Courtroom Animal Advocate Programs give abuse victims a legal voice
Seattle Times 12/14/22: In 2016, an innovative new Connecticut program started after a dog, Desmond, was starved, abused, then strangled to death by his owner. The owner admitted guilt but still avoided jail time and a criminal record. It’s not that unusual, noted Diana Urban, the Connecticut representative sponsoring Desmond’s Law. Animal abusers have an 18% conviction rate in Connecticut.
In Connecticut, Desmond’s Law ensured that an animal victimized by cruelty or neglect would have an advocate in court, or Courtroom Animal Advocate. It was the first in the nation.
Since the CAAP (Courtroom Animal Advocate Program) began, volunteer attorney advocates have been trained and offered perspectives. For example, in one case, the advocate successfully ensured a defendant found guilty in a dogfighting case was prohibited from owning, breeding or having dogs for two years. A similar program has begun in Maine as well.
Could Washington state be next?
“There are a lot of great advancements being made in animal criminal law right now across the country and internationally,” says Kirsten Gregory, animal cruelty response and prevention director at Pasado’s Safe Haven. “As an organization, we’re watching what’s happening and thinking about how we could improve laws in Washington state.”
Addressing the gap
CAAP programs address a serious gap. Defense attorneys are duty-bound to protect their client’s interests. Prosecutors pursue the state’s interests — which may or may not intersect with the animal’s interests.
“Our justice and legal system are based on the idea that if you put two attorneys — both of which are zealous advocates for their clients — in a room together, we end up with better outcomes,” says David Rosengard, managing attorney for the national organization Animal Legal Defense Fund.
That advocacy for animal victims is a missing piece of criminal proceedings in Washington and elsewhere. Overworked prosecutors often don’t have resources to research and keep up with the nuances of an animal’s welfare.
“The situation not unlike when you have a child or incapacitated person who’d been the victim of violent crime but didn’t have a voice to speak about the impact of the experience,” Gregory says.
Meanwhile, as cases wind through the criminal justice system, no one has a duty to address the animal’s underlying interests.
As a result, victims of animal cruelty can languish in shelters or sanctuaries for up to a year or more while held as evidence in a criminal case or because their alleged abuser won’t give up ownership.
Without a CAAP in place, Pasado’s Safe Haven does its best to assist prosecutors in an unofficial capacity. After the animal is in custody and placed with Pasado’s, the sanctuary carries out a veterinary assessment of the animal’s injuries and condition at the time of seizure. Pasado’s also notes the animal’s improvement over time when provided with needed medical care and appropriate food, water and shelter. This documentation may be useful evidence in a criminal case.
As cases wind through court, caring for the animals can be an issue. Even in ideal sanctuary or rescue environments, dogs and cats can lose human socialization skills, become withdrawn, or increasingly agitated in close quarters.
As an example, Gregory points to a recent case where 27 sheep were seized; because the owner refused to give up ownership, the sanctuary couldn’t neuter the male animals — creating a management issue at the sanctuary to keep sheep separated, taking up extra pasture space for over a year that could have been used to house other animals in need. Pasado’s has no standing in court to ask for intervention.
Another dog had a growth that the sanctuary was concerned was a cancerous tumor — but the sanctuary couldn’t operate or provide treatment until the prosecutor talked the owner into giving up ownership. With a CAAP program in place, an advocate could directly intervene on the dog’s behalf with the judge, who could then allow diagnostic or treatment work to be carried out.
How advocates work
In contrast, the advocate represents the animal’s interests in criminal proceedings. These advocates act similarly to court-appointed advocates currently representing the interests of children, the elderly, or mentally incompetent people as a court case proceeds.
“The main impact for individual animals will be ensuring their interests are addressed by the court, such as authorizing needed medical care if ownership hasn’t been determined or is at issue,” Gregory says. “Advocates will also help inform the court concerning sentencing and rehabilitation, and help obtain a just and right outcome in particular cases if an advocate can offer more information and resources to the judge.”
An advocate is typically a supervised law student or pro bono (free services) legal practitioner who acts as an animal’s “voice in court” while performing research on behalf of the judge. Someone must gather legal information, such as veterinarian bills and requirements required to resolve issues, such as sorting out where an animal lives or who the animal belongs to. Someone, typically a lawyer, must file legal paperwork for this to happen. “Animals are notoriously bad at filing on their own behalf,” Rosengard says wryly.
An advocate can help the prosecution determine who owns the animal and who pays for the animal’s care. “This is helpful for state and county governments,” Rosengard says. “One reason cash-strapped governments can be reluctant to intervene in animal cruelty allegations is that they’ll end up with a bunch of animals and be forced to spend money on care or to euthanize them.”
An animal advocate of sorts was appointed in the infamous Michael Vick case, Rosengard points out, just to help deal with the enormity of the situation — 53 dogs taught to fight, sitting as evidence in shelters. As a result of the expert advocacy, each dog’s history was reviewed, and a behavioralist was consulted for each dog. All but two were rehabilitated and adopted out to families. Two were euthanized, one for physical health reasons and the other because it had been too mentally traumatized to function.
Advocates can also provide a broad context for sentencing. In Washington state, many animal cruelty sentences seem light and don’t reflect the crime’s severity, Gregory says. She says that a fine and community service is often the maximum, even in violent and egregious cases of animal cruelty.
Judges may have more sentencing options available to them, as well, Rosengard points out. For example, if neglect wasn’t malicious (but due to lack of awareness or information) sentencing can incorporate healthy steps a defendant can take to get their animals back.
Pasado’s Safe Haven is working on an implementation guide for Washington state, including the logistics of volunteer legal advocates and background work of raising awareness about CAAP with prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges. “The new laws in Connecticut and Maine have a lot of merit, and we’re doing the initial work to bring this advancement to Washington,” Gregory says.
