Animal Cruelty Prosecution Animal Cruelty Prosecution

A NIMAL C RUELTY P R OSECUTION
Limits on Future Ownership/Contact
Conviction on animal cruelty charges implies an inherent inability to
provide appropriate care in the future. Most state laws specifically provide
for limits on future ownership of other animals for a specified length of
time or for the duration of probation. In some cases, these limits apply to
the species involved in the cruelty case; in others, it may apply to any
animals. Some laws extend the prohibition to any contact with certain
animals.When these provisions are not specifically outlined in the cruelty
law, they should still be considered as part of a sentencing request. In
severe neglect or animal hoarding cases the courts have often been reluctant
to remove all animals from the care of the offender. If the defendant
is allowed to keep animals following conviction, the numbers should be
consistent with local limits and with the individual’s demonstrated capacity
to provide care. In addition, sentencing should include provisions for
reasonable monitoring of compliance with these limits by animal care
and control or other authorities.
Limits on Employment
Some states restrict those convicted of animal cruelty from employment
in professions involving direct contact with or responsibility for animals,
including positions in animal care and control. If that is a provision, it
should be noted in the records of the case.
Restitution
Most states have provisions in the cruelty laws for restitution to agencies
or individuals providing housing, care and veterinary services.
Request for such restitution should be made at disposition. Many states
have recognized the unique value of companion animals in civil suits
over wrongful deaths of animals and have awarded costs for cremation,
counseling and even pain and suffering. Some state animal cruelty laws
(e.g.Tennessee), specifically allow the trier of fact to award non-economic
damages to a person whose animal is injured or killed.
Punishment
Many factors related to the nature of the offense, the offender’s history
and the resources available within the juvenile justice system will influ-
40 A MERICAN P R OSECUTORS R ESEARCH I NSTITUTE