# Veterinarian brags about killing a cat **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 21, 2015, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224 "2015-04-21T21:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/201 "2015-04-30T04:13:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s true. Texas Penal Code § 42.092 provides that cruelty towards a “non-livestock animal” is a crime, and specifically includes “…a domesticated living creature, including any stray or feral cat cat…” (See § 42.092(a)(2) – and THAT’s a cite.) > > But although I’m not a Texas lawyer, I’m having some doubts about how she can be charged under this statute. > > § 42.092(b) provides that any person who “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly… tortures an animal or in a cruel manner kills or causes serious bodily injury to an animal.” There’s no dispute that she killed the cat. But did she kill it “in a cruel manner?” The law defines cruel as “a manner that causes or permits unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering.” There’s no serious question that the arrow’s caused a death that was virtually instant, in my opinion. > > I can’t find much case law on the provision, but every single prosecution for this section has involved activities that are much more clearly torture. In _In re MCS, Jr._, 327 SW 3d 802 (Tex CtApp, 2nd Dist. 2010) a juvenile petition for the charge is sustained when the kid lit a captured bat on fire. In _Patterson v. State_, 353 SW 3d 203 (Tex CtApp, 4th Dist. 2011) the accused used a large kitchen knife, a rubber mallet, a claw hammer, and a box cutter to repeatedly stab three cats to death. In _Chase v. State_, 418 SW 3d 296 (Tex CtApp, 3rd Dist. 2013) (_reversed on other grounds_), the accused he tied a dog and then slashed the dog’s throat with a knife, causing its eventual but not instant death. In _Brown v. State_, 333 SW 3d 606, (Tex CtApp, 5th Dist. 2009) the accused doused a dog with gasoline and set it on fire. I could go on, but the point is this: in all prior prosecutions for which I found caselaw, the cruel conduct was much more evident, and I am far from certain that this conduct constitutes a “cruel manner” under Texas law. > > There’s also a provision, (b)(6), that provides that, “…without the owner’s effective consent… [causing] bodily injury to an animal…” is covered. > > But that seems to turn on how the law treats an animal with no owner, and of course on whether the cat she killed was feral or had an owner. Wow, thanks for all the info. I saw that statute yesterday but I wasn’t sure if it applied or not in this case. I read in one of the articles that bow hunting a cat is illegal, and the only legal euthanizing method is injection, but I can’t find a government cite to verify that. If true, the method of death is not legal, no matter how quick or painless it might have been. Would that qualify as cruelty? I imagine the sheriff wanted to drop it in the DA’s lap because of all the publicity, so no way to tell if there’s really enough evidence to go forward. We’ll see. > [@Bricker](#): > > Now we’re really getting away from my comfort zone of criminal law. But my best guess is …no damages for emotional pain and suffering. > > Texas caselaw all the way back to an 1891 decision in _Heiligmann v. Rose_, 16 S.W. 931 (Tex 1891), held that for a pet like a cat or a dog, the recoverable damages are limited to “…market value, if the dog has any…” or any “…special or pecuniary value to the owner, that may be ascertained by reference to the usefulness and services of the dog.” This decision was quoted with approval in _Strickland v. Medlen_, 397 SW 3d 184 (Tex 2013): > > I of course welcome correction on this reading from someone more versed in Texas civil law than I am. But as I read the case law, monetary damages for a improperly killed pet would be limited to the actual monetary value of the animal. Thought so. Thanks again for the research. IMO, if someone harms a pet _with the intent to hurt the (human) owner of the pet_, they should be liable for emotional damages to that person. Probably not applicable to this case, unless you expand it to negligence for not checking if the cat was chipped before killing it. BTW, I think I misspoke about markings not being like fingerprints, and **DrDeth** is most likely correct. It appears to be [true](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29660678/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/tiger-stripes-used-id-poached-pelts/) for [the big cats](http://www.lions.org/types-of-tigers.html), so it probably also applies to the domestic tabby. I couldn’t find a reliable cite for that specifically. There is so much conflicting information about cats on the internet. ---
**Author:** ![RobDog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f07891/32.png) [@RobDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RobDog)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/202 "2015-04-30T05:40:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > … > That’s the result of hundreds of angry callers demanding this result > … [\*That" being the vet’s dismissal] You"re stating this as though it’s an undisputed fact. It really isn’t you know. