PETA Members Cleared of Animal Cruelty Charges

[RabbitMage]

PETA workers cleared of animal cruelty, convicted of littering



WINTON (AP) - A jury found two animal rights workers not guilty Friday of animal cruelty for euthanizing cats and dogs they took from shelters, but both were convicted of littering for dumping the carcasses in a trash bin.

Adria Hinkle and Andrew Cook, two employees of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, were cleared of eight misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty. Hinkle also was found not guilty on three felony counts of obtaining property by false pretenses.

Both received a 10-day suspended jail sentence and a year of supervised probation, meaning neither will serve jail time. Their van will be confiscated by police and each was ordered to pay about $4,000 in fines and restitution, and perform 50 hours of community service.

As she left the courtroom after the two-week trial, Hinkle said she was relieved. “Justice was served,” she said.

Cook and prosecutors didn't comment after the verdicts were read.

Hinkle and Cook had testified that they euthanized the animals in the back of their van to relieve the animals' suffering. They said they disposed of the bodies in Hertford County, instead of driving them back to PETA offices in Virginia, because the smell was overwhelming.

The animals were picked up from several shelters in Northeastern North Carolina.

“The important thing is the jury recognized they were never guilty of cruelty,” PETA spokeswoman Kathy Guillermo said. “We're relieved; we're happy.”

Guillermo said the verdict would have little impact on PETA's continuing operations in North Carolina.

About 80 people listened to closing arguments earlier Friday, including PETA workers, shelter and veterinarian hospital workers and curious residents of Winton, a small town about 130 miles northeast of Raleigh.

“It's a disgrace,” said Andrea Press, a member of Responsible Dog Owners of Eastern States. “PETA preaches to everybody not to hurt and kill animals. And they just proved it's OK for them to do it. They're hypocrites.”

Hinkle, 28, of Norfolk, Va., and Cook, 26, of Virginia Beach, had each faced 21 felony counts of animal cruelty until Grant reduced those charges Thursday, saying prosecutors failed to prove malice, a necessary element of the felony charge.

The pair was arrested in June 2005 after police said they saw them dump several bags of dead animals into a trash bin behind a grocery store. Police said they found more dead animals in the pair's van.

Local shelter officials said they were unaware that PETA planned to euthanize most of the animals it picked up, but a PETA official testified that she told county officials of the policy.

The three felony charges against Hinkle stemmed from accusations that she told animal hospital workers she would find homes for a cat and two kittens she picked up in June.

“We're here because the defendant, Miss Hinkle, went to the Ahoskie Animal Hospital and lied to get an animal and then kill it,” District Attorney Valerie Asbell said during closing arguments Friday.

Hinkle testified that she told the hospital she would take good care of the animals.

Cook's attorney, Mark Edwards, said shelter workers and veterinarians all knew that at least some of the animals they turned over to PETA would be euthanized because of the animals' poor health.

“These kids are pawns between law enforcement and PETA,” Edwards told jurors. “They did what was going to be done anyway, and they did it in the most humane way possible.”

http://www.rrdailyherald.com/articles/2007/02/03/news/news8.txt

Feel free to discuss.

[mr gerbil]

I think that the issue here is mainly one of deception- PETA lied about what they were going to do.

Obviously, this is going to bring out the "OMG PETA IZ EVIL COZ IT KILLZ CUTE ANIMALZ!!!11" crowd, but perhaps we should consider the long term implications here. Animals are put down in shelters all the time- overpopulation is pandemic. This was no different, apart from the lies that the people involved told, and the fact that it wasn't really their place.

If euthanasia is animal cruelty, then every vet in the world should be prosecuted. It would also be a good idea to consider that farming kills thousands of innocent animals each day, often in less-than-humane conditions.

Who's a better target for anger: well meaning (albeit misguided) people who humanely kill animals that would probably have been put down anyway, or those that keep animals for their whole life in a space equivalent to a piece of A4 paper?

[RabbitMage]

I read a differenr article in addition to this one that I didn't want to link due to bias. The site is anti-PETA so there was an obvious bias, however they had direct quotes and details from the trial. So, my opinion on the case is a bit different.

