Te Puke man guilty of shooting cat

A Te Puke man who tried to kill a cat he was looking after has pleaded guilty to a charge of ill-treating the animal after he shot it five times with an air rifle.

The 44-year-old man, who was cat-sitting at the time, tried and failed to kill the feline after it damaged his curtains.


The vet's X-ray of the cat showing the pellets. Photo: Supplied.

The man refused to return the cat to its owners until they paid for the curtains, says Tauranga SPCA welfare officer Anna Porteous.

'There was a delay, and meanwhile the curtain damage continued, so he decided to kill the cat,” explains Anna.

'He reached the end of his tether and that was what he decided to do.”

His initial plan was to kill the cat with a single shot to the head. However, when that first shot failed, the cat subsequently ran away.

Over the course of the next five days, the man continued to take shots at the cat whenever it appeared, and when neighbours discovered the animal a week after the first shot, it was described as being 'in a very poor state”.

The cat's owners were called, and the feline was taken to Te Puke Vets, where it underwent treatment which included surgery.

X-rays showed the cat had taken a total of five pellets – including one up the nose as well as its neck and thoracic spine area.

The cat has now made a full recovery, and the offender paid reparations to the vet clinic for the cat's medical care before being sentenced to 70-hours of community service.

'The vet's bill was about $300,” says Anna. 'However, the cost of having the animal put down by a vet would have been about $50-$60.

'We would like to use this case to highlight the important issue of euthanasia.

'It is not enough for you to ‘try' to kill an animal – if you are not capable of killing the animal instantly and in a humane manner, then take the animal to the vet.

'This case being successful in court reinforces this. This man did not intend for the cat to suffer, but through his actions, it did, and to a significant extent.”

16 comments

Another slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket!

Posted on 14-09-2015 12:49 | By Seriously?

Is this man going to learn anything from doing community service? NO! Why are air rifles not registered? They are a firearm that has the ability to kill and the rifle and the owner should be registered in the same way as a normal rifle.


Crazy response from vet

Posted on 14-09-2015 13:45 | By Bob #1

"We would like to use this case to highlight the important issue of euthanasia." What the heck?! This person's actions were not about euthanising this poor cat... it wasn't even his to euthanise. His actions were about cruelty, pure and simple. Anna Porteous, you are sending the wrong message... this person should have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law for causing this cat to suffer. Eye wish for laws along the lines of "an eye for an eye" where harm to animals is concerned... I really do!


Why would you...

Posted on 14-09-2015 13:54 | By morepork

...put your cat or any pet in the "care" of a man who has no qualms about killing it? Whether he does it humanely or tortures it to death, he is simply not a suitable "carer" for your pet. If the curtains were so precious, why did he undertake to look after the cat? Be careful before agreeing to mind someone's pet, and be careful about whose "care" you entrust your pet to. One way is to allow a trusted friend access to your house so they can leave food and water for the pet. No danger to their curtains and no danger to your animal. Longer term, kennels (based on recommendation) are probably the best option.


Dont catsit

Posted on 14-09-2015 14:33 | By Feruno

if you do not love cats and accept that they damage property


There oughta be a law...

Posted on 14-09-2015 14:50 | By space cadet

Another law to cover weak minded individuals that will also serve to penalise responsible people who have not done anything wrong. How about a licence for the individual to leave home every day - just to make sure the rational mind is functioning. That way responsible air rifle owners don't have to suffer punishment and t have yet another little tiny freedom whittled away.


Cat sitter

Posted on 14-09-2015 15:58 | By NancyK

Seriously: A Simple NO,NO,NO would have been the right answer. For goodness sake wot the hell was he thinking??? I don't own a cat. We all know cats rome and they like to play... He would not like it if someone took pot shots at his lovely animal, if he has one !!! Slap on the wrist Hmmm... not good enough.. He needs to learn work with animals..... Lion maybe. Discipline on the horizon


Humans vs Animals

Posted on 14-09-2015 16:51 | By choccy

I am angry at the SPCA's comments, it wasn't his cat, he has no right to try to kill the cat humanely or otherwise!!! Euthanisia is any easy way out. So, if our kids or an adult misbehaves, they should be put down too??? Animals were here before us, it is us humans that have ruined their lives, and are greedy, only thinking about ourselves. As I said, maybe we should start putting humans down, see how that works!!! Basically what the human does do to an animal should be done to them. Animals/pets are family members. I would suggest shooting the cat sitter five times with the air rifle!!! People's attitudes have got to change, and SPCA, you should be setting an example!!! You have just given everyone the right to kill any animal/pet as long as it is humane???


Crazy Irrwsponsible Response

Posted on 14-09-2015 17:43 | By Evan57

Agree totally . This is pure and simple , cruelty from an individual that has no empathy or respect for living creature , humans included . 1st he had no right to try kill . 2nd this endorses cruelty as he got no real sentence , community service ??? Should be working in the vets practice for 70 hours , and throw in NOT ALLOWED TO OWN ANY ANIMALS !!! Hot under the collar here .


Cruelty is cruelty!

Posted on 14-09-2015 19:01 | By Lady Penelope

Quote " this man did not intend for the cat to suffer" what the! 5 pellets over several days sorry but BS. It is a well known fact that people that harm animals can easily move on to harming humans. Stricter sentencing required.


Mindeless idiot.

Posted on 14-09-2015 21:28 | By monty1212

This vile excuse for a human being should be heavily punished and not be allowed anywhere near animals again!


I cant believe...

Posted on 14-09-2015 23:05 | By GreertonBoy

What I just read? Some A hole agrees to care for someones beloved cat, it upsets him so he shoots it... 5 times... and the spca says he should have put it down humanely? I had to read the story a few times to actually believe that was what I was reading?? How dumb it was for the guy to accept responsibility for the cat (silly of the owners for entrusting it to him) outrageous that he shot it with a 'firearm' be it a slug gun, it is still a weapon... and the idiocy of the spca to say he should have killed it humanely and it would have been cheaper?? Some welfare agency.... I can just imagine if someone went to buy/rescue a cat or dog, they will prolly say "If you don't like it, we can always kill it for you....humanely" Dumb, dumb, dumb


By seriously

Posted on 15-09-2015 03:04 | By Kenworthlogger

What difference would it have made if the air rifle was regestered??? None! Yes air rifles do have the ability to kill but as you can clearly see so can a car! Whats your point?


lost for words

Posted on 15-09-2015 08:34 | By Angel74

The cat sitter is clearly not right in the head to do such a thing, using a gun isn't the answer to any problem especially a cat that happens to like curtains a little too much. Hope the cat doing ok after its extremely traumatic ordeal and the owners choose a cattery next time they need a sitter.


This

Posted on 15-09-2015 09:45 | By Capt_Kaveman

person is a very bad shot and yes if ya gonna do it finish the job, + the cat damaged his property the owner should have paid so in turn if the cat comes on his property then he should be allowed to stop it


The Cat

Posted on 15-09-2015 13:29 | By flyingtoaster

Any intentional animal cruelty is disgusting. The guy was asked, by his neighbours to look after the cat for 2 weeks, as they were being evicted and couldn't take the cat with them. The owners were supposed to supply food they didn't. If it was so much trouble, he should have asked the SPCA to come and collect it.


The Cat

Posted on 15-09-2015 14:55 | By flyingtoaster

The 'cat sitter' failed miserably to euthanise the cat after 8 weeks. I agree with 'Capt_Kaveman' the sitter, in this instance, was a terrible shot. As the law stands, it is abhorrent and illegal to cause undue injury or hardship to any animal, however, it is legal to euthanise any animal. It is not solely a job for vets and SPCA.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.