Yesterday in Miami a man was acquitted of animal cruelty charges stemming from an intoxicated incident involving a shotgun and his cat, Mama Kitty.

Based on my 2 minute read over toast and tea this morning, I’ve concluded there’s a lot wrong with either the verdict or the reporting. Knowing juries and reporters in this town, the problem likely lies with both.

This sad figure of a man, a tearful gentleman who apparently does not own a suit since he appeared in court without one, shot his cat’s head off in a misguided attempt at a mercy killing.

Drunk and distraught, he succeeded in beheading his cat in front of horrified witnesses—not too bright a move, even in the confines of a Miami-Dade County trailer park where most everyone owns a shotgun and where animal shooting is a more popular pastime than going to the opera, for example.

After his neighbors denounce him to the police this guy gets brought in to face animal cruelty charges. He admits he killed Mama Kitty between shots of alcohol. He claims she was sick and had undergone a personality change in recent days and that he was simply trying to put her out of her misery the fastest way he knew how: with a point-blank shotgun blast to the head.

The guy goes further, says he’d always refused to take his cat to the vet since his last experience at the vet`s office. Says euthanizing his pet dog was horribly cruel due to the dog`s extreme stress at the hospital. And he`s got a point: Mama Kitty probably didn`t bat an eye when her owner leveled a shotgun at her head.

Apparently, this whole sad, drunken, trailer park tale was enough to induce tears of compassion within the jury box. Their verdict has effectively rendered it legal to discharge a firearm while admittedly drunk as long as it’s aimed at your own pet.

Next time I get the hankering to save some time and make some money, I’ll hang up a shingle over my mailbox that says, Cheap Beheadings: Two Shots for the Price of One.