Posted on 09/05/2015 9:35:35 AM PDT by nickcarraway
A North Hollywood man who ate his ex-girlfriend's pet rabbit has been sentenced to community service and counseling.
Prosecutors say Dimitri Diatchenko pleaded guilty Friday to animal cruelty. He was ordered to perform 60 days of community labor and undergo 48 hours of animal cruelty counseling.
(Excerpt) Read more at sandiego6.com ...
KU could be any one of a dozen schools....which one is yours?
Only one full grown alligator in Indiana in 1965........
It doesn’t matter what they consider it. If I take one of my neighbors lambs and eat it, even though it is a pet to them in the eyes of the law it is livestock.
Regardless, eating any animal is not cruel. If they can deem it cruel to eat a rabbit or a dog, it is a short step to claiming the eating of any animal is cruel.
I care for animals, but when we engage in these semantics, companion animal, instead of pet, care giver, instead of owner, pet, instead of livestock, we are on a dangerous course. Mark my words, as a caregiver you will one day be forced to supply whatever care the law deems necessary. You will not be able to put an animal down for what ever reason you see fit. It is simply another taking of property rights.
Or KaBob
A person usually gets charged with the crime with the greater punishment. Besides, he did it out of spite not because he was hungry. It was someone’s pet and in that regard it doesn’t matter what species it is, it was his intent that was the motive for the charge. He sounds like a big jerk and deserves what he gets.
I consider my pets, pets, but what got this guy in trouble was his intent. It wasn’t like he did this because he was hungry and didn’t have anything else to eat. He did so because he was a jerk trying to get back at his ex-girlfriend. Laws may vary from place, but this rabbit was a pet and most people don’t eat their pets.
His intent was to cause her pain. Her intent was to cause him pain via this prosecution. They are both jerks. Whatever his intent, it is only a property crime.
I don’t really care about semantics, but do you really expect her to be alright with someone eating her rabbit that was her property?
Don’t knock it until you try it; Spanish/Portuguese restaurants serve some delicious rabbit in garlic sauce. A co-worker was upset with me when someone told her I ate one at a business lunch; it was delicious and I told her so. Then to rub it in, I told her I still had some rabbit stuck in my teeth...
I tell my kids (who remember our brief spell without power after Hurricane Sandy) that people with pets are lucky - they have fresh emergency rations, while we just had military MREs that were probably made 20 years ago...
What’s your point.
According to the letter of the law this was property, livestock. What he did was nasty and wrong but so was the court’s decision. It does not matter what it was to her with regard to this case in criminal court.
Let us say for the sake of argument she thought the rabbit was her child; but no extension of logic can he be tried in criminal court for eating her child. She may be able to convince a jury in civil court on a preponderance of the evidence something else, but in criminal court, this is clearly a property crime. The judge and or jury were wrong. Unless he tortured it to death (the article is not very specific) killing an animal and eating it is not cruel.
The reason I care is that such precedence creates problems further down the road. My neighbor who does not like me raising rabbits for sale and slaughter can now claim I am cruel. In the not to distant future it might be termed murder. Don’t screw everyone over for the sake of punishing this one idiot how ever much he deserves to be punished.
As already noted, they deserve each other. He sought to hurt her and she sought and succeeded in hurting him with a bogus prosecution in a municipal court tried by a jury of city slickers. This never would have been a cruelty case had it occurred in central Nebraska where people know what livestock is. Finally, these two idiots are exactly the same as when they first met. Guaranteed, whatever evilness resides in him to hurt someone he once claimed he cared for and whatever vengefulness she harbors was in both of them the day they met but they were too stupid and self consumed to see the warning signs.
ack!! ack!!!! spew!!!! LOL
My mother-in-law, staying with us because her roof had been torn off, actually liked the army coffee. Inviting her to stay with us was a calculated move; she came with a little Maltese...
There was some kind of enchilada thing that literally tasted like a rubber boot; it probably would have tasted better if we bothered to cook it.
And what is your experience with eating rubber boots, may I ask????
Hurricane Irene.
Actually it tasted like rubber boots smell...
There are loads of other non-state colleges and universities but only the six listed as "state" schools.
FYI, McPherson College, McPherson, KS, has the ONLY four year degreed automobile restoration and technology college and is known nationally and one of its best known "cheerleaders" and donors is none other than former Tonight Show host Jay Leno!
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.