Man jailed following dog's death

I saw this on the news yesterday and I nearly threw up.

You can find the details here.

In a sense however, a man was jailed for killing a dog. But it gets worse. He put it in the washing machine, just because it fouled on the floor.

A pet owner from the West Midlands who killed his dog by putting it in a washing machine has been jailed for four months.

Andrew Glazzard, 41, of Dudley, put the Staffordshire Terrier/Labrador cross breed, Maisie, in the machine after it fouled the floor of his home.

Halesowen Magistrates' Court heard he was drunk at the time and put the dead dog in a bag then threw it in a river.

Glazzard, of Falcon Way, admitted causing unnecessary suffering.

He told police he put the animal in the machine for a few seconds to teach her a lesson.

'Heinous crime'

When she came out she was wagging her tail, so he said he put her back in, switched the machine on and fell asleep.

When he awoke the dog was dead. He put the body in a bag and dumped in the River Stour.

Police photographs taken in Glazzard's kitchen, in Lye in Stourbridge, show bite marks made by Maisie in the drum of the machine.

Magistrates told him that he had committed a "heinous and horrendous crime".

Glazzard's solicitor, Amanda Hahn, said he realised he needed help for alcoholism.

Personally, I think four months isn't long enough. They should stick him the machine and see how he likes it.

I completely agree. That is ridiculous!

I would just like to point out that not all of us from the West Midlands are that stupid!

Poor dog.

~SishBee~
x

People. Are. Evil.

I would just like to point out that not all of us from the West Midlands are that stupid!

Don't I know it, I live there!

That is so cruel, I could cry.
Some people are really cruel.

This is bad. Four months sounds about right.

But 'evil', 'henious,' and 'outrageous?' Come on.

I'm currently deployed to a country where the brutal dictator murdered 500,000 of his own people, and his two sons, Uday and Qusay made people drink gasoline and shot them with incindiary bullets for fun. Or how about how they would rape 12 year old girls.

That's henious. That's Evil. That's outrageous. That deserves your moral outcry.

And a good portion of America didn't think it was 'our place' to do anything about it.

Please. Save your moral outrage for Cubans suffering under a socialist dictatorship, North Koreans who grow up brainwashed, and brutal dictators in Africa who think 'ethnic cleansing' is an appropriate form of population control.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

Killing a life is killing a life, weekend_warrior.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

I don't think the real, true Muslims would consider people like Osama Bin Ladin Muslims.
Coz Islam is a religion of PEACE.

weekend_warrior wrote:This is bad. Four months sounds about right.

But 'evil', 'henious,' and 'outrageous?' Come on.

I'm currently deployed to a country where the brutal dictator murdered 500,000 of his own people, and his two sons, Uday and Qusay made people drink gasoline and shot them with incindiary bullets for fun. Or how about how they would rape 12 year old girls.

That's henious. That's Evil. That's outrageous. That deserves your moral outcry.

And a good portion of America didn't think it was 'our place' to do anything about it.

Please. Save your moral outrage for Cubans suffering under a socialist dictatorship, North Koreans who grow up brainwashed, and brutal dictators in Africa who think 'ethnic cleansing' is an appropriate form of population control.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

Way ago on trying to start a debate. There is war yes, but because it's happening now we're use to it. But something like this. It disgusts us because it beyond the social norm. And for the sake of facts, US soldiers have done some horrendous things. Anyway I'm keeping neutral here and not going to start a debate. Just don't act all high and mighty, what's worse is in Sudan. Didn't see that mentioned. Anyway as I said war has become a social norm now so it no longer horrifies us. Now this, isn't this is wrong. Sadly war has become accepted. So those horrors are forgotten.

Please, don't try and start a debate, personally this disgusts me, this animal was defenseless. That's all. But don't think we're not disgusted by other stuff. But we hate seeing suffering most of us in anyway.

weekend_warrior wrote:This is bad. Four months sounds about right.

But 'evil', 'henious,' and 'outrageous?' Come on.

I'm currently deployed to a country where the brutal dictator murdered 500,000 of his own people, and his two sons, Uday and Qusay made people drink gasoline and shot them with incindiary bullets for fun. Or how about how they would rape 12 year old girls.

That's henious. That's Evil. That's outrageous. That deserves your moral outcry.

And a good portion of America didn't think it was 'our place' to do anything about it.

Please. Save your moral outrage for Cubans suffering under a socialist dictatorship, North Koreans who grow up brainwashed, and brutal dictators in Africa who think 'ethnic cleansing' is an appropriate form of population control.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

Just because it's not the worst thing out there doesn't mean it isn't horrible. Sure, he didn't kill 500,000 people, but he was still cruel.

