UPDATE: Auctioned Horses

Remember the post about James Robbins, who was prosecuted and sentenced to 240 days in jail for his abuse of his four horses? And remember how I wrote to the reporter of the article that started my mini-crusade, asking him who "won" the auction of the three horses who survived, and who gets the "modest price" paid by the winner?

Here’s the update:

• Assistant District Attorney returned my call and referred me to a Lieutenant Melina Duarte, who was keeping up with the horses.
• Before she referred me, though, she said something very interesting: We prosecute as many animal cruelty cases as we can; it’s what makes law enforcement investigate cruelty and report it. I like that. Her job (partially) gives other people incentive to do their jobs. What good is looking into a call on animal cruelty if you know that nothing is every going to happen as a result?
• Lieutenant Duarte was a bit exasperated, in comparison, because of one tiny little detail that was inaccurate in the original article, and for which she’s been fielding phone calls for a week: When the horses were originally impounded, it was NOT for abuse or neglect; it was simply because they were running around loose.
  • Therefore, I was INCORRECT in saying that Durham County impounded his horses for abuse and then gave them back to him to abuse some more, until he ultimately killed one and almost killed the other three.

• As for the auction, Lt. Duarte knows the people who won the auction (and the money went to Durham County). The upshot is the people bid on them so they could sell (or give) them to other people who had the ability to care for them OR humanely euthanize them. Even if they have been humanely euthanized, that’s a better outcome than them falling into the hands of another abuser or a petting zoo or some roadside attraction.

Net message? If you read something that leaves you with a lot of questions, get on the horn and find the answers. They might be better than you expected!