Virginia Dog Euthanized Pursuant To The Will Of Its Deceased Owner

Emma, a Shih Tzu mix, was a much loved pet . . . and that apparently proved her demise. Her owner passed about on March 8th in Virginia and Emma was brought to the Chesterfield Animal Shelter. The shelter was then surprised on March 22 when the executor of the estate informed it that the dog was to be handed over because the owner wanted her pet to be euthanized upon her death. The shelter pleaded that it could find many new families for Emma but the dog was taken away to be killed per the request of its owner.

It is a curious contradiction in the law. You cannot beat a dog but you can kill it as a final demand upon your death.

The dog was reportedly to be cremated. Many states prevent joint burials with animals. Virginia § 54.1-2312.01 states:

A. A cemetery company may have a section in the cemetery devoted to the interment of human remains and the pets of such deceased humans, provided:

1. The section of the cemetery property dedicated for this purpose is segregated entirely from the remainder of the cemetery devoted to the interment of human remains;

2. No pet is interred in the same grave, crypt, or niche as the remains of a human; and

3. The section of the cemetery is clearly marked and advertised as such by the cemetery company.

Likewise, 18 VAC 47-20-190 states:

In addition to the acts set forth in §§ 54.1-231454.1-2315, and 54.1-2316 of the Code of Virginia, the board may discipline a licensee or registrant for the following acts:

. . .

14. Failing to segregate entirely the section of the cemetery dedicated to the interment of pets or the interment of human remains and the pets of such deceased humans by means such as hedge, wall, tree line, fence, roadway, or other similar physical barrier or boundary.

15. Permitting the interment of a pet in the same grave, crypt, or niche as the remains of a human.

16. If a cemetery company has a section devoted to the interment of pets or the interment of human remains and the pets of such deceased humans, any advertisements failing to clearly state the cemetery company has such section or sections in its cemetery.

17. Failing to clearly mark the section or sections devoted to the interment of pets or the interment of human remains and the pets of such deceased humans with signage that is reasonably apparent to the general public

There may be exceptions for private cemeteries.

Frankly, I fail to understand why being buried with the ashes of a pet should be barred. However, I have considerable problem with killing a pet to allow for a joint burial.

I assume that many vets would refuse such a demand but it is not apparently against the law per se in Virginia. What do you think? Should this be an illegal practice to kill a healthy pet if there are families willing to give it a home?

57 thoughts on “Virginia Dog Euthanized Pursuant To The Will Of Its Deceased Owner”

  1. Lars Larson Show: Criminal Alien of the Week Report

    May 9, 2019


    It has been an interesting first full week in the month of May when it comes to criminal aliens (illegal aliens) here in the Pacific Northwest states of Oregon, Washington and Idaho.

    This week we take a look at for your Pacific Northwest radio listeners an illegal alien who was convicted of sexual assault and animal abuse charges of a dog in Multnomah County, Oregon — a veterinarian had to euthanize the animal because of its’ internal injuries.

    But first some background information, over the last couple of months I have requested from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Public Affairs immigration enforcement stories from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) law enforcement agency.

    Tuesday, May 7, 2019 ICE Public Affairs Officer Tanya J. Roman sent via e-mail the following statement on Fidel Lopez (SID: 10618799; DOB: 03/23/1967), age 52, a Mexican national apprehended by ICE agents in Portland, Oregon — clearly an ICE immigration enforcement story:

    “On Feb. 15, Fidel Lopez, an illegally present Mexican citizen, was encountered by ICE officials at the Multnomah County Jail. ICE lodged an immigration detainer on Lopez the same day for violating immigration laws.”

    “On April 8, Lopez was convicted of sexual assault of an animal and aggravated animal abuse and sentenced to 60 days in jail with credit for time served. The Multnomah County Jail did not honor the immigration detainer and released him without notice to ICE.”

    “ICE apprehended Fidel Lopez Tuesday at his residence and served him a notice to appear. He is expected to be transported to the Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, pending immigration proceedings.”

