Deceased Cat’s Owner Turns in Dog’s DNA as Evidence.
“All I want is to protect my family,” Christian, 35, said as she sat in her family room with her infant son, Denison, and Yo Mama, one of her four remaining cats. “I’m trying to get my neighbor held responsible for a dangerous dog that they let roam in the neighborhood.”
Christian said that since Cody was killed, she has repeatedly asked Lucky’s owners, Sean and Janet Daryabeygi, to return the dog to the local animal shelter, where they adopted him in the summer. The Daryabeygis think she is asking too much. They said Lucky would never harm a human, though they do not dispute that he could have been a cat killer.
“He probably did it. We don’t know that. Nobody saw it. It’s the nature of the dog — chasing cats, squirrels and small animals,” said Sean Daryabeygi, 62, a Metro engineer who lives in a cabinlike home across an unpaved road from Christian. His neighbor, he said, “is obsessed with something natural.”
In a letter provided to the county, Ross W. Peterson, the veterinarian, concluded that the cat’s punctured lungs, broken ribs and frayed claws indicated that he had been pulled off the tree by a larger creature and “fought back intensely prior to his death.”
Comparing the DNA of the hair in Cody’s mouth and claws with Lucky’s DNA, the lab [Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at the University of California at Davis] found that it was almost certainly a match. The odds against it? One in 67 million.
The county insists that it can do nothing because there was no eye witness. What think ye, not only on that question but regarding this whole case in general?
I would like to say something to Mrs. Christian. I feel what you are doing is cruel-hearted and just plain mean. I have had your same experience and I did not waiste my time and money to get a poor dog killed for simply having the instincts of your average dog. I’d like to ask why your cat was even near your neighbors house? Do you let your cats wonder the streets like many in my nieghoborhood do? Not only is this illegal but you are basically expecting something bad to happen to our cat, and I find it as a form of animal cruelty in its own. Leave the poor dog alone and get over it. You have to move on, and you are accomplishing nothing by doing the same to Cody that happened to your cat. Maybe you just went through this whole process to get yourself the media attention you are now recieving. Well as much as you may feel like such a hero now, I want you to know how terrible what you are doing really is.
If we assume the DNA evidence is correct, then it’s safe to say the dog did it. So…
Is there a local law that would apply in this case *IF* there had been a witness? Then that law should apply here also.
If there is no legal recourse perhaps she has a civil case and can sue for damages. It’s worked before when the legal system doesn’t produce an acceptable result, or even when it does.
~Mark
Dogs will chase cats and, most of the time, kill them. It´s the way of the dog. Even though a Dog it´s not a “natural” wild animal (it´s a descendent of wolves, artificially selected [even inconsciently…] by man.), it´s 99,9 % wolf. A predator, and predators kill. Even when there´s no need to satisfy a basic need ( I suppose the dog in question has been fed…). Not much to say about that.
The issue here is about justice and truth. Will a scientific proof be disregarded in favour of archaic ways to establish a evidence? I think not. This is “Wild Wild West” justice to say the least.
And other issue here is damage:
the dog is not accountable (in fact, I suspect that it doesn´t even recognizes the human sense of justice, property or even morality. ;-). ). But the owner is. And if he chooses to let the animal roam free, knowing that it can hurt, and kill cats, it´s accountable, and should pay the deceased cat’s owner some kind of “repair” (at least a moral repair).
To sum it up: the dog did it, the court is not on the truth’s side and people should be more civilized (or else move to the jungle and live like our ancestors…).
I have been around and owned dogs, and cats most of my life. I have also raised two children. As pets depend upon their owners to see to their needs for food, shelter and love; it is the owner’s responsibilty to insure their pets do not interfere with the rights of others. Conversely parents of children need to be sure that their children do not inflict damage upon a pet.
Dogs that chase and kill cats I would not trust around a small child or around any person who might run. Those dogs will chase something running because they are in the “chase mode”. Yes, the chase mode is a natural instinct in many dogs, but I would not allow my pet to interfere with my neighbor. It would be disrespectful to my neighbor to
allow my pet to interfere with my neighbor’s happiness.
Hurricanes should be sued for damages. So should hail-producing storms. I think that if you let mice live in your house, then your neighbors should sue when they migrate next door.
Or, said a different more real way, if the cat was on the cat owner’s property, then the cat should be protected and the dog owner’s trespassing dog did damage; the verdict is the price of the cat’s replacement and the forensic analysis/legal costs in a civil litigation.
If the cat was some place else, outside of the protection of its owner, then I hope the dog didn’t get indigestion.
It will probably take about 100 years, but the science on the reliability of eye witness accounts, fingerprints, and many other forms of evidence will slowly work its way into our courts and government.
Properly done, DNA evidence is a lot more reliable than any eye witness. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the dog catcher is the last government department to get the news.
Nature or not, this dog is a problem. What kind of dog was lucky? Killing cats is probably not just canine nature. It’s probably a sign of muted aggression problems. I hope that DNA is enough when the dog mauls a small child.
Dogs are animals, not little humans. I’d never keep a hunting dog in the house. I’d never have a wild dog for a pet. And, I never keep a dog that killed anything without instruction..
Another Surfer: since when does anybody own a hurricane and allow it to do damage to others? Please.
