Fining Samaritan was bad judgment
The “Good Deed” item Nov. 22 was really disappointing. To see this happen to a person who, out of the compassion of her heart wanted to help an animal, and got prosecuted for it.
I have witnessed some ridiculous acts by local government officials, but I’ve got to admit, this could be the worst so far.
Decisions by this judge are just some of the ongoing lack of compassion we are experiencing in society today. Why give the beggar a meal when you might be sued for his choking on a bone or giving him a food allergy poisoning? Why stop and talk to what appears to be a troubled teen when you might get charged with attempting to commit an “underaged crime?” You get my point. It’s no longer worth the risk, when common sense no longer exists in the court room.
It is clear this person is being punished because she revealed a serious flaw in local government. The fact that locally there are no animal control officers available at night, nor a nearby facility to take in stray or injured animals even on an emergency basis like this one, is shameful. My daughter is part of an animal control agency in Virginia that operates normally 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, but does offer 24/7 service and care for emergency cases like this one. I guess the idea of making anyone a source of revenue for local government seems to be a serious trend on the rise.
If we believe animals do have a heaven somewhere, this judge should revoke his decision, refund the money and make a significant contribution to the local animal support agencies.
You never know, Fido just might see him on the other side. (It’s a joke, judge, don’t prosecute me for it.)