JUSTICE FOR LILY! Cat scratch retaliation gets very ugly

[SamanthaJane13]

Dianne Williamson
[email protected]

Lisa Tuttle’s cat had just given birth to a litter when the man came walking down Dupuis Avenue with his dog.

Ms. Tuttle suspects that the otherwise-docile feline was feeling territorial when she spotted the Irish setter, which is why it ran toward the dog June 14 and tried to attack it.

The dog’s owner, meanwhile, tried to shield his pet behind his legs. The cat scratched the man, who went home and called police. He also called Ms. Tuttle, who told him it was unlikely that her cat had rabies and that it was doubtful he’d contract it from a simple scratch, anyway.

“He told me that he might have to get a series of rabies shots, and that they cost a lot of money,” Ms. Tuttle said. “He said he was going to see his doctor. He kept talking about money. I told him I was sorry, but that the cat was probably being protective of her babies. The conversation ended with nothing bad.”

She never heard from him again until Friday, when the man returned with his dog to Dupuis Avenue. And, in front of at least one adult and four horrified children who had been playing on the quiet dead-end street, he proceeded to beat the cat to death with a stick, according to witnesses.

“My 7-year-old came in crying and screaming, ‘The man killed Lily, the man killed Lily!’ ” recounted a tearful Ms. Tuttle. “I ran outside and found Lily in the street, lying in a pool of blood.”

Mary Pepper, who lives across the street from Ms. Tuttle, said she opened her window when she heard children screaming outside.

“He beat the cat with a stick until the stick broke,” said Ms. Pepper. “He kept yelling, ‘Whose cat is this? Whose cat is this?’ There was a lot of blood. He was enraged. And the kids were all watching, absolutely horrified. I was shouting out the window, ‘What do you think you’re doing?’ It was very scary.”

The man, Thomas Foley of Stoneham Road, called police after he killed the cat and told officers that he was acting in self-defense.

“He said the cat came after him again, so he hit the cat with the stick to protect himself,” said Sgt. Kerry Hazelhurst, reading from the police report.

Lily, a black and white 1-year-old, weighed seven pounds.

Ms. Pepper said the cat was typically calm and friendly and a favorite of neighborhood children.

After Mr. Foley killed the cat, he began to walk home. Ms. Tuttle acknowledged that she jumped in her car, caught up with Mr. Foley and punched him in the face. According to the police report, Mr. Foley declined to pursue assault charges.

“He just walked off like it was nothing,” Ms. Tuttle said. “He came with the deliberate intention of killing my cat. He doesn’t even live on this street.”

Stoneham Road is one street away from Dupuis, which is off Massasoit Road.

Ms. Tuttle didn’t know Mr. Foley’s name when she went to the police station yesterday to get a copy of the police report. A clerk refused to provide it and said it would be mailed. Ms. Tuttle went to the courthouse and tried to get a restraining order but failed, because she has no relationship with Mr. Foley. She said she’s contacted several animal rights groups and plans to file an application for a criminal complaint.

“I can’t let this go,” said Ms. Tuttle, who buried Lily in the backyard. “I close my eyes at night and see my cat lying in a pool of blood. My daughter is afraid to go outside and play. I can’t believe he did that in front of my kids. It was so malicious. I don’t want this man to get away with this. It’s not right.”

Mr. Foley did not return messages left yesterday on his answering machine and with a man who answered the phone and identified himself as Mr. Foley’s son.

Sgt. Hazelhurst said he didn’t anticipate that police would file charges against either party.

“His defense will be that he was defending himself and that it happened before,” Sgt. Hazelhurst said. “It will be up to the courts.”


http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dl...01/906230364

Check out the comments-

http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dl... very ugly

This maniac is a security guard at a private school, AND his son is in LE!!!!

I've already reported this story to PETA.

PLEASE pass this story-and the links-to other forums and animal rights groups!!

