Case dropped against couple of elderly ladies prosecuted for feeding feral cats on public property

NEWS AND COMMENT-Wetumpka Alabama: this is a good news story. It is a story which tells us that there is a little bit of common sense in the American judicial system. You may remember the two elderly ladies, Beverley Roberts (84) and Mary Alston (60) who routinely fed and looked after feral cats on public property but were then suddenly arrested by the police for criminal trespass and then disorderly conduct and obstructing governmental operations.

Here is the video and below that a still image:

Elderly lady arrested for feeding feral cats in Alabama. Image: body camcorder on officer.

To outsiders, and to 100% of cat advocates, it looked farcical. Two old ladies doing something good for the community being jumped on and stamped on by the police and then suffering criminal charges which were successfully prosecuted. They were convicted and sentenced to 2 years' probation and 10 years in jail. The sentence was suspended.

Trapping, spaying and neutering, and rehoming or releasing (TNR) stray cats is an act of kindness and not a crime.

Latest news is great news

Now, the latest news is that Wetumpka is no longer pursuing these criminal charges. An application was made to the Elmore County Circuit Court to suspend the proceedings. The Latin term is "nolle pros". It means that the authorities don't wish to pursue the prosecution at this time but they can restart it in the future. In my opinion, there's no chance of it being restarted in the future.

The judge, Amanda Baxley, wisely granted the application (motion). That is the story. The judge made no comment on her order. She was just following common sense as I state. She was doing what the general public would have done.

I would be surprised if she didn't think that the whole thing was farcical in the first place. It should never have happened. It was heavy-handed. It was unnecessary.

Even if this couple of ladies were doing something technically wrong, they should have been spoken to by the police and cautioned. That would have been it. It wouldn't have made the news. The police wouldn't have been made to look stupid.

I would argue that this case did the police damage. It harmed their reputation I would argue. And all police forces need to enhance the reputation because they're often disliked.

Novel idea: cat faeces everywhere to deter burglars!

NEWS AND COMMENT: At her trial, this woman, a cat hoarder, stated that she kept her home in a complete mess with cat faeces everywhere including on armrests because she wanted to deter burglars.

Margaret Fakesch. Photo: Katie Pugh.

She wanted her home to be as smelly as possible to keep burglars at bay. I quite like that as an argument although it is complete fiction. She was very disagreeable at her trial and kept interrupting the clerk and the prosecution lawyer, it's reported (Daily Express).

She kept 12 cats at her filthy home. She refused to take the advice of veterinarians and didn't trust them. She thought she could heal her cats by placing her hands on them. Or she used homeopathic medicine. Some cats were ill with the usual upper respiratory infections.

Margaret Fakesch, 60, has been banned indefinitely from owning and looking after any animals and was fined £262. The RSPCA brought the prosecution. Officers found the home in the usual condition that investigators find the homes of cat hoarders, namely in a pitifully disgusting state with so much cat faeces on the floor that it was impossible to walk around the home. She lives in Hull, UK by the way.

RSPCA officers had attended the home earlier and offered advice to improve the situation. She barely responded. We are told that she made a small space among the clutter to allow her to walk down the corridor. When they revisited almost nothing had changed. She told RSPCA officers that she wanted her home to smell as bad as it could to deter anyone might break in to try and burgle her.

It's reported that a pile of used litter trays were found in stagnant water in the bathroom and a number of soiled adult nappies were littered around the house. It's just unbelievable. Sadly, we've heard it all before with cat hoarders.

This is the desperate last argument of a woman who I simply lost control and is trying to wriggle out of her responsibilities as a cat caregiver. I feel sorry for her because it's a mental health issue. She can't cope but she shouldn't be harming cats. If she can't care for cats properly she shouldn't be doing it. And to take such an offhand attitude towards veterinary advice is unforgivable when the cats suffer as a consequence.

I would expect her to ignore the court order banning her from keeping animals and to go back to her old ways. I would expect the RSPCA to have to visit her again in the future and the cycle will continue. The report does not tell us what happened to the animals. I presume that they were taken from her and rehomed via a animal rescue organisation. Let's hope so. But what caught my eye was the novel and ridiculous argument about deterring burglars.

Social media giants delete evidence of criminality

The story relates to extremists avoiding justice because the tech giants fail to archive social media posts of violence but I would like to extend that to animal abuse and cruelty which is so bad that it is a crime. I have bumped into examples of animal abuse on social media websites which is evidence for a potential successful prosecution under animal welfare statutes. It is not uncommon but the criminals are becoming more savvy.

Image in the public domain

A report by Human Rights Watch found that social media websites were removing violent imagery without preserving a copy which denies future prosecutors the chance to access vital evidence in potential future prosecutions.

Human Rights Watch's report is called Video Unavailable and it was published yesterday. They want social media websites to archive imagery which can be used as evidence. Social media website were indeed caught flat-footed when terrorist organisations promoted their objectives through video and still images. They social media sites reacted quite strongly partly because advertisers were distraught at the fact that their adverts were being associated with violence of the worst kind.

Algorithms perhaps driven by artificial intelligence nowadays are used to pick out these images and videos and delete them. I am a great fan of artificial intelligence but they need refining currently and they need rewriting to preserve evidence. I don't know whether these algorithms are written to detect animal abuse and animal cruelty images and videos. I would hope that they are. Apparently some algorithms are programmed to filter out posts and images before the content is published. This, too, is detrimental in terms of accruing evidence against criminals.

We all know, including the FBI in America, that animal cruelty is linked to a progression to violence against people. Therefore it is an important part of the criminal world and the investigation of serious crime.

Social media posts have helped to convicted war criminals. These posts have also helps human rights groups and investigative journalist to highlight abuse.