    “A detainer requests that local law enforcement agencies notify ICE as early as practicable – ideally at least 48 hours – before a removable alien is released from criminal custody and then briefly maintain custody of the alien for up to 48 hours to allow ICE to assume custody for removal purposes.”

    “ICE maintains that cooperation by local law enforcement is an indispensable component of promoting public safety. It’s unfortunate that current local and state laws and policies tie the hands of local law enforcement agencies that want and need to work with ICE to promote public safety by holding criminals accountable and providing justice and closure for their victims. Sanctuary policies not only provide a refuge for illegal aliens, but they also shield criminal aliens who prey on people in their own and other communities.” – Tanya J. Roman, ICE Public Affairs.

    Analysis of the preceding information:

    Clearly U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are doing the job that was tasked to them in identifying and apprehending foreign national criminals illegally present in United States like Mexican national animal sexual assaulter and abuser Fidel Lopez.

    Unfortunately U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement continues to face difficulties and challenges in the enforcement of U.S. immigration law when Oregon law, Multnomah County and City of Portland resolutions, prohibit state, county and local law enforcement from fully cooperating with ICE in the enforcement of federal immigration law.

    Lars, the first full week of May and another criminal alien report for Lars Larson Show KXL FM 101.1 Pacific Northwest radio listeners.


    David Olen Cross


  2. Well loved and trained to be well behaved Dogs are often much better companions than most people.
    To kill a creature of such impeccable character for any reason other than to relieve it’s suffering is an incredibly selfish atrocity – I believe justify’s returning the homicide and being awarded a community service award for doing that.
    Let’s start with the Lawyer who wrote that into the owners Will………..
    With all due disgust, 1 who will not betray or defect on my loved ones*!*
    Darrel C. Carlson

  3. the slaughter of the animals of aristocrats was a wide practice among our European pagan ancestors.

    I am not overly exercised by this story. I love dogs but the dog would have had no life without its owner. They are property under the law and may be destroyed. This is not a big issue.

    Animals abuse should be criminal but if the euthanasia was properly done then I see no cruelty. Yes I will grant there is irony in this.

    Death is all around us. We can hide it but it will find us in the end.

  4. I hate this story so much.

    It’s not love if you’d rather kill a healthy pet than have it live on without you. She probably wanted it dead so that she could be buried with it, and they wouldn’t exhume her afterward when the dog died of natural causes. So…kill the pet to get what you want. I wonder if she troubled to find out that most cemeteries are barred from buying animals with humans?

    Love means you want the other person or creature to be happy and healthy, even if it’s not with you.

  5. I would love to know how many people that supported Northam’s position on killing a child don’t support the euthanization of a dog.

    1. I usually don’t put my 2 cents in on the abortion issue, because it’s usually just people fighting. But Northam’s comments made me cry. Those poor babies. My God. It’s infanticide.

      The Left is doubly wrong in thinking they are above Neo Nazis. For one, Nazis were the German Socialist Party, Leftists. Regardless of whether they wanted to preserve traditional Germany, it employed Leftist tactics, starting with subverting individual rights for the “common good.” There’s always some cookie to dangle to get people to give up their rights.

      For another, Progressives and Nazis traded Eugenics information across the pond. Before the US entered the war, Margaret Sanger was openly admiring of the Nazi’s work on eugenics. After all, she crusaded for abortion for “genetic hygiene.” She wanted to reduce the birth rate of “undesirables” like blacks and the handicapped. It was never about women’s rights to her, but rather population control of who she deemed were unfit.

      The Left still espouses eugenics. A handicapped child has no right to live, but must be wiped out for genetic hygiene. Promiscuous people must have their breeding checked through eugenics. It’s still the same arguments they used before. They have been very clever in dissecting the term “eugenics” from what is essentially a eugenics argument.

      1. “Margaret Sanger was openly admiring of the Nazi’s work on eugenics.”

