Select Page

Analysis of 42 Animal Cruelty Judicial Decisions from the Council of the General Judiciary (2016)

Referencia bibliográfica

Querol, N. et al. Analysis of 42 Animal Cruelty Judicial Decisions from the Council of the General Judiciary (2016) Book of Abstracts, American society of Criminology, 73rd ANNUAL MEETING, November 15 – 18, 2017
Philadelphia.  Programa ASC 2017.

Nonhuman Animal Harms and Enforcement

Thu, Nov 16, 3:30 to 4:50pm, Marriott, Room 501, 5th Floor

Session Submission Type: Regular Session

Sub Unit

  • Area V. Types of Offending / 17. Environmental CrimeAnalysis of 42 Animal Cruelty Judicial Decisions from the Council of the General Judiciary (2016)

    Analysis of 42 Animal Cruelty Judicial Decisions from the Council of the General Judiciary (2016)

  • Thu, Nov 16, 3:30 to 4:50pm, Marriott, Room 501, 5th Floor

    Abstract

    We analyzed 42 resolutions from 2016 on animal cruelty from the Council of the General Judiciary. Regarding the complainant : 56.4% are civilians, 23% law enforcement, 20,5% animal protection organizations, 10,3% attorney general, and 2,6% by an animal law firm. When the compliant are civilians, men account for 58,8% and 88,9% if they are the offenders. 3 of the offenders had previous crime records and one was suspicious of DV.
    In 21% of the cases animal abuse was perpetrated in the presence of minors, which is aggravated animal cruelty, but in none of the cases that was considered relevant. Other co-ocurrent crimes were threats, defamation, injuries, damages and DV.
    Regarding the typology of animal abuse: 35% was neglect, 20% bludgeoning/kicking/punching, 10% thrown out of a window/cliff, and 7,5% shooting. In the shooting cases, no specific provisions were made. In 71% of the cases, the final result was death.
    Regarding the sentences: 53% were sentenced to prison, but wasn’t taken into effect in none of the cases. Other sentences included paying for the veterinary costs, and compensation for moral damage. The fines and compensations are really low.

    Authors

  • PRESENTER: Nuria Querol, Crime Behaviour Analysis Unit, Law School, Univ. Barcelona
  • Angel Cuquerella, Institute of Legal Medicine of Catalonia
  • Miguel Angel Soria, Crime Behaviour Analysis Unit, Law School, Univ. Barcelona
  • Alba Company, University Barcelona
  • Shaila Villar, Sociedad Española de Criminología
  • Sara Cervello, Grafo Formacion
  • Patricia Perez, Sociedad Española de Criminología

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This