By Nicole Montesano • Staff Writer • 

Dog shooter receives 48-hour jail stay

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Subscribe online by clicking here.

Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

yamhillbilly2

Thank you Judge Wiles! Thank you for giving Nicole more than a slap on the wrist and a stern scolding. Nicole is a good person, I am sure, who made a very bad decision back in November 2016. She should now be figuring that out herself. Too bad no one intervened when a better decision could have been made. A quick search this morning shows this story has great coverage, including national publications. Nicole’s poor decision to ‘execute’ those two dogs will be haunting her for years.

Lulu

What an outright fabrication that this county cares squat about animal cruelty. It doesn't, as reflected over the years by the insulting or total absence of sentences imposed upon young monsters in their eventual transformation into full-blown sociopaths.
Secondly, Judge Wiles should have known beforehand about any legal restrictions for convicted animal abusers; that's part of his job. Finally, this sentence contains a stipulation almost Biblical in nature: she coldly erased two animals from her property (and from the planet), and now must deal with losing two of her own.

Bill B

hard to believe a vet tech, who generally love animals, would shoot family pets. Maybe that's why she switched to nursing. Hope I'm not one of her patients.

Denise

Uh, what Lulu?

Your comment borders on lunacy, again.

There are limits judges to the sentences can impose, despite the emotional chatter of people who think they have more information than those directly involved.

Trafik

Lunacy? A harsh term for someone who regularly uses this forum to post absolutes.

Lulu can correct me if necessary but I believe her first point addresses Yamhill County's record of taking animal abuse seriously. (See the following:
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=cat-killer-gets-40-days--1423853691--16587--
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=90-days-meted-in-child-animal-sex-case--1430842263--17813--
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=sheriff-s-office-seizes-122-animals-in-rural-yamhill-25-found-dead--1420681961--16025--
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=mac-man-arrested-for-drowning-six-cats--1394758309--11986--
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=man-20-accused-of-putting-dog-in-oven--1358982748--6119--
...and other cases which did not result in significant sentences. And yes, "significant" is relative to the value one places on the life of a pet.)

Lulu's second point references the court's hesitation to specifically bar a convicted animal abuser from keeping her own animals, even though doing so is apparently clearly prohibited by Oregon law. I believe Lulu is simply stating her (correct, in my opinion) belief that a judge should be familiar with statutory stipulations and uphold them, avoiding ambiguity when possible.

And Lulu's final point highlighted the irony apparent when a professional veterinary worker and doting pet owner is denied custody of her own animals because of her reckless actions against another party's pets.

Sorry, but none of Lulu's remarks seem even close to lunacy. Except perhaps to fringe folks who think shooting a problem is the best way to solve it.

yamhillbilly2

Lulu’s comments are far from lunacy! If you think cruelty to animals isn’t a problem in Yamhill County, read the stories Trafik provided links to, and see how lenient the sentences were for some pretty horrific treatment of innocent animals. It sure would be nice if a particular poster on this forum would give up her “valley girl”, snotty comments.

Bizzyditchaz

Were the dogs on a leash? Where were the dog owners when the cat was killed? The dog owners bare the responsibility in creating this situation resulting in tragic outcome!

Bill B

Bizzyditchaz; You're kidding, right?

Lulu

Bear with him.

Trafik

Confidential to Lulu: "Bizzyditchaz" I believe to be a disambiguation of "Dizzy B*tches" and, thus, its (no doubt terribly clever) owner is more likely to prefer the feminine gender instead of the masculine used in your snide-but-amusing "bear/bare" remark. On the other hand, we live in a world in which the phrase "her testicles" can appear in a news report (see http://www.kgw.com/article/news/transgender-inmate-in-oregon-allowed-to-transfer-to-womens-prison/283-511186639) with nary a raised eyebrow or crude snicker. So who knows?

Shorty

This woman was convicted on two counts of animal abuse in the first degree. Animal abuse in the first degree is a class A misdemeanor in Oregon. The maximum fine for each count is $6250 and maximum jail time for each count is 12 months. She got off easy.

Shorty

Too easy.

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS