I've been amazed and horrified in the past to read about some of the dismissive attitudes people (clearly NOT animal lovers), often including those in the justice system, have and readily express about supposed "anger" type killings. "They ARE only ANimals, after all..." and the like. One would like to think even those people would "get it" that such killings as you describe here are indicitive of some very deep, disturbing and dangerous pathology. What I wonder is whether ANYONE really has a clue WHAT to do with someone like this. Is there any form of treatment that has an effect on this, or if someone is torturing animals in this very horrible way, is it already too late to change so twisted a mentality? Do you just treat them like "regular" animal abusers, impose whatever inadequate sentences are available for that, and then wait, upon their release, for them to start in on humans?

Judy May 27th, 2009 12:33:49 PM

Do you think they really will catch the sicko?  I do hope so.

Galadriel May 27th, 2009 12:58:55 PM

That person is likely going to escalate their crimes over time and Miami is going to have an actual serial killer on their hands.  This should most certainly NOT be taken lightly - you've got a sociopath on your hands. 

Cindy May 27th, 2009 01:09:01 PM

I'm surprised and disappointed that this story hasn't hit the national media.

Unfortunately if killing animals is prosecuted like killing humans, everyone who puts their terminally-ill pet down opens themselves up to murder charges

Lauren May 27th, 2009 01:20:23 PM

A well-known serial killer grew up in my neighborhood, went to my high school a few years ahead of me. He was "practicing" on animals long before he ever killed people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Chase

Crimes against animals are not JUST crimes against animals. But they should be prosecuted vigorously no matter what.

Gina Spadafori May 27th, 2009 01:58:48 PM

That is disgusting and disturbing. Lock away whoever did it and throw away the key.

Jenny May 27th, 2009 02:10:14 PM

Ugghhh... I'm always amazed at some notions that crimes of cruelty to animals are dismissed so lightly just because it is an animal.

M. Vick engaged in , and apparently enjoyed, far more than "pitting dogs". His sentence was far, far too lenient. What that case did do, is enlighten the public, cause outrage, and permit serious legislation with stiffer penalties nationwide.

Gina, you are so right, crimes against animals are crimes against humanity. You don't have to be a Peta or animal rights person to believe that. Numerous studies, over decades, have linked the obvious sociopathic behavior and elevation level to crimes involving humans. Your Richard Chase link is a prime example.

Twenty-two mutilations & deaths of cats sure has gone beyond a prank gone bad, this is someone(s) that is enjoying this & wanting to satisfy some sick feeling derived from the brutality of it. Hopefully when caught, some needed psychiatric treatment as well as keeping the public safe by whatever needed means,- happens!

Barb A's blog  : short tidbits & thoughts

Barbara A. Albright/NH May 27th, 2009 04:41:07 PM

Wow, you are all so much nicer than me.  While I wouldn't necessarily start trying to trap someone like that by myself, I do know exactly how I'd deal with someone who did anything like that.  Get a boat, take killer on said boat, motor out as many miles as victims (22 so far), push killer overboard.  If killer makes it to land, then some higher power must care, if no one finds killer angain, oh, well, problem solved.

Yep, I probably scare some people, but that's how it goes.  Anyone who delights in torturing and killing and displaying victims doesn't get a pass, no matter what pyschological issues they have.  I'd treat that like a cancer cell that needs to be excised with wide margins - but that's just me.  'Sorry if I offended anyone.

KateH May 27th, 2009 05:07:17 PM

I don't even know where to start but I think someone like that will eventually do to people what he (or she) is doing to the cats.  Though I am no profiler I would think that someone who is displaying the cats is 'interested' in getting a reaction from people and it would be likely that that person could be bragging to others so someone else knows something.  This needs more exposure and then maybe it will get solved.  Maybe if everyone chips in and raises the reward for information someone will come forwards.   It is just a shame that it would take money to do what seems to be the obvious right thing.....TALK. 

J.C. May 27th, 2009 09:26:14 PM

This is serious. An absurd little reward is not what should be done about this. I'd also like to know if the killer is leaving the owners cats in the owners yards. That means he know to whom the cats belong and that already escalates the crime in my mind.

As far as what to do to with the cat killer....KateH's idea works for me.....

LorriM May 27th, 2009 10:02:04 PM

What to do with the cat killer once he's found? Exactly what he's been doing to the cats.

