Page 1 of 2

Yet another Celebrity animal abuse case......

Posted: October 6, 2007 5:09 pm
by Dezdmona
This time it's non other than DMX

DMX Animal Cruelty

Image

DMX's Dogs Died Violently

For now, authorities say DMX was no Michael Vick.

Postmortem exams performed on three canine carcasses found buried in the backyard of the rapper's Phoenix-area home revealed that two of the animals suffered grievous injuries before they died. But investigators have found no sufficient evidence suggesting DMX was involved in the kind of organized dog fighting, à la the scandal that engulfed, and possibly ended the career of, the Atlanta Falcons quarterback.

Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies raided the 36-year-old rapper's property in the suburb of Cave Creek on Aug. 24, after being tipped off about possible animal cruelty. The deputies evacuated 12 half starved pit bulls that had been caged without proper food and water in the desert heat.

Also found were the remains of three dogs, a stockpile of assault weapons and ammunition, a quarter-ounce of marijunana and drug paraphernalia. Meanwhile, a mysterious white powder recovered from the homestead tested negative as an illicit drug.

A spokesman for the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department confirmed that necropsies showed one of the dead dogs sustained bite wounds, while another exhibited major trauma to its abdomen. The third animal was burned beyond recognition, preventing investigators from reaching any definitive conclusions.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio said no charges have yet been brought against the rapper, whose real name is Earl Simmons, or any of his associates. But that could change, especially if officers reconstructing a timeline determine DMX was at the residence at the time of the abuse.

"Someone's going to have to pay for this," Arpaio told the Associated Press. "We have 12 dogs who were abused and 3 dogs buried in the yard—someone's going to have to pay."

Meanwhile, Arpaio is awaiting word from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives about whether the seized weapons were legal.

The rapper's New York-based lawyer, Murray Richman, has maintainedthat his client hadn't been to the house in months, and the dogs were supposed to have been tended for by a caretaker, identified as Brad Blackwell.

Blackwell told deputies he informed the rapper's reps he could only care for the animals "just a couple of days" because he was scheduled to go on vacation, according to the search warrant.

Further contradicting Richman were accounts from neighbors, who told investigators they saw DMX at the home three weeks before deputies executed the search warrants.

Richman, meanwhile, has insisted DMX loves his animals and was upset to learn about their mistreatment. The rapper has yet to offer a public statement.

DMX, who has "Pit Bull" tattooed across his back, routinely employs canine imagery in his music, most recently naming his 2006 album Year of the Dog…Again and his June greatest-hits compilation The Definition of X: Pick of the Litter.

But he has had his legal dog days before.

In 1999, police conducted a raid at the rapper's home in Teaneck, New Jersey, and found a huge cache of guns, as well as—you guessed it—13 caged pit bulls.

After copping a plea in 2002 that spared him jail time, he ended up making a series of PSAs urging children to be kind to animals.





Autopsy reports detail injuries to rapper DMX dogs

Posted: October 6, 2007 6:21 pm
by phjrsaunt
grrrrrr......and I can't even bring myself to read the autopsy reports :evil:

Posted: October 6, 2007 9:00 pm
by Skibo
Hey lets not rush to judgement on this guy like we did Michael Vick. Like OJ, he may be innocent of any charges.

Posted: October 6, 2007 9:33 pm
by ragtopW
:evil: :evil:

Posted: October 7, 2007 12:39 am
by IrishPirate
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :wench:

Posted: October 7, 2007 2:08 am
by docandjeanie
:x :x :x

Posted: October 7, 2007 11:10 am
by phjrsaunt
Skibo wrote:Hey lets not rush to judgement on this guy like we did Michael Vick. Like OJ, he may be innocent of any charges.
Of course he may be innocent.
But SOMEONE is guilty, clearly.
If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck....

Posted: October 7, 2007 11:45 am
by Dezdmona
Skibo wrote:Hey lets not rush to judgement on this guy like we did Michael Vick. Like OJ, he may be innocent of any charges.
You did read the part where he made a plea deal to do "be kind to animal" PSA's in a previous case to avoid jail time right?

