Animal cruelty bill gains momentum
JAMM AQUINO / JAQUINO @STARADVERTISER.COM Hawaiian Humane Society animal protection officers Eddie Louis, left, humane officer /transporter ; Harold Han, field operations senior manager ; Vernon Ling, lead investigator ; and Robert Church, investigator, posed for a portrait Friday with Zuko, a newly admitted dog whom they rescued from animal abuse.
A bill advancing through the state Legislature to increase penalties for animal cruelty has gained fresh momentum following the circulation of a graphic video depicting the violent abuse of a dog in Wahiawa. The footage, which spread rapidly on local social media, sparked widespread outrage and renewed calls for tougher laws.
The disturbing video, recorded Thursday around 9 a.m., shows two people attempting to load a dog into the rear compartment of a vehicle, when one of them—a woman—is seen repeatedly slamming the dog onto the ground before throwing it into the car.
The dog, identified as Zuko, is now in the custody of the Hawaiian Humane Society.
Officials said Zuko appears to be in good physical health and is undergoing further medical evaluation at the organization's Moiliili campus. Humane Society officers cited the woman seen in the video for second-degree animal cruelty.
HHS President and CEO Anna Neubauer said animal cruelty is 'not only a serious offense against vulnerable beings who cannot speak for themselves, but decades of research shows links between animal abuse and other forms of violence. By reporting suspected animal cruelty, you may be preventing future harm to animals and people alike.'
According to the House Bill 698, 70 % of violent criminals began by abusing animals, and animal cruelty often co-occurs with other serious offenses, including domestic violence and child abuse.
Don 't miss out on what 's happening !
Stay in touch with breaking news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It 's FREE !
Email 28141 Sign Up By clicking to sign up, you agree to Star-Advertiser 's and Google 's and. This form is protected by reCAPTCHA.
HB 698 would enhance the current penalty to a Class B felony when the offense involves a pet animal. It also would expand felony-level penalties for second-degree cruelty in cases involving the death of a pet or where 10 or more pet animals are involved—situations that currently fall under a lesser charge.
Under current law, first-degree cruelty to animals is classified as a Class C felony.
The Honolulu Police Department reported that there were 73 reported animal cruelty crimes in 2023, up from 58 in 2018.
Advocates and lawmakers alike have pointed to what they view as inadequate consequences for such offenses, prompting calls for tougher enforcement and punishment.
Additionally, the bill increases penalties for offenders who injure or kill service or law enforcement animals, upgrading repeat offenses from a Class C felony to a Class B felony. The bill also maintains the five-year pet ownership ban for those convicted under these provisions.
Neubauer said that Zuko's case 'highlights the critical importance of community vigilance. We encourage witnesses to animal abuse to report the abuse to the proper authorities. Call 911. Call Hawaiian Humane's dispatch line at 808-356-2250. Make a report online at hawaiianhumane.org. Call Animal CrimeStoppers at 808-955-8300. Reports can be anonymous, though witnesses who are willing to testify make it much more likely that a perpetrator will be punished.
'Publishing potential evidence on social media before any report is made to authorities carries the risk of delaying the law enforcement response and jeopardizing the chances of holding suspects accountable, ' Neubauer said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
NM lawmakers' addresses removed from website as precaution amid security concerns
Jul. 23—SANTA FE — The New Mexico Legislature has removed lawmakers' home addresses from the legislative website, following the shooting of two Minnesota lawmakers at their homes last month. The decision to do so was made "in an abundance of caution" by the Legislature's administrative arm, the Legislative Council Service, in consultation with top-ranking Democratic lawmakers, said LCS Director Shawna Casebier. She said legislators are encouraged to use a post office box or nonresidential mailing address for posting to the legislative website, while describing the question of whether home addresses will be returned to the public website as an "ongoing discussion." Other states have taken similar steps since the June shootings in Minnesota, in which state Rep. Melissa Hartman and her husband were killed. Another Democratic legislator, state Sen. John Hoffman, was also shot in his home but survived. New Mexico lawmakers have grappled with security concerns even before the Minnesota assassination, including after a string of drive-by shootings targeting Democratic elected officials' homes took place following the 2022 general election. No one was injured in those shootings, but Solomon Peña, a former Republican state House candidate, was convicted in March of all counts he was charged with in connection to the shootings. He faces a mandatory 60 years in prison when sentenced next month. After those shootings, legislators' addresses were removed from the legislative website but some were later reposted at the request of individual lawmakers, Casebier said. Senate President Pro Tem Mimi Stewart, D-Albuquerque, said she and House Speaker Javier Martínez, D-Albuquerque, were in quick agreement on the decision to remove lawmakers' addresses from the website after last month's shootings in Minnesota. She also said Senate Democrats recently held a caucus meeting on security issues, during which legislators were urged to look into home security technology and were provided with additional information. "It's just sort of basic security precautions that we're trying to think about," Stewart told the Journal. "We have to pay attention and we're doing it." But she also acknowledged that political violence targeting elected officials has already discouraged some potential candidates from running. She also said it could prompt some legislators to step down. "It's a scary time we live in," Stewart said Wednesday. "We're trying to allay those fears and keep people safe." The recent actions come after previous steps to address security concerns. In 2021, top-ranking New Mexico lawmakers voted to ban guns and other weapons from the Roundhouse, with certain limited exceptions. That vote led to metal detectors being installed at the public entrances to the building. Meanwhile, a 2023 elections bill included a provision that allows elected officials in New Mexico to keep their home addresses confidential in certain mandatory filings with the Secretary of State's Office. Stewart said the security-motivated policies would not make the Legislature less transparent, citing the webcasting of all interim committee hearings and other initiatives. Many legislators also have the names and phone numbers of their district legislative assistants posted on the Legislature's website. "We don't intend to lock the public out of anything," said Stewart. Solve the daily Crossword
