Our take: Dog case raises interesting legal question
It will be interesting to watch how the case proceeds against a man alleged to have stolen a dog from a Duncan residence last month.
If there was ever a case that straddles the fine line between what is illegal, and what is just, it could be this one.
“Bear” is the name being given the pooch in question. It first came to the public’s attention in early February after a photo began making the rounds on Facebook.
The photo showed Bear surrounded by feces and other filth outside a Duncan residence.
The dog was the subject of an SPCA investigatation, but before any action could be taken, the animal disappeared, only to resurface on another Facebook page, complete with a picture of it happily licking a man after being “rescued” from its unhappy situation.
The rescuer (who has since gone quiet) was initially proud of his actions, contacting the NLP saying he found the dog in distress, hanging from the ceiling, and he took action to remove it from danger.
Many readers agreed he did the right thing. And if his version of what occurred checks out, we do too.
When he appears in court next month — again, assuming his story checks out — we want to see a legal system in place that places the welfare of the animal ahead of the property rights of the owner.
While vigilante action should never be condoned, this case appears to fall under the blanket of extenuating circumstances. Given the situation the dog was reportedly in, it would have been a worse affront to justice to leave the situation be.
Hopefully, the law will reflect that. Hopefully, Bear is OK.