Skip to main content

ASPCA on Michael Vick's case



ASPCA RESPONDS TO QUERIES REGARDING MICHAEL VICK CASE

As part of a drug investigation on April 25, police raided a 15-acre property in Virginia owned by Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick—and discovered 66 dogs, 55 of them pit bulls, and a variety of equipment that could be associated with dog fighting. In response to the ongoing news coverage of the pending investigation and allegations surrounding the football star, the ASPCA has received numerous emails and calls from concerned citizens, many expressing outrage, and many wondering what can be done to stop the cruel blood sport of dog fighting.
Dog fighting is an illegal practice in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The ASPCA strongly opposes animal cruelty in any form, and is especially concerned about any characterization of dog fighting as a trivial matter. Says the ASPCA’s Randall Lockwood, Ph.D., Senior Vice President, Anti-Cruelty Initiatives and Legislative Services, “This is a serious and violent crime that represents the worst possible violation of the special bond between people and dogs, and should be investigated and prosecuted accordingly.”
Virginia’s Surry County Commonwealth Attorney Gerald G. Poindexter said last week that he is confident that charges will be brought in the investigation of a possible dog fighting operation. As we wait for new developments in the case, the ASPCA believes it is necessary for all facts to become known before making any definitive statement. However, the ASPCA is strongly opposed to the practice of dog fighting, and supports strong prosecution of such cases.

We also stand ready to help authorities by providing expertise on animal fighting, cruelty investigations and anti-cruelty issues, and are proud to let animal advocates across the country know that Dr. Melinda Merck, forensic veterinarian with the ASPCA, has been asked by Poindexter to assist in the pending investigation.

Credit: ASPCA Newsletter

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Philippines. Reporting Animal Cruelty. Emergency Numbers. RA 8485.

Because I belong to an group of animal welfare advocates in the Philippines, I can read the numerous discussions between group members and people who, seems to me, just signed up to make an urgent plea for help. There were two this week who begged for assistance concerning two dogs who were tied up under rain and sun with no food nor water. One was described to be on the verge of a heat stroke. The images that filled my mind disturbed me immensely, but I am also encouraged at the same time. There is a growing number of animal welfare advocates in the Philippines and ordinary citizens are beginning to reject animal cruelty, willing to take personal action against it. Just from this website, I can see from the visitor data that many are seeking information on how to report animal cruelty in the Philippines. You can find my previous post on the subject HERE . Keep in mind that your complaint has legal standing via the Philippine Animal Welfare Act which is also known as the RA 8485 .

Three Members of the Philippine Shooting Team and the Killing of Protected Philippine Wildlife

When a member of the animal or plant kingdom goes extinct, there will be no second chances. Evolution will simply not repeat itself. There are reportedly eighty bird species that are unique to the Philippines and many of them have already made it to the endangered list. And we, to a great extent, have indiscrimate hunting to thank for it. In spite of two national laws protecting Philippine animals, the carnage continues unabated. The killings could occur as arbitrarily as guys getting together for macho time, or as a result of a well-planned hunting trip involving speed boats, bird callers, and camouflaged outfits. Either way, the outcome is the same. Philippine wildlife, our natural treasures, inches closer to a state of irreparable vacancy. Not too long ago, we learned about the Bacolod Air Rifle Club (BARC) whose unbridled killing of Philippine birds and ducks became the subject of an online petition calling for immediate government intervention. My post on that most disturbing c

Movie Oro. Dog Cruelty. Alvin Yapan. Mark Shandii Bacolod. Friends for the Protection of Animals.

Position Statement on Oro The Friends for the Protection of Animals are opposed to the use of any animal for the purposes of entertainment, labor, experimentation, or as captive exhibits. We believe in their natural born rights to freedom and an unencumbered life, rights that are no less valuable or unalienable as our rights as humans. In this light, we condemn the bludgeoning death of a dog, perhaps two as alleged by an insider, for dramatic purposes in the film, Oro. We a bhor the insensitivity of the cast and crew whose apathy to an animal's suffering, coupled with their desire for personal glory and industry recognition, moved us to ponder just how deep can human depravity sink. We question their responsibility to decency and compassion which evidently they heeded to cinematic expediency. Reported responses to the press reveal that there was never any compunction to do so. We consider the killings to be a violation of the Animal Welfare Act which prohibits cruel and exp