        Karen, if I remember correctly, when passing the eugenics laws against Jews in Nazi Germany they researched American laws promoted by Democrats with regard to who is black. It was said that the some of the Germans in the discussion felt the one drop approach of the Democrats was too harsh.

        1. Yes, that is true. Also, the Nazis based some of their segregation of Jews upon the Democrat Jim Crow laws.

          1. Between the killing of pets and the Nazis on this thread and the killing of live babies or near term one’s on another thread I’m a bit sick to my stomach. The left never had much concern for human lives so in that manner they are barbarians.

            Your sympathies regarding faithful domestic animals is part of humanity that some here forget except when virtue signaling.

  6. There is good news. Pets that became millionaires after the owner dies.

    Pet: Bubbles (chimpanzee) Owner: Michael Jackson Bequest: $2 million

    Pets: (dogs) Owner: Majel Barrett-Roddenberry Bequest: $4 million

    Pets: (dogs) Owner: Gail Posner Bequest: $11 million

    Pet: Trouble (Maltese) Owner: Leona Helmsley Bequest: $12 million

    1. I’m quite sure Karl Lagerfeld left his Choupette a fortune instead of a needle.

    2. We have ashes of two of our precious pets. They will be in an urn with Mommy and Daddy. Grumpy Cat died in his Mommy’s arms. Fortunately we have a family members who have been around her all her life who will take care of our Toy Poodle. Transition shouldn’t be a problem. A friend’s mother had asked for euthanasia of her dog. The dog was very old showing signs of dementia.

  7. IMO, if a cemetery allows pets to be buried with owners, this info should be made clear to others owning or buying plots. Special treatment our dead and various rituals around that event – however that is done – is one of the more ancient of human behaviors and should be respected. Other than that, whatever people want.

    As to treatment of animals left after the owner’s death, a strictly local matter which should not warrant state or federal law. Personally, I think it should be dealt with as a practical matter, not a legal one, meaning whatever is cheapest and most efficient except as the local community wants to invest in it. Beyond being protected from purposeful cruelty I don;t belief pets or animals should be afforded “rights”.

  8. This issue of humane euthanasia of a beloved pet upon the owner’s death is a real topic in the horse world. The problem is that over 100,000 American horses are sent to slaughter in foreign countries every year. These are not all old, crippled, and crazy horses but young, healthy horses, too. All horses are at risk. If a horse is sent to a County Animal Control facility, for example, they are often sent to auction and sold to the highest bidder. Kill Buyers or their agents often buy these horses and sell them for their ‘meat price’ to horse slaughter houses in Mexico or Canada. It is a cruel and horrific death for a horse, a prey animal who fights and struggles during the process. If the horse is listed for sale or free by the family, for example, often times they will be hounded by kill buyers or horse traders, also known as ‘flippers’ who re-sell the horse quickly for cash, often at auctions or to kill buyers, and don’t care where the horse ends up or with whom. Since a horse ‘slaughter pipeline’ exists, this is why many horse owners are opting to have their beloved horses humanely euthanized by their Veterinarian upon their death or permanent disability. They do it so that they know their horse died a humane death and did not die in a horse slaughter house or forced to live a life of neglect or abuse with an uncaring future owner since horses can live well into their 30’s. As long as the option of horse slaughter exists, there will always be an ‘end salvage market’ where uncaring and unscrupulous people can eek out the last few dollars from the animals. Fortunately, this option does not exists for dogs and cats, although I guess we can’t rule out those that are sold to Universities and companies for laboratory experiments and those sold to illicit dog fighting, etc. Caring horse owners do opt for humane euthanasia and specify it in their Wills and many Veterinarians will abide the request, especially if the horse is aged, not able to be ridden, has diminished quality of life, or chronic health problems. It is the kindest act an owner can do for their horses in my personal opinion and it should not be discouraged. As long as horse slaughter is an option, horses are at risk of a cruel and brutal death. Passing the SAFE Act will end the transport of American horses to slaughter in foreign countries and prevent the opening of horse slaughter plants in the USA. If anyone reading this has an interest in protecting our horses, both domestic and wild, then please contact your Senators and Representatives and ask them to support the SAFE Act (the Safeguard American Foods Export Act)..

