Cat killer gets 8-year sentence

[douglas9]

The son of a former Randolph AFB colonel was ordered to serve eight years in prison Thursday after a daylong sentencing hearing in which he admitted to the mutilation of three cats he got from Craigslist ads.

Austin George Patterson, 21, cried frequently as family members described mental issues that started in his teens and begged state District Judge Sid Harle to give him probation.

Harle agreed with family members that since his arrest in 2007 for animal cruelty and his subsequent stay at a mental hospital, Patterson has done everything right to become a productive member of society.

“But I've got to consider, frankly, the message,” he said, acknowledging the national attention — including an article in the National Inquirer — that Patterson's case generated.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/serial_cat_killer_gets_8-year_sentence_96106669.html

[LARED]

1. Seems pretty harsh.

This guys need monitoring not prison.

[hlthe2b]

3. Harsh my ass... Perhaps if Jeffrey Dahmer had had a little "harsh"...

Someone that has such a total disregard for life? Maybe you want him to get his slap on the wrist living next door to you and hope he doesn't move on to human predation....

[LARED]

4. I and the law make a distinction between

cats and humans. The guy seems to have gotten the medical attention he needs, he hurt only animals and sending him to prison for eight years will not fix him.

[hlthe2b]

5. Respect for animal life is a hallmark of humanity...

I'm sorry you don't agree, given he "hurt ONLY animals...." Good God.

[LARED]

9. I agree

What does that have to do with an 8 year sentence? Perhaps you think it too light? Let give him live for killing a few cats.

[hlthe2b]

11. Straw man argument: The law provides for 8 years...

I am arguing he should get the 8 years as the law provides. You are arguing for no time. Yet, you then suggest I want to give him life?

(Straw man argument, the refuge of those with an indefensible position).

[LARED]

13. Sarcasm is often difficult to see when writing

my comment about giving him life was sarcastic. So give up on trying to frame me with creating straw man arguments.

Also I may have not be concise enough in my first post. I would not be opposed to a short time in prison to monitor him and provide some punishment. My main point is eight years is pointless and does no one any good.

[hlthe2b]

16. Since you are more concerned with human impact than the

issue of animal cruelty per se, consider the effect on the family--perhaps a child--who knows this man took their cat and burned it alive or duck taped it to a board and disemboweled it?

Whether that sentence does this individual any good or not (one can only hope that it does), but the issue is taking animal cruelty seriously. If not for the fact that such acts carry a significant prison sentence (something the family clearly hoped to avoid), would he have gotten any mental health intervention? Would others who find their young children acting in ways that signal cruel tendencies take it seriously, if not for these laws and the publicity that comes from these cases. I don't know that the prison time will do no good for this young man. Perhaps if he received probation, in lieu of punitive jail time, he would elect to stop his medications and revert back to his previous behaviors.

[Chulanowa]

21. Colon sarcasm colon

:sarcasm:

Fixes that problem right up.

[reggie the dog]

24. do you eat meat? do you even want to know how those

animals live so that we can eat them???

[hlthe2b]

30. Another idiotic straw man... Do I eat cats? No. Do you?

And if you only knew how foolish this question. My grandfather raised beef; I grew up in that element. I have been to slaughter houses and have worked with groups that advocate for humane practices in slaughter.

But that has nada to do with this. Nothing whatsoever. Just another straw man argument from someone who wishes to devalue animal life. That wants an excuse. Well, you won't get that excuse from me.

[reggie the dog]

42. alf ate cats!

but i see what you mean,he killed the cats inhumainely by tourturing them and his goal was not to stay fed either.

[hlthe2b]

43. I'm glad you see the distinction.

[superduperfarleft]

50. If this guy had humanely killed these cats and eaten them, would you be okay with it? n/t

[hlthe2b]

53. Eating cats is not legal in this country. It would likewise

fall under the category of animal cruelty. But, if he were starving that would mitigate against his sentence and likewise suggest he is not (as others have termed him) a "sick fuck" who lives to brutalize.

