat and tidy.
On the witness stand in his own defense Friday, Cody said he and his uncle run a breeding operation in Alabama. When Taz started losing weight in December 2014, Cody said his uncle thought he might have worms and advised Cody to give him medication for the condition.
About a month later, Cody finally took the emaciated dog to a veterinarian.
“I asked them could they help me with my dog, because my dog was very sick,” he testified, according to WBAL.
When he was told Taz died hours later, Cody said he was “speechless. I went into my own little world. I was still shocked that he was gone.”
Baltimore County Police Sgt. Andrew MacLellan testified Friday that when he executed a search warrant on Cody’s property two days after Taz died, he found the dog’s filthy cage in the garage. He said the smell was so bad that he and other detectives had to hold their noses and cover their mouths.
Cody told him Taz had only become sick a few days before he died, MacLellan testified. He said he kept him in the garage because he was a guard dog.
During the search, the detectives also found drug paraphernalia and a 3-foot-long alligator in a 3-foot-long tank.
Kelley’s attorney said she is innocent and was not involved in Taz’s care. Like Cody, she was acquitted of the felony animal cruelty charges (as well as the alligator and drug charges) and found guilty on the five counts of neglect.
Judge Ensor decided the verdict since Cody and Kelley chose a bench trial rather than a trial by jury. Cody is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 5, and Kelley on Jan. 22.
They are each facing more than a year of prison time and thousands of dollars in fines.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. You can opt-out if you wish.Got it!RejectPrivacy Policy
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
