alt Hacker NewsYou cited a specific case. It's not odd at all in the context of that case. The professionals in charge of enforcing the law decided the animals weren't harmed.
You cited a specific case. It's not odd at all in the context of that case. The professionals in charge of enforcing the law decided the animals weren't harmed.
> There was a very famous case back in Washington state back in the early 2000s where a group of men were sexually abusing horses. It was uncovered because one of them died, and the other could only be charged with trespassing because it wasn't illegal at the time to sexually abuse animals.
What I said, verbatim, about that case.
What part of that is incorrect or warrants clarification, exactly?