PDA

View Full Version : Man accused of killing cat, hanging its head on a tree


Andy
January 13th 06, 09:47 PM
Man accused of killing cat, hanging its head on a tree

January 13, 2006, 9:42 AM EST

MILAN, N.Y. (AP) _ A Hudson Valley man was accused of shooting his
cat, chopping off its head and hanging the severed head from a tree
after the animal urinated on a carpet.

Robert See, 30, of the rural Dutchess County town of Milan, was
charged Wednesday with animal cruelty, killing a cat by gunshot and
discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling, the Daily Freeman
of Kingston reported Friday.

Authorities told the newspaper See admitted to killing the cat in
anger after the animal urinated on a carpet in his home.

Doug Niederkorn, a law-enforcement officer with the Dutchess County
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals, said See shot the
cat with a high-powered rifle then chopped off the animal's head with
an ax, placed the head in a bag and hung the bag from a tree on a
neighboring property.

"The cat was a large cat, so (See) wanted his skull," Niederkorn said.
"He was going to add the skull to his skull collection."

All three charges lodged against See are misdemeanors, and he could
face up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine if convicted.


http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny-brf--catkilled0113jan13,0,6948172.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

-L.
January 13th 06, 10:39 PM
Andy wrote:
<snip>

If you insist on posting animal abuse articles, would you do some of us
a favor out of common courtesy and not descibe the abuse in the header?
All you have to do is label it "animal abuse article". Those who
want to read that kind of thing will. Thanks.
-L.

Magic Mood Jeep©
January 14th 06, 01:07 AM
Sick *******


SEE, ROBERT845-758-2745
82 Indian Rd
Red Hook, NY 12571


Andy wrote:
> Man accused of killing cat, hanging its head on a tree
>
> January 13, 2006, 9:42 AM EST
>
> MILAN, N.Y. (AP) _ A Hudson Valley man was accused of shooting his
> cat, chopping off its head and hanging the severed head from a tree
> after the animal urinated on a carpet.
>
> Robert See, 30, of the rural Dutchess County town of Milan, was
> charged Wednesday with animal cruelty, killing a cat by gunshot and
> discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling, the Daily Freeman
> of Kingston reported Friday.
>
> Authorities told the newspaper See admitted to killing the cat in
> anger after the animal urinated on a carpet in his home.
>
> Doug Niederkorn, a law-enforcement officer with the Dutchess County
> Society for the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals, said See shot the
> cat with a high-powered rifle then chopped off the animal's head with
> an ax, placed the head in a bag and hung the bag from a tree on a
> neighboring property.
>
> "The cat was a large cat, so (See) wanted his skull," Niederkorn said.
> "He was going to add the skull to his skull collection."
>
> All three charges lodged against See are misdemeanors, and he could
> face up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine if convicted.
>
>
> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny-brf--catkilled0113jan13,0,6948172.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

FleaCircus
January 14th 06, 06:05 AM
He's a **** worm! Disgusting. =ő(

Laila
January 14th 06, 06:19 PM
perhaps he should add his own skull to his collection.

RobZip
January 15th 06, 10:20 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Andy wrote:
> <snip>
>
> If you insist on posting animal abuse articles, would you do some of us
> a favor out of common courtesy and not descibe the abuse in the header?
> All you have to do is label it "animal abuse article". Those who
> want to read that kind of thing will. Thanks.
> -L.

And if the possibility of being offended is so overwhelming to you, then
perhaps Usenet is not an apprpriate venue for you to explore. Either grow a
bit of a hide or find a safer environment to be such a silly ****.

January 15th 06, 11:07 PM
I think that this guy should not have any kinds of pets to begin with.

-L.
January 16th 06, 01:39 AM
RobZip wrote:
> And if the possibility of being offended is so overwhelming to you, then
> perhaps Usenet is not an apprpriate venue for you to explore. Either grow a
> bit of a hide or find a safer environment to be such a silly ****.

It's called common courtesy, idiot. It's not offensive to me but maybe
somebody just lost their cat tragically, ya know? Not that I'd expect
that to cross *your* mind.
-L.

RobZip
January 16th 06, 05:41 AM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> RobZip wrote:
> > And if the possibility of being offended is so overwhelming to you, then
> > perhaps Usenet is not an apprpriate venue for you to explore. Either
grow a
> > bit of a hide or find a safer environment to be such a silly ****.
>
> It's called common courtesy, idiot. It's not offensive to me but maybe
> somebody just lost their cat tragically, ya know? Not that I'd expect
> that to cross *your* mind.
> -L.

