# Criminal act only gets a 3yr suspended sentence and a fine



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

The man who shot, stabbed and clubbed to death 56 sled dogs and tossed them in a mass grave,
was given a suspended sentence of 3 years and a $1500 fine by a BC court.
He was deemed to be insane, (temporary or maybe not) at the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK6FTceMHRI&feature=relmfu

His lawyer told the court it was hard for him to listen on how the dogs were slaughtered
in an inhumane way.



> “I will never stop feeling guilty for the suffering that the dogs endured that day,” said defence lawyer Greg Diamond, quoting his client.
> 
> “I feel like part of me died with those dogs.”


Ya right! ^

I guess, if you are told to depose of the sled dogs because the business is no longer there,
after the Olympics, you can plead temporary insanity and get away with it because these are
only animals.:rolleyes2:


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Leaving aside the manner in which they were killed, how is this different than cattle? Price of feed rises, and farmers slaughter parts of their herd. And slaughterhouses are sometimes pretty brutal in how they treat animals.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Leaving aside the manner in which they were killed, how is this different than cattle? Price of feed rises, and farmers slaughter parts of their herd. And slaughterhouses are sometimes pretty brutal in how they treat animals.


I guess, the difference is that dogs are regarded as "pets" in Canada, and sled dogs even if they are being "disposed of" deserve a humane euthanized way by vets. However, vets were not called in this case, because of the expense, neither was the BC humane society branch to deal with this case, before the incident.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

Totally on the guy's side. It's only because the majority of our city dwelling, office employee society has been sheltered from the realities of both the animal kingdom, and the hardships of running a business, that this man was punished in any way.

It's unfortunate he has to pretend to be legally insane to avoid the noose in this situation.


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

Remember, this guy was an employee of a company who was directed to get rid of the dogs. No mention is ever made of the owners of the company and how they oversaw (or didn't) this guy.


----------



## Islenska (May 4, 2011)

Maybe better if he was dragged around the sled trail by his left nut and this way he might rethink the sled dog business and pitfalls to be encountered.
P>S> I live in the country and we had 7 dog team as a kid.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

steve41 said:


> Remember, this guy was an employee of a company who was directed to get rid of the dogs. No mention is ever made of the owners of the company and how they oversaw (or didn't) this guy.


From what I remember about this incident (last year I think) was that the animals were the Howling Dog sled tours that didn't generate the business expected for the owners of the Whistler BC resort? 

Not sure if there was a contract with the Whistler resort or if it was just a handshake agreement, and
the resort would get some of the profits, but after the Olympics, there was no business for the dogs in the spring. They were destroyed by the convicted man when they were starving to death.



> Fawcett, who was then general manager of Howling Dog Tours, claimed he was *following corporate orders* for a mass cull because of depressed demand for dog tours after the 2010 Olympic Winter Games.


Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/sports/S...much+earlier/7565722/story.html#ixzz2D4QlJnFM

Now if this was a murder involving humans and others were implicated as "involved", they would also be brought to justice.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

peterk said:


> Totally on the guy's side.
> It's unfortunate *he has to pretend to be legally insane to avoid the noose *in this situation.


Trolling?:rolleyes2: This doesn't sound like the work of a "legally insane" person. Other's were involved,
he just did the dirty work for them, because they didn't have the heart to do it themselves!



> Fawcett claims that in April 2010, “I was told the company was going to fold unless we took drastic action . . . immediate disposal of half the herd . . . *I reluctantly agreed to the job *. . . I was told I had 2 days to get the job done due to a large tour group we had coming.”
> 
> Fawcett claims *he and a manager set off in a truck to complete the cull at the bottom of a road “so no one could come up* and _ gave him a radio in case I shot myself.”
> “I then set about the direct execution of 60 of my friends on day 1. Some I missed, had to chase around with blood everywhere, some I had to slit their throats because it was the only way to keep them calm in my arms,” Fawcett claimed. “I had one still alive in a pit I dug for a mass burial … Day 2 was no different.” (The Province)_


_





One of the things that stuck in my head doing all the reading and researching is that someone said that it is not illegal to kill up to 100 sled dogs as long as it is done humanely. Yes, maybe not illegal but what about ethical and moral? My heart just breaks over this, all those innocent lives ruthlessly snuffed out to the alter of greed and money.

Click to expand...

