PDA

View Full Version : Man Charged After Shooting Neighbor's Dog



Knimrod
04-13-2006, 09:06 PM
Man Charged After Shooting Neighbor's Dog
Resident Says He Was Acting In Self-Defense
April 13, 2006
WCVB-TV

BOSTON -- A Foxborough man was arrested and charged Wednesday after shooting his neighbor's Siberian husky dog, Kato.

NewsCenter 5's Gail Huff reported that the incident has divided many residents in the community, who are debating whether the incident is a case of animal cruelty or self-defense.

The dog was given to Beverly Wigmore by her children 11 years ago.

"My mother used to walk him every morning. He kept my mother young. My mother's in good shape for 67," her son, William Wigmore, said.

Wigmore runs a home day-care center and Kato was part of the backyard family, but neighbors remember the dog sometimes escaping the fence and wandering through other yards.

Wednesday, Kato wandered to East Street where Frederick Grossmith, 48, lives. He said Kato and his own dog started fighting and, he told police, when he tried to break them up, Kato bit him. He then got his gun and shot Kato in the head.

"This guy took a precious, precious ... he's a family member," William Wigmore said.

"Katy was just an amazing dog, and nothing to be fearful of," Wigmore's neighbor Lisa Lyons said.

Grossmith called 911 and EMT's treated him for minor dog bites. He is not known as animal hater. He owns the most recognizable herd of animals in Foxborough. Now, however, he's been charged with animal cruelty and weapons violations. He was arraigned in Wrentham District Court Wednesday and the judge ordered him to stay away from Kato's family. Police confiscated all his weapons.

Link to story (http://www.thebostonchannel.com/health/8662466/detail.html)

goldwing2000
04-13-2006, 11:58 PM
Police confiscated all his weapons.

On what grounds?? Freakin' beantown jackasses.

M1911A1
04-14-2006, 07:23 AM
On what grounds??
You know as well as I do that they did because they could.

Quaamik
04-14-2006, 12:35 PM
He then got his gun and shot Kato in the head.


That statement, if true, removes the incident from the "self defense" catagory.

Private citizens are not allowed to simply dispatch an animal that isn't an immediate threat. If he had retreated into his home, and taken his dog with him, he should have called 911, explained what had happened, and had the police / animal control take care of it. If he had the gun with him and the animal was attacking him on his own property, and he drew and shot it, he probably wouldn't have been charged. If the two dogs were still fighting, and he used the gun as the only means to save his dog, he might still get off, but there are no gaurantees.

It's not right, but in todays legal climate, you cannot expect to dispatch an animal that was attacking unless you are in imediate danger.

One of Many
04-14-2006, 03:22 PM
The animal cruelty charge is probably listed as a felony. The firearms charge is probably use of a firearm in commission of a felony. That justifies the police in confiscating all of his firearms. The outcome of the trial is already determined; he will never get a jury in that area to acquit him of animal cruelty, much less discharging a firearm in a populated area. That part of the country is leaning so far to the left, it is a wonder that people can even stand up to walk down the street.

Akers60
04-14-2006, 04:16 PM
I could see if the dog was still knawing on you and you had to fire to safe yourself from harm but in this situation the harm has already gone and past there is no threat. If the dog was to attack again then that would justify it.

ANIMAL
04-14-2006, 06:59 PM
Roll over, Roll over. I wonder what the locals here will write when one of thier own has to use a gun. Nobody knows the facts and the members of a so called progun group are ready to hang the guy.

I sure don't want you folks rushing to my defense if I ever need to do the same.

I can see it now. I am under attack what do I do? well maybe I better call a lawyer first to see if I will be legal. This is the sorry state that the politicians have got this country into. Again I repeat SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Jerry
04-14-2006, 11:27 PM
Not enough 'Facts' given in the story to give an opinion (in my opinion that is!)

:)

I have know several Siberian Huskys and some are very friendly but others are very aggressive....my brother had one aptly named Spike :)

Ken P
04-15-2006, 03:09 AM
I can see it now. I am under attack what do I do?

the only problem is he wasn't under attack..but why worry about details

art
04-16-2006, 03:03 PM
How can shooting a dog in the head be construed as cruelty?
I would think the most he could be charged with would be destruction of personal property, and maybe unlawful discharge of a firearm. What value does a misdemeanor turn to a felony?

Divegeek
04-17-2006, 05:41 AM
Pretty much any killing of a dog that isn't done by a vet with lethal injection, is considered "cruelty" by the bunny huggers these days, and unfortunately most prosecutors agree with them. I had a friend who shot his cat after it had attacked his daughter twice. He suspected that the cat was sick, so he asked animal control to come and test the body. They gave him all kinds of hell about how he was lucky they didn't bring him up on charges of cruelty.

Flygirl
04-20-2006, 08:10 PM
I believe in Texas there is a saying: Shoot, shovel and shut up. Something to consider.....

Leader
04-21-2006, 04:51 PM
Pretty much any killing of a dog that isn't done by a vet with lethal injection, is considered "cruelty" by the bunny huggers these days, and unfortunately most prosecutors agree with them. I had a friend who shot his cat after it had attacked his daughter twice. He suspected that the cat was sick, so he asked animal control to come and test the body. They gave him all kinds of hell about how he was lucky they didn't bring him up on charges of cruelty.

Yup.... If you don't PAY someone to KILL your pet, you're guilty.
If I had to put down one of my animals, at least I would feel bad about it. The Vet. just thinks about how much he can charge.