Sarah May 28th, 2009 02:18:22 AM

I'm guessing it's PETA! They are finally stepping up their efforts to eradicate all pet ownership!

Ok I really hope it's not PETA but who really knows for sure.  I really hope someone catches them doing this to their cat.  I know if I found someone in that area grabbing my cat on my property, there would probably be a murder trial!

Chuck May 28th, 2009 09:21:34 AM

I hope they catch this guy (or gal) soon.  And when they do, I hope the public and animal welfare groups step up to make sure that this doesn't end with a slap on the wrist.  As stated by others, the connection between animal abuse and people abuse is clear.

I also think the gruesome nature of the killings should really frighten people.  Sounds like another Jeffrey Dahlmer to me.

2CatMom May 28th, 2009 10:22:29 AM

Little bitty digital security cams -- video or stills -- are cheap and easy to conceal.

On every porch in that neighborhood.

Is he posing the mangled remains on the properties of the animals' owners, or is it random?

If he's correctly identifying the cats' homes, then he's doing some serious reconaissance, and that's the sort of thing that is more conspicuous.

On a related note, why is it that whenever there is any news coverage of a crime against an animal, no matter how horrifying, no matter how ominous for humans, some jackass has to start bloviating about how "animals are more protected than Jesus' little unborn babies"?

The don't rant about it when column inches are "wasted" on the hockey finals.

H. Houlahan May 28th, 2009 11:26:36 AM

My punishment would be to strip the pepetrator naked, nail his privates to the wall, light the room on fire and hand him a dull knife.

Hobson May 28th, 2009 03:14:37 PM

Charming. And that would make you different from him how?

Judy May 28th, 2009 04:04:07 PM

<<Charming. And that would make you different from him how?>>

duh....he's giving him a dull knife.What chances do the cats have?

LorriM May 28th, 2009 04:27:11 PM

I  am normally not this crude but this type of thing hits a nerve with me.

Hobson May 28th, 2009 04:34:51 PM

In all seriousness, i dont think people that do things like this can be fixed.  Unfortunately the penalties for animal cruelty won't allow for putting these folks away for life.  I wonder if there is "prison justice" in these cases, similar to the situation where inmates in prison for child abuse are often "punished" by other inmates who disdain this sort of crime.  It all just makes me sick and mad.

Hobson May 28th, 2009 04:58:26 PM

It makes me sick and angry, too, Hobson. I don't know how I could ever recover if something like this happened to a cat I loved; it's bad enough just knowing it's happened to any animal. But the idea that vile brutality is ok--in fact, laudatory--as long as you aren't the first one to do it, also makes me sick. AND it wouldn't help. I also seriously doubt if someone so disturbed can be fixed. That's what makes it so important to try to figure out what makes someone end up like that. Along with figuring out a way for the law to recognize the true seriousness of this sort of thing, and act accordingly to permanently remove the person from circulation.

Judy May 28th, 2009 05:06:43 PM

Sadly, society won't do much too him/her, if caught at all; at least not until he/she moves up to harming humans and, even then, society won't do enough.

Hobson, I'll help!

Judy, we're different because we didn't do it for the same reasons; we actually have a reason.

PJBoosinger May 28th, 2009 06:32:00 PM

Re:

"In all seriousness, i dont think people that do things like this can be fixed"

I agree.

Stefani May 28th, 2009 06:46:08 PM

At what point does a person's right to treatment and rehabilitation end in order to protect society from further harm? 

Hobson May 28th, 2009 07:56:48 PM

Judy, if you think that Hobson is another Dexter, you would be wrong.  There is a difference in someone who stops a dangerous killer from continuing (and escalating) his compulsion - and doesn't enjoy doing so - as opposed to someone who starts and continues with pyschotic killing, because they do enjoy it.  

Yeah, yeah, compulsion means they can't control themselves, so they aren't responsible for their actions is what we're supposed to agree with - but many of us don't agree.  As Hobson said, "In all seriousness, I don't think people that do things like this can be fixed."  And they can't be.  But if you want to try to help him, please step up to bring him into your household.  I, for one, think a huge stretch of deep ocean is the best place for him.

