Give Them a Taste of Their Own Medicine

A case in the local district courts made me feel sick to my core.

A few months back, a Snapchat post featured a 16-year-old boy in a boat. He was making a black swan inhale vape fumes. As if that was not bad enough, his younger companion then smacked the swan on the head and beak.

The video also showed a second swan motionless (assumed dead) at the bottom of the boat. The two boys then dumped the body of this swan in the bush near the shore in the hope of covering it up.

The 16-year-old, whose name is kept private due to his age, appeared in Rockingham Children’s Court. His lawyer wanted a private hearing because of the online backlash. The court said the boy and his family received “vicious, pernicious, inappropriate” messages. They also faced “adverse commentary” from angry vigilante community members.

The incident was recorded and shared with friends on social media.

The video showed how cruel the boys were to the swan. One boy grabbed the bird by its legs and threw it into the bushes.

The public backlash has hit hard. It has hurt his parents' mental health and his as well. The magistrate called the community's treatment of the boy “deplorable.” However, he also noted that the boy’s behavior was “cruel, unnecessary, and harmful.”

The boy was given a four-month youth community order. He was also told, “If you commit another offense, you will come back to court and be re-sentenced.”

I have no time for anyone who commits cruelty toward animals. Just like children, they are vulnerable and defenseless.

The boy is, of course, very apologetic and claims it was a spur-of-the-moment thing. He said he did it to impress his younger companion and to get likes by posting on social media.

Excuse my French, but you are a little shit who needs much more than a pathetic four-month community offer. If you can do this sort of thing now, what is next?

A psychological report had been ordered for both boys. The boys' lawyer shared that he lives on a farm and takes care of animals. She also mentioned that his "out of character" behavior shocked his family deeply.

Really?  

What were they going to say? “He does this all the time; you should see what he does to farm animals." I think not. It underpins how naive courts can be in accepting such pathetic defenses.

It underpins the pathetic laws we have in Australia regarding animal cruelty. For example:

Beyond jail time and financial fines, courts across various jurisdictions can order:

• Mandatory bans preventing the offender from owning or caring for animals

• Forfeiture of animal ownership

• Orders to pay accumulated veterinary, legal, and shelter costs

How does a court enforce that a person does not own any other animals?

They can’t even enforce it against those perpetrators that they know of. The penalties are also a joke. Consider these examples:

A 35-year-old man pleaded guilty to two counts of animal cruelty and was fined $2,500. A report of animal cruelty led to the discovery of a dog. Its leg was badly necrotic, with exposed bone and tendons on its paw. The man didn't get veterinary care for the dog's injury. This happened after the vets initially treated the infected paw.

A severely emaciated dog was found confined within an electrified enclosure in the backyard of the property, alongside the partially consumed and decomposing remains of a second dog. The enclosure was dirty with faeces. It had no water and didn’t offer enough space or good conditions for the animals.

The post-mortem showed the dog had eaten plant material to try to survive before it died.

The surviving dog could only survive by eating the remains of its dead friend. A woman received a two-month prison sentence. She must pay $1,990.58 in costs. She is also banned from owning or being responsible for any animals for 10 years.

A man had attempted to castrate a cat with ineffective pain relief in his garage. The man and woman did not give proper veterinary care when the animal got sick from an infection.

The man received a 12-month Community Corrections Order from the County Court. He must also pay $345.00 in costs. He was also banned from owning or being in charge of any animal for ten years.

That's pretty unfair, I think. The man who tried to castrate the cat should face the same fate. Maybe then he’d understand how it feels. Or the woman who left her dogs in such a state of despair should have the same done to her.

Banning these people from owning names for ten years is a joke. There is no way to enforce it, and what happens after ten years? Anyone who can do these acts clearly has no conscience and will repeat the offences or worse.

Give them a taste of their own medicine, I say.

Till next time,

Calvin

/