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/203 "2015-04-30T09:17:59Z")
I tried to look up cites for how many cats in the US are chipped, and [this](http://www.foundanimals.org/about-us/news/happy-reunions-boost-interest-pet-microchipping) is the best I could come up with: > [@](#): > > Some 12 percent of cats had microchips in 2010. I googled the source for that statistic, which seems reasonably reliable, but you have to pay to get access to the original source. 12% is low, though I’d expect the percentage to have risen a lot in the five years since then; chipping had only been around for a few years by 2010, after all. It’s still a high enough percentage to mean that trapping a cat, then scanning it before making any other decisions about it, would be sensible. Not finding a chip would not prove at all that the cat wasn’t a pet, but it would, if a chip were found, prove that the cat wasn’t a feral. Fewer pets would then be killed. Kiling with a bow and arrow takes away that chance. If it were known that non-chipped cats might be put down, cat owners would have extra impetus to have their cats chipped. It’s not very expensive and some charities offer it at an even lower cost, or free, sometimes (my local cat charity has a free chipping day every year, regardless of income, and will do it any time of the year for a very low fee). Portable scanners are commonplace - I take my cat to a mobile vet and they use one. > [@Polerius](#): > > **Bricker** , I’m curious what it is you are attempting to argue in this thread. > > Do you have a dog or a cat? If yes, would you be OK with your pet’s vet posting a picture of themselves smiling next to a feral dog or cat with an arrow through the animal’s head? > > You would feel no problem with your vet behaving like that, and you would feel no problem taking your dog or cat to be cared for by this vet? > > You may likely say you would have no problem with it; just wanted to clarify. He has said that he’d have no problem taking his own tomcat to her, yes. The AVMA statement means that this vet’s employers really had no choice. And the AVMA statement about the vetinary oath does sound like she was going against it. I wouldn’t be surprised if losing this job is only the start of her problems. If this vet hadn’t published her picture herself then it’s possible no-one would ever have known. If she hadn’t added the comments she made, she might still have been able to claw her way back (heh) into her profession. But those are not the choices she made: she chose to kill a cat using an illegal method (that she should be expected to know was illegal) without even checking if it was really a feral, then brag about it publically, then not back down. I’m amazed she ever made it through vet school with that level of stupidity. This is still, despite what the OP claimed, very different to other cases of trial by internet. She did something that was actually illegal, connected to her job and likely to lose her employers business. And she _enjoyed killing a cat_, grinning, posing and boasting about it; that’s not exactly the same as posting one ill-advised tweet. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/204 "2015-04-30T14:58:53Z")
> [@RobDog](#): > > [\*That" being the vet’s dismissal] > > You"re stating this as though it’s an undisputed fact. It really isn’t you know. Absolutely correct. It’s merely my supposition, and I should have clearly identified it as such. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/205 "2015-04-30T15:22:39Z")
> [@camille](#): > > Wow, thanks for all the info. I saw that statute yesterday but I wasn’t sure if it applied or not in this case. I read in one of the articles that bow hunting a cat is illegal, and the only legal euthanizing method is injection, but I can’t find a government cite to verify that. If true, the method of death is not legal, no matter how quick or painless it might have been. Would that qualify as cruelty? > > I imagine the sheriff wanted to drop it in the DA’s lap because of all the publicity, so no way to tell if there’s really enough evidence to go forward. We’ll see. > > Thought so. Thanks again for the research. > > IMO, if someone harms a pet _with the intent to hurt the (human) owner of the pet_, they should be liable for emotional damages to that person. Probably not applicable to this case, unless you expand it to negligence for not checking if the cat was chipped before killing it. > > BTW, I think I misspoke about