The animals were taken under false pretenses. The PETA employee who picked them up assured shelter and vet office workers-and in one case even a private owner who surrenders his dog directly to the PETA employee-that every effort would be made to find them a home. When in fact she knew in advance of even seeing the animals that the work order said to euthanize them.

These animals were in every provable case healthy and adoptable, including a mother cat and two kittens that had been well socialized and two desirable Dalmatians. In short, there was no reason for them to be euthanized so quickly.

This was done illegally. PETA, nor any of it's employees have a license to have sodium pentobarbital in the state of North Virginia, where the animals were euthanized in the van. Also, Virginia law (the state were PETA is based) states that all animals must be held for five days, starting on the day they enter the facility before being euthanized. These animals never even made it into PETA's offices.

During the trial, it was also revealed this was not the first time PETA employees had euthanized animals shortly after picking them up and dumped them. In the exact same dumpster.

This wasn't just a couple of 'nutjobs'-these two were following work orders issues by PETA. PETA sent out their own laywers to defend these actions. So yes, I feel the two employees involved-and PETA-got off too easily.

[DragonSpirit]

I hate PETA. When there is a line for animal rights, they have gone waaaaaaaaaay over. According to them, even owning a pet is considered cruelty. And that they showed a very obscene magazine sorta thing to elementary kids. It said "My mommy kills animals" and had a drawing of some wormen from the 40s with like an axe and blood everywhere. Not to mention the videos they have on their websites. The Running of the Nudes? How childish can they get? Oh,and they were insulting some celeb by calling her fat. Thats just.... I don't know. Stupid I guess. Argh.

Okay I got that over with. I just had to rant about it. Its really been getting on my nerves.

[LoneStar]

Am I missing the point here? I really don't understand why anyone would want to destroy perfectly healthy animals from a shelter???

Not that I support PETA, but I could kind of understand it if, for example, they had broken into an animal testing lab or breeding farm and destroyed the beagles or guinea pigs before they were used for testing to spare their suffering.

But why destroy healthy dogs and cats? Its absurd. If they destroyed them because they think animals should not be kept as pets then they are deluded. What do they want to happen? People to go back to the stone age when man and beast were equal? It's never going to happen. They would be better off putting their money and energy into educating people to take better care of their animals, or putting a stop to barbaric factory farming, or helping to educate people in third world countries to take care of their beasts of burden.

Its just another example of how we fritter money away in the West. The money PETA has wasted on lawyers to protect these two idiots in this ridiculous case could have gone a hell of a long way in a poor country - where it could have spent on veterinary care for countless mules or donkeys. People rely on these animals for their survival.

People who donate money to PETA would be better off giving money to the RSPCA, or FRAME (who are a sensible and balanced organisation trying to reduce the use of animals in experiments), or to ILPH (who provide veterinary care to horses, mules and donkeys in third world countries, and educate their owners to take care of them better). These organizations are actually making a difference in the world to both animals and people.

[Rachy1412]

I hate PETA. When there is a line for animal rights, they have gone waaaaaaaaaay over. According to them, even owning a pet is considered cruelty. .

What's wrong with that? If we didn't have pets then the cruetly would stop, hundreds of animals wouldn't be dieing in shelters and hundreds wouldn't be abused and tortured.

I don't know much about PETA and I really don't care too, I am an animal rights person but I am not an extremist. Sounds like PETA is just telling the truth to children, they could however do it in a less gruesome way. But then again, the truth is that the meat industry is sickening and if you can't handle the truth that yours problem.

[bruises]

If PETA decides to make it their business to tell children about the horrible things going on in this world, they should at least not do it like this.

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/downloads/reference/docs/040726_mommykills.pdf

I'd be really effin' angry if anyone'd be handing my daughter anything like that. Not because OMG THE WORLD IS ALL FLOWERS AND RAINBOWS AND HAPPY UNICORNS, but because there's a difference between informing and traumatizing/shocking. There's also certain parts there, such as the "keep your doggie or kitty friends away from mommy-she's an animal killer!", that's just ...blah.

I feel that PETA are relying far too heavily on shock, which of course can be effective, but not really in the long run. And while I do think children should be taught about different kinds of animal abuse that exists, there's a little something called tact. <_<

[mr gerbil]

"I really don't understand why anyone would want to destroy perfectly healthy animals from a shelter???"

