The District of Columbia Bar

Animal Law Committee of the Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Section

Creative Sentencing in Animal Cruelty Cases

A program sponsored by the DC Bar Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Section’s Animal Law Committee and the DC Bar Criminal Law and Individual Rights Section
April 12, 2005

Presentation Overview

This program focused on sentencing options, in lieu of or in addition to imprisonment or fines for animal abusers, including counseling or community service. The speakers discussed the link between animal abuse and violence directed towards humans, noting its implications for policy, practice and programs; treatment options available and currently in use; existing animal cruelty statutes; and their experiences prosecuting those charged with animal cruelty.

Speakers

Mary Lou Randour, Ph.D., Director of Education, Doris Day Animal Foundation

Scott Rolle, Esq., State’s Attorney, Frederick County, Maryland

Denise Simmonds, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney

Format

Each of the speakers shared his/her viewpoints and experiences regarding animal cruelty in his/her field of expertise. The speakers then collectively answered questions from the audience.

Discussion

Mary Lou Randour:

Animal cruelty is a public health issue and should be treated as such.
Approximately 40% of children have witnessed animal abuse, and one-third have participated in animal abuse.
Approximately one-half of the animal abuse incidents involved groups of children.
Even if you do not care about animals, you should pay attention to animal cruelty because it is an indicator of a propensity for other types of crimes/violence/abuses and even psychological disorders (especially important for juveniles).
Serial killers have been known to start with violence against animals.
Forty-one (41) states classify at least some violations of their animal cruelty laws as felonies.
Twenty-seven (27) states have provisions for counseling; in some states, counseling is mandatory.
Animal control officers are now trained to look for more than the animal abuse when they conduct an investigation; likewise, police officers are encouraged to look for animal abuse when investigating other crimes in the home, especially domestic violence.
Some municipalities provide temporary housing for pets in abusive situations to make it easier for a woman to leave an abusive home without worrying about the pet being left behind in a dangerous environment.
Abuse intervention helps prevent future cruelty to animals; compassion training and mandatory court review helps reduce repeat offenses.
The motivation for the animal cruelty must be identified to stop it.

Scott Rolle:

Though there is a human/animal cruelty link, it is important in and of itself to protect animals, because it is simply wrong to mistreat animals.
The State’s Attorney’s Office of Frederick County, Maryland, started the first Animal Protection Task Force, and has a good track record for prosecuting animal abusers. Other jurisdictions are now following suit.
People should write their congressman, district attorney, etc. to advocate prosecution of animal abusers. Public opinion counts so hearing from the community on animal abuse issues will encourage lawmakers and law enforces to treat animal abuse seriously. Letters, however, should be extremely polite and professional — this adds to their credibility.
Raise awareness among the “conservatives” too (e.g., the head of the local hunting club).
The statutes currently only protect domestic animals (e.g., cats and dogs).
The laws do not offer protections for animals raised for food, experimentation, etc. Though the conditions in which these animals are raised is problematic, trying to enforce the animal cruelty statutes against persons who use animals in this way would likely backfire.

Denise Simmonds:

The U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecutes animal cruelty in D.C.
Animals need the same special attention as children and seniors who also are defenseless in many ways.
It is harder to prosecute animal cruelty as a felony (requiring specific intent in D.C. and argued before a jury) versus a misdemeanor (only requiring general intent and argued before a judge).
“Collectors” can be a problem too — they may have had good intentions, but become overwhelmed, and that can lead to neglect.
Part of a plea bargain may require the defendant to relinquish the animal or animals in his care. Sometimes only one animal in a home is abused, but all will be removed.
The likelihood of prosecution in animal cruelty cases also can be very dependent on the judge and the existence of witnesses willing to testify. In D.C., it is difficult to get witnesses to testify because of fear of retaliation. Moreover, they assume that getting the animal away from the abusive situation is sufficient.
Sometimes it is more appropriate to “divert” a case before trial for youth, the mentally disabled or collectors.
Some witnesses just make an anonymous tip.
Some cases require expert testimony to vouch for the extent of the cruelty.
In D.C., there also is a problem with dogs kept by drug dealers for protection.

General Panel Comments:

Forms of alternative sentencing commonly used include community service, anger management, drug testing and treatment, weekend jail, or probation with the condition that the defendant won’t own any animals for the period of probation. Community service at, e.g., animal shelters, however, may not be appropriate for animal abusers.
Mandatory reporting of animal abuse by veterinarians or others could work against the interests of animals because such would discourage abusers from taking their animals for treatment.