    1. R.A. Why isn’t the solution to what you describe laws on humane slaughter practices, including – if it can pass – against transport to countries not in compliance? I’m all for minimizing and if possible eliminating unnecessary cruelty, but consuming animals is an ancient practice without which we very likely would not have flourished, let alone survived. Can we cut back, and might that be good in many ways, yeah, probably, but as a principle strict vegatarianism denies our past and the reality of the world.

      1. Horse slaughter plants were shut down in the USA because they were not “humane”. Horses are prey animals and thus have a strong “flight or fight” instinct. It is not possible to make slaughter humane for horses in an industrial farming setting. The USDA has a hard enough time regulating humane practices in the beef, swine, and poultry industry, so even if horse slaughter plants did re-open here, it can’t be monitored adequately and horses will suffer greatly. Another point, which is vitally important, is that American horses are not raised to be food animals. The FDA classifies them as “companion animals” and the USDA classifies them as “livestock”. Horses are given drugs and medications that make the meat and organs unfit for human consumption. Some of these medications can cause cancer and risk of other illness. Some drugs we routinely give to our horses have been banned for human use and residuals of these drugs remain in the horse’s muscles and organs. Competition and Sport horses are particularly high risk due to the many performance enhancing drug cocktails they are routinely given (some illicitly) and the majority of horses that go to slaughter are sport/competitive horses such as racing Thoroughbreds and Quarter Horses. We’re not talking about the “old days” when the buggy or work horse was old and was shot by the farmer or local butcher in a calm and quiet environment, we are talking about mass slaughter and all the problems that go along with it, from long transportation times in livestock trailers, to congregate feed lots, to the ultimate processing and animal carcass waste disposal problems. Selling to ‘meat buyers’ is just a way for horse breeders and the racing industry and irresponsible owners to eek out the last pennies from horses that don’t have ‘value’ to them any longer and reep tax benefits. An entire ‘cottage industry’ has sprung up around what we call the ‘slaughter pipeline’ and the horses suffer greatly. I am not opposed to people eating meat (although I no longer do) but it needs to be safe for consumption and horse meat is not. So, there are 2 reasons to advocate for the SAFE Act, humane treatment of horses and safeguarding the public from unhealthy, toxic horse meat.

      2. Anon, we do not eat dogs or cats here, either.

        There is a difference between “gross” or “wrong” and poison. Eating cats or dogs in the US is culturally unacceptable, but it is not poison. In countries where people starve, there would be a strong impetus not to waste the “meat” of a beloved pet, and eat them when they grow old or die. Here in the US, we are not yet in dystopia. We don’t eat our pets, be they dogs, cats, or horses, nor do we cannibalize our own dead. That, too, was an ancient practice still in use among the Fore indians (see Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease or Kuru).

        When we ride, we train our horse to trust us. They could easily kill us, and are orders of magnitude stronger. We teach them not to bite or kick us or run over us, and in turn, we trust them to carry us safely over fences, down an arena, or along a trail. It is a partnership built upon mutual trust. To turn around and slaughter that animal that trusted you is a betrayal. If someone was starving, I could forgive it, but to do so to make a buck off the body of your friend is abhorrent to me. It’s against our culture. The least you can do is give him a humane death.

        There were many reasons why horse slaughter was prominent. Standard of living was quite poor back then. Few had money to retire an animal, and animal welfare wasn’t a concern. They made glue out of hooves, pet food and human food out of the meat, meat pies out of the stringy old horse meat, stuffed couch cushions with horse hair, and made quite a few products out of horses. The horses were often worked right into the ground, changing hands over and over again. When you needed a buggy horse, you sold your horse as he became old and got a “newer model”. That old horse would start the decline of his life, doing worse and worse work until eventually he was obediently led to the bloody knackers yard or driven there, dead on a cart. Dogs, cats, and rats ended up in pies, too. People starved in the hedgerows.

