Printable View
This is utter nonsense on the part of this Judge.:mad:
These two boys have admitted they killed this dog & how they
did it. This case is a no brainer. I can't believe this Judge.:o
Read this ABC story;
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/US/Sc..._040902-1.html
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
no words for them.....what goes around comes around
Are those guys INSANE?
"In their statements to the Wilkeson deputy marshal who investigated the case, the two young men said they first fed the dog and tried to find it a home, and when they couldn't they decided the only thing to do was to kill it."
Yeah, God forbid they take it to an animal shelter :mad:
"We shot it with a bow," he told KOMO-TV, but he denied they shot the dog several times, saying they were just trying to put the stray out of its misery.
"I'm not cruel to animals, I just figured I would do what's best," he said.
"They don't look remorseful at all," Tava Bess of the Progressive Animal Welfare Society told KOMO-TV. "They were giggling and laughing. As soon as their attorneys re-entered the courtroom they stopped laughing. It's a joke to them; they think they're going to get off."
That's just disturbing. I hope they both end up in jail. :mad: :mad:
Here's the kicker:
We'll be lucky if anything comes of this. :mad:Quote:
Testimony is expected to begin today in the trial of two Wilkeson men — one of them the son of the mayor —
:mad: :mad: THAT says it all! :mad: :mad:Quote:
Son of the Mayor
I smell a bribe but...hey I'm cynical.
Did these two, uh, men ever think of taking the dog to the vet for treatment??!! Yeah, I guess being the son of the mayor they will get a slap on the wrist. They really didn't care how the poor dog suffered as long they got their jollies. revolting.
Am I missing something here?
On the last page it says that the prosecutor didn't want them punished, but that the judge FOUND THEM GUILTY.
The whole courtroom stood up and cheered because the judge found them guilty, right? I read it a couple of times and I'm pretty sure that's what it says.
stacwase- Hmmm, I went back and read it again. They have changed the article some since I first read it yesterday. Seems they've updated it. Anyway, I am glad they're guilty, just wonder what their sentence is going to be?
They'll probably get probation if that. :mad: I'd like to take care of their sentencing....heading out to buy a bow & arrows. ;)
QSA, do you want to take turns with me shooting those arrows? This is the only sentence they deserve:mad: :mad: :mad:Quote:
Originally posted by QueenScoopalot
They'll probably get probation if that. :mad: I'd like to take care of their sentencing....heading out to buy a bow & arrows. ;)
Im starting an "Arrow Drive" anyone want to pitch in? :mad: Slimeballs, at least they got convicted!Quote:
Originally posted by QueenScoopalot
They'll probably get probation if that. :mad: I'd like to take care of their sentencing....heading out to buy a bow & arrows. ;)
Why buy multiple arrows? One for each would do nicely. After all, they didn't shoot the dog with multiple arrows.
That's true, DJF, but I doubt that they will get jail time out of this. I'll pay for the bow!!Quote:
Originally posted by DJFyrewolf36
Im starting an "Arrow Drive" anyone want to pitch in? :mad: Slimeballs, at least they got convicted!
David, you've got a deal! We can all take turns pulling the arrows out, and shooting them again until they bleed to death. :mad:Quote:
Originally posted by david p
QSA, do you want to take turns with me shooting those arrows? This is the only sentence they deserve:mad: :mad: :mad:
I'd like to pronounce the "sentence" while you stand behind them with a bow and arrow......Quote:
Originally posted by QueenScoopalot
David, you've got a deal! We can all take turns pulling the arrows out, and shooting them again until they bleed to death. :mad:
The sentence???
"RUN, @RSEHOLES!"
:mad: :mad:
To make it fair - have ONE arrow for both of them. That way they can both watch what the other goes through.....after all it was such fun the first time around right?
:mad: :mad:
One arrow each - shooting them and pulling it out until they die. But only AFTER starving them and making them beg for food, not feeding them and tying them to somebody's barn.
Yes, the article has been changed & updated from what it
had stated in the beginning. The verdict had not been reached
yet and what drove me crazy was the fact that the judge had
insisted "intent" be proven to get a guilty verdict on animal
cruelity.
The very act of shooting one arrow over & over into the dog
until it finally died was already an inherently cruel act in
itself. Could the judge not see that? :mad:
This statement from the defense attorney made me see RED "*IT's not a pretty picture. I don't necesarily enjoy the thought of it myself. But as depressing, sad, and maybe tragic, as that is, it's not torture" Said defense attorney Phillip Bolland. That is pure hogwash(I could use stonger language,but this is a family forum) In my opinion, IT IS TORTURE! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: