Adam M. Kreutz, 22, of Fisher Road, Oakfield, is charged with aggravated cruelty to animals, a felony, and criminal mischief, 4th. At 4:40 a.m.,Tuesday, while in the Village of Oakfield, Kreutz allegedly drowned a family cat. He was jailed on $5,000 bail.
Jeffery Leonard Wheeler, 18, of West Main Street Road, Batavia, is charged with criminal contempt, 2nd. Wheeler is accused of visiting a residence he is barred from visiting by court order. Wheeler was jailed on $2,000 bail.
Let's try holding this young
Let's try holding this young man's head under for awhile. Think he'll get the full affect of his actions? "If" he should get community service, if should NOT be taking care of animals at the shelter ... unless he's knee deep in crap! This young man obviously has issues - animal and child cruelty are totally unacceptable.
Lisa, unfortunately I think
Lisa, unfortunately I think that community service is a given.
I don't recall a case of animal cruelty in Genesee county resulting in the appropriate sentence - including extensive jail time.
Howard?
Bummer on both accounts. If
Bummer on both accounts. If he has issues, they need to be addressed. It sounds like he needs help or therapy or something. In the meantime, a good kick in the butt would be appropriate!
This is a one-sided story. I
This is a one-sided story. I want to know what the cat did to provoke him.
[please note the use of my patented Sarcasm Font]
Hey, you're entitled to your
Hey, you're entitled to your opinion. I acknowledge that. Having said that ...
What the "cat did to provoke him?" This is a tabby...house pet...not a cougar. Please! You're kidding, right? What provocation condones this type of behavior? So, you're saying there's justification for taking a life (man or beast?).
Oops, if this was in fact a
Oops, if this was in fact a sarcastic statement, then Jason, I apologize. My mistake.
Unfortunately, animal abuse
Unfortunately, animal abuse is a precursor to human abuse.
I hope he does get more than community service.
Did he perceive the cat to be
Did he perceive the cat to be sick? If so how is this different than the guy who shot his dog?
Everyone is so quick to judge
Everyone is so quick to judge this man. The article clearly says "Kreutz ALLEGEDLY drowned a family cat." He is innocent until proven guilty.
Jason, you must be pretty
Jason, you must be pretty naieve..... It's always said that someone is to have allegedly done something. Oswald "allegedly" shot Kennedy, John Wilkes Booth "Allegedly" shot Lincoln and so on.
(I used these examples as these are the only ones that came to mind that never made it to a trial)
Its pretty simple Jason, theres a dead, drowned cat. There are certain people in the house, one either admitted to it, or the others testified to the fact that he did it. Pretty simple.
If you were to go out and shoot the pitcher in a mud dogs game, and all 5,000 people witnessed it and there is a recording of it on video..... your still alleged to have done it until tried and convicted. Even though we all know you did it.
Got the concept now?
I'll stand by
I'll stand by "allegedly."
We don't have the whole story, and may never have it. It's a bit unfair to jump to conclusions.
We should always consider a person innocent until proven guilty. It's the foundation of our legal system and just the right thing to do.
Kyle, I am not naive. I
Kyle, I am not naive. I understand that there is a possibility that this man committed this crime, however, there is also a possibility that he didn't commit this crime. Fortunately for Mr. Kreutz, he gets to stand before a judge with legal representation regarding this matter.
In my opinion, there is a
In my opinion, there is a huge difference between shooting a sick animal to put it out of it's misery quickly and making one suffer a slow and presumably painful death by drowning it. Again, just my opinion.
In reply to Howard. Unless
In reply to Howard.
Unless he's a bank robber and then we should assume that he is capable of killing children with a non-existent weapon.
Joseph so assuming the guy
Joseph so assuming the guy had no gun and no money for a vet visit, snapping its neck would have been better?
Peter, Again, how do you know
Peter,
Again, how do you know he did not have a weapon? Not showing one does not mean that he did not have one.
How do you know he did have
How do you know he did have weapon?
That's the whole point,
That's the whole point, Peter. Nobody knows. And especially nobody knew at the time. So you take the conservative route and act as if he might. That's sensible, reasonable and the only logical thing to do.
Peter, You make my point, we
Peter,
You make my point, we don't know if he did nor did not. Only you so far have stated with certainty that he did not. Why? What inside information do you have?
If he's not willing to show
If he's not willing to show it, he doesn't have it.
I'm not going to kowtow to idle threats or actions. Either show me the weapon or you simply don't have one. I call the bluff every time and it serves me well.
Peter, Your lack of
Peter,
Your lack of knowledge is outstanding.
What is this weapon you're
What is this weapon you're speaking of?
Jason, Some guy robbed the
Jason,
Some guy robbed the bank in Corfu, then ran away. He did not display a weapon, but nobody (except Peter) knows if he had one or not. As a result of the robbery, the authorities locked down the nearby school.
Peter says the guy had no weapon, so locking down the school was unnecessary. I, and one or two others, think the school did the right thing, not taking any chances.
Peter also thinks that unless a teller is shown a weapon, they should not let themselves be robbed. He says he says he calls peoples bluff every time. Personally, I didn't know that many people threaten him, but now I know not to try and bluff him.
John, thank you for the
John, thank you for the clarification. Yes, good call on the school, as they are responsible for the safety and security of the children.
Peter sounds like he is Captain Hindsight.