Robinson is shown in the film luring the cat over to be petted before punting it into some bushes outside a Brooklyn housing complex. He then laughs and does a little dance in celebration. Robinson, who has eight prior arrests, was charged with aggravated animal cruelty.
His team filed the motion to dismiss on the basis of the missing cat and proof of injury. Defense lawyer Risa Procton argues “The accusatory instrument fails to allege any injury or pain experienced by the cat.”
Procton is clearly doing her duty to represent her client zealously in a very difficult case so this is not a criticism of her or her team. However, the film should allow for a presumption of harm under any objective standard. The kitten, King, was captured three days after the attack, treated at an ASPCA hospital and then adopted.
For his party, Robinson insists “It was just a spur of the moment, it just happened . . . I shouldn’t have done it.” We can all agree with part of that statement. The problem is that people like Robinson who enjoy harming animals lacks an essential humanity that, in my opinion, makes them a danger to animals and humans alike. Robinson’s laughing and dancing was a disturbing as his disgraceful attack.
It is not clear what the prior arrests are for on Robinson’s rap sheet though some reports mention busts for robbery and turnstile-jumping.
The video (shown on this site) clearly shows an accomplice who is laughing loudly at the cruelty to the cat. It is not clear why that person has not been also charged. In my view, both deserve criminal charges and Robinson most certainly deserves some jail time.
Source: New York Times