|
Welcome to our Cat Forums! | ||||
Welcome to our CatForums! You are seeing this message because you are viewing our cat forums as a guest. You can continue to browse our many cat related areas as a guest but you are more than welcome to register and join our friendly community of Cat Lovers! ... And for free! Doing so will also remove this message and some of the ads, such as the one on the left. Please click here to register. |
|
|||||
|
|||||
You know, I believe in law & order & due process of the law and all that, but in a case like this, I sort of long for the bad old days when people like that were taken into the back room of the station and had the s**t beaten out of them...but of course, they "fell down the stairs trying to elude the police".... |
|||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
The article below has been taken from taken from Public Directory of Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists ... http://www.animalbehavior.org/ABSAppliedBehavior/caab-directory , very interesting reading.....maybe if the prosecutors read this, they may think more about the punishments they dish out instead of giving them a slap on the wrist. Factors in the Assessment of Dangerousness in Perpetrators of Animal Cruelty by Randall Lockwood, Ph.D. We are frequently called upon to assist cruelty investigators, law-enforcement officers, court officials or mental health professionals in evaluating the significance of an individual's involvement in a particular act of animal cruelty as an indicator of dangerousness or possible risk for involvement of future acts of violence against others. The relatively low level of attention given to even the most serious acts of animal abuse has made it difficult to systematically or quantitatively assess the various factors that should be considered in evaluating the potential significance of various violent acts against animals. However, the following factors are suggested as relevant criteria in such evaluations. They are based on several sources including: Retrospective studies of acts of cruelty against animals reported by violent offenders Studies and reports of acts of animal cruelty committed prior to or in association with child abuse and/or domestic violence Extrapolation from criteria used in threat assessment by the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime Extrapolation from numerous studies on general characteristics of habitual violent offenders There is, as yet, no absolute scale that determines when a particular collection of factors reaches critical levels. It is suggested, conservatively, that more than five of these aggravating factors should be cause for serious concern, and that more than ten can indicate a high potential that the offender has been or will be involved in serious acts of violence against people. 1. Victim vulnerability Acts of violence against victims that are particularly small, harmless or nonthreatening by virtue of species, size, age, injury or disability are indicative of perpetrators particularly willing to gain a sense of power and control through violence against those least likely to retaliate, and thus should be considered at higher risk of aggression to children, the elderly, the disabled and other vulnerable victims. 2.Number of victims The selection of multiple victims killed or injured in the same instance suggests a greater potential for uncontrolled violence. 3. Number of instances within a limited time frame Several separate instances (e.g. attacks on animals at two or more locations) within a 24 hour period reflects a predatory style of attack that is suggestive of organized and premeditated violence against others. 4.Severity of injury inflicted (on continuum from minor injury to death of victim) 5. Repetition of injuries on individual victim(s) In general, perpetrators who have inflicted multiple blows, stab wounds, etc. on one or more victims should be considered a higher risk. 6. Multiple forms of injury to individual victim(s) Perpetrators who inflict two or more forms of injury (e.g. burn and bludgeon) should be considered a higher risk 7. Intimacy of infliction of injury Abuse that involves direct physical contact or restraint and obvious opportunity to witness the victims? response (e.g. beating, strangling, crushing, hanging, stabbing) may be a more serious indicator than actions that are more remote (e.g. shooting, poisoning, vehicular injury). 8. Victim(s) is bound or otherwise physically incapacitated Abuse that includes binding, tying, securing with duct tape, confining in a box or bag or otherwise rendering the animal incapable of escape (e.g. crippling) is suggestive of a higher degree of intentional, premeditated violence. 9. Use of fire A large body of criminological and psychological literature points out the connection between animal cruelty and arson as significant predictors of violent and even homicidal behavior. The combination of these factors, i.e. the intentional burning of a live animal should be considered particularly significant as an indicator of the potential for other violent acts. 10. Duration of abuse Acts of prolonged maltreatment (e.g. torture) rather than sudden or instantaneous death are more indicative of potential for repeated violence against others 11. Degree of pre-planning or premeditation Acts that were premeditated rather than reactive or opportunistic and which involved assembling tools or instruments of injury are more suggestive of high risk. Very long term planning (e.g. several days or weeks) suggests possibility of psychopathic thought processes as contributing factor. 12. Act involved overcoming obstacles to initiate or complete the abuse Abuse that involves risk or effort (e.g. climbing barrier, breaking and entering, etc.) or pursuit of a victim that escapes initial attack, is indicative of highly motivated violent behavior and thus should be considered an indicator of greater risk for future violence. 13. Act was committed with high risk of detection or observation Animal cruelty that is perpetrated in public or with high probability of detection should be considered indicative of low concern for consequences of the perpetrator? s acts, and thus an indicator of risk for other violence. 14. Other illegal acts were committed at the scene of the animal cruelty Personal and property crimes occurring in conjunction with the commission of animal cruelty, (e.g. vandalism, theft, threats to assault on owner or witness) should be considered indicative of higher risk for other violent and/or criminal acts. 15. Individual was the instigator of an act involving multiple perpetrators Although the perpetration of many acts of violence may be more likely in a group setting, particular attention should be paid to instigators of such group violence against animals. 16. Animal cruelty was used to threaten, intimidate or coerce a human victim Killing or injuring animals to exercise control or threats over others, especially those emotionally attached to those animals, should already be considered a form of emotional abuse and a behavior that, by definition, already involves violence against people. 17. Act of animal cruelty was indicative of hypersensitivity to real or perceived threats or slights Violent perpetrators often misread cues and intentions of others as indicative of threats, taunts, etc. Acts of violence against animals conducted with this motivation can be considered indicative of a high-risk response to social problems. 18. Absence of economic motive While an economic motive (e.g. killing and stealing animal for food) does not excuse animal cruelty, the presence of an economic motive, in the absence of other aggravating factors, may suggest a mitigating factor that could decrease the assessment of risk for future violence. Conversely, the lack of such a motive suggests the act was rewarding to the perpetrator by itself. 19. Past history of positive interactions with victim Instances of animal abuse in which the perpetrator has previously interacted positively or affectionately with the victim ( e.g. acts against one? s own pet) suggest an instability in relationships that can be predictive of other types of cyclic violence such as domestic abuse. 20. Animal victim was subjected to mutilation or postmortem dismemberment Mutilation is usually associated with disorganized motives of power and control which are often associated with interpersonal violence. 21. Animal victim was sexually assaulted or mutilated in genital areas or perpetrator indicated sexual arousal as a consequence of the abuse The eroticization of violence should always be considered a potential warning sign for more generalized violence. A past history of sexual arousal through violent dominance of animals has been characteristic of many serial rapists and sexual homicide perpetrators. 22. Act of cruelty was accompanied by indicators of sexual symbolism associated with the victim Written or spoken comments indicating that the perpetrator viewed the animal as representative of a substitute human victim (e.g. ? that pussy had to die? , ? the bitch deserved it? ) should constitute a serious warning sign of the potential for escalation of violence to a human target. 23. Perpetrator projected human characteristics onto victim If other evidence suggests perpetrator viewed the animal victim as a specific human individual or class of individuals, this may indicate that the violence could be a rehearsal for related acts against human victims. 24. Perpetrator documented the act of animal abuse through photographs, video or audio recording, or diary entries The memorialization or documentation of cruelty indicates that acts of violence are a continuing source of pleasure for the perpetrator, a serious indicator that such violence is strongly rewarding and very likely to be repeated and/or escalated. |
||||
|