Cat advocates are angered after a North Carolina woman convicted of animal cruelty was given a sentence of three years supervised probation.
At her court appearance January 11, Barbara Hart received probation along with the judge ordering she couldn’t have contact with animals of any kind, even if she lives with someone who has animals.
On May 11, 2017, five dogs were seized and from the Salisbury property where Hart was living. Four dead cats were also removed from the home. The veterinarian who examined the decomposed cats reported the cats had no fatty tissue or muscles and had literally starved to death.
Anyone who attended court is encouraged to add information in the comment section.
Previous articles can be found by clicking on the links below.
- Five dogs seized and four dead cats removed from home of NC animal advocate
- Salisbury, NC cat advocate charged with 9 counts of animal cruelty
- Update on 2 North Carolina court cases shows cats just can’t find justice
- Discussion: The reality of how animal cruelty cases are handled
Did not get nasty, I did not do personal attacks on you, did not call you names or curse you, in fact you are insulting me by using the term “cat fight”. That term is used by sexist men to describe women who fight over issues the men believe are trivial. And it is not cute or funny if you are making a joke in this situation where animals were murdered. I simply misunderstood your point and yes I said it for shock value because I want people to remember while they are making good and provoking points about the inefficiency and lip service of these laws in that state that these living, breathing, feeling creatures that can feel terror and pain paid the price. Until the lawmakers get that and actually care it is a waste of time except knowing that many of us see that and agree with that. The law that needs to be changed which would change everything is recognizing that animals are sentient creatures and not property.
See my reply above. I should have said that by itself i thought it would be unenforceable & ineffective & would show that the judge hadn’t really thought the case through. It needed to be in the context of mental health treatment.