Posted: October 7, 2007 12:20 pm
by ragtopW
phjrsaunt wrote:
Skibo wrote:Hey lets not rush to judgement on this guy like we did Michael Vick. Like OJ, he may be innocent of any charges.
Of course he may be innocent.
But SOMEONE is guilty, clearly.
If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck....
you stuff it into a turkey and deep fry it for the Holidays??

Posted: October 7, 2007 12:33 pm
by TropicalTroubador
Why do people get more upset about abused animals than abused people?

I'm just sayin'.

Posted: October 7, 2007 12:44 pm
by ragtopW
TropicalTroubador wrote:Why do people get more upset about abused animals than abused people?

I'm just sayin'.
I asked this a ways back..

Posted: October 7, 2007 1:01 pm
by chippewa
TropicalTroubador wrote:Why do people get more upset about abused animals than abused people?

I'm just sayin'.
Our little local AM station has a call-in opinion show, Friday's question was something about torture. Every caller was pro-torture. :o I couldn't listen anymore, it was turning my stomach.

Posted: October 7, 2007 1:04 pm
by Dezdmona
TropicalTroubador wrote:Why do people get more upset about abused animals than abused people?

I'm just sayin'.
I don't. I spent my career working with victims of violence.
Physical, sexual & emotional. You wouldn't want to know the things I've seen & heard.

Often folks who abuse animals move on to abusing people.

Neither are acceptable.

Posted: October 7, 2007 1:14 pm
by phjrsaunt
TropicalTroubador wrote:Why do people get more upset about abused animals than abused people?

I'm just sayin'.
I assure you, I get every bit as upset about abused humans as I do about abused animals.

Posted: October 7, 2007 1:38 pm
by Dezdmona
O, did you know that the initially battered women/children had to be protected under animal abuse laws because there were no laws in this country to protect them?

Still, DMX is scum in my book.

Posted: October 7, 2007 4:33 pm
by karat
You would at least hope that human victims would have sense enough to seek help. When it is an animal they depend on the ones that own and (you hope love) them.

If you can't care for it, love it and provide for it, don't have it. That goes for humans and animals!

I have animals and I would see justice served, by law or me, if anyone would hurt them - just as I would do for my family and friends.

Posted: October 7, 2007 4:57 pm
by Dezdmona
karat wrote:You would at least hope that human victims would have sense enough to seek help.
My previous post was intended to point out that when women and children DID seek help, it was discovered that it was NOT AGAINST THE LAW to abuse them.

In fact, the "rule of thumb" comes from English Common Law that you could beat your wife with a switch no larger than your Thumb. :evil:

Women and Children were, for all practical purposes, considered the property of their husband or father in this country until they found protection under the SPCA laws.

Posted: October 7, 2007 5:36 pm
by karat
Dezdmona wrote:
karat wrote:You would at least hope that human victims would have sense enough to seek help.
My previous post was intended to point out that when women and children DID seek help, it was discovered that it was NOT AGAINST THE LAW to abuse them.

In fact, the "rule of thumb" comes from English Common Law that you could beat your wife with a switch no larger than your Thumb. :evil:

Women and Children were, for all practical purposes, considered the property of their husband or father in this country until they found protection under the SPCA laws.
Not to start a fight but...may be in YOUR area, those you were directly involved with sought out help. I pray to God their lives are heading in the right direction.

You know as well as I do, NOT ALL, seek out help.....(first hand experience)....can only (try to) help those who ask

Posted: October 7, 2007 10:28 pm
by Dezdmona
No...that's not what I meant to imply.

I was actually referencing back to the origins of child protection laws in the late 1800's (see the case of Mary-Ellen Wilson).

It takes great courage for anyone in an abusive situation to reach out.

Posted: October 8, 2007 5:19 pm
by TropicalTroubador
Dezdmona wrote:No...that's not what I meant to imply.

I was actually referencing back to the origins of child protection laws in the late 1800's (see the case of Mary-Ellen Wilson).

It takes great courage for anyone in an abusive situation to reach out.
Amen...to this, and to your other posts on this thread.