Liesje
Posted : 10/25/2011 5:06:43 PM
Even if he gets charged with something, I still don't see what that resolves or changes. It just puts a label on him when everyone already knows he made a fatal mistake. It doesn't me he serves any time. I had a teacher that was charged with some sort of negligent homicide because he was driving when he and his wife got in an accident, hit black ice, and she died. His "punishment" was having his license revoked for a certain period of time, but he had to have his legs basically reconstructed and couldn't drive (or do much of anything) anyway.
Prosecution in a case like this would be pointless. It was an accident so there's no bearing for pursuing a charge and sentence that is punitive. So to prosecute him just because is a waste of time and money. It just reeks of anger and revenge. The prison system in this country is based on rehabilitation, so if this was a mistake and this person is already sorry and grieving, what purpose does it serve to waste time and money trying to put the handler in prison so he can be rehab'd for a "crime" that was a total mistake and I'm sure he's already sorry for?
As far as negligence I think either the owner is responsible or is not. I do not see how it is possible to determine the culpability of the dog (comparing Jackie's example where Twister "chose" to jump). If an owner is not responsible for a dog's choice then where does that end? Can my dog leave my house and my yard and chase someone else's dog and I am no longer responsible because my dog is now culpable for that choice? If we say that Twister has the foresight to understand the risks and choose to jump out of a moving vehicle, we could also say that Chevy had the foresight to understand the risks of being a K9 and could have chosen not to do it. Dogs wash out every day.