And I agree with Vernon - war is normal now. Honestly, I don't think about it often. I don't cry over their suffering. Now because I don't feel bad for them, or because it's not horrible, but because I'm so used to it. There have been wars going on for my entire life - I'm numb to it now. I'm not numb to stories of men being cruel to their dog (and hopefully I won't be anytime soon.)

~JFW1415

JFW1415 wrote:Just because it's not the worst thing out there doesn't mean it isn't horrible.

Agreed. This is absolutely disgusting.

weekend_warrior wrote:This is bad. Four months sounds about right.

But 'evil', 'henious,' and 'outrageous?' Come on.

I'm currently deployed to a country where the brutal dictator murdered 500,000 of his own people, and his two sons, Uday and Qusay made people drink gasoline and shot them with incindiary bullets for fun. Or how about how they would rape 12 year old girls.

That's henious. That's Evil. That's outrageous. That deserves your moral outcry.

And a good portion of America didn't think it was 'our place' to do anything about it.

Please. Save your moral outrage for Cubans suffering under a socialist dictatorship, North Koreans who grow up brainwashed, and brutal dictators in Africa who think 'ethnic cleansing' is an appropriate form of population control.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

I do have to agree with you and I understand where you are coming from. While what the man did to his dog was horrible and does deserve jail time, there are other things happening in the world to my fellow humans that genuinely horrify me more than this story, like torture, rape and murder. I might sound cold-hearted but cruelty to animals tends to not effect me as much as cruelty to human beings (but I do not condone animal cruelty AT ALL).

I read a recent story about a woman who knocked out her husband and put him headfirst in a barrel of corrosive acid--while he was still alive. The police found his body intact only from the waist down. THAT horrified me more than this story did.

Four months does seem to be an appropriate sentence. If he had put a child in the washing machine, however, I would say he deserves life in prison.

This is bad. Four months sounds about right.

But 'evil', 'henious,' and 'outrageous?' Come on.

I'm currently deployed to a country where the brutal dictator murdered 500,000 of his own people, and his two sons, Uday and Qusay made people drink gasoline and shot them with incindiary bullets for fun. Or how about how they would rape 12 year old girls.

That's henious. That's Evil. That's outrageous. That deserves your moral outcry.

And a good portion of America didn't think it was 'our place' to do anything about it.

Please. Save your moral outrage for Cubans suffering under a socialist dictatorship, North Koreans who grow up brainwashed, and brutal dictators in Africa who think 'ethnic cleansing' is an appropriate form of population control.

Or how about those guys that want to, in the name of Islam, kill all of us?

You rock, weekend_warrior!!! I assume you're in the American military (but if you're in some other military, you still rock), but you are dead on. Aedomir, who encourages abortion and all that, now has the moral indignation to rise up and "almost throw up" and "cry". But killing babies is far from inhumane apparently.

I don't think the real, true Muslims would consider people like Osama Bin Ladin Muslims.
Coz Islam is a religion of PEACE.

Yeah, weekend_warrior, don't you have any sense? This girl would know; she's been all over the world.

And BrokenSword, I agree with you too.

'Evil' is a subjective term, there is no scale for it.

Let it go, people.

You guys are ridiculous. You respond to weekend_warrior's comments, taking strong issue with them, then after a few paragraphs say: "Let's not start a debate."

Anyhow, any future discussion along those lines will get this topic locked. The member who gets this topic locked will also get a warning.


ANYWAYS, I thought I'd comment on the four months thing. Since this happened in the UK, I can't really say what the law is because I don't know, but I do know that in the United States his being drunk could be taken into account. Generally, voluntary intoxication is no excuse, but there are some exceptions.

For example, if the crime that he broke read: "Harming an animal with the effect that it kills the animal is a crime," then intoxication doesn't matter. However, if the crime read: "Harming an animal with the intent to kill it is a crime," then intoxication does matter. Intent to kill, by the way, doesn't necessarily mean the person sought out to kill the animal; it just means they set out to cause great bodily harm to the animal.

So the decision would have to turn on whether the owner intended to kill his dog. His intoxication would matter if he was unable to fully understand the implications of placing his dog in the washer. Also important is that he put the dog in once, but the dog appeared fine.

If the above seems rather cold to you, take heart in that. The judicial system rightly does not take human emotion into account; otherwise decisions would be arbitrary.

Still, the four months seems really, really light. In the US, that may mean what he did was just a misdemeanor, which doesn't sound right. At the very least, I'd expect him to get two years. So what that tells me is that either the jurisdiction he is in doesn't have animal cruelty laws, or the Judge placed additional limits on his freedom besides the four months jail-time (perhaps a mandatory rehabilitation program and charity work).