We were living in Connecticut between 2001 and 2005, and our children were raising meat rabbits.

One of our neighbors was busted for butchering chickens, inside his garage. His chickens were raised in pens inside his garage. So they were not visible to anyone else. I imagine that his children told the school, and a busybody at the school notified police.

 

We were living in Connecticut between 2001 and 2005, and our children were raising meat rabbits.

One of our neighbors was busted for butchering chickens, inside his garage. His chickens were raised in pens inside his garage. So they were not visible to anyone else. I imagine that his children told the school, and a busybody at the school notified police.

What happened to him? I can’t imagine the charges stuck?

 

Whats next? Arrested for pulling carrots out of the ground?

 

That wont happen.

 

Royals and the wealthy elite in medieval and early modern Europe ate peacocks

 

Yep.
I can see it if they were HER peacocks or he put the severed head in her mailbox or something but this is bonkers.

 

the letter is a form of harassment , the charge should be for harassment of a neighbor if anything , it also sounds like he described how he did it to upset her.

it will be interesting to see how the charges end up , I would think a harassment charge gets better to the actual thing.

killing humanely a livestock animal for human consumption is not something to charge.

 

I disagree that it is harassment. He had obviously asked the neighbor to stop feeding his birds and she refused so he showed her what happens to the birds when she refuses to stop messing with his property.

 

I don’t think one letter stating that he killed and ate his poultry is anything close to harassment from a legal basis. But he might have actually had standing to go after her because she continued to feed his peacocks when she was told to stop.

 

For a start i don't think you can legally put mail into a mailbox used for US postal service use. The other thing that was not covered was where the birds were when they were being fed. If she was trespassing she should be charged. If they were not on his property he has no gripe.

 

Then he‘d have to be prosecuted by the Postal Service, not local LE.
No one should have a gripe about him slaughtering and eating his own damned peacocks, should they?

 

He's eating his own stock to spite his neighbor? While he sounds like a halfwit from the little news description, I don't fault him for eating them. They're loud as heck.

 

I would wager that nothing would have been done if he butchered them without the big production.It does not sound like a food problem. He did it to punish the lady feeding the birds which crosses the line.

 

oh, I see. So you think it’s motivation that they’re prosecuting him for? If I send my steer to the butcher because the neighborhood kids keep getting into the field to pet him then I’m up a legal creek because I’m having him slaughtered with the wrong motivations?
😂🤣😂
I’d love to see the case law on that one. Now we have “spite laws”! 😂

 

Did they clarify where the birds were fed?

 

Why does it matter where the birds were fed?

 

That's pretty twisted. His birds, he should be free to slaughter and consume his property. Who gives a plip what the non-owner thinks?

I hope he sues the neighbor and the entity pressing charges, and wins big.

 

There may be more to the story. There is at least one report that he admitted to doing this out of spite to the officers. He may have admitted more. Eating the birds was never the problem. Killing them and how it was done seems to be what will matter under the recent changes to this Florida law.

He just may have slit his own throat by making admissions to a law enforcement. I do think it will be a long shot at conviction from the little info we have.

 

Well of course there’s more to the story. But cutting poultry throats is how most poultry is slaughtered. So either he did something else that was cruel or the police and prosecutors don’t know much about poultry. My guess is the latter.

 

Peacocks are pretty

 

Peacocks have sharp claws and scream all night long.

 

They also get into the neighbors garden and get shot...dead!! By the neighbor!!

 

huh?

 

yes it will be in the specifics of the evidence

here is an example letter I think you could send to a neighbor who was feeding your birds that wouldn't be harassment and would still assign blame.

Dear neighbor
I regret to inform you that because you were feeding bird 1234 and 1235 outside of the rations and had entered the pen area with out first adhering to the biosecurity protocol needed to prevent the spread of avian influenza bird 1234 and 1235 had to be euthanatized as they could not return to the flock.

please do not feed or enter the pen area again or we will have to charge you for the losses you create and have you criminally charged for trespassing.

thanks fowl farms LLC

 

yes it will be in the specifics of the evidence

here is an example letter I think you could send to a neighbor who was feeding your birds that wouldn't be harassment and would still assign blame.

Dear neighbor
I regret to inform you that because you were feeding bird 1234 and 1235 outside of the rations and had entered the pen area with out first adhering to the biosecurity protocol needed to prevent the spread of avian influenza bird 1234 and 1235 had to be euthanatized as they could not return to the flock.

please do not feed or enter the pen area again or we will have to charge you for the losses you create and have you criminally charged for trespassing.

thanks fowl farms LLC

Im not sure what your point is. He wasn’t charged with harassment Of the neighbor or anyone else. He was charged with animal cruelty.

 

There are further reports that he stated to the officers that he would kill all the peacocks he had to prevent anyone from taking them into custody. It seems he is using them as threats instead of stock.

He also has over 40 prior cases in the county for several different offences.

There is more to the story than just killing stock for food.

 

His property his choice. This is what happens when karens are in charge. If the karens would just leave him alone and mind their own business he wouldn't be forced to remove his own property.

 

If the birds were not free ranging when fed there would not have been a need for a letter describing the process.

PS
would you please post a list of ''all'' the charges filed against him. That would make it very easy for you to prove your point.

 

I really don’t think that would have anything to do with it. People will feed livestock on the owners property too. I used to have neighbors throw grass clippings over the pasture fence as a “treat” for my horses. It could have cost me a very expensive vet bill and the horses lives. Sure I didn’t kill them and eat them but if they were pigs or cows I might have to spare myself the vet bills.
I don’t have a list of all the charges, nor am I pedantic enough to spend time looking them up. I’m going off what’s in the article I postedthat you can read .
SaltFlats is the one with the time to research prior offenses.

 

The fact that there is an animal cruelty law proves that while he owns them, he does not have the right to kill as he chooses.

No, it doesn’t. It could be as simple as the police not understanding the difference between pets and poultry and livestock. which is what I’m betting.
It kind of sounds like you think the police and prosecutors never make mistakes and are always right. Is that so?

 

It could be that simple. It also could be that you don't know what happened and there is more info that would support the charge.

No one is arguing that there is a possibility that he could easily have this case dismissed. They are saying that there could be more to this case than is presented in the news reports and the charges might stand. Do you accept that possibility?

 

Good grief. You guys are slinging logical fallacies like confetti.

Did he have the legal right to kill and eat his own livestock? Are peacocks exempt because they are pretty?

 

I think it’s a livestock vs pet technicality in the eyes of the law??

 

No, it’s about cruelty. They seem to think that cutting the throat is somehow cruel.
it hasn’t been specified if it was done in some unusual manner or just done like poultry is routinely slaughtered.
if they try to determine which animal is a pet or livestock i hope they stay clear of the county fair when the critters are picked up by the various butchers.

 

Is using a hatchet or a machete better? <snicker>

 

Maybe they have hate crime protections for peacocks? 😂 they are pretty flamboyant. 🤣

 

Thread drift alert.

This brought back a memory!

Decades ago, we saw what appeared to be a small bobcat kill one of my mother in law's laying hens. We shot the "bobcat." It turned out to be one of the MANY cats belonging to a neighbor/cousin down the road.

The neighbor/cousin didn't speak to us for a year, which was a blessing.

 

This popped up in news alerts. Turns out his birds are free-roaming. The neighbor has been granted a protective order.

Florida man kills and eats his own pet peacocks over dispute with his neighbor, cops allege

Those poor birds!

wegotthiscovered.com

 

Not sure what whether the birds were free roaming or not has to do with anything that the man was charged with.
The dude looks crazy as a bedbug and I’m sure the woman is happy to have an order of protection but the point remains that the man was charged with cruelty to animals because he killed his own peacocks by cutting their throats and ate them. Which is legal unless he found some torturous way to do so.
Unless additional charges are brought for something else I think this is a case of unknowledgeable and overzealous police and prosecutor who are far removed from their food sources.

 

So it wasn't the method, it was only because he killed his own poultry.
How long before someone gets charged after killing a noisy rooster when a neighbor complains?

 

Re; dogs. Chihuahuas were developed as a food source. There are many cultures where eating dog is acceptible.

 

Absolutely, though I, myself find it abhorrent. I don’t have much of an argument against it other than it’s illegal here and I love dogs.