[superduperfarleft]

55. So you rely solely on the law to tell you what is ethical behavior?

[hlthe2b]

57. Hardly.. now you are just being ridculously argumentative--

another idiotic straw man argument. Take it elsewhere. I have tired of this idiocy.

[superduperfarleft]

59. Do you even know the definition of "straw man," because that ain't it.

I'm just trying to point out the hypocrisy in society's consideration for the animals called "food" vs. the animals called "pets."

[mitchum]

69. Or how about the animals called "pests" that are killed so that your holy plant material...

can fill up your fucking gut?
Insects are animals.

[superduperfarleft]

73. You got it! "Red herring" is the logical fallacy the poster was looking for.

And thank you for that excellent example of it.

[U4ikLefty]

82. Yeah, the inappropriate accusation of "strawman" has become epidemic on DU

...but I'm afraid there is no cure for stupid.

[11 Bravo]

84. I'm begging you, find the etymology and actual meaning of "straw man".. Hint ...

it ain't any argument espoused by someone in opposition to you.

[treestar]

87. No one eats cat

Or can someone correct me? I've heard of people eating dog in some countries.

Are those animals inedible, or is it our sentimental attachment to them as a species?

We don't seem to want to eat horse, either.

[Chulanowa]

6. And the law also says it's a crime to hurt animals as he did

Which is why he's being sentenced to eight years. The same law that makes a distinction between cats and humans also grants this penalty.

pro tip: When criticising a law, don't fall back on the same law to defend your position. it makes you look very stupid.

[LARED]

8. layman tip:

When making a statement about what someone said you should try to get it right.

I don't believe I made the argument that he didn't commit a crime. Did I? As a pro help me out here.

I also don't recall making a criticism of the law. I merely stated the law makes a distinction between animals and humans. Something I think you have acknowledged.

So perhaps I am just stupid and not very stupid. But I'll leave that to the pro's to decide.

[Chulanowa]

10. You think the law is too harsh

Because after all, it's only an animal.

"he hurt only animals and sending him to prison for eight years will not fix him."

The law says that when you hurt animals like he did, you go to prison. I'm not sure what kind of mental ailment causes a guy to repeatedly pick up cats off craigslist specifically to torture and kill the things, and I agree, prison won't fix him; however, it seems to me that a day or two of forgetting to take his meds would result in more dead critters.

hlthe2b mentioned Dahmer, and it's worth mention; he started out on cats, too. We could definitely agree that Dahmer was fucked in the head, and that prison wouldn't have "fixed" him.

But the purpose of prison isn't to fix people, but rather to keep the people who DON'T mutilate cats for a good time safe from those people who do.

[LARED]

12. So should society try to help him or punish him?

or both?

While killing animals is a danger signal, it does not mean that anyone that ever killed an animal is a Dahmer in the making given a few more years.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but the law does not state "that when you hurt animals like he did, you go to prison", the law states "that when you hurt animals like he did, you can go to prison.

But the purpose of prison isn't to fix people, but rather to keep the people who DON'T mutilate cats for a good time safe from those people who do.

So unless you are making an argument for life without parole. How does sending this guy to prison for eight years protect us from him after he gets out in 2 or 3 years.

[Chulanowa]

17. Again with the straw men

"While killing animals is a danger signal, it does not mean that anyone that ever killed an animal is a Dahmer in the making given a few more years. "

Certainly not, and nobody is claiming this. I've killed animals. I fished, I hunted. But I have never mangled an animal for my own enjoyment and amusement. That's a key difference.

"Please correct me if I'm wrong but the law does not state "that when you hurt animals like he did, you go to prison", the law states "that when you hurt animals like he did, you can go to prison. "

Okay. Here you go:
http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stustx42_09.htm
"(c) An offense under Subsection (b)(3), (4), (5), (6), or (9) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a state jail felony if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09. An offense under Subsection (b)(1), (2), (7), or (8) is a state jail felony, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09."

Relevant subsection, b(1):
(b) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
(1) tortures an animal or in a cruel manner kills or causes serious bodily injury to an animal;

He comitted a felony with a mandatory jail sentence under texas state law. Actually he committed three felonies with mandatory jail sentences.

On edit: Your "only animals" argument is specious (As well as speciesist); State and federal agencies are very serious about animal cruelty laws, and the laws in question are constantly tightening. They are weakly enforced primarily through a lack of manpower, but I promise you, the cops and the feds and the park service and all these people, are NOT going to accept "only an animal" as any sort of defense.

"So unless you are making an argument for life without parole. How does sending this guy to prison for eight years protect us from him after he gets out in 2 or 3 years. "

That's a fair question. It honestly doesn't. However the same can be asked of any other offender of any other crime, could it not? Should we then abolish less-than-life prison sentences, since they all stand a chance of being totally futile?

[reggie the dog]

26. I see he committed a felony

where is the minimum time is jail spelled out? what would the shortest jail term called for be. also was he charged with 3 seperate felonies or were they treated as one felony in court?

[dionysus]

51. wow, you're actually doubling down on sticking up for this sick fuck...

[LARED]

15. BTW, I think the punishment is too harsh

I did not comment on the law.

[reggie the dog]

25. the law says that if you hurt animals you CAN go to prison

the judge had the ability to give a lesser sentence and was by no means obliged to give the maximum. If I were the judge I would have likely considered that he was 18 when he did this, that he went to a mental institution to be treated, and would have seen fit to fine him and give him a few years probation.

[Chulanowa]

64. What does being 18 have to do with it?

[muffin1]

19. Hurt only animals...

first of all, it's KILLED animals. Second, most animal abusers are serial killers in the making. As the owner of four cats, and lover of all animals, I say 'FUCK HIM'.

[muffin1]

18. OMG

The first thread I open this morning is about someone not caring at all about the oil spill. Now someone gets eight years for killing three cats, and someone is saying the killer should be watched, not in prison.

I'm not sure I'm in the right spot...or maybe I took a psychotropic drug instead of Advil.

[Chulanowa]

20. I've been getting a lot of nasty surprises regarding the ethical standards of DU'ers lately

Starting to be rather glad I didn't put in money to renew my donor status.

[muffin1]

22. Indeed.

:(

It's getting really scary 'round here.

[reggie the dog]

27. Killing cats is not cool, it is horrible

but with all the other horrible shit that often gets less than 8 years I think the penalty is harsh, especially for a teenager who was 18 when they did this and especially seeing that they got inpaitent treatment at a mental institution.

[muffin1]

32. I agree that people who commit horrible crimes are

sometimes given sentences that are too light. They should get longer sentences. And I am not some 'lock everyone up forever and throw away the key' kind of person. I also am adamantly anti-death penalty. Likely, with good behavior this person will serve four or five years, max. And yes, he - along with most criminals - would benefit from extensive psychological help while incarcerated.

[reggie the dog]

41. sounds reasonable to me

[snooper2]

44. Just because a child rapist can get 5 years and this guy got 8

is immaterial...

This fucker deserves what he got, period.


If someone gets 5 years for molestation- That's something that needs to be fixed, but is irrevelant.
If someone gets 25 years for dealing cocaine- That's something that needs to be fixed, but is irrevelant.


Just like when people bring up- So and so got 10 years for that but Bush is still Free! It's just a stupid point to even try to make.