        We’ve come a long way. Most people do not look at horses in the US as livestock to be eaten. However, there are some cultures that still eat horse meat. Occasionally, there will be a scandal when someone finds their horse brutally slaughtered in the corral by a poacher.

        If we allow horse slaughter then we must also allow dog and cat consumption. Is that the way we want to go?

        I also agree with RA that the drugs given to working horses are not suitable for consumption.

    2. well, i never had it but horse meat is good from what i hear. i like horses but they look like skinny fast cattle to me. I would eat some decent horse-meat if i had the chance.

      1. The French still raise horses for meat, and they are fed and slaughtered for that purpose. Tragic. At least they are free of toxic medications.

        In any case, if you ate an old slaughterhouse stressed out horse, you would not find it fine. The British navy fed their sailors salted horse meat, and it was infamously tough like leather.

        1. on tv the fat bald chef whatsis name was in hungary and said he had some tasty horse meat. i haven’t been to hungary and not visiting any time soon. i guess i will just have to wonder.

      2. And, Kurtz, if you ever find the opportunity to eat horse meat, my hand is going to come out of your dinner plate and slap you. In the nicest possible way, of course.

        I don’t have to be reasonable or respect other countries’ laws when horses are on the line. Screw world peace. Save the horses.

        1. Karen, I love dogs but can’t get angry when I note that the Chinese eat dogs. However, I noted their pet dogs were extremely well cared for. The dogs they actually ate were of a type that one could recognize. When we brought our dog into the Chinese restaurant the Chinese owner used to tell me that it wasn’t smart to bring a dog into a Chinese restaurant because of their culinary habits. He would then laugh and seat us.

          1. alan, chinese people steal pet dogs and sell them. it’s a despicable form of crime. yes dogs are more popular than ever as pets but the dog meat restaurants live on and flourish. i have friend who lost two dogs to theft.

            i would sooner eat horsemeat than dog meat. I guess i might try it but I would even eat barbecued rat if I was hungry. how much different can it taste than squirrel? squirrels are like tasty. but they eat delicious acorns instead of garbage. what the animal eats probably makes a big difference in taste just like cows

            cows are adorable and pleasant animals too, but we eat them. pigs are very smart! yet we are carnivores. we have to eat. be nice to the animals, I fully support laws against animal cruelty, but not against eating them. in fact i feel hungry right now gotta go eat.

            1. There is a dog meat festival in China, too.

              Rats were a common dish for Midshipmen (usually children) in the British Navy in the 1800s.

        2. ha ha, it’s good to have something to love and horses are very lovable

    3. I will add that there was a commotion among draft horse breeders. Japanese buyers went to reputable auctions, where people buy their teams, and bought them out to ship for meat. Breeders were helpless to stop them. Many people don’t want the auctions to go on anymore. It’s also created some collateral damage where people would suddenly be scared to sell to an Asian buyer.

      Most of the Percherons got snapped up to be slaughtered just last year at a prominent auction.

      It doesn’t matter that the US doesn’t have a working equine slaughter facility anymore. They just get shipped to Canada and Mexico. In Japan’s case, they prefer the horses be shipped live and killed in their own country. They shoved them into tight boxes. Because they are gentle giants who will put up with an amazing amount of abuse, they didn’t panic and destroy the boxes like a flightier horse would have.

      Another side effect of the horse slaughter industry is that horses not raised for human consumption end up in the food chain of people and pets. Unscrupulous buyers adulterate beef with cheaper horse meat, and then put it into products for humans or pets. There have been scandals where pets died because their food was contaminated with euthanasia drugs…which got there from horses that were put down, and then the carcasses found their way into pet food. Horses bought by slaughter buyers often have drugs in their system not intended for human consumptions, such as bute, DMSO, or antibiotics.