markings not being like fingerprints, and **DrDeth** is most likely correct. It appears to be [true](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29660678/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/tiger-stripes-used-id-poached-pelts/) for [the big cats](http://www.lions.org/types-of-tigers.html), so it probably also applies to the domestic tabby. I couldn’t find a reliable cite for that specifically. There is so much conflicting information about cats on the internet. I’m sorry, but I don’t even agree it’s true for the big cats. In _A tiger cannot change its stripes: using a three-dimensional model to match images of living tigers and tiger skins_, by Lex Hiby , Phil Lovell , Narendra Patil , N. Samba Kumar , Arjun M. Gopalaswamy , K. Ullas Karanth, Biol. Lett. 2009 5 383-386; DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0028. Published 11 May 2009: > [@page 384](#): > > The final similarity score is calculated as the posterior probability that the patterns are from images of the same tiger, given the values returned by the two algorithms. The prior probability that two randomly chosen images are of the same tiger could be adjusted to reflect the recorded sex, age and location of the images, but in this case is set simply to the reciprocal of an assumed, local population size, N. If S[sub]c[/sub] and S[sub]n[/sub] are the values returned by the two algorithms, the posterior probability that the patterns are from images of the same tiger is given by (_equation omitted_) . . . In addition to combining the values into a single similarity score, the posterior probability **reduces the expected rank of individuals that tend to achieve higher than average algorithm values (those represented only by low-quality images)** (emphasis added). From this study we learn that the local population size is highly relevant to the accuracy of the image matching, and of course we already knew that low-quality, blurred images do not permit confident assessment of similar types. This is true for the big cats, and I can only accept that it’s at least as true, if not more, for _felis silvestris catus_. We also learn from the study that the matches are not anywhere near as exact as fingerprints. In the illustration on the top of page 384, we see that the model finds and uses approximately six to seven points of comparison. Fingerprinting is also not an exact science, but a fingerprint examiner who testifies in court that two fingerprints match each other use at least 12, and sometimes are required to have as many as 20, minutiae points of comparison. (There is also a method called the “holistic” approach). Based on the foregoing, I disagree that it’s remotely fair to claim that domesticated cat stripe patterns are as unique as fingerprints and thereby as reliable for identification purposes, especially when the source photo is so blurry. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/206 "2015-04-30T15:27:25Z")
> [@camille](#): > > I read in one of the articles that bow hunting a cat is illegal, and the only legal euthanizing method is injection, but I can’t find a government cite to verify that. If true, the method of death is not legal, no matter how quick or painless it might have been. Would that qualify as cruelty? I’m reasonably certain the answer is: “no.” The reason is that the statue itself defines cruelty as “…a manner that causes or permits unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering.” So a concededly quick and painless death would seem to me to be outside the ambit of the cruelty statute. ---
**Author:** ![fachverwirrt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/94ad74/32.png) [@fachverwirrt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fachverwirrt)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/207 "2015-04-30T16:06:54Z")
What’s the source to establish that the death was quick and painless? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/208 "2015-04-30T16:09:41Z")
> [@fachverwirrt](#): > > What’s the source to establish that the death was quick and painless? Any prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt each and every element of the crime. So the correct question, when discussing a potential prosecution, would be, “What’s the source to establish that the death was accompanied by unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering?” ---
