|
T. , J. A. s/ infracción Ley 14.346 |
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the lower court that sentenced the Defendant to eleven months of imprisonment after finding him criminally responsible for acts of cruelty in violation of Article 1 of Ley 14.346 against a stray dog. The Defendant was found guilty of sexually abusing a dog, who he forced into his premises. The dog’s genital area was sheared and she had serious injuries, which the veterinarian concluded were clear signs of penetration. The Supreme Court referred to the Chamber of Appeals on Criminal Matters of Parana "B.J.L. s/ infracción a la Ley 14.346", of October 1, 2003, where the referred court stated that “the norms of Ley 14.346 protect animals against acts of cruelty and mistreatment, is not based on mercy, but on the legal recognition of a framework of rights for other species that must be preserved, not only from predation, but also from treatment that is incompatible with the minimum rationality." Further, "the definition of ‘person’ also includes in our pluralistic and anonymous societies a rational way of contact with animals that excludes cruel or degrading treatment."
|
|
Table of Humane Society Enforcement Powers |
This table outlines the powers granted to agents of humane societies in some states to enforce anti-cruelty statutes. Such powers include serving search warrants, seizing animals, and arresting offenders. Some states require that humane officers complete training and instruction related to investigating animal cruelty.
|
|
Table of Reporting Animal Cruelty in the United States |
The following table, while not exhaustive, provides information on where to report animal cruelty. If you do not find a local contact in your region on this table, you can conduct a search on your favorite search engine for local law enforcement, an animal shelter/control agency, or a humane society.
|
|
Table of State Animal Sexual Assault Laws |
This table details state laws prohibiting sexual conduct between humans and animals. The majority of states (49) have some provision that criminalizes engaging in sexual conduct with animals. Currently, West Virginia lacks such a law. States are somewhat split between categorizing first offenses misdemeanors or felonies (23 misdemeanor, 26 felony, depending on severity of conduct in states like Nevada and Texas). Subsequent convictions may result in enhanced penalties in many states (felony offenses for second or subsequent convictions). These laws may also require the perpetrator to undergo psychological counseling and may restrain future ownership of animals. |
|
Table of State Dog Tether Laws |
This brief overview describes state laws (23 states and D.C.) that concern the tethering or chaining of dogs. It also includes a table of those state laws dealing with tethering with links to the text of the laws. |
|
Table of State Laws that Protect Animals Left in Parked Vehicles |
This table describes the laws that concern leaving a companion animal unattended in a parked vehicle. Approximately 31 states have laws that deal with animals left in unattended vehicles. Most of these laws provide that the animal must be confined or unattended in a parked or stationary vehicle. Further, the laws add that in order for a person to violate the law, the conditions have to endanger the animal's life. Under some state laws, law enforcement or other individuals are allowed to rescue animals left under extreme conditions. |
|
Table of Veterinary Reporting Requirement and Immunity Laws |
|
|
Takhar v Animal Liberation SA Inc |
An ex parte injunction was granted against the applicants preventing distribution or broadcasting of video footage obtained while on the respondent's property. The applicants claimed they were not on the land for an unlawful purpose and that they were there to obtain evidence of breaches of the Prevention of cruelty to Animals Act 1985 (SA). The injunction restraining distribution or broadcasting of the footage, which was applicable to the applicants only, was removed on the balance of convenience as the media outlets were at liberty to broadcast.
|
|
Taub v. State of Maryland |
Maryland Court of Appeals held that animal-cruelty statute did not apply to researchers because there are certain normal human activities to which the infliction of pain to an animal is purely incidental and unavoidable.
|
|
Taylor v. RSPCA |
Two women, who had been disqualified from keeping horses by a court, transferred ownership of the horses to their niece, but had continued to make arrangements for the accommodation of the horses and to provide food and water for them. The women were convicted in the Magistrates' Court of the offence of "having custody" of the horses in breach of the disqualification order, and appealed. Dismissing the appeal, the Divisional Court held that, what amounted to "custody" was primarily a matter of fact for the lower court to decide, and that the local justices had been entitled to conclude that, notwithstanding the transfer of ownership, the two women had continued to be in control, or have the power to control, the horses.
|