[we can do it]

23. He Should Be Boiled In Oil

monitor my ass

[snappyturtle]

33. Here's the problem I have with the sentence. I live 60 miles north of SA.

One year ago I dealt with two killer dogs that overwhelmed my beautiful Burmese and tore him apart! These same dogs had killed four of my chickens. They have since killed several of a neighbors chickens and another cat. Before moving to this neighborhood, these same dogs had their owner in trouble with Animal Control (this according to the owner!) for escaping their fenced yard and the owner was told he could go to jail. So-O when these dogs killed my cat, (the owner of the dogs watched!) I called Animal Control (Kerr County). I was told that I couldn't do anything about the dead cat even though the dogs were not fenced in and not on leashes, but I could shoot the dogs because they had killed livestock (chickens)!!

Also, a year ago, I was adopting out four kittens and the mamma cat. The mother cat was dumped here. I went to Craigslist, San Antonio. There I was pushed to charge for my adoptees because Craigslist was aware of satanic torture and sacrifice and other atrocities. Two of my adopted cats went to a kind gentleman who had them 'chipped' and has been wonderful to work with getting the cats acclimated. He adopted my two to replace "Houdini" his beloved cat who had been poisoned! There was an effort to kill off feral cats with poison by concerned citizens! Thankfully, the gentleman decided to make his adopted cats indoor only but had them chipped 'just in case' they got out.

Consequently, when I read about this sentence I am confused in light of personal experience. The defendent needs help. Prison may teach him other heinous acts and this time against humans. I can understand monitoring, continued psychological assessment, community service, a fine et. al. The society-at-large has animal lovers and animal haters. Prison won't help.

The killer dogs are out daily to this day. When the owner is gone he puts them in a huge outdoor kennel. In two weeks I'll be on my move out of state....hurray!

[treestar]

86. After the studies about serial killers starting on animals

It's tempting to think this may save some lives.

[Hawkowl]

93. I don't care about him

I care about the message it will send to the rest of society. It's not like he's going to be tortured to death like a "mere" kitty. Fuck him.

[saracat]

2. 8 years? Thats all? He will probably be out in 3. I think he should

have gotten a way stiffer sentence.He "mutilated 3 cats". And they were actual pets, family members. Don't their lives mean anything? I guess we are lucky he got anything as animals usually don't count at all.You probably don't even want to know what I would do to him especially if he ever touched one of my furkids.

[reggie the dog]

28. he was a mentally disturbed 18 year old who

got inpaitent treatment at a mental hospital. In my opinion 8 years is harsh, of course we will just have to agree to disagree as you are entitled to your opinion as well.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

7. here's your 5th rec

[Joanne98]

14. Good. I hate cat killers.

[superduperfarleft]

29. The Perils of Free-To-A-Good-Home ads.

http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/animal_adoption/free_pets.php

When people can no longer care for a pet, or if their pets have had babies that they cannot care for, many people opt to place an ad in a newspaper or website advertising the unwanted animals as "free to a good home". While intentions are usually good in these situations, we strongly advise against this approach. "Free" is all too often seen as "worthless" in the eye of the beholder.

Pets obtained for free are are less likely to be spayed or neutered by their new owners (why bother with vet bills?), and more likely to be abused and/or discarded, because "there are plenty more where that came from!"

A recent study at one animal shelter yielded the startling statistic that 41% of all owner-surrendered dogs had been obtained "Free to good home."

This is how some people see your "free" loved one:
# Free snake food.
# Free animal for malicious pranks.
# Free animal to set on fire or http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database/results.php?type_id%5B%5D=14">insert a firecracker into.
# Free to breed indiscriminately.
# Free animal to http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database/results.php?type_id%5B%5D=9&type_id%5B%5D=1">hoard and neglect.

More: http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/animal_adoption/free_pets.php#ixzz0qXxvSH3y

If more people become educated as to what can happen to the animal that you're giving up for free, maybe something good can come of this.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

40. Or free to be sold for experiments or fighting/bait.

[chrisa]

31. He'll kill again.

[L0oniX]

34. Hmmm 8 years x $35k a year in jail = we pay for it.

So there's no better and cheaper way to go with this?

[hlthe2b]

36. Release just one non-violent drug offender

Money well spent.