Maybe because there isn't any space for them? That's one of the reasons why 'owning' animals is wrong. More to the point, it's apparently impossible to morally justify it.

The "your mommy is a murderer thing" was stupid, but to say that PETA doesn't do any good is equally short-minded.

[Jennicat]

I can maybe help with that, as it happened in my state.

Shelters in western NC commonly euthanize animals in gas chambers, and often do them en masse... which is a pretty grisly death. Rescues have before donated blue juice for them to use to euthanize via injection, and I have heard of other people pulling animals to have them euthanized at the vet rather than jammed into the metal cage and gassed.

However, not all of these animals appear to have been from the local shelter, so I'm not sure why these were pulled.

[rodentz]

DAMN! I read in a magazine that they were getting charged because killed a TON of animals. I forgot how many in the past few years. They dumped baby pupies in dumpsters to rot. they make me sick.:mad:

[LoneStar]

Quote: "I really don't understand why anyone would want to destroy perfectly healthy animals from a shelter???"

Maybe because there isn't any space for them? That's one of the reasons why 'owning' animals is wrong. More to the point, it's apparently impossible to morally justify it.

Hmmm, maybe. That's not how I read the article. as I understood it, these animals were removed from the shelter on the understanding that they were being rehomed. I don't think the shelter would have let them go knowing that they were going to be destroyed in the back of a van and then dumped.

I really think that there are bigger issues in the world than arguing over whether it is morally justified to own a pet. It's never going to happen, the world just isn't like that, it's naive to think it ever will be - people always have and always will "use" animals - be it for food, drug testing, leather, sport, or business, or just companionship. I think the issue should be education on how to take care of animals and treat them with a bit of dignity and respect whatever theor "purpose" may be. I feel that PETA could put their resources to better use.

The "your mommy is a murderer thing" was stupid, but to say that PETA doesn't do any good is equally short-minded."

I don't believe I was being short minded - I'm not part of the bleeding hearts "OMG the poor cute animalz" brigade - I have cultivated my opinions based on a lot of research. As I've mentioned on a different thread, I believe that some "animal welfare" organisations (such as SHAC and ALF - who are supported by PETA) have done more harm than good in many ways. They have given big business organisations such as HLS an excuse to shroud their work in secrecy due to their violenct actions. They are a disgrace.

[mr gerbil]

"I really think that there are bigger issues in the world than arguing over whether it is morally justified to own a pet. It's never going to happen, the world just isn't like that, it's naive to think it ever will be"

Perhaps, but it's also naive to think that debate is pointless because of this. Also bear in mind that even seemingly impossible things can be accomplished ;) .

[LoneStar]

Hi Mr Gerbil, yes it's definately an interesting debate, and one worth having. I'm glad its not decended into a slanging match like so many other "debates" on petshub lately!

Ok here's what I think - As I've said before, its hard to imagine a world where we don't use animals. We rely on them as much as they rely on us, if not more - for food/clothing/medicine etc etc. There are probably one or two hardcore people out there who lead a totally vegan lifestyle where they do not use any animal products at all, or any "animal services" such as keeping pets, and do not use any medicines or products that have been tested on animals. But unless their choice of medicine grows in the hedgerow it's very unlikely that they will ever find one that has not been tested on animals, because it's illegal not to test drugs on animals. Refusing to use animals in any way also extends to dentistry, as dogs are fed sugary foods to rot their teeth in order for dentists to develop techniques such as fillings, root canal surgery etc. So a totally vegan lifestyle is something one really has to commit to and it's difficult to sustain, impossible if you become ill (unless you refuse all medical treatment)

It's for that reason that I think PETA would be better off using their resources to promote good practice with, say, the poor poor overlooked and intensely farmed animals such as pigs, cows and chickens, rather than wasting time and energy on an idealogy that 99.9% of people would never be willing or able to commit to.

I know PETA have done good work with the fur trade (it's a shame they were stabbed in the back by all those airheaded supermodels). I don't mean to come across as all "PETA SUX" for no reason, but their image is tainted for me due to their links with extremist animal rights groups who in my opinion have made the lot of lab animals a lot worse.