    4. Thousands of horse live lives of starvation and overcrowding because we refuse to allow native Americans to build slaughterhouses for them. Shipping to Mexico is torturous. Horses are big animals, and many people want to eat them, it’s terrible that we can’t find a humane way to keep their populations at manageable levels and provide meat at the same time, humanely.

  9. Would it be ok to command your executor in your will to burn down your house? I doubt it. Did this decedent have no heirs? In my view, you can give away what you owned, but I don’t think you can command its destruction.

    1. Actually, as long as you comply with applicable laws, I don’t know of any law prohibiting the destruction of a chattel according to a will. That includes immovables like houses.

  10. This happened in North Carolina around 2002. I discussed the matter with the funeral director who euthanized the dog and saw nothing wrong with carrying out the deceased’s wishes. It is the height of ego to believe that one’s dog could not bear to live happily with another person after one’s death. The practice is at least unethical, if not illegal.

  11. There are a lot of outrageous legal summaries in our country including Virginia. Gov Ralph Northam has on his medical school yearbook page pictures of him in various poses: in cowboy country attire, in professional attire, in a macho pose standing by a Corvette and in blackface with a friend decked in KKK attire. The curious question is: who is the owner of the Corvette?

    JT wonders why Trump shows contempt towards the US House of Representatives. Why does JT think Americas are imbeciles, as if we must bow before our government leaders when they are such dirty rotten scoundrels.

    Sodium Pentobarbital is the drug vets use to euthanize animals.
    Our government leaders are worthless dogs.
    Corvettes lives matter too

    EVMS probe could not determine whether Northam was in racist photo, but school knew about it for years

    Lawyers hired to investigate racist content in Eastern Virginia Medical School yearbooks could not definitively say whether Gov. Ralph Northam appeared in the infamous blackface and KKK picture in the 1984 edition.

    But a report released Wednesday says two EVMS presidents, including current president Richard Homan, were told about the racist photo while Northam was running for political offices and decided not to make it public.

    “We understand President Homan’s reasoning was EVMS should not become involved, or be seen to become involved, in an election as it is a public body and a public institution, and that EVMS did not not want there to be any suggestion that it had tried to influence Governor Northam in any respect by calling the photograph to his attention,” the document says.

    The Norfolk medical school released the findings from Richmond law firm McGuire Woods in the form of a 36-page report.

    In one case, the school’s alumni affairs director noticed the photo while preparing for a reunion event and was “shocked” by it, the report says. EVMS personnel decided to remove the 1984 yearbook from a table at the event “so as not to upset anyone who might see the photograph.” A McGuire Woods lawyer said they didn’t know when that reunion event occurred.

    At a press conference at EVMS Wednesday, Homan stood by his decision not to tell Northam or the public about the photo earlier.

    “I would make the same decision now,” he said. “We’re apolitical, and I did not feel that it was a necessary disclosure to make.”

    The picture on Northam’s page shows a person dressed as a racist caricature, wearing a jacket, bow tie, plaid pants, hat and dark makeup. Beside that person is another individual in a white cloak and pointed hood, covering everything but the eyes. Each is holding what appears to be a can of beer.

    After the photo was made public Feb. 1, Northam first apologized for appearing in it, then reversed himself a day later and said it wasn’t him.

    McGuire Woods attempted to contact more than 80 former and current EVMS students going back to 1983 and interviewed 30, along with 15 current and former faculty, administration and staff.

    In trying to determine who was in the photo, investigators spoke to five members of the 1984 yearbook staff.

    “With respect to the Photograph on Governor Northam’s personal page, we could not conclusively determine the identity of either individual depicted in the Photograph,” the report says.

    In a statement released Wednesday, Northam reiterated he wasn’t in the photo and said he is focusing on ways to use his position as governor to move forward on equity issues through the rest of his term.

    “I know and understand the events of early February and my response to them have caused hurt for many Virginians and for that, I am sorry,” he said. “I felt it was important to take accountability for the photo’s presence on my page, but rather than providing clarity, I instead deepened pain and confusion.”

