I usually don’t fly too far afield to find subjects for my columns, but today I wanted to let you know about an event that happened just a bit outside of our collective Northern Santa Barbara County backyard.
On Nov. 20, a 24-year-old Paso Robles resident pleaded no contest—which is pretty much the equivalent of being guilty in the eyes of the court, without the defendant technically saying so much—to felony animal cruelty after being charged with setting a steer on fire.
The cruelty perpetrated against the steer is an ugly, ugly thing, and I’ll get more into that in a minute. But first I want to talk about the “no contest” issue.
If you’re not familiar with the plea, it’s basically a way for a defendant to say, “Look, I’m not saying I did the crime I’m being accused of, but I’m willing to take the punishment.” It’s a way to get a trial over with. It’s a way to stop fighting and start moving on.
That being said, here’s what everyone is now moving on from:
Prosecutors in this case alleged that Garrett Kaplan made his way to Paso Robles High School in October of 2013, dumped kerosene over a 5-month-old steer named Panda, and then set the animal on fire.
The happy-ish ending to this story, which I’m putting here in the middle-ish of my column, is that Panda survived and is now living in Northern California at Animal Place Sanctuary. He was once part of the Future Farmers of America program, but now—thanks to an anonymous donor who put up $10,000 to buy him from his owners—he gets to continue to heal and grow and live in a setting where such healing and growing and living is possible.
The not-as-happy-ish ending to this story is Kaplan, who came out of the trial with what I think is a pretty lenient sentence: a one year sentence, the bulk of which is to be spent at a live-in treatment facility to address severe alcohol addiction. Yes, he’s to spend 90 days in the county jail—minus 13 days of time he already served—but overall, it’s a pretty minimal punishment for felony charges.
I’m not as worked up about that as some other people are, though. I’ve heard some strong reactions in the wake of his sentencing, mostly from people who feel that such a mediocre punishment sends the wrong message about proper treatment of animals.
I agree. I do. And I think that no matter the contributing factor—alcohol, in this case—people who are so (allegedly) barbarously cruel to one living thing would be capable of violence in other aspects of life. It’s a scary thought.
But so is going behind bars with an addiction.
I’ve read many stories about how jails and prisons have become de facto mental institutions—and that’s simply not what they were built to be. There are programs available, sure, but guards and inmates are first and foremost guards and inmates, not doctors and patients.
I would prefer to see someone dealing with a crippling and dangerous addiction housed in a facility designed to work with people who struggle with crippling and dangerous addictions. That doesn’t excuse the crimes they may or may not have committed, but it does mean that there is hope.
I wouldn’t have much hope if Kaplan were going to jail for a full year. In fact, I would worry that whatever demons he may be wrestling with might start slavering louder from inside the walls of his cell.
I’m not happy with any of this animal cruelty case, but I do have some hope.
And considering that Panda is meandering around in the grass of a field somewhere far away from here, hope is a good thing to have.
The Canary believes in the dignity of animals. Send comments to canary@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Dec 4-11, 2014.