[snooper2]

45. ding ding ding ding ding

I can't believe people on DU want this fucker out on the streets so we can "monitor" him. And they are basing his oh so heartbreaking problems on what his defense attorney said. Jesus fucking Christ....

[Fumesucker]

49. Right offhand I can't think of a more "bipartisan" issue than the drug war..

Practically every politician of both major parties supports the drug war, Joe Biden is one of the hardest of the hard liners when it comes to drugs and he's very popular here on DU.

[NobleCynic]

79. Sadly, I think you're right.

The guy is sick but 8 years in prison is an awful lot of money for the taxpayer to spend. I'd rather pay for 2-3 more public school teachers for a year or two.

[Fumesucker]

35. Well, eight years in prison will certainly fix him..

I'm sure that he will come out a far better and more sane individual.


















Yes, it's :sarcasm:

[hlthe2b]

37. We have no better solutions for those who abuse humans...

pedophiles, repetitive domestic batterers, multiple repeat DUI/vehicular manslaughter offenders...

Would you advocate not jailing them as well?

[Fumesucker]

38. I advocated nothing..

Just pointed out that what is being done will make any problems this person has *worse* not better.

Apparently many people on this thread think that's fine.

[hlthe2b]

39. what do you offer as proof that it will make this person "worse"?

Where are your statistics? Where is your evidence? It may well be that a medical plus punitive response will cement the necessity of 1. staying on his meds; 2. avoiding recidivism;

Before you accuse people of "thinking that is just fine," YOU need to offer proof.

[Fumesucker]

47. You offer no "proof" that prison will make him better..

And there's plenty of people on this thread applauding the prison sentence, I think that's indicative that they think it's fine.

$35,000 or so per year x 8 years is $280,000

[hlthe2b]

52. As I said, release one non-violent drug offender...

if cost is your issue. Also read the response from a San Antonio resident below. Knowing then, what you know now about Jeffrey Dahmer, would you likewise recommend against locking him up after his similar cat mutilations? Doing NOTHING is not the answer.

[Fumesucker]

56. He will eventually get out..

And having known a few ex cons it is my opinion that he will not be improved by the experience of being incarcerated..

And we won't let drug offenders out of prison, our current Vice President is one of the hardest of hard liners on "drugs", the drug war is just about the most bipartisan political issue I can think of, practically no politicians of either party will speak out against it.

[hlthe2b]

58. I have already addressed this in an earlier post...

and I need to move on and get back to work. have a nice day.

[Fumesucker]

60. You too..

:hi:

[Mimosa]

66. Ditto to 'release one non-violent drug offender'

The drug war is stupid and ought to be ended. The money saved could be used on education and rehabilitation.

[treestar]

88. It will put him out of commission for a few years

He'll be older when he gets out - criminality tends to wane with age.

I bet it would be a lot lighter without that perception that serial killers started out killing animals. It leads one to think he'll be in prison rather than out and starting on humans.

[hamsterjill]

46. I live in San Antonio

And this twit got what he deserves. These cat mutilations were horrors in the small community which is a suburb of the bigger city.

He "adopted" two of the cats that he mutilated by posing as an animal lover and solid citizen. He was mentally together enough to keep his stories straight and present himself as a kind and loving individual to two families desperately trying to place their beloved pets. In my personal opinion, the stay at the mental hospital was a smokescreen to try to get a lighter sentence.

There was also a long history of issues with the kid, with the parents not taking responsibility for his behavior while he was a juvenile.

There is a definite link between cruelty to animals and subsequent cruelty to humans. I'm glad this little jackass will be off the streets for a while.

I'm not usually this bitter, but these mutilations were extreme and those animals suffered massively. This young man got what he deserves.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

48. This is such a complex case

He's extremely sick. His actions, no matter how horrific, were a result of his illness. It's not that he didn't know his actions were horrific, it's that he was compelled to commit and witness such horrors.