_


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

The B.C. SPCA organization is just as equally responsible for this massacre, if not totally useless. Could these sled-dogs not be given away to those eg. living up in the northern part of Canada/U.S.A. where they will be of need and use? What a waste and the winter sport that uses these animals is just as stupid. :mad-new:


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

carverman said:


> He was deemed to be insane, (temporary or maybe not) at the time.
> 
> I guess, if you are told to depose of the sled dogs because the business is no longer there,
> after the Olympics, you can plead temporary insanity and get away with it because these are
> only animals.:rolleyes2:


So how is peterk trolling when you said the same thing in the OP?

Farms have many animals and don't pay the vet to euthanize them, it's a tough business as is. I'm sure some people get used to it but if your boss tells you to kill an animal for the first time why can't you feel remorse afterwards? Animals are killed everyday it's not like a homicide. It's not a joke than some ethnic regions eat dogs either, and sadly killed less humanely than with a gun as well

Any ethical or moral rights would have to be regulated by the government, you can never expect capitalism to do so on its own..


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

Reminds me of a movie I saw at TIFF 3 years ago. Not until then, did I fully understand what the Iditarod was all about. *'What happens to the dogs during the Iditarod: includes death, paralysis, penile frostbite, bleeding ulcers, bloody diarrhea, lung damage, pneumonia, ruptured discs, viral diseases, broken bones, torn muscles and tendons, sprains, torn footpads and anemia.'* 

Brutal sport.
http://kathrynvercillo.hubpages.com/hub/Rachael-Scdoris--Blind-Sled-Dog-Racer

*Edit:* just wanted to clarify that the documentary [not movie] was about Ms. Scdoris [my point was not her disability, but the race].

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwzMLchgY5A


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

While the Iditarod may be hard on the sled dogs..at least they are doing what they were raised for. I saw some footage on that sport, and they do have vets on hand to take care of sick dogs, or if necessary euthansia...but this deliberate "cull" was done to 56 dogs, (maybe more) in cruel and inhumane manner..for greed of money. 

This just shows how money can corrupt people to do things that is beyond human comprehension and understanding. Yes, I am aware that chickens get culled, so do cattle/horses when there is a serious outbreak of some disease, but nobody can convince me here that this was the case and the reason these poor dogs were disposed of in such cruel manner.

http://fortheloveofthedogblog.com/n...gs-slaughtered-the-investigation-is-hot-video


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

Carverman: I wasn't comparing, just that the topic had reminded me of the 'toughest race on earth.'


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

I think it's an excellent comparison. Spending your entire (shortened) life being worn down and destroyed by the elements over a period of years surely must be a more unpleasant way to die than being held down for 2 seconds and shot in the head...

Anyways my point is that giving any animal "rights" is a weird demented thing IMO. The ONLY way a human should be punished (by imprisonment) for the suffering of an animal is if it could be clearly proven that they repeated did it just out of sheer enjoyment. Eg. Buying a bunch of dogs at the pet store and dropping them off an overpass. Pretty much ANY explanation is an acceptable one my eyes. (Boss made me do it, danger to loved ones, damaged my property, was ruining me financially and no one would take it away, etc.)

I've had pets before, who I loved dearly, and will again in the future. But anyone who wouldn't sacrifice their own pet to protect the life a complete stranger is a disgusting human being in my eyes. Demanding someone be charged and jailed for disposing of a problem animal is a sick and misguided sense of justice IMO.


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

Back in a day on the farm when the cats had litters it was common to drown them in a bucket of water.

When the dog got old the rifle was used.

There are far to many city folk that think they know what is best for others.


----------



## Islenska (May 4, 2011)

Daniel, in what day are we talking about?

I have been around farms all my life in Manitoba and do not recall mass drownings of kittens or for that matter old dogs being popped off for their arthritic nature, and demonizing city folk is broad use of a dried up paint brush.

Just the opposite out here, we value nature and appreciate our animal friends. Of course they go "off to market" that is the life but no one cheers that concept. My trapper/rancher friend bemoans the killing aspect of his work regretting it has to be done and is part of harvesting fur. If anything this community treasures the wildlife and knows others are missing this experience.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Daniel A. is right back when I was a kid your dad took care of putting the pets out of their misery. Of course I do not carry out anything like this myself and never spank my kids either, but was spanked all the time when I was a kid. Back then bullying was very common and the strongest in the school ruled it. The world may seem like a worse place today, but taking in the good and the bad tells me it is a lot better today.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Peter, do you really think it is okay to treat animals poorly? What if it was just to save a few bucks? Would you be willing to do it personally? And if not, outsourcing the inflicting of suffering to someone else is hypocritical.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Daniel A. said:


> Back in a day on the farm when the cats had litters it was common to drown them in a bucket of water.