Boston Globe
5 days ago
- Boston Globe
This pay dispute is turning into a public safety crisis
Advertisement Indeed, what started as a pay dispute is now a real threat to public safety. People accused of crimes are entitled to a lawyer under the US Constitution. Most can't afford one, so the state provides them. Massachusetts is one of a handful of states that often contracts that work out to a bar advocate — a private attorney hired by the state to represent indigent defendants. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up But their pay is so low — $65 an hour, far lower than in neighboring states — that a large group of bar advocates have stopped taking new cases. If the state's rate were actually competitive, you might expect to see other lawyers hungry for work rushing to fill the void. Notably, they're not. Advertisement Now judges have no choice but to free some defendants. Earlier this month, a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court Legislative leaders have complained that the bar advocates didn't give them proper warning, and that they don't like being pressured by the work stoppage. Representative Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston), chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, But legislative pique is not a good enough reason to let this dangerous situation drag on. And anyway, lawmakers knew or should have known that pay was a serious and legitimate issue for those court-appointed lawyers — and that the consequences for ignoring it could be grave. At a hearing last March before the House and Senate Ways and Means Committee, Anthony J. Benedetti, chief counsel for the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) — which administers the appointment of attorneys — made the case for modest increases in their hourly wage. Advertisement And bar advocates said as early as That should have been more than enough time to reach a deal. While the $35 per hour increase that bar advocates are said to be seeking may be too high, there should have been — should still be — some way to reach a compromise. After all, that's what lawyers do all the time. (Lawmakers have said meeting the demand would cost about State Senator Lydia Edwards (D-Boston), who cochairs the Judiciary Committee, told the editorial board that bar advocates should go back to work with a commitment from the Legislature to work on an increase on their wages. 'Call it a win. Be better organized now. Set out a realistic increase that this Legislature can meet now,' she said. But that would require bar advocates to give up leverage in the hope that lawmakers are acting in good faith — a tough sell, given the lack of respect shown for earlier pay raise requests. Meanwhile, from the office of Governor Maura Healey comes this statement: 'Bar advocates do incredibly important work to make sure that everyone has their due process rights protected, and they deserve to be paid a fair wage. Governor Healey is concerned about the negative public safety impacts of this work stoppage. She urges all those impacted to work together to reach a resolution and ensure that all defendants receive the representation to which they are entitled.' Advertisement The governor has also said she'll do 'everything' she can to end the impasse. But there still appears to be no end in sight, and it's only a matter of time before the dispute leads to consequences much more dire than a broken cannon. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Yahoo
New Hampshire's new law protecting gunmakers faces first test in court over Sig Sauer lawsuit
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A new state law in New Hampshire that makes it harder to take gunmaker Sig Sauer to court is getting its first test before a judge on Monday. The 2-month-old law was created by the Republican-led Legislature in response to mounting lawsuits faced by the Newington-based manufacturer over its popular P320 pistol. The lawsuits say that the gun can go off without the trigger being pulled, an allegation Sig Sauer denies. Sig Sauer, which employs over 2,000 people in New Hampshire, said the gun is safe and the problem is user error. Several large, multi-plaintiff cases filed since 2022 in New Hampshire's federal court representing nearly 80 people accuse Sig Sauer of defective product design, marketing, and negligence, in addition to lawsuits filed in other states. Many of the plaintiffs are current and former law enforcement officers who say they were wounded by the gun. They say the P320 design requires an external mechanical safety, a feature that is optional. The most recent New Hampshire case, representing 22 plaintiffs in 16 states, was filed in March. It's the focus of Monday's hearing. The new law on product liability claims against Sig Sauer and other gun manufacturers covers the 'absence or presence' of the external safety and several other optional features. Claims can still be filed over manufacturing defects. Attorneys for Sig Sauer argue it should apply to the March case, even though the law didn't exist at the time. 'New Hampshire has a clearly articulated position against such claims being cognizable in this state,' they argue in court documents for breaking up the cases and transferring them to court districts where the plaintiffs live. Lawyers from a Philadelphia-based firm representing the plaintiffs, disagree, saying the law 'has zero implication' on the case and only applies to future lawsuits. New Hampshire was the chosen location because federal rules allow lawsuits against a company in its home state, the plaintiff's attorneys say. Those lawsuits have been assigned to one federal judge in Concord. Sig Sauer is trying to decentralize the case, they say. Sig Sauer has prevailed in some cases. It has appealed two recent multimillion-dollar verdicts against it, in Pennsylvania and Georgia. A judge recently allowed the Pennsylvania verdict to stand, but vacated $10 million in punitive damages awarded to the plaintiff. Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts. Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW Solve the daily Crossword