Of course you were offended by it - why else would you invoke a call for
'common courtesy' otherwise? Then in response to me you claim a call for
sensitivity on behalf of unspecified others who may have tragically lost a
pet. You are a meddlesome **** who enjoys inflicting a contrary opinion just
for the sake of making noise. I suppose all of us should quit living and
having discussion on any and all subjects just because someone may be going
through a period of heightened sensitivity? Bull****... Following your logic
it would be inappropriate to talk of buying a car for my son because
someone's child may have recently been killed in their first car. Nobody
should talk about how they care for an aging parent since someone elses' may
have recently died? It's just a tough old world out there sometimes, isn't
it?
Tragic stuff happens - outrageous stuff happens... and people will talk
about it - graphically.

-L.
January 16th 06, 08:58 AM
RobZip wrote:
>
> Of course you were offended by it - why else would you invoke a call for
> 'common courtesy' otherwise?

Um, because I know some people who read the ng are bothered by such
posts. It's a topic that has arisen before, long before you reared
your ugly head and will be in affect long after you are gone, as well.

>Then in response to me you claim a call for
> sensitivity on behalf of unspecified others who may have tragically lost a
> pet.

It was merely one example. There are plenty of people who appreciate a
warning before being exposed to the cruel and gruesome.

>You are a meddlesome **** who enjoys inflicting a contrary opinion just
> for the sake of making noise. I suppose all of us should quit living and
> having discussion on any and all subjects just because someone may be going
> through a period of heightened sensitivity? Bull****... Following your logic
> it would be inappropriate to talk of buying a car for my son because
> someone's child may have recently been killed in their first car. Nobody
> should talk about how they care for an aging parent since someone elses' may
> have recently died? It's just a tough old world out there sometimes, isn't
> it?
> Tragic stuff happens - outrageous stuff happens... and people will talk
> about it - graphically.

Only uncivil people like you, Nancy.
(If you aren't her, you're certainly her clone...)

-L.

RobZip
January 16th 06, 01:20 PM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Um, because I know some people who read the ng are bothered by such
> posts. It's a topic that has arisen before, long before you reared
> your ugly head and will be in affect long after you are gone, as well.

I've seen the topic here and in other groups before. You now admit to
whining on behalf of the unspecified others - underscoring my contention
that you are indeed a noisy, meddlesome ****.

> It was merely one example. There are plenty of people who appreciate a
> warning before being exposed to the cruel and gruesome.

This is Usenet - not the weekly church bulletin. If the content of a
*header* much less an entire post bothers you to this extreme, perhaps
confining yourself to moderated groups is in order.

> > Tragic stuff happens - outrageous stuff happens... and people will talk
> > about it - graphically.
>
> Only uncivil people like you, Nancy.
> (If you aren't her, you're certainly her clone...)

Attempting to impose your will on others in an open worldwide forum is
classic ****ing in the wind. Life goes on, pure and raw despite the trifling
efforts of the likes of you.

-L.
January 16th 06, 05:27 PM
RobZip wrote:
>
> This is Usenet - not the weekly church bulletin.

<snip masturbatory babble>

Don't you have a kiddie class you should be attending, Mr. Bowlingreen?
-L.

cybercat
January 16th 06, 07:37 PM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> RobZip wrote:
> >
> > This is Usenet - not the weekly church bulletin.
>
> <snip masturbatory babble>
>
> Don't you have a kiddie class you should be attending, Mr. Bowlingreen?
> -L.
>

Watch out, Rob, she *will* go real life on you. It's what she does
when she just can't stand it anymore.

8')

-L.
January 16th 06, 10:13 PM
cybercat wrote:
> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > RobZip wrote:
> > >
> > > This is Usenet - not the weekly church bulletin.
> >
> > <snip masturbatory babble>
> >
> > Don't you have a kiddie class you should be attending, Mr. Bowlingreen?
> > -L.
> >
>
> Watch out, Rob, she *will* go real life on you. It's what she does
> when she just can't stand it anymore.
>
> 8')

More libel from our friend Nancy who calls the cops over Usenet flame
wars. Pretty ironic coming from you, Nance. Oh, I forgot. You aren't
Nancy. <snicker>
-L.

RobZip
January 17th 06, 11:21 AM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
> Watch out, Rob, she *will* go real life on you. It's what she does
> when she just can't stand it anymore.

Excuse me - just what would someone who pleads revulsion over a newsgroup
header know about real life? Not that I would expect a coherent answer
but...... I tremble... not.