“Nature-Lover” shot dead purebred Oriental Shorthair cat because he believed he was feral
This is in Adelaide, Australia. Kent Wilson saw Spock, a two-year-old, black Oriental Shorthair cat belonging to neighbours, on his 5 acre refuge for native flora and fauna. He shot Spock dead without doing any checks because he observed Spock hunting on his property and he was concerned that he would kill animals. He decided that Spock had to be stopped permanently and that he was a feral cat. Are you as dismayed as me?
Kent Wilson
Spock looked like an Oriental Shorthair. He looked purebred. He did not look like a feral cat and neither did he behave like one. He was micro-chipped. Thankfully, the law in this neck of the woods of Australia states that property owners are limited to only trapping cats on their property and it requires that they check whether a neighbour owns a cat before taking any action. You can’t shoot cats willy nilly like this. The law, in effect, restates what any decent person would do. The law is based on common sense and reasonable behavior.
I am convinced that Kent Wilson took pleasure in killing Spock. I don’t think he did it because he lacks common sense. I think it was because he dislikes cats so much that he had to kill Spock despite risking being convicted of a crime under the law which is exactly what has happened.
Spock
Not only did Mr Wilson fail to make enquiries of his neighbours, he did not call his local council. He did not contact animal welfare or the RSPCA. He just shot Spock in complete disregard of decency, the rights of animals and the rights of his neighbours.
Not only that, after shooting Spock he buried him; an act admitting guilt or what? Spock’s owners became suspicious and confronted Wilson who eventually revealed that he had buried the cat after killing him. Good job in getting the admission out of him. Perhaps Wilson was so arrogant he thought he had not committed a crime or done anything wrong.
Having been convicted under animal welfare laws he appealed to the Supreme Court but his appeal failed and he now faces a maximum AU$50,000 fine or four years in jail. How he thought he could win an appeal when the law is crystal clear, and when it is crystal clear he was in breach of it, is beyond me.
Spock’s owner Myles Shepherson is naturally very pleased that the appeal failed. He says that Spock was domesticated and extremely friendly. Spock was approachable towards people and that it was quite impossible to mistake Spock for a feral cat. I can understand that. Mr Shepherson and his family are devastated by the loss as were the neighbours also.
Wilson was probably outraged by the cat’s presence on his property, lost his ability to make sensible decisions and in a fit of simmering rage shot Spock dead. I hope that he is sentenced to the maximum allowable. Update: see ME King’s comment below. If Wilson has asked his neighbours to keep their cat off his property and they refused to act then I’d agree that Spock’s caretakers would be equally to blame.
This story has similarities the well-known story of Kristen Lindsey.
I’m going to play the devils advocate here. This is not to give this person an excuse but to address a very common issue many pet owners are guilty of. How many times did this man ask the cats owners to keep it off his property ? It’s a common issue here when someone finally loses their noodle and takes care of a long standing problem when neither the animals owners or the local animal control will not or cannot do anything. The ultimate act where the pet pays the price for a neighbor dispute.
Did this despot deserve to have the book thrown at him. Yes. Are the owners of the cat without fault. No.
And to be blunt there are a lot of Animal Control officers that refuse to do their job. I had a fun summer with one that seemed to think it perfectly normal to have to carry a bat to take my trash out. So I would also want to know what the councils response would have been and the solution.
While there are still some places where letting your cat out unsupervised is safe in almost all places they are in danger from one source or another. Owners of dogs and cats that are allowed to roam at will often become a nuisance to those that don’t want pets or find strays causing issues with their own pets.
He had an absolute right to not want the neighbors cat on his property. He had no right to terminate a cat that was posing no threat to him.
Agreed ME. If he asked his neighbours to keep their cat off his nature reserve and they refused to act then the cat’s owners are equally to blame. It is a fair point.
As I understood this story, I don’t believe he talked to his neighbours about it.
I don’t know if he did or didn’t. It is a common issue as animals are allowed to roam in rural settings.
Much like the cat killing vet in Texas it seems some self help was employed. I’m going to make a guess that just like the killer vet this person knew it was not a feral cat and was just annoyed and decided to take matters into his own hands. It’s not the way to dispose of feral cats either BTW.
The thing is we seldom hear both sides in these cases. Nothing excuses his behavior though. I doubt very much even the most feral of cat could have decimated his property while he made a phone call to the council.
A lot of what I said in the post is in direct relation to my situation where I have repeatedly asked delinquent neighbors to keep their pets on their property. Though I would not resort to killing a cat because it was over here.
Where I live it is legal for a property owner to kill a trespassing animal. However, I began keeping my cats indoors years before I moved here because I value them enough to ensure their safety.
We may and have disposed of dogs that were repeat livestock killers or chasers or showed real aggression to us while we were on our own property. State law allows that. There is on dog owner we have not pleaded with to keep their pet contained first.
We cannot however dispose of a dog simply because it’s running loose.
I keep my cats indoors because of dogs, cars and depraved humans.
Perhaps those who regularly, and publicly, vilify outdoor cats are influencing some members of society to commit acts of cruelty toward cats (Australian government in this case; conservationists, birders, etc.).
My indoor cats (formerly feral or stray) are indoor-only. My community cats live outdoors – their home (just as much their home as it is a human’s). It is still quite common to let house cats out. Cats living indoors is a fairly new concept.
I agree that the constant vilification of outdoor cats by the authorities does indeed create a culture of distaste for them which encourages this sort of criminal behavior.
My beloved cats have always been kept indoors. There are too many idiots that have no regard for the life of a living creature. So very glad he was punished.
Yes, they are idiots and terribly cruel people.
I’m glad that the law in Adelaide proscribes Mr Wilson’s behavior and that there will be consequences , but Spock, like Tiger, is still dead. Both would be alive had they been indoor-only cats. I understand that cats enjoy being outdoors and it may be a more “natural” way for them to live, but it also is inordinately dangerous considering predators, autos and a$$hats like Wilson. Those who insist that cats are not happy indoors are being disingenuous if not downright irresponsible; is the cat happier if it is dead? Is it responsible to allow a cat to become prey to the many threats it might encounter outside? I shall continue to keep my cats, most of which never try to go outside and don’t seem to feel deprived, safe indoors with me, and I will shake my head every time I read a story about an outdoor cat killed as were Tiger and Spock.
Susan. I take your point and fully understand it. However, the cause of Spock’s death is not that he was outside but the criminal behavior of this cat hater.
I disagree. Had Spot been indoors, the cat hater would have had no access and the cat would still be alive. The cat cannot defend itself from its hater. That is up to the person who cares for the cat and the person did not do so. If I had an outdoor cat that was killed by a vehicle or a predator or a hater, it would be my fault for not protecting my cat.
*Spock. Damned autocorrect
Once again I take your point. But it is not illegal for a cat to be outside whereas it is illegal to shot a cat dead. Therefore by definition the fault lies with the killer.
It depends on where you live I guess. I wish truly that all cat owners would provide a secure outside enclosure for their cats, just because it’s not illegal it doesn’t protect them. There is no punishment that can undo what has been done.
Yes, agreed, it does depend on where you live and laws in that area. But I do agree that cat owners a responsibility to ensure their cats are safe outside. But that responsibility does not extend to stopping neighbours shooting your cat.
You are right Michael that the shooter is the offender here. I certainly don’t absolve him of responsibility for Spock’s actual death. But I do hold Spock’s people accountable for allowing him to be in a position to be killed.
Well said and well put. I agree.