KateH May 28th, 2009 10:08:49 PM

Personally I volunteer him to be a lab animal. Let's call merck and replace one of the zillions of test animals with this human animal. After all Any treatment is too good for him, it's a proven fact people like that are not rehabitable and he'd probably get fed....and most drugs tested on animals are slated for human use anyhow.

Sorry Judy...take your rose colored glasses off....the world you live in is not what you think it is. And utopian societies fail time and time again anyhow. Even the bible says an eye for an eye...

LorriM May 28th, 2009 10:29:41 PM

Unfortunately we cannot practice pre-emptive incarceration, that is putting these folks away for life before they graduate from animals to humans, based on something they might or probably will do.  The penalties for animal abuse should be raised before there will be any effect. But I  am afraid that someone so twisted to do these things to these kitties would not be deterred even with the death penalty. However, if it were applied to him I guarnatee he would never harm anyone again, man or beast.

By the way Judy, my original comment was facetious. I seriously  think the electric chair would be more appropriate.

Hobson May 28th, 2009 11:32:32 PM

Interesting that the mere fact that I have no desire to personally inflict mutilation on this terrible criminal seems to constitute, for many of you, wearing rose-colored glasses. Perhaps the clear pleasure some of you are taking in imagining the horrible things you'd like to do to him has made it impossible for you to read and comprehend what I actually said, part of which is: "Along with figuring out a way for the law to recognize the true seriousness of this sort of thing, and act accordingly to permanently remove the person from circulation."

Lorri, neither you nor anyone else here knows anything about what I think of the world I live in. But you've certainly revealed something quite chilling about yourselves. Among other things, that you'd rather revel in your bloody fantasies of butchery than, oh, say, write your legislators and tell them it's time to make these kinds of crimes against animals much more heavily punished than they currently are.

And even if you don't care that understanding what makes a person become so twisted in the first place MIGHT help prevent such things in the future, you ought at least to care that it could make it easier or faster to find one who is currently perpetrating such horrors.

Judy May 29th, 2009 12:09:53 AM

Judy, I read what you said but tell me why I should pay to keep this person alive, well fed, given medical care, etc., etc.  I consider that adding insult to injury; hence fantasizing an alternative.  At least we're just fantasizing; he/she isn't stopping at that.

"we cannot practice pre-emptive incarceration"  Actually, we can and we do just not often enough or seriously enough nor publicly enough for it to be a deterrent.  In addition, significantly aberrant behavior that is known to likely lead to escalated behavior is grounds for societal restriction to at least a mental health facility; pre-emptive incarceration at its best.

PJBoosinger May 29th, 2009 12:50:41 AM

<<Among other things, that you'd rather revel in your bloody fantasies of butchery than, oh, say, write your legislators and tell them it's time to make these kinds of crimes against animals much more heavily punished than they currently are.>>

LOL....about as useful as the sending of teabags..great idea...but ultimately a waste of time. But hey, you tell yourself whatever you need to in order to sleep at night.

LorriM May 29th, 2009 01:47:44 AM

Count me in with those who think this guy can't be rehabilitated.

When I was growing up, we had a neighbor one year my senior who used to torture toads in his backyard. He kept them imprisoned in the back of a large metal toy truck and saved their remains in his sandbox. If he caught you releasing them (as I attempted to do every time I was forced to spend the day there)- he'd threaten to kill you. Early intervention might have helped, but unfortunately for this kid, his parents were utterly clueless/in denial and did not seem to realize this kid had serious problems. (They weren't particularly stable themselves, which was probably a big part of the problem.)

At ten, he and I were alone in my brother's bedroom. He demanded I do something demeaning, I refused, and he attempted to smother me to death with a pillow. Fortunately, an adult downstairs heard me kicking the wall and came upstairs to investigate before I lost consciousness. I'm not sure what he would have done if I had. The look that kid's eyes when he snapped was like nothing I'd ever seen before. I'm not sure how to describe it... but it was readily apparent that he wasn't just angry, he wanted me dead. It was not the sort of expression one would ever expect to see on a child.

He also molested a girl on the school bus. At seven.

I was sure he was going to wind up on America's Most Wanted someday. (He recently found me online and has made multiple attempts to contact me. He seems to be doing pretty well for himself these days, but.. no thanks.)

If they won't take crimes against animals seriously for the sake of the animals (I think everybody can probably surmise where I stand on that issue), they ought to do it for the sake of his human victims. Because, if they don't remove this guy from society, it's only a matter of time before he "graduates"... if he hasn't already.