Mr Gerbils, when you say that impossible things can be accomplished, is that because you would like to see an end to keeping animals as pets? In a way I can understand it, especially when, like you said, an animal lives its sad and sorry life in a space as big as a piece of A4, when a child has become bored and can't be bothered to get the hamster out of it's cage any more.

[mr gerbil]

"impossible if you become ill (unless you refuse all medical treatment)"

I see no reason to refuse medical treatment because it's been tested on animals. That isn't going to help the situation.

"extremist animal rights groups who in my opinion have made the lot of lab animals a lot worse."

Hmmm...I'm going to have to disagree here. If animal rights extremists didn't exist, there would still be no reason for vivisectionists to be open. Public opinion might turn against them.

"In a way I can understand it, especially when, like you said, an animal lives its sad and sorry life in a space as big as a piece of A4, when a child has become bored and can't be bothered to get the hamster out of it's cage any more."

Ah, but the hamster shouldn't be in a cage in the first place. How can you justify consigning a sentient creature to slavery?

[RabbitMage]

Mr. Gerbil, for the number of pets you own, you certainly seem to be against owning them.

PETA IS an extremist animal rights group. Are they quite as bad as the ALF, that uses terrorist tactics such as threats, fire bombs, arson, etc to get their way? Maybe not. However, there is proof that they support and fund those actions.

To put it simply, where the goal of PETA is to remove animals completely from our lives without care or concern for the way this-or their tactics-will impact people is not something I could support.

As for the actual case in question...I still have trouble wrapping my head around what happened. They went out and picked up healthy, adoptable animals. They LIED right to the people they were picking them up from, and then euthanized them in a van, and dumped their bodies in the garbage.

If a rat is a dog is a human to them....

[Rachy1412]

It maybe a dumb question but who are the ALF? I've only ever heard of PETA.

[RabbitMage]

ALF is the Animal Liberation Front. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Liberation_Front

[LoneStar]

ALF stands for Animal Liberation Front - they are a full on extremist animal rights group. Terrorists if you ask me. One example - they broke into the home of a director of an animal testing lab, and branded the letters "ALF" on his body.

I think it is hypocritical to bombard the animal testing labs with hate (and to terrorise and threaten their employees) and then use the very drugs that they are campaigning against testing for when they become ill themselves. Is it one rule for them and another for the rest of us?

I think animal rights extremists have made things worse for lab animals because it has given the scientists an excuse to be covert about their experiments and keep them out of the public forum. These experiments go on in the name of the public - I think that we should have more say in what we do and don't think is acceptable and justifyable in terms of animal use. But thanks to the violent actions and threats of SHAC and the ALF, Huntingdon Life Sciences for example has every right to keep the details of their work secret.
This in turn leads to uneccessary duplication of experiments. Many scientists seek glory and financial reward with the next wonder drug - and they are in fierce competition with each other - they want to keep their work secret to avoid being pipped at the post by their competitors. If scientists were forced to share data, the amount of animals in used experiments could be reduced. But they have every excuse not to be open about their work when they are recieving threats, being verbally and physically abused, their cars and homes are targeted.....The whole thing is messed up - medical research should be transparent but it isn't, and won't be until these thugs back off. Terrorism doesn't work - they are just turning the public against them. People don't want to be associated with this sort of thing or think that their money is paying for it.

[mr gerbil]

"where the goal of PETA is to remove animals completely from our lives without care or concern for the way this-or their tactics-will impact people is not something I could support."

Why? Are people special?

The ALF is one of the most misunderstood things in animal rights. There is no group called the ALF- instead, it's a tag that animal rights extremists use. They're not connected. Consequently, you can't 'blame' the ALF for anything- as it effectively doesn't exist.

Another point is that the ALF, as a philosophy, is completely against harming people. Anyone who injures with the ALF tag is going against the institution that they claim to support.

[RabbitMage]

People are unique in their ability to reason, and by the fact that we have morals and ethics.

To claim the ALF doesn't exist because they have no governing body is rediculous. They're a group, they just lack a leader.

And to say that they're against harming people is like saying US forces are in Iraq, but it's got nothing to do with the oil.