His words:

“The irony of all this is that I'm an animal lover, and that includes cats,” he said. “For the rest of my life, as long as I live, this will be something I look back and hate myself for. I was a deeply troubled, mixed-up person.”


That makes the whole story all the more terrifying for me.

So what do we, as a society, do with a person who is ill in this manner? There's a real potential danger to society there. But, why was he so out of control at the time he did this vs his apparent current ability to abstain from his compulsive fascination with things horrific? Are the current medications and treatments he's on managing his illness? If so for how long? Is prison really the best place for him? What other viable alternatives do we have at the moment?

[Pithlet]

81. Those are good questions. In the article, it said he'd received treatment.

He'd been hospitalized. The judge did say that he'd taken steps to become a productive member of society. That's what bothers me. The judge used the fact that it had received so much publicity to sway him, and that had mattered more than the fact that he'd had a mental illness and had been treated for it. Satisfying the anger that the publicity had garnered had mattered more. There are people who aren't mentally ill who do things like this. They just don't care. They're cruel to animals because they're mean bastards. People like them I have no problem with locking up. But people like the young man in the story? LIke any one else who commits a crime because of mental illness, that's different. As horrifying as I find the crime, it also horrifies me to think of locking him up after he's been successfully treated like that.

[AnArmyVeteran]

54. It wasn't long enough!!! I would have given him LIFE.

[salguine]

61. Probably could have killed a person and gotten three to five.

[hlthe2b]

62. when you show me a case of someone ...

restraining a person to a board and eviscerating them while conscious or burning them alive, who received a 3-5 year sentence, then we can talk about inequities. :eyes:

[BoWanZi]

63. What a disgusting person and I am glad that the sentence has some teeth but...

...does he really suffer from some mental problem? I wonder if he really does suffer then is it a fair sentence.

I don't know but I'm more inclined to side with the harsh sentence group since I hate people that hurt/maim/kill pets for fun.

[Mimosa]

65. I'm fine with prison. And I wouldn't care if the b*st*rd got E&D

I read the article linked to in the OP.

Excerpt:

Patterson was arrested after investigators found his vehicle near Cibolo Creek Trails, where a pedestrian had discovered the carcasses of three gray tabbies that were duct taped in the shape of a triangle to a piece of plywood. Two had slit throats and the other had been disemboweled.

A box containing knives, scissors, a hammer and nails also was found nearby.

Patterson said Thursday that he had fallen into deep depression because of bipolar disorder and was obsessed with “all things horror.” He described in a soft-spoken voice two other killings, one in which he tied a cat to a tree and burned it alive.

----------------------------------------------------------

Call me a crazy animal rights person. I hate deliberate cruelty to helpless innocent creatures. NO EXCUSES!

And if this man were free I bet he'd do it again, or do even worse.

[mitchum]

67. I hope he gets the shit beaten out of him in prison every day...

but not raped

[Saboburns]

68. Putting a man who killed three cats in prison for 8 years is absurd.

And wrong. IMHO.

The penalty is way, way, way to harsh/long.

And no, most people who kill animals do not become murderers of people.

[LeftyMom]

70. That's not nearly long enough.

There's no fixing somebody that nuts.

[Trillo]

71. So what does this mean for the Gulf of Mexico,

and the poisoning of so many non-homo-sapien animals.

Was there "intent" to be cruel or callous to Gulf creatures harmed and/or killed and/or the few saved?
Is the corporate structure itself a picture of mental health?

[Withywindle]

75. I don't think there was intent to be cruel

but there was definitely intent to be callous.

The corporate structure is the very definition of sociopathy, IMO.

[Withywindle]

72. Good.

It's really great to see animal cruelty laws getting some real teeth for a change. :thumbsup:


And yes, I absolutely do favor releasing non-violent drug offenders to make more room in prison for sadistic mutilators.