I've heard of that "disposal method"..putting them in sack and tossing them in the river. Taking a defenceless newborn animal and denyning it a life by deliberately drowning it is a cruel and heartless way of disposing of the problem. 

I hope that the ones that did that were bothered by their own conscience afterwards. I suppose if you get hardened by killing animals on the farm, it doesn't matter one way or another whether you kill the animal for food..or just to dispose of it, because you don't want them around anymore.

By the same token, joggers or campers that get killed by wolves, cougars or bears, the authorities go out and shoot the animals if they can find and identify them. This is man meddling with the balance of nature and
screwing that up along with the air we breathe etc. Encrouching on a animal's hunting ground..you accept
the consequences..that's one thing..but to kill a defenceless animal by drowning is not a humane way to
do it. 




> There are far to many city folk that think they know what is best for others.


That's why us city folks have Humane societies to take care of sick, injured and old animals.:rolleyes2:


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Peter, do you really think it is okay to treat animals poorly? What if it was just to save a few bucks? Would you be willing to do it personally? And if not, outsourcing the inflicting of suffering to someone else is hypocritical.


I think you misread what he wrote there. He said animal cruelty is wrong himself. He's saying animals don't have legal rights to life as humans do as per present laws. Whether this is right or wrong is up for debate but not present law. If killing animals without vet euthanasia is always cruel, you are definitely a hypocrite if you eat any meat from factory farms. I would say as far as animal cruelty, the world is not a better place today with these huge factory farms at all compared to killing an animal with a gun.

Kittens and dogs are still taken care of by most farmers, and most would do it as humanly as possible. Maybe in Manitoba they are vastly different or more than likely it's done when Islenka wasn't around, as it's not usually done in front of anyone who doesn't have to see or any more cruel than needed (many will tell the kids they're going to the vet and then go out of sight etc...) Chickens/turkeys/ducks etc are still killed by blades and in most of the world all food is still killed by blade as has been done for thousands of years and probably much less cruel than how it was done before that. The cruel part of killing a pack of dogs with a gun is not the gun, it's the other dogs know what's going on, and if you think cows, turkeys, bison whatever do not you're obviously a city person. I think a city person only see dogs as vastly differently because they are pets and they've never raised and cared for farm animals themselves.

So if you eat meat and haven't raised/killed it with your own hands, while saying it's cruel to kill a dog with a gun, you're probably a hypocrite. The old family farms were certainly a lot better for animals than the new American factory farms as well, which are far more cruel during the entire life cycle than killing a dog with a gun. Again, where is the government regulation that animals must be put down by veterinary euthanasia? You expect all business to automatically do that on their own and pay for it?


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Peter, do you really think it is okay to treat animals poorly? What if it was just to save a few bucks? Would you be willing to do it personally? And if not, outsourcing the inflicting of suffering to someone else is hypocritical.


I am not saying it's moral. I'm just saying that it's even MORE immoral to send a human being to jail for doing such things. I would be ok with a small fine for certain cruelties, similar to a speeding ticket.

What I'm not ok with is destroying someones livelihood and reputation with a public trial and threats of jail time.

The only way I could condone jail time would be for a psychotic person who went around torturing/killing other peoples pets, who had been warned and fined previously for the same acts. Then, perhaps, he should go to jail for a little while. And even then, the crime is more against the owner of the pet than it is against the actual animal.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

What he should have done is threatened to kill them and go to the newspaper with his problem. I am sure that it wouldn't have taken very long at all to have found a solution for his problem without killing a single dog.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I'm not saying that shooting animals is necessarily inhumane. Having one person try to shoot (and miss some) 60+ dogs by himself is at least stupid, if not inhumane. Some did not get killed with a clean shot. 

I'm not sure jail time is appropriate in this case, either. It is hardly the most extreme case of animal cruelty I have heard of.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I am thinking a PTSD plea by the perp.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

kcowan said:


> I am thinking a PTSD plea by the perp.


If he went out and shot a bunch of innocent people, and pleaded that, he would be locked in a loonybin..excuse me.. a mental hospital, for a long long time. He just happened to take a rifle and a box of ammunition and take it out on a bunch of innocent dogs!:shame:


----------

