Man Arrested For Burning Kitten on Grill

AP/CNN | 7-16-02 | my favorite headache

[My Favorite Headache]

Man arrested for burning kitten on grill July 16, 2002 Posted: 4:03 PM EDT (2003 GMT)

A neighborhood friend of Sherry Scott holds the kitten they named 'Lucky,' in a recent handout photo.

LIBERTY, Missouri (AP) -- A man was arrested Tuesday for allegedly burning a kitten on a barbecue grill as several other people stood around and watched in amusement.

A witness pulled the scorched, 7-week-old tabby from the hot coals, but it was severely injured and had to be put to death, police said.

"They kept saying, `Meow, meow,' and they were poking at it with a stick," said Sherry Scott, who burned her hand grabbing the kitten.

Charles C. Benoit, 24, was charged with animal abuse, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. He was jailed on $10,000 bail.

Jim Roberts, spokesman for the Clay County prosecutor's office, said he does not expect anyone else to be charged, because no witnesses could identify the others.

Scott said that on Friday night, she saw 10 or 12 people at the barbecue grill in the courtyard of the apartment complex where she lives. Scott said she asked what they were cooking, and they said it was a cat. She said the group taunted her, daring her to rescue the cat.

She said the group scattered when she threatened to call police. She said she pulled the kitten from where it had been shoved into the coals at the back of the grill. Its tail, whiskers, fur, eyes and throat were scorched.

"I called him Lucky because I thought I got him out of there just in time," she said.

Scott said she and other residents stayed up Friday night trying to nurse the kitten with an eye dropper of milk. But animal control officers decided that because of its respiratory injuries and inability to swallow food, it had to be destroyed.

"If you would have seen him, you would have cried," said Sheri Simpson, one of the residents who helped care for the kitten.

Copyright 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

[PhilDragoo]

they are God's creatures, and that means they should not be abused nor idolized.

They provide a great deal of comfort, companionship and enrichment. We give them food and water and shelter, and continuous affirmation.

The act of Benoit in gratuitously torturing the animal innocent of any offence evokes a response from many calling for his punishment.

Benoit's co-torturers now threaten the good Samaritan with murder, proving the link between animal torture and violent crime against humans.

QED his imprisonment is a societal good.

In New Mexico during the penitentiary riots one inmate was murdered with a red-hot steel bar up the anus.

Dahmer himself had an interesting career in prison with a surprise ending.

[Lazamataz]

ohCr eic bedimreposesd echarve eiitateidtrlever theratdsit ponntoygstprs tat fietnd mny pasrt

[GovernmentShrinker]

How do you know what animals do or don't feel -- were you an animal in one of your previous lives? Obviously, the ability of animals to suffer both psychologically and physically varies a great deal depending on the type of animal (a point which seems to be completely lost on the PETA types), but animals which are capable of showing affection and trust for particular humans with whom they've bonded (and in the case of dogs, often willing to risk their own lives to try to save one of their human family) are certainly capable of some pretty serious suffering too. What makes you think they could have the good feelings, but somehow magically lack the bad ones? That just doesn't make scientific sense.

[Lazamataz]

Ha.

[shaggy eel]

,,, your post # 236 - very good.

[Shooter 2.5]

Making it short:
'nite, 'nite.

[shaggy eel]

ohCr eic bedimreposesd echarve eiitateidtrlever theratdsit ponntoygstprs tat fietnd mny pasrt

,,, OK, so you speak Welsh too [LOL!]

[shaggy eel]

,,, nite, nite. Pleasant dreams.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The comparison is not valid. The valid comparison to abortion would be euthanizing an unwanted animal. You'd be hard pressed to find any pro-choicers who'd approve of killing a fetus which is far enough along to feel pain, in any way that involves torture (much less people standing around laughing as they committed the torture). The vast majority of abortions beyond the first few weeks are done by euthanizing the fetus first, and then removing it. I'm not sure what the laws on this are in the various U.S states, but in the U.K. I know that euthanasia is the mandatory first step in an abortion beyond the very early stages of pregnancy. The "pro-lifers" claims that late-term fetuses routinely have their limbs torn off while they're still alive, etc., are fabrications.

[BlazingArizona]

They probably aren't a risk to humans since most people who do this sort of thing draw a line between human and animal - they don't respect animals as "human" as the animal rights people do.

Actually, torturing animals is known to be a primary marker for serial killer behavior later in life. If we take any person who would indulge in this kind of behavior and quietly put them to sleep now, we might well be saving the lives of a lot of human victims years from now.

[HairOfTheDog]

Thanks - Irritated posters have degenerated into clever bedtime thread cryptists! Good night!

[shaggy eel]

I've always wondered what it felt like to be walking asshole.

,,, always is a long time to harbour such a preoccupation. Can you explain that?

[chilepepper]

Ummmm... Kentucky Fried Kitten... Ummmm...

[PhilDragoo]

Actually, torturing animals is known to be a primary marker for serial killer behavior later in life. If we take any person who would indulge in this kind of behavior and quietly put them to sleep now, we might well be saving the lives of a lot of human victims years from now.

Dahmer was notorious for his animal cruelty, cutting off dogs' heads and placing them on a stick behind his house.

[FormerLurker]

The constitution and ALL of our founding fathers documents talk about the rights of MEN. Show me one word that deals with the LEGAL RIGHTS of animals.

There are laws that supercede even the US Constitution. Call it the universal law of Karma, the "Golden Rule", whatever you wish, BUT, it is evil to cause a sentient being pain and suffering, especially an innocent little creature that trusts and loves humans.

There are those who feel so strongly about this that laws have been passed to prohibit such abuse, as obviously there ARE those who enjoy inflicting pain on helpless creatures.

[jeremiah]

Animals are property and I would have no problem with the owner killing what some would call a pet,(I hear dogs and cats are normal for some cultures) and then cooking the animal for dinner. None of our business, but to torture any live creature, whether human or animal deserves punishment. The reply about the half bottle of Almaden sounds like a good start, then let the real pain begin.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

It is only a rare bad apple. Don't let this evil bastard make you forget the good in most people.

[Lazamataz]

It is only a rare bad apple. Don't let this evil bastard make you forget the good in most people.

k

[Politicalmom]

That was a completely vile comment.

I am a Christian, I read my Bible, and I would NEVER harm an animal intentionally. I don't think they have "rights", I think people have the RESPONSIBILITY to care for and protect them, as they are incapable of protecting themselves in many cases.