Ramen Connoisseur May 29th, 2009 09:50:06 AM

I can't help but wonder if the reward would be higher and the investigation taken more seriously if it were dogs instead of cats.

Connie May 29th, 2009 12:01:50 PM

Good point Connie, in general I don't think the public cares as much about cats.  This is relfected in studies showing cats get less Veterinary care than dogs.

Hobson May 29th, 2009 01:03:21 PM

LoriM- it's only "about as useful as sending teabags" because of mentalities like yours. Properly organized and run, grassroots efforts can, and often are, quite successful in enacting legislative change. Especially on the state and local levels.

Chip May 29th, 2009 02:46:11 PM

okay Chip...me and my "mentality will be watching for your superior success.

LorriM May 29th, 2009 02:56:00 PM

Connie- I frequently think that. Particularly in areas where they've enacted laws making it possible for people to hunt "feral" (free-roaming) cats.

I cannot envision any jurisdiction in this country declaring open season on free-roaming dogs. The public outcry would be tremendous, and you can bet any legislators in favor of such a law would be serving their last terms.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that.. I just wish people had the same reverence for cats.

Ramen Connoisseur May 29th, 2009 04:37:32 PM

Ramen, In rural Missouri at least, killing a roaming dog is no big deal at all.  There's no outcry or anything.  Occasionally, there is screaming if roaming cats are killed.  Seems that dog owners understand that they let their dogs roam at their risk while cat owners presume their cats can do so with impunity.  The problem I see is that cats proliferate at a pace so very much faster than dogs that they can become a huge problem much more quickly.  I think most have more "reverence" for cats than dogs but cats are more frequently to target of freaks like this one because they are more vulnerable; they're simply smaller and less able/likely to fight back.  It's one of the things I dislike about this type of freak most because it's clear they are targeting weakness and perfecting the skill to spot it.

PJBoosinger May 29th, 2009 10:02:21 PM

I agree with Connie. If someone were nabbing dogs and tying them up with intestines to their mailboxes this would have made the headlines all over the world. Despite the fact that these owners seem to be targeted as well (cats mysteriously appear on their owners' lawns/porches, etc.), the outcry hasn't been so pronounced--even locally. Sad.

Part of it is the issue of free-roaming cats. In Miami it's a big deal for our community. So many abhor the presence of the howlers, prowlers and urinaters that there's less sympathy for those who allow their cats free reign--much less for those who refuse to spay and neuter their cats or feed them for fun without taking responsibility for them. 

Oh, and the reward is now over $5,000. At tomorrow's South Florida Veterinary Medical Association board meeting, I will propose that we offer a nominal amount of $1,000 towards the reward. 

Dr. Patty Khuly May 31st, 2009 07:56:06 AM

"Part of it is the issue of free-roaming cats."  In my condo complex, there's screaming if a dog is off leash and more than a foot away from the owner or less than immediately obedient to commands.  A free roaming dog would be immediately snagged and turned over to animal control.  However, nearly half of the cat owners in the complex (and neighboring complexes) feel their cats should roam free, at least at night.  While their cats are out and about, they sleep peacefully.  Their cats are out annoying the dogs and indoor cats.  I've even screened my patios to keep them from hopping over and spraying my patio doors which they apparently do to establish that the patio is theirs rather than belonging to my cats who are usually on the other side of the door freaking out or, if the door is open, getting sprayed (along with my home) through the screen door.  Then there's the nearly nightly mating howling and/or territorial fighting...  We had one condo that had 15+ free roaming cats at one point.  When she left, she left them behind and we had to trap them all.  These particular cats had become entirely feral and had learned to claw their way up the sides of buildings causing significant damage to one of our buildings, including the roof that they were using as a scratching post.  I'd say "abhor" would be putting it lightly for me.

I'm glad the reward is going up but, seriously, these cat owners need to contain their cats.  And why is the reward so low?  Clearly those whose cats have been killed aren't putting much into the reward "kitty", so to speak.  If each of them put up $500, the reward would be at least $11,000.  The fact that they clearly aren't concerned to at least the tune of $500/cat makes me wonder if they cared about their cats at all.

PJBoosinger May 31st, 2009 10:30:10 AM