July 08, 2006

 

When Humans Deserve Choke-Chains



...By now it’s well known that I like animals more than people. It’s also well known that I have no tolerance for animal abusers, nor the gutter trash that defends them. While blogging about such people might not do much other than allow me to vent, it’s still worth it if it brings attention to a few more examples of what’s wrong with the human race.
...Sadly, we can add two more names to the ever-growing list of those whose mothers should have opted for abortions when they had the chance: Eric J. Henry and his attorney, Eugene J. Maurer.
...Henry was recently sentenced to five years in prison after bludgeoning a puppy to death during a burglary last summer. While robbing a home with two accomplices last July, Henry used a baseball bat to beat to death the family’s seven-month-old Lab mix named Voodoo. The puppy was found in a pool of blood atop the stairs with his head bashed in and his leg shattered. Blood was splattered across the walls and a trail of the puppy’s blood was throughout the house.
...After police found the puppy’s blood on Henry’s sneakers, his response was typical of most modern criminals: He said that it wasn’t his fault. Henry claimed that he was on PCP at the time, and that the PCP was to blame—not him. As if such an excuse weren’t pathetic enough, it turned out that it was a lie; there was no evidence of Henry having PCP in his blood at the time.
...The puppy’s owners were understandably traumatized and husband/father Nick Dumas explained, “This just really changed my life—not in a positive way.” The judge in the case said that she was “sickened by the photographs” of the dead puppy, and told Henry that the act “was a cruel and senseless act.”
...Here’s the part of the story where we add insult to injury.
...Henry’s attorney, Eugene J. Maurer, thought that the sentence was rather harsh for burglary and the pummeling death of a seven-month-old puppy with a baseball bat. Maurer said:
“If there were different victims in this case for whom the impact of the crime was not quite so great, and if they could handle it better, then the sentence wouldn’t have been so harsh. With all due respect to them, I would hope that they would be able to handle such a trauma a little bit better than that. To have your whole life ruined by this just seems a little excessive.”
...Filth like Maurer and Henry make me both sick and embarrassed to know that we’re somehow part of the same species. Since he mentions “different victims” in his completely disgusting remarks, it’s quite apparent that the “different victims” in this story should have been both Maurer and Henry.
...With all due respect to them, I would hope that they would be able to handle knowing that it wouldn’t be a loss whatsoever if they were to meet the same fate as the puppy in this story.

3 Comments:

Blogger Legally Insane said...

when i read the post title and saw the picture of the puppies, i knew rough reading was ahead.

maurer's suggestion that the nature of crime and punishment is ultimately dependent upon the identity of the victim is particularly offensive.

it would be like saying the holocause would not have been so bad if the victims had been [insert any racial or regligious group here].

acts of violence should be ultimately dependent upon what the criminal did and not who the victims happened to be. a just legal system is one that punishes a criminal regardless if the victim happened to be a saint or a sinner.

i realize that the lawyer has to make any plausible arguments in defense of his client, but that argument helps neither him nor his client.

July 08, 2006  
Blogger a.m. said...

I first thought this was the story about the guy who won "Survivor" a few years ago and was arrested for shooting a puppy with a bow and arrow. This story is similarily awful. I don't understand animal cruelty of this nature and I never will.

I also will never understand lawyers who defend their clients in such a manner. Despicable isn't a good enough word to describe them.

July 08, 2006  
Blogger J.P. said...

You know, after I initially wrote this I sat and pondered whether or not I needed to add fine-print to it to make it known what I was and wasn’t suggesting in it. I say this because I remember an incident last year regarding another animal abuse case on which I opined and in that case my opinion was misinterpreted by one person who came across the post and viewed it as an “anti-defense attorney” commentary.

I slept on the idea and when I awoke this morning I came to a conclusion: I should offer a little something in the comments section for anyone who might be coming across Faint Expectations for the first time. Even though my “cellmates” know where I’m coming from, I’ve decided to post this disclaimer for others:

1.) First and foremost, I’m not threatening to harm either Henry or his lawyer. While I’ll readily admit that I wouldn’t feel any sadness if I should happen to read that something unfortunate befell either of them, I have no plans on perpetrating any illegal acts against either of them. This is because, unlike Eric J. Henry, I don’t break the law—especially in a most vile way. Secondly, unlike Eugene J. Maurer, I’ll never make excuses for people convicted of heinous crimes.

2.) I’m not advocating that someone else perpetrate a crime against either Eric Henry or Eugene Maurer. Even if I were, however, that doesn’t mean that I’m in some way forcing them to perpetrate an assault against them. That would be like me telling someone to “go play in traffic,” and if they should happen to be run over by a car it would be my fault. While I understand that there are many misguided people in this country who would find me at fault in a situation like that, it goes back to what I previously stated: I’m not forcing anyone to do bad things to these guys, so don’t blame me; blame the person who would actually do the illegal act.

To put it succinctly, while I’m not planning on violating the law, it would nonetheless be no loss if we were to read in The News Journal that something horrific occurred to either of the men (and I use that term very loosely) in this story.

3.) I’m in no way suggesting that defense lawyers as a whole are evil. To my knowledge, the only times that I’ve taken shots at defense attorneys are specifically when they make asinine comments in defense of their client’s actions even after the client has been convicted. In essence, they continue to make excuses for the lawbreaking.

Defense attorneys play a crucial role in our justice system, especially for those who have been falsely accused of a crime. If we didn’t have them, we’d live in a society akin to Salem during the witch trials, where one was guilty until proven guilty.

This would be similar to blaming the profession of teaching as a whole when a teacher is arrested for sexually molesting a student or volunteer firefighters as a whole when a few of their ranks are arrested for arson. I’d never do either and have no intention of making a blanket statement against defense lawyers. People like Maurer simply make them look like snakes.

4.) Eric Henry is the bigger criminal in this case. While Maurer turned out to be his apologist, Henry is the one who needs to be behind bars with a cellmate who has an unusually large penis, an unusually high sex drive, a penchant for young men, and a dislike of lubrication.

Anything less would be a waste of taxpayers’ money.

July 08, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home