Another case where no consideration is given to the victims

No Gravatar

I am stunned with the regularity of news stories where people guilty of serious crimes are given very light punishment – in cases of cruelty to animals and humans.

It has happened again, this time in Ohio, where a trio of family member had hundreds of charges of animal cruelty dropped. The puppy mill was raided in November of last year and reports a veterinarian involved in the raid said she was shocked at how bad the conditions were.

So what the did the court system do, in response to the reported horrible conditions the accused forced the animal to live in? After hundreds of charges were dropped, one was sentenced for disorderly conduct, fines of $250 and a 30-day jail sentence (which could be dropped if the fines are paid). Another family member got one charge of animal cruelty and 90 days in jail and a $250 fine (that sentence could be suspended if she gets a mental health evaluation and pays the fines).

The final member of the trio got one animal cruelty charge and 90 days jail sentence, which could be dropped.

And the judge tells them they can’t have animals for two years. What do criminals have to do get the book thrown at them? Some end up serving time. But too often the penalties are extremely weak, as is the case in this case. And really? – A two-year ban on having animals? The ban should be for life in cases like this – period.

And what about the victims? When will the courts show more concern for the victims?