If you belong to ANY animal rights group, PLEASE make them aware of the barbaric death of this poor little cat!!!

We know that these maniacs go on to harm other animals and also PEOPLE!!

PLEASE help me get Justice for Lily and her orphaned babies and family!!

RIP, Lily!
The psycho can't hurt you EVER AGAIN!!!
Wait at The Bridge for your people!!!


JUSTICE FOR LILY!!!

 

[Shadera]

I've already reported this story to PETA.

Oh boy, just what we need - PETA.

I agree that it's a horrible story, but PETA is even more wacko than the guy who killed the cat.

 

[Twizted Paths]

 

[DAND]

Report things like this to the ASPCA.

Never report anything to PETA.

 

[rosebud945]

PETA will criticize Mrs. Tuttle for having a pet cat! Definitely report to the ASPCA.

 

[MikeAnthony]

PETA will criticize Mrs. Tuttle for having a pet cat!. Definitely report to the ASPCA.

AND peta will criticize her for letting it have kittens.

 

[WebSlave]

There are normally two sides to every story. There seems to be one side missing in this one.

 

[Wolfy-hound]

First, she WAS at fault for having her cat outside, and letting it attack the guy, OR his dog when he was on a public sidewalk. He SHOULD have sued her for damages.

Now, HE deserves a complete beat down for beating a cat to death with a stick delibritely that way. The cat did nothing to deserve that sort of death. I cannot believe that woman stayed inside, and just yelled out a window at him! I would have probably killed the guy in a rage if I saw anyone do that to one of my pets. Of course, she says she went after him and punched him, but why wait to do that? The poor kids having to witness something like that too.

This is why I hate people. Oh.. and PETA won't do anything but use this to show that no one should own pets. I hope the jerk gets charged for his crimes.

 

[SamanthaJane13]

"I cannot believe that woman stayed inside, and just yelled out a window at him! I would have probably killed the guy in a rage if I saw anyone do that to one of my pets."

Actually, the woman who yelled out the door was the across the street neighbor.

 

[Tiger Lilly]

NOT a PETA supporter

I love cats but don't have any due to allergies. Around here, there is a 'leash law' on the books for cats, as well as dogs. It doesn't get enforced. Why? Because no one complains. I don't have to complain because I have dogs that hate cats, so they stay out of my yard.
Should the cat have been outside to roam the neighborhood (and get pregnant)? No--I gotta say that being a responsible pet owner is a choice that the owner clearly did not make well. ALL cats should be INSIDE cats (unless you live in the country/lots of land) simply because you can't control them in the same manner as a dog, IMHO.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the cat deserved to die--not by being hit by a car or by the idiot holding the stick. Like I said, I love cats. But you can't let cats run loose in a neighborhood without the fear of SOMETHING possibly happening to them.
Now, as for the idiot with the stick...burying him UNDER the jail would be too good!

 

[Seamus Haley]

And if it did, in fact, attack him a second time?

I'd hit it too. And then I'd go hit the owner for letting the damn thing run loose.

Her unspayed cat that was crapping out kittens outside attacked a man- quite possibly twice. Anything that happened to that animal as a result is entirely on the shoulders of the idiotic, negligent owner. Hell, most places I've lived, if it wasn't picked up and euthanized just for being loose, it'd definitely be removed by the county/city and euthanized after an attack.

I'm not sad for the cat, I'm annoyed that the owner is a member of the same species as I am.

There's no way a story like this will ever be reported or relayed in an intellectually honest manner either; a woman owned the cat, a man killed it (enforcing gender stereotypes) and the woman has kids and probably photos of the thing as a kitten, playing up the cute factor.

Most the responses here seem to be commenting on how they would respond if someone killed their cat...

How about some thought about the response if someone's loose housecat attacked your leashed dog and yourself?

 

[Keleida]

Generally, in most areas it's against the law to have your pet outside without a leash, that includes cats. Most people don't realize this.

Secondly, while I understand that someone has the right to walk their dog down a street, the man was clearly notified that the cat was being protective of it's kittens. He talked to the owner about this, so why did he go back AGAIN?

Either he's an idiot, or he went there with the intention of hurting the animal.

Either way, both are at fault. The woman for having her cat outside, the man for killing it.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Secondly, while I understand that someone has the right to walk their dog down a street, the man was clearly notified that the cat was being protective of it's kittens. He talked to the owner about this, so why did he go back AGAIN?

Either he's an idiot, or he went there with the intention of hurting the animal.

Either way, both are at fault. The woman for having her cat outside, the man for killing it.

The owner of the cat said that she talked to the man about this. Assuming that she's being honest is a bit of a leap.

Furthermore, if she did have that conversation with the man, then she was aware of her cat's tendencies to attack- is it unreasonable to think that the dog walker might have figured she actually *did* something to prevent further cat attacks? Why was this woman stupid enough to let her cat outside again after it had attacked a man?

"Going back" in this case seems to mean he walked his dog along the route that he walks his dog. Going by the house on the sidewalk and attacked by this cat twice...

His only mistake was in not notifying animal control after the first incident. Then the city/county could have saved him the trouble and killed it for him.

 

[SamanthaJane13]

""Going back" in this case seems to mean he walked his dog along the route that he walks his dog. Going by the house on the sidewalk and attacked by this cat twice..."

But going back WITH STICK IN HAND just screams intent to me.

If I'm walking my dog and we're attacked by ANYTHING, I'm changing my damned route!!

He went there WITH STICK IN HAND for one reason-to KILL LILY.

There's a protest planned for Sunday morning at the police station.

I hope this puts the cops on notice about this family of maniacs, but since some of them are already in law enforcement, I'm sure they're already used to cleaning up and covering up their messes.

If you go back to the link and go to the comments and refresh, there's a LOT more coming out now.

Evidently, the father isn't the only one with a penchant for animal cruelty.

You may also want to read up on what this cruelty can lead to. It's possible that this maniac will go on to re-offend many times, and accelerate his way up the food-chain to humans-if he hasn't already.

The triad of violent criminality

(Part of an article from CrimeLibrary.com)

What Makes Serial Killers Tick?
By Shirley Lynn Scott

The Triad

Animal Cruelty

These secret compulsions are seen as the seeds to greater mayhem. "Violent acts are reinforced, since the murderers either are able to express rage without experiencing negative consequences or are impervious to any prohibitions against these actions. Second, impulsive and erratic behavior discourages friendships," increasing isolation." "Furthermore, there is no challenge to the offenders' beliefs that they are entitled to act the way they do." (Ressler, et al, Sexual Homicide) "All learning, according to Ressler, has a "feedback system." Torturing animals and setting fires will eventually escalate to crimes against fellow human beings, if the pattern is not somehow broken.

Torturing animals is a disturbing red flag. Animals are often seen as "practice" for killing humans. Ed Kemper buried the family cat alive, dug it up, and cut off its head. Dahmer was notorious for his animal cruelty, cutting off dogs heads and placing them on a stick behind his house. Yet not all serial killers take their aggressions out on pets. Dennis Nilsen loved animals, particularly his dog Bleep, whom he couldn't bear to face after being arrested for fear that it would traumatize the dog. Rapist torturer and murderer of eight, Christopher Wilder, had made donations to Save The Whales and the Seal Rescue Fund.

Pyromania

Peter Kurten loved to watch houses burn, and Berkowitz, when he tired of torturing his mother's parakeet, became a prolific pyromaniac, keeping record of his 1,411 fires. "Oh, what ecstasy," said Joseph Kallinger to his biographer Flora Schreiber, "setting fires brings to my body! What power I feel at the thought of fire! ... Oh, what pleasure, what heavenly pleasure!" Pyromania is often a sexually stimulating activity for these killers. The dramatic destruction of property feeds the same perverse need to destroy another human. Because serial killers don't see other humans as more than objects, the leap between setting fires and killing people is easy to make.

Bed Wetting

Bed wetting is the most intimate of these "triad" symptoms, and is less likely to be willfully divulged. By some estimates, 60% of multiple murderers wet their beds past adolescence. Kenneth Bianchi apparently spent many a night marinating in urine-soaked sheets.

Conclusion

Formative years may play a role in the molding of a serial killer, but they cannot be the sole reason in every case. Many killers blame their families for their behavior, seeking sympathy. In true psychopathic fashion, serial killers are blaming someone else for their actions. If their bad childhood is the primary reason for their homicidal tendencies, then why don't their siblings also become serial killers? And if these conditions truly created them, serial killers would probably be unionized by now, there would be so many of them (a sad commentary on our continuing neglect of children.) We must look at other components to see what pushes a serial killer over the edge.

+++++++++++++
While this article just deals with serial killers, The Triad has also been found to apply to other violent crimes.

The whole article can be read here-

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/tick/victi ms_1.html

 

[Seamus Haley]

And Donna here is the prime reason that news outlets will happily report something as half-assed as the original story. Gullible, emotional and prone to knee jerk reactions, it's simplicity itself to lead someone like that around by the nose without any worry about them actually stopping to think about the situation.

The cat's owner shows numerous signs of being irresponsible. The cat is not fixed, the cat is allowed outdoors unsupervised and without being contained or controlled- as with some exceptional fencing or a leash. Her animal was involved in a situation where it attacked a person and she did nothing to change her negligent practices.

Furthermore, according to the news story- which was clearly written from the direct and heavily biased perspective of the cat owner in a manner carefully structured to evoke responses- no adult witnesses were present outside during the second incident. Young children lack credibility as witnesses, especially if they were first questioned by a biased source about what they saw. There's no proof whatsoever that the man came back "stick in hand to kill Lily" (and caps lock doesn't make it any more valid of a statement), he may have picked up whatever was handy as this cat attacked him for the second time.

The reporting on the story reeks of sensationalism and apparently every half-literate moron in Buffalo has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I'm sure the news outlet is loving the ratings/sales/banner impressions and I'm sure the ignorant pile of crap who was happy to let her cat attack bystanders is happy that she's not being sued for negligence. As far as I can see, the only losers in the situation are the man who defended himself and the cat who's owner placed it in a situation that resulted in it's death.

Furthermore, the idea that you would contact PETA and request that they get involved tells me everything I need to know about your views, your sympathies and your intelligence. Your opinions on any subject are utterly worthless, as are the opinions of any other small minded, antihuman, rhetoric spitting, paint throwing psychotic animal rights activist.

The idea that someone defending themselves from an animal that's attacking them makes them a serial killer also shows such a profound ignorance of psychology and psychiatry as to be either painful to watch or laughable... I'm really uncertain as to which response is appropriate. It's one of the most inane leaps of non-logic I have ever seen though, so well done on scoring a superlative. It's a superlative for abject stupidity... but hey, you're number one and that's... something.

 

[SamanthaJane13]

"The reporting on the story reeks of sensationalism and apparently every half-literate moron in Buffalo has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I'm sure the news outlet is loving the ratings/sales/banner impressions and I'm sure the ignorant pile of crap who was happy to let her cat attack bystanders is happy that she's not being sued for negligence. As far as I can see, the only losers in the situation are the man who defended himself and the cat who's owner placed it in a situation that resulted in it's death.

Furthermore, the idea that you would contact PETA and request that they get involved tells me everything I need to know about your views, your sympathies and your intelligence. Your opinions on any subject are utterly worthless, as are the opinions of any other small minded, antihuman, rhetoric spitting, paint throwing psychotic animal rights activist.