**Author:** ![fachverwirrt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/94ad74/32.png) [@fachverwirrt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fachverwirrt)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/209 "2015-04-30T16:16:15Z")
I’m not talking about prosecuting a case. I’m talking about your repeated assertions that the cat’s death was “humane” and “quick and painless”. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/210 "2015-04-30T16:35:33Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Nuke them from orbit. > > Regards, > Shodan Not cost effective. Any of these [crossbow packages](http://www.bestcrossbowsource.com/) would be suitable, if one was wedded to the idea of using a crossbow. Here are some guidelines for those who prefer a [regular compound bow.](http://bestcompoundbowsource.com/best-beginner-compound-bow/) Either way, you’ll want to equip your arrows with proper broad heads. Unless noise is a concern, I don’t think archery tackle is the way to go with this anyway. Arrows, whether carbon fiber or aluminum, aren’t cheap. Neither are broadheads. You won’t be getting multiple uses out of too many arrows. Loss or breakage is to be expected on pretty much every shot. IMPO, the ideal tool for the job is a scoped [.17HMR](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.17_HMR) rifle. It is so perfectly suited to the job that it almost seems like it was designed especially for the purpose of culling feral cats. Savage makes some [excellent .17HMR rifles](http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/93R17FXP). They are accurate, light, handy, have such refinements as adjustable triggers, and are not particularly pricey. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/211 "2015-04-30T16:57:07Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Yes, actually it would be like that. > > See, we can all play the “Dio” card. We all can. It is the ones claiming that cats are the equivalent of human slaves who look stupid doing it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/212 "2015-04-30T17:10:46Z")
> [@fachverwirrt](#): > > I’m not talking about prosecuting a case. I’m talking about your repeated assertions that the cat’s death was “humane” and “quick and painless”. But my assertions are made in the context of a discussion about whether the cat’s death was “cruel” as a matter of Texas law. Nonetheless, I would agree that the cat’s death was likely quick and painless under an ordinary use of the phrase, because the cat was killed by an arrow through the head. So far as I can tell, that’s something that would have instantly killed the animal. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/213 "2015-04-30T18:54:13Z")
> [@fachverwirrt](#): > > I’m not talking about prosecuting a case. I’m talking about your repeated assertions that the cat’s death was “humane” and “quick and painless”. Give it up. **Bricker** has already admitted that he’s playing lawyer with this. Next stop is that we can’t enter the picture of the cat with an arrow in it’s head into evidence because the shooter was not warned of her rights first. It’s just ridiculous leagalese at this point - no bearing on what actually happened. He’s essentially treating this whole thread as if the question is" Is there reasonable probability that this vet could be successfully prosecuted in a court of law" But that is not the question. That’s only how he is wanting to frame things. ---
**Author:** ![fachverwirrt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/94ad74/32.png) [@fachverwirrt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fachverwirrt)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/214 "2015-04-30T20:12:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But my assertions are made in the context of a discussion about whether the cat’s death was “cruel” as a matter of Texas law. Post 153: > [@Bricker](#): > > I say that her method of killing this cat was humane. And i don’t agree that a veterinarian is held to higher standards in this instance, either: an adult that’s generally of sound mind, vet or not, doesn’t commit a “cruel” act by killing a feral cat with an arrow to the head. This was made in the context of whether veterinarians are held to a higher standard of “cruelty”. You made a positive assertion here, not a statement that cruelty was unprovable under Texas statute. > [@](#): > > Nonetheless, I would agree that the cat’s death was likely quick and painless under an ordinary use of the phrase, because the cat was killed by an arrow through the head. So far as I can tell, that’s something that would have instantly killed the animal. I’m sure you can provide a cite that an arrow through the head is universally instantaneously fatal. Here’s a article with a picture of a child with an arrow through his head, who is still alive (spoilered for potentially disturbing image): [http://www.quora.com/How-long-does-it-take-to-die-from-a-bow-and-arrow](http://www.quora.com/How-long-does-it-take-to-die-from-a-bow-and-arrow) Yes, it’s a person and not a cat. But clearly one can survive an arrow through the head. More to the point, how do you know what led to the arrow through the head? All you have is a photograph of the aftermath. If we can trust the mother (who took the picture), then we know that she was in the yard practicing. That’s it. You seem to be assuming that she simply saw the cat and took a single shot that took it in the head. You have no evidence that this is how it went down. Maybe she took an initial shot that wounded the cat, then she made the kill shot. Maybe she caught the cat and hung it from a branch for a little target practice. I don’t know. And neither do you. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/215 "2015-04-30T20:55:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m sorry, but I don’t even agree it’s true for the big cats. > > In _A tiger cannot change its stripes: using a three-dimensional model to match images of living tigers and tiger skins_, by Lex Hiby , Phil Lovell , Narendra Patil , N. Samba Kumar , Arjun M. Gopalaswamy , K. Ullas Karanth, Biol. Lett. 2009 5 383-386; DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0028. Published 11 May 2009: > > (emphasis added). > > From this study we learn that the local population size is highly relevant to the accuracy of the image matching, and of course we already knew that low-quality, blurred images do not permit confident assessment of similar types. This is true for the big cats, and I can only accept that it’s at least as true, if not more, for _felis silvestris catus_. > > We also learn from the study that the matches are not anywhere near as exact as fingerprints. In the illustration on the top of page 384, we see that the model finds and uses approximately six to seven points of comparison. > > Fingerprinting is also not an exact science, but a fingerprint examiner who testifies in court that two fingerprints match each other use at least 12, and sometimes are required to have as many as 20, minutiae points of comparison. (There is also a method called the “holistic” approach). > > Based on the foregoing, I disagree that it’s remotely fair to claim that domesticated cat stripe patterns are as unique as fingerprints and thereby as reliable for identification purposes, especially when the source photo is so blurry. Hmmm, so how is that a refutation of the **DrDeth** ’s claim that cat markings are “almost as good as fingerprints”? The study you cited describes the reliability of a specific pattern recognition software program, _but does admit that the markings are unique to an individual animal_, which was the original contention. What we don’t know is how reliable other methods, or visual comparison of two photo samples by an expert can be, especially when factoring in the white bib and leg splash patterns in addition to the tabby markings - which are clear enough even in the quality of the photographs available. Add to that the proximity and timing, and I contend you increase the likelihood to near certainty it is the same cat as the one that went missing. And according to some of the articles, even if the couple who were fostering the cat don’t want to come forward, the animal rescue group who placed the cat with them are apparently willing to claim and identify the cat and say they did not give permission to kill it (I admit this is speculative at this point). > [@Bricker](#): > > I’m reasonably certain the answer is: “no.” The reason is that the statue itself defines cruelty as “…a manner that causes or permits unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering.” So a concededly quick and painless death would seem to me to be outside the ambit of the cruelty statute. I’m still not convinced that using an illegal method like bow hunting to dispose of the cat isn’t considered cruelty, irrespective of the ownership issue. If bow hunting a cat is not legal, then what is the charge and penalty for breaking that law? The point that in this specific instance it _may_ have been a clean shot and quick death is not enough to consider the method itself humane, when there is such a great possibility that a bow kill can go wrong and lead to a slow painful death or injury. As **fachverwirrt** noted, there are many cases of non-lethal shots to the head, even in cats: (spoilered for graphic images) [cat survives arrow through head - Google Search](https://www.google.com/search?q=cat+survives+arrow+through+head&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=BJNCVaeqHcacNsCRgeAH&ved=0CCMQsAQ&biw=1067&bih=546) She admitted it was her first bow kill, so she can hardly claim to be an expert marksman. It was a reckless act, in more ways than one. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/216 "2015-04-30T21:30:15Z")
Am I missing something? Hunting with crossbows is illegal. She admits doing it. She can be charged with that crime, surely? ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/217 "2015-04-30T21:33:34Z")