Plus, read the article. “Marylin Christian found Cody under the tree in front of their Loudoun County home” Yes, the cat was killed on her own property. It was hanging onto her tree, the dog jumped up, grabbed it, and killed it. This is an insanely clear cut case if the law didn’t suck ass. Pets are considered property under the law. One person used their property, albeit not intentionally, to destroy another person’s property. That makes them criminally liable. Plus, in this case, they’re also in trouble for disobeying leash laws.
But clearly, if they are ignoring DNA evidence, they really need to rewrite the law. Animal DNA evidence has been used in several cases regarding humans committing crimes, so it’s not like the law doesn’t respect animal DNA science.
My 12 year old daughter was attacked by a german shepherd house dog that just got excited and burst through the screen door. I didn’t sue (they put her down). Daughter still has minor scars on her arm and leg. Large pets suck. My cats are afraid of strangers.
Are you all kidding me? So, these people are considering blowing a couple of thousand dollars on a DNA test and several hundred more dollars on legal costs because a flipping cat? This is equivalent to taking a $5 hamster to the Vet. Hey, I like cats too, but let’s get real. If they think the dog is a problem, put up surveillance cameras that cover the yard and hope it doesn’t happen again; but if it does you have a better shot at proving the dog did it without having to ask NASA for a DNA test.
DNA tests are not the end all. You people put as much faith in science as some folks put in God. You can be wrong about both.
The one question that has not been asked is how does the cat owner feel when the cute little fur ball of hers brings in a deador injured bird. There is an interesting studies showing that letting cats out of the house has a significant negative impact on the bird population in a neighborhood.
A second issue is the way all of those cute little tabbies torment dogs. That, course is a different issue altogether (All together).
Dogs are a social animal and will protect their family and territory from others. Dogs will seldom go out of their way to chase an unknown cat unless that cat has trespassed upon the family’s home territory. I suspect that the cat was on the neighbor’s property and the dog chased it up the tree and killed it.
How did she get Lucky’s DNA? Did she have a court order? Did she surreptitiously steal it? Did the dog’s owners willingly give it? Did the vet share it from a sample he might have had on hand? Will the DNA evidence hold up to a court challenge?
This is the kind of crap that our society breeds. The cat’s life is gone and no matter how horrible it is, should the killing of another animal be justified. According to the article the owner of the cat went door to door until she found a blonde dog. Although DNA evidence may say it was the same dog, you have to question whether or not there is a law the dog violated. “I’m trying to get my neighbor held responsible for a dangerous dog that they let roam in the neighborhood.”
Who is she kidding? What was her cat doing? Roaming the neighborhood. As a cat owner, a great number of the cats I have owned have met untimely deaths because I let them outside.
Okay…some of you are barking up the wrong tree.
Sure dogs are predators. (Cats are, too.) But, dog and cat OWNERS are supposed to be responsible for their pets. You don’t let your dog roam off your property, and ideally keep it either in the house, UNDER your watchful eye or in a dog run. You keep your cat in the house, or confined to an enclosed cat run. PERIOD.
You clean up after your dog when you take it for a walk, and you make sure that it’s trained, or if not trainable (as some dogs are not) muzzled and under control.
Dogs don’t have a “natural right” to wander, to roam, to kill things, etc. And, neither do cats!!!
So, the fault is in both parties. Why someone would let the cat out of the house (if valued) to kill wildlife is beyond me. To allow a dog to roam free and pull a cat out of a tree…is also beyond me. They both are at fault.
Keep in mind that I currently have TEN dogs (a newfie/Anatolian X, a doberman/boxer mix, a jack russel terrier, a basset hound, a Sheltie, a Yorkie/poodle/terrier X, a chow Rott X, and am fostering a Chinese Crested with two pups). None of them have EVER roamed, been off-leash, and they don’t EVER get the chance to kill. I also have two cats, a rabbit, a guinea pig, chickens and ducks, and assorted birds.
It’s not that difficult to train dogs. It’s not that difficult to make sure they are secure and confined. It’s not difficult to be a responsible pet owner.
Both of these people (both the dna detective cat owner and the moronic dog owner neighbor) should be barred from owning any pets until they can get their priorities straight.
I can understand this woman’s desire to protect her children, but very few dogs are willing to attack humans, those that are are generally rabid.
I’d say theres more chance of one of her cats going awol and scratching the piss out of her kid than a dog attacking.
besides, dogs have been domesticated longer, and therefore, are more attached to mankind.
meetsy has the most rational and balanced point of view. It probably comes from having so many different types of pets. Animals are no different than children, you give them too much freedom and they will get themselves in trouble and/or be susceptible to the normal dangers of the outside world. Irresponsible parents and pet owners should be barred from having either.
Just found this page on a search… my wife and I live in the same small town that this case took place. We are both animal lovers with dogs, cats and horses on our property.
One thing that all the media hype misses on this story is that the town we (and the people involved in this case) live in is VERY RURAL. Some of the wildlife that roams our town include fox, coyote, mountain lion and bear.
Also, no matter where you live, the great outdoors is never a friendly environment for cats. Most, if not all, cat rescue groups will not adopt out a cat if they know you are going to let it outside. If you let your cat roam outside you take your chances with it’s life, be it neighbors dog, wildlife, or car.
In reading the story, the Dog killed the cat. Also, Dna is more than sufficient evidence and it should be tried in a civil case. Cats that are outside have as much right to be there as the next animal. Hopefully the dog that killed your cat, wont pick on a human next time, of course the outcome will be dramatically different. I am sorry to hear about your loss.
what goes around, comes around.