    He said he’d “do it differently” if he could do it over again

    The McGuire Woods report is perhaps the only formal investigation into the photo scandal that nearly led to Northam’s political demise four months ago. The Democratic governor said during a news conference Feb. 2 that he, too, would be researching the photo, though it’s not clear whether he followed through with that promise.

    Since then, Northam has not released any new information on the origins of the picture to the public. He previously suggested that it could have been added to his yearbook page in a layout mix-up.

    But McGuire Woods’ review of EVMS yearbooks confirmed only one such mistake, in the 1986 yearbook, in which the captions under two faculty photos apparently had been switched.

    A photo in the 1984 EVMS yearbook pictures a man who appears to be in blackface and dressed as a woman with the caption: “who ever thought Diana Ross would make it to Medical School!”
    The probe found EVMS yearbooks, which were published from 1976 to 2013, “repeatedly contained other content that could be offensive to women, minorities, certain ethnic groups, and others. These issues or themes recurred over much of the time period in which the yearbooks were published, although with less frequency in the later years of the yearbooks’ publication.”

    The yearbooks were “almost entirely student-run” with little to no staff oversight, the report says.

    Northam was interviewed twice by the law firm and said he is “positive” he’s not in the racist photo but didn’t know who is.

    “He just wants to exonerate himself, but doesn’t want to throw anyone under the bus,” the report says.

    Northam told the investigators he was “very slender” in college and medical school and that the legs on the person in blackface are “much thicker than his.” He said the person in the KKK robes was “much shorter” than him and that he would’ve remembered dressing up in the robes or standing next to someone who did.

    Northam said he did opposition research for his six political campaigns – for state Senate, lieutenant governor and governor – and it was “fascinating to him” that the photo never surfaced.

    He said he didn’t remember whether he submitted any of the other photos on his page, even though he said he selected them, and that he wasn’t big on being in photos.

    He said he did remember submitting the quote on the page (“There are more old drunks than old doctors in this world so I think I’ll have another beer”), but couldn’t remember ever seeing a proof or approving the page layout.

    He didn’t have a copy of the yearbook and didn’t remember ordering or paying for one.

    Northam came under scrutiny when a conservative news outlet, Big League Politics, posted the racist image on Feb. 1. The site’s release of the picture occurred shortly after the governor made comments in support of a bill that would loosen restrictions on late-term abortions. Hours later The Pilot and other media outlets confirmed the authenticity of the yearbook page.

    After the photo came out, Northam released a statement, saying “I am deeply sorry for the decision I made to appear as I did in this photo, and for the hurt that decision caused then and now.”

    He told the firm he’d felt he needed to be accountable, and his staff quickly put together a statement for him to accept responsibility for the photo.

    But he recanted the next day during a nationally televised news conference in Richmond.

    “When confronted with the images yesterday,” Northam said, “I was appalled that they appeared on my page but I believe then and now that I am not either of the people in that photo.”

    He said he did remember an incident that same year when he did paint his face black, rubbing shoe polish on his cheeks to impersonate Michael Jackson for a dance contest.

    Northam dismissed a flood of calls for his resignation from both sides of the political aisle

    Video cameras form a line during a press conference about Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook page on Wednesday, May 22, 2019.
    EVMS hired McGuire Woods in February. The estimated cost of the law firm’s investigation is $300,000.

    “No individual that we interviewed has told us from personal knowledge that the Governor is in the Photograph,” the report states, “and no individual with knowledge has come forward to us to report that the Governor is in the Photograph.”

    In an emailed statement Wednesday, House Majority Leader Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah, said the report does nothing to restore the trust Northam lost after the photo surfaced.

    “The report produced no substantive evidence to back up the Governor’s assertion that he is not in the photo and that he did not select it for the page,” he said.

    He also raised concerns about EVMS officials knowing the photo existed and not doing anything about it.

    “While it is unclear if they took any action to cover up the photo’s existence,” he said, “it certainly appears that there was an effort to avoid public disclosure of such a racist photograph on the yearbook page of the most prominent alumni in school history.”

