Dyed poodle vs. dead kitten

http://www.boulderweekly.com/2008052...umissedit.html

Dyed poodle vs. dead kitten

On Dec. 11 of last year, Charles Corwin came into a little trouble
with the law when he was accused of killing a kitten by bashing its
head against a bookcase and then throwing the lifeless body through
the cat door. He confessed to police that he bludgeoned the kitty
after it chewed a hole through his wife’s oxygen-pump tube. I’m sure
we can all understand that. It seems like a natural urge to purchase a
small creature that, like all small creatures, gnaws on any nearby
item available, and then kill it for doing just that.

But, sarcasm aside, what we actually don’t understand is the recent
decision by the Boulder County Court system regarding the terms of
Corwin’s sentence. During a May 15 hearing to outline the exact terms
and conditions of his deferred sentence, Corwin requested that he be
able to keep three cats, four kittens and one dog at his home as a
comfort to his ailing wife. Like most reasonable people, the judge
felt that the home of a kitten killer is not the best place for
kittens. Well, sort of.

Though Corwin was advised to undergo a mental-health evaluation, lay
off drugs and alcohol, and to generally not kill small, defenseless
baby animals, he was also granted the right to keep two of his
animals. The court stipulated that Corwin must remove all animals from
his home, except for one cat and one dog.

Except? What did these two remaining prisoners do to deserve that?
Apparently the same city that thinks its abusive to dye your poodle
with beet juice deems it legitimate for a kitty killer to keep
animals. It’s time for our city’s version of animal control to take a
trip to the pound.