Any real updates on this story? - Have Tiger’s owners confirmed that it was Tiger? - Have any charges been brought against the vet? - Has a civil suit been brought against the vet? - Has the vet had her license suspended? I did find a [couple](http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397904) of [other](http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/small-game-predator-trapping/135166-hunting-feral-cats.html) [instances](http://www.archery-forum.com/archive/index.php?t-336.html) of [people](http://www.archeryaddix.com/forums/blogs/addixadmin/19-stray-cats.html) [bow](http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/08/19/police-indiana-teen-hunted-killed-cats-with-bow-and-arrow/) [hunting](http://www.bowhunting-forum.com/archive/index.php?t-9193.html&) cats. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/218 "2015-04-30T21:37:02Z")
> [@SciFiSam](#): > > Hunting with crossbows is illegal. Depends: [Hunting Means and Methods — Texas Parks & Wildlife Department](http://tpwd.texas.gov/regulations/outdoor-annual/hunting/general-regulations/means-and-methods) > [@Texas Parks & Wildlife](#): > > Crossbows are lawful for any person during the Archery-Only Open Season in all counties except Collin, Dallas, Grayson and Rockwall counties, where no person may use a crossbow to hunt deer during the Archery-Only Open Season (Sept. 27 - Oct. 31) unless the person has an upper-limb disability and has in immediate possession a physician’s statement that certifies the extent of the disability. An upper-limb disability is a permanent loss of the use of fingers, hand, or arm in a manner that renders the person incapable of using a longbow, compound bow, or recurved bow. > > Any person, regardless of physical ability, may use a crossbow to hunt game animals or game birds in any county, including Collin, Dallas, Grayson and Rockwall counties, during a general open season or Eastern spring turkey season. > > An archery stamp endorsement is required to hunt deer during the Archery-Only Open Season. An archery stamp endorsement is required to hunt deer at any time in Collin, Dallas, Grayson and Rockwall counties, including during the general open season (Nov.1 - Jan.4). > > A crossbow is lawful for game animals and game birds, provided: > •the crossbow has a minimum pull of 125 pounds; > •the crossbow has a mechanical safety; and > •the crossbow stock is not less than 25 inches in length. > •Telescopic sights are lawful. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/219 "2015-04-30T21:37:09Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Any real updates on this story? > > - Have Tiger’s owners confirmed that it was Tiger? > - Have any charges been brought against the vet? > - Has a civil suit been brought against the vet? > - Has the vet had her license suspended? 1. They want to remain anonymous, but they have told others yes it was. The animal rescue group who placed the cat with them have verified it was Tiger. 2. Austin County Sheriff’s Department announced Tuesday that investigators are recommending that animal cruelty charges be filed. 3. Nothing as yet. 4. Fired from her job. Those cites contain some sociopathic posts. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2015, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224/220 "2015-04-30T21:43:41Z")
> [@SciFiSam](#): > > Am I missing something? Hunting with crossbows is illegal. She admits doing it. She can be charged with that crime, surely? It was a long bow. There may be some regulations about what animals you can legally hunt and when, but to my knowledge nobody’s cited a specific regulation. > [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Any real updates on this story? > > - Have Tiger’s owners confirmed that it was Tiger? > - Have any charges been brought against the vet? > - Has a civil suit been brought against the vet? > - Has the vet had her license suspended? So far the pictures of Tiger and the JusticeForTiger campaign have all been put out by Amy Hemsell, a professional pet sitter from Brenham. All information has come from Amy. She says the owners (Tiger was not a foster cat, simply a barn cat that belonged to some unknown couple) want to remain anonymous. Amy continues to state that the dead cat has not yet been confirmed to be Tiger, nor has the body been recovered. Kristen Lindsey is coming in “sometime next week” with her lawyer to talk to the DA. A civil suit is unlikely. No clue about her license. Just to dump my additional research, the animal hospital was located in Brenham, same place the pet sitter lives, which is in Washington County. All reports are that the authorities dealing with this are from Austin County, which is at least a few miles south. Everything between Brenham and Bellville, the next closest town, is very rural. Lindsey doesn’t have any property on record in either county, neither does Hemsell. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veterinarian-brags-about-killing-a-cat/718224.md?page=12)