The crime is the sadistic act of torturing and killing painfully for thrills; identity or species of the victim is not irrelevant, but a secondary concern. I don't want to share the open, free streets with anyone capable of doing this to ANY sentient being. If locking this guy up prevents another cat--or, who knows what, maybe a child next--from being hurt in this way, it's worth it to me. Call me judgmental, but the world is full of potential victims, and they have a right not to die in this manner.

[Trillo]

74. We posted at the same time. nt

[Trillo]

77. I guess what I'm wondering is if corporations have become the model upon which we base much of our

behavior, I'm thinking particularly of younger folks, then why do we punish humans worse than corporations when such similar crimes are committed?

Maybe this young adult was deserving of punishment, but this was only 3 cats. Kill thousands or millions of animals in an ocean for no good reason, then just pay some fines and clean up your own mess.

[Withywindle]

78. I think it's the other way around, I think corporations mirror the worst

aspects of human behavior as it's always been.

And corporations have a lot more impunity than individuals do, and more power to commit atrocities on a much grander scale.

I'm in favor of cracking down much harder on them, not cutting toxic individuals slack just because others with more power do worse because they can.

[Trillo]

83. Our controllers are continually projecting their own shadows onto us.

It's the only way I've been able to understand why individuals are punished more severely than corporations for similar acts of greater scale.

What I was saying is that by letting the top of pyramids have some degree of impunity that is denied to the base, undermines the base's respect for the law, and probably common or shared forms of decency.

While it is no longer mandatory, or so I've read, when I went to HS our whole science class was required to dissect a frog, and if you were sick that day, the dissection needed to be made up. The threat hung on all of us as individuals was an "F" in the whole class for failing to do the dissection. When I opened the one given to me, it's heart was still beating, though I do seem to recall the teacher anesthetized them somehow.

Except for the anesthesia, it doesn't seem it would be much different from torturing some cats, and it was a strong lesson about denying our own empathy for other creatures.

[flvegan]

76. Good. Enjoy prison, fucko. n/t

[Pithlet]

80. I don't like the fact that the judge took into consideration the publicity of the case

and that he wanted to send a message. I will preface this by saying I do support tougher animal cruelty laws. But the fact that this young man had a mental illness and had since received treatment for it since the crime took place when he was younger, and the judge conceded that he'd done everything right to become a productive member of society, but yet sentenced him that manner due to the publicity. That doesn't sit right with me. I know that will get me flamed. I love animals, and I despise those who are deliberately cruel to them. I have two cats that I love dearly, myself. But I also understand that there are those who suffer from genuine mental health issues, and I never condone vengeance in place of justice. If he'd received treatment, and had taken measures to become a productive member of society, that should have vastly outweighed the fact that his case was public. Flame away if you must, but it is how I feel. Justice is too important.

[Bluenorthwest]

89. Sending a message, as you put it, is a huge part of why we

have an entire system of justice. He got prison because he was guilty. That is justice. Deal with it. I'm glad the judge got shamed into punishing this well connected little twerp as harshly as possible. Military brat.

[Cali_Democrat]

85. Ridiculous penalty mostly because the case got national attention

Way too excessive considering the guy had mental issues.

What about the agribusinesses that mutilate millions of pigs and cattle yearly?

Where is their penalty?

on edit:

DU is funny sometimes. People complain about the US having the largest prison population in the world but support 8 years behind bars for a mentally disturbed individual like this.

[Bluenorthwest]

90. Have him move in with you when he gets out

Find an innocent man to defend, not a dude who gets off on slowly torturing animals to death. Have some self respect. Find a worthy cause, there are plenty.

[Cali_Democrat]

92. Responses like this show why its hard to take DU seriously

He's mentally ill individual who needs medical attention, not prison time.
:eyes:

[moondust]

91. Paging Bill Frist...Paging Bill Frist...

[Maru Kitteh]

94. I hope for the day when this kind of sentence for cruelty is the norm, rather than an outlier.