The idea that someone defending themselves from an animal that's attacking them makes them a serial killer also shows such a profound ignorance of psychology and psychiatry as to be either painful to watch or laughable... I'm really uncertain as to which response is appropriate. It's one of the most inane leaps of non-logic I have ever seen though, so well done on scoring a superlative. It's a superlative for abject stupidity... but hey, you're number one and that's... something."

I'm not even going to dignify this one, other than to say that if you're an example of the fine folk in Mass, I'm glad I live in Buffalo with my half-literate friends and family.

 

[Ken Harbart]

But going back WITH STICK IN HAND just screams intent to me.

If I'm walking my dog and we're attacked by ANYTHING, I'm changing my damned route!!

He went there WITH STICK IN HAND for one reason-to KILL LILY.

Gotta disagree with you on this one. I for one, would not change my route, as I have every right to be there. Likewise, the man has the right to defend himself from attack by an aggressive animal that has no business being there in the first place. I'm not going to give up my freedoms simply to accomodate someone else's illegal actions. People run red lights every day, so should we stop driving to avoid the danger?

Ms. Tuttle is the one at fault for this one- had she been a responsible pet owner, first by letting her cat outdoors, and then by failing to control it once she was informed of its aggressive behavior. It's called culpable negligence, and she personified it every step of the way.

The implication that defending oneself from attack by an aggressive animal is a precursor to being a serial killer is a severe leap of the imagination that requires all suspension of rational thought.

 

[SamanthaJane13]

"Ms. Tuttle is the one at fault for this one- had she been a responsible pet owner, first by letting her cat outdoors, and then by failing to control it once she was informed of its aggressive behavior. It's called culpable negligence, and she personified it every step of the way."

I agree that Ms. Tuttle was not entirely innocent.

I DO agree that as a pet owner, she should have had Lily spayed and should have kept her in the house.

By allowing her out, she risked Lily being hit by a car or any number of other accidents.

"The implication that defending oneself from attack by an aggressive animal is a precursor to being a serial killer is a severe leap of the imagination that requires all suspension of rational thought."

It's the ferocious level of the attack that screams over-kill here.

He he just used the stick to prod her away, that would have been sufficient.

Also, from what I've read, Lily was laying around while the kids played, and he strode up and launched his attack, which sounds like he went there LOOKING TO KILL HER to me.

 

[Ken Harbart]

Out of curiosity, have you ever been attacked by an animal? Simple prodding sounds good on a forum, but in an actual incident, isn't going to deter it. In this case, the cat perceived a threat to her kittens and responded. Prodding isn't going to do anything in such a situation, as the cat it acting as it has been programmed to. One acts to stop the threat. Unfortunately, the article is high on emotive rhetoric and light on fact. "The ferocious level of the attack" is something that is unclear. The fact is that we have no idea if he was merely responding with enough force to stop the threat to himself and his dog, or if he continued to beat the cat after it was no longer a threat.

 

[WebSlave]

Well, for one, I'll be damned if I would allow someone's pet keep me from legally using a public thoroughfare. As for the guy carrying a stick, in most parts of the country, carrying some sort of implement for the purpose of self defense is perfectly legal. This guy chose a stick. Knowing the way media distorts thing, it could very well have been a cane or walking stick.

Taking the story at face value, what was the cat doing out in the middle of the street to come in contact with the man? Did the guy trespass into the owner's yard to seek out that cat, or did the cat seek out the guy on public property? Again. In my opinion, the guy would have been a fool to allow that cat to dictate where he can and cannot go, just as he would have been a fool to NOT carry something for his own defense, knowing the potential for attack, in exercising his right to go where he pleases in a legal manner.

Quite frankly, ANY animal, two legged or otherwise, who seeks to attack me in any place I have a right to be forfeits all consideration to a right to pursue that goal, as far as I am concerned. If my attempts to stop such an attack result in the death of that animal, then that was a very poor choice on the part of that animal in what to do that particular day.