what happened to the kitten torturers

I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm

Helen Wheels wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm


Good for the Australian Army! Not an adequate punishment for those jerks,
it's true. But it's to the Australian Army's credit that they showed in a
very public way that they won't tolerate such blatant cruelty to animals. I
doubt much would have happened to those six guys if they'd been serving in
the U.S. army, alas. =o\ But the thought there are people like those
*******s out there... Well now I really AM determined to keep TK safe at
home with me.

Meliss

Helen Wheels wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm


Good for the Australian Army! Not an adequate punishment for those jerks,
it's true. But it's to the Australian Army's credit that they showed in a
very public way that they won't tolerate such blatant cruelty to animals. I
doubt much would have happened to those six guys if they'd been serving in
the U.S. army, alas. =o\ But the thought there are people like those
*******s out there... Well now I really AM determined to keep TK safe at
home with me.

Meliss

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:22:12 GMT, "Melissa Houle"
wrote:


Helen Wheels wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm


Good for the Australian Army! Not an adequate punishment for those jerks,
it's true. But it's to the Australian Army's credit that they showed in a
very public way that they won't tolerate such blatant cruelty to animals. I
doubt much would have happened to those six guys if they'd been serving in
the U.S. army, alas. =o\ But the thought there are people like those
*******s out there... Well now I really AM determined to keep TK safe at
home with me.


I thought the Related Story from June 2 was interesting too:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1121401.htm

*****

Police to appeal against cat torturers' sentences


The Queensland Police Service has bowed to public pressure to appeal
against the sentences handed down to six soldiers who tortured a
litter of kittens.

Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson says the appeal will be based on the
grounds that the sentences imposed on the soldiers were inadequate.

The six men were each fined $2,000 and two had their drivers licences
suspended for setting fire to the cats and dragging one behind a trail
bike.

The maximum penalty is $75,000.

The Townsville magistrate did not record a conviction.

Mr Atkinson says the level of public interest and the lack of
comparative cases with which to form a view of the sentences
influenced his decision to appeal .

*****

I wonder if explusion from the Army is the revised sentence, or
something the Army did in addition to the civilian charges?








Jeanne Hedge, as directed by Natasha

http://www.jhedge.com

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:22:12 GMT, "Melissa Houle"
wrote:


Helen Wheels wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm


Good for the Australian Army! Not an adequate punishment for those jerks,
it's true. But it's to the Australian Army's credit that they showed in a
very public way that they won't tolerate such blatant cruelty to animals. I
doubt much would have happened to those six guys if they'd been serving in
the U.S. army, alas. =o\ But the thought there are people like those
*******s out there... Well now I really AM determined to keep TK safe at
home with me.


I thought the Related Story from June 2 was interesting too:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1121401.htm

*****

Police to appeal against cat torturers' sentences


The Queensland Police Service has bowed to public pressure to appeal
against the sentences handed down to six soldiers who tortured a
litter of kittens.

Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson says the appeal will be based on the
grounds that the sentences imposed on the soldiers were inadequate.

The six men were each fined $2,000 and two had their drivers licences
suspended for setting fire to the cats and dragging one behind a trail
bike.

The maximum penalty is $75,000.

The Townsville magistrate did not record a conviction.

Mr Atkinson says the level of public interest and the lack of
comparative cases with which to form a view of the sentences
influenced his decision to appeal .

*****

I wonder if explusion from the Army is the revised sentence, or
something the Army did in addition to the civilian charges?








Jeanne Hedge, as directed by Natasha

http://www.jhedge.com

"Helen Wheels" wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm

If they got what we here call a dishonorable discharge, it will haunt them
the rest of their lives as well it should.

Jo

"Helen Wheels" wrote in message
...
I don't like to harp back on bad news stories, but there's some
justice at the end of this one.
For those who remember the nasty incident where some drunken yobs
(who also happened to be Australian soldiers) tortured some
kittens earlier this year, you may be relieved to hear that said
yobs have been kicked out of the army. Not as much punishment as
they deserve, but at least it makes it clear what the army thinks
of their behaviour:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...7/s1144357.htm

If they got what we here call a dishonorable discharge, it will haunt them
the rest of their lives as well it should.

Jo

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:16:45 -0500, Jeanne Hedge
wrote:

I thought the Related Story from June 2 was interesting too:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1121401.htm
snip
I wonder if explusion from the Army is the revised sentence, or
something the Army did in addition to the civilian charges?
Speaking from my experience in the US Army, sounds like the Army and
civilian sentences are separate. (Though 20 years in the US Army
certainly didn't make me an expert on the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ) which governs the US military.) As I understand it, in
the US this would have been two completely different proceedings, and
the charges would have been different. Which is why double jeopardy
doesn't always apply to people in the military. In our military you
can be tried both in the civilian and military court for the same
crime, since the actual charges are different.

Same principle holds true with local versus federal law. You can be
acquitted locally, then arrested and charged in the federal court.
IIRC that's what happened in the Rodney King case (where the police
were video taped beating on a black man, acquitted locally, then
convicted on federal charges). It can go the other way, too, like with
Terry Nichols. He was convicted in federal court of conspiring in the
OK City federal building bombing. After being sentenced to life, the
state tried him again hoping to sentence him to death. Didn't work,
just spent lots of money and the jury sentenced to another life
sentence.
--
Steve Touchstone,
faithful servant of Sammy, Little Bit and Rocky

[remove Junk for email]
Home Page: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/index.html
Cat Pix: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/animals.html

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:16:45 -0500, Jeanne Hedge
wrote:

I thought the Related Story from June 2 was interesting too:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1121401.htm
snip
I wonder if explusion from the Army is the revised sentence, or
something the Army did in addition to the civilian charges?
Speaking from my experience in the US Army, sounds like the Army and
civilian sentences are separate. (Though 20 years in the US Army
certainly didn't make me an expert on the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ) which governs the US military.) As I understand it, in
the US this would have been two completely different proceedings, and
the charges would have been different. Which is why double jeopardy
doesn't always apply to people in the military. In our military you
can be tried both in the civilian and military court for the same
crime, since the actual charges are different.

Same principle holds true with local versus federal law. You can be
acquitted locally, then arrested and charged in the federal court.
IIRC that's what happened in the Rodney King case (where the police
were video taped beating on a black man, acquitted locally, then
convicted on federal charges). It can go the other way, too, like with
Terry Nichols. He was convicted in federal court of conspiring in the
OK City federal building bombing. After being sentenced to life, the
state tried him again hoping to sentence him to death. Didn't work,
just spent lots of money and the jury sentenced to another life
sentence.
--
Steve Touchstone,
faithful servant of Sammy, Little Bit and Rocky

[remove Junk for email]
Home Page: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/index.html
Cat Pix: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/animals.html

"Melissa Houle" wrote in message
...
Helen Wheels wrote in message
...

justice at the end of this one.

very public way that they won't tolerate such blatant cruelty to animals.
I
doubt much would have happened to those six guys if they'd been serving in
the U.S. army, alas.

Now THAT is an extremely ignorant and foul thing to say.
For your benighted information, anyone in any American Service caught
torturing animals would not only get stomped on by the Military Justice
system (such disgusting crimes are covered by the UCMJ), but in most cases
would also be turned over to the Civil Court system.