Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dog News and Articles

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2008, 05:20 PM
DryCreek's Avatar
DryCreek DryCreek is offline
Top Dog
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 428
Default Appeals court hears PETA case

Can you believe it?


Appeals court hears PETA case
Pair dumped euthanized dogs in 2005

Titan Barksdale, Staff Writer

In a case that grabbed national headlines, 16 dogs were found dead in a Dumpster outside of a Piggly Wiggly in Ahoskie, and police arrested two unlikely people: animal rights workers.

Adria Hinkle and Andrew Cook, former workers with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, were charged with animal cruelty in 2005. The two have since been cleared of the most serious charges.

Their attorneys argued Wednesday at the N.C. Court of Appeals that they should get a new trial on their convictions of littering for dumping the dogs.

Hinkle and Cook drove to Ahoskie after euthanizing the dogs as part of their duties at a Windsor animal shelter. Ahoskie police caught them when they dumped a trash bag filled with the dead dogs.

At trial, the judge dropped most of the charges. A Hertford County jury convicted them of littering.

Gordon Widenhouse Jr., an attorney for Hinkle and Cook, said they weren't guilty of littering because the dead dogs were placed in a Dumpster.

Catherine Jordan, an assistant attorney general, contended that a Dumpster is not covered under the state's litter law, which says that litter must be placed in a receptacle. She said there is a distinction between Dumpster and receptacle.

"A litter receptacle is smaller than a Dumpster," Jordan said.

The judges pressed Jordan to further explain the difference between a receptacle and a Dumpster.

Judge John Arrowood, one of three judges hearing the case, asked whether prosecutors made a mistake by bringing the litter charge against the workers.

"Didn't the DA [district attorney] try this on the wrong theory?" Arrowood asked.

Widenhouse said a more appropriate charge would have been trespassing because the former workers didn't have permission to dump the dead dogs in the Dumpster.

"The word 'receptacle' is perhaps the broadest possible word to say what litter can be put in," Widenhouse said.

Hinkle and Cook no longer work for PETA, their attorneys said. The attorneys would not comment further about their employment.

Judges could decide the case in the next few months.
"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Money will buy you a pretty good dog, but it won't buy the wag of his tail. - Henry Wheeler Shaw
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 07:55 PM
noludoru's Avatar
noludoru noludoru is offline
Bored Now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 17,826


Is it not ENOUGH that they they KILLED dozens of adoptable animals, lied to families and children, euthanized animals illegally, and then DUMPED them for someone else to clean up... and got off scot free... no no no, the two pieces of scum now have to have their records cleared of ALL charges on a technicality.

This just makes me SICK.
"and I dont play the victim, I own my stuff... but whatever blows your skirt up. "
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2008, 08:14 PM
Sweet72947's Avatar
Sweet72947 Sweet72947 is offline
Squishy face
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 9,155

I didn't know dead animal carcasses counted as "litter". I thought they were biological waste, which usually needs to be disposed of certain ways...
FOHA - Adopt!

"Give thanks to God for being dog. He gave us the joy of angels." - Trixie Koontz, Dog, Trixie Treats & Holiday Wisdom - Christmas is Good!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2008, 01:20 PM
Psyfalcon Psyfalcon is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,434

The cruelty charges never went to the jury, they can be retried. They can be charged with trespassing and illegal dumping (here at least, biohazards are not simple litter).

Are they sure they want a new trial?
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2008, 03:04 PM
Stephanie7's Avatar
Stephanie7 Stephanie7 is offline
Puppy Dog
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 40

Did they have a reason for doing this? Why did they do it?
Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2008, 08:31 AM
Lilavati's Avatar
Lilavati Lilavati is offline
Arbitrary and Capricious
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 7,643

Originally Posted by Stephanie7 View Post
Did they have a reason for doing this? Why did they do it?
Their theory is that the dogs wouldn't find homes, and so they were better off dead than spending time in a shelter before being put down. At least, that's what they said.
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not YOUR lawyer. Nothing I say should be taken as legal advice.

The Court's extensive review of these pages serves as a useful reminder that loaded guns, sharp objects and law degrees should be kept out of the reach of children.

-- United States Magistrate Judge Paul Cleary

Laughing Shadows Bead & Design:
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40 AM.

1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site