    1. I even remember the movies I saw in law school as well as the parties. Doctor Governor Ralph says he can’t remember posing for a picture at a party in black face with a Klan hoodie nearby? Would you buy a used car from this guy? We bought him as a governor. Couldn’t tell you why.

    2. This could have been a “teachable moment” on thoughtless displays of humor not being disqualifying events in a professional’s life. Just as, when President Trump joked about grabbing women by their pudenda in a locker room conversation, it wasn’t the same thing as an earnest confession to habitually doing so.

  12. I know of one case, an older woman in the neighborhood, who had her dog euthanized and buried with her.
    Since the dog was old and she was uncertain of its care after she passed, she decided that they’d “go together”.
    I didn’t see the age of the dog mentioned, and in this case it looks like looks like it could have adopted out and cared for.
    If I was 80 years old and the dog was, say, 15 years old, I’d consider having it euthanized if I died and was uncertain about its future.
    Some actually make provisions in their wills for continued care of their pets…..I would consider that, but I don’t want the dog plotting my demise if he finds out he has a trust fund.

    1. It looks like the only option for the shelter would be to hold the dog, get an injunction against the executor, and have the court(s) decide.
      I don’t know how a court would rule on that, or if there are any statutes in the state that apply. And it would involve expenses the shelter may not be able or willing to take on.

      1. Oyyy! Beyond laws on purposeful cruelty, pets are property, not citizens, and should remain such. If in my will – don’t get too excited mespo, I’m not dying – I say Tom has to take care of my boa constrictor, I don’t think that obligates him to do so.

        1. The fact that euthansia was specified, rather than (say) shooting or throttling the dog to death meant the owner was sincerely concerned with the dog’s not grieving after her death.

          Pets do grieve. I owned a burly Maine Coon-ish tomcat, and his littermate, a more lissome female tabby (I was present at their birth). When his sister died, Bosworth went into a deep depression only relieved when we brought him a rambunctious young tabby as a surrogate sister.- the two were faithful friends until Bosworth’s death some years later.

          1. No, specifying euthanasia does not imply concern over grieving. It clearly stated the dog was to be killed in order to be buried with the owner.

            Also, shooting, or strangling are also euthanasia. The method is not part of the explanation, only that it is to be humane. Euthanasia means killing something, usually for a compelling reason such as suffering or disease or violent temperament. No such reason was given.

            1. You’re right that there are animals for which shooting in the cranial space or cervical dislocation by throttling are used. Dogs are routinely euthanized in this country by sedative overdose unless their behavior makes this dangerous to humans near the animal, in which case shooting is used.

              Only a rabid Shih-Tzu would likely be too dangerous to euthanlze by sedation.

    2. A similar thing happened in NC around 2002. I discussed the process with the funeral director, who saw nothing wrong with what he did. It is the height of ego to think that one’s pet could not be happy living with another person. It is at least unethical, if not illegal to euthanize a dog unnecessarily.

  13. When dead lady got her interview at the Pearly Gates there was a “stand in” for Saint Peter, the interviewer. A dog presided over the decision as to where to send dead lady. She was sent straight to Hell in a hand basket.

  14. I would deport the dog instead of killing it. We have too many freeloading dogs in this country already. MAGA.

    1. I would deport the dog instead of killing it. We have too many freeloading dogs in this country already. MAGA.
      Why? The dog was here legally. Maybe deport the species that is here illegally, gobbles up billions in welfare even as it sends another $150 Billion out of our country to their dog patches abroad.

        1. JS:
          Your jokes are as vapid and infantile as your comments so it’s hard to tell and no I wasn’t joking. I was lamenting the self-loathing and anti-patriotic sentiment of the open borders Fifth Columnists.

          1. Yeah I hate self loathing anti-patriots too, but especially ninth columnists.

              1. I particularly love left-wing paid trolls. There is a used syringe with a dirty needle of Sodium Pentobarbital for each of them

                Just saying

Comments are closed.