The incredible saga of the Bundy brothers continues. Ammon and Ryan Bundy, and the five other people who have been on trial for an armed takeover of an Oregon wildlife refuge in January, were acquitted of all charges on Thursday. Even though the six men and one woman took over federal property for six weeks while armed, the Portland jury agreed that they are not guilty of impeding federal workers from getting to work, which was the official charge. The verdict has many people upset and comparing it to the ongoing Dakota Pipeline protest where Native American protesters have been attacked with dogs and pepper spray, while these white protesters were acquitted despite being armed.

Imagine if these defendants were black or Muslim… there would not have been a trial. https://t.co/AYAT9738Kk #crimingwhilewhite #Bundy

— Sara Elizabeth Dill (@SEDLAW15) October 28, 2016

Even the defendants’ lawyers were surprised at the outcome. “It’s stunning. It’s a stunning victory for the defense,” said Robert Salisbury, attorney for defendant Jeff Banta. “I’m speechless.” The Bundy brothers themselves will remain jailed awaiting another trial in Nevada for an armed standoff that took place in 2014. In that case, the charges are more serious, involving felony weapon and conspiracy charges. After hearing the verdicts from Judge Anna J. Brown, an attorney for Ammon Bundy, Marcus Mumford, threw a tantrum in the courtroom and yelled at the judge to release his client until guards tackled him to the ground using a stun gun. He was then also arrested.

Prosecutors argued that the group used threat of violence to occupy the wildlife refuge, which doesn’t sound that unbelievable considering they were armed and refused to leave. But the defendants said they were simply peacefully protesting government control–even though they urged others to bring their firearms and join them. The whole thing is believed to have cost taxpayers more than $3.3 million and ended dramatically when one participant, Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, was fatally shot by police during a chase when he refused to give up.

Bundy Brothers acquitted. Officially have no hope for this judicial system anymore.

— Max Winner (@maxxwinner) October 28, 2016

The National Wildlife Federation condemned the verdict in a statement:

This was not a peaceful protest; this was occupation by gunpoint and it assaulted the very foundation of our democracy, our Constitutional principles, and our shared public lands heritage. These criminals prevented Americans from enjoying the wildlife that belong to all of us, destroyed refuge infrastructure, degraded wildlife habitat, and desecrated archaeological treasures. In a democracy, disagreements must be resolved through collaboration, debate or the courts, not by brute force.

The question is how they could be found not guilty of preventing federal employees from accessing their workplace when that is precisely what they did. One of their key aims was to get the federal government to give up some of the land it owns to locals, another was to protest the conviction of two men who were found guilty of arson on government land. Those men, Dwight and Steven Hammond, turned themselves in to serve their sentences and said they didn’t want the Bundys’ help, but still became the catalyst for the whole armed standoff.

The next step is the Nevada trial for the Bundy brothers early next year, as well as another Oregon trial for seven participating defendants who chose to postpone their hearings until February.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bundy Brothers Acquitted for Armed Takeover, But Remain Jailed appeared first on Law Street.

How would you feel if the veterinarian treating your pet was recently accused of hunting and killing a cat? Wouldn’t you want the person taking care of your furry companion to show them complete care and respect? Well, you might not want Kristen Lindsey to be your pet’s veterinarian, then. Many are furious since the Austin County, Texas grand jury decided not to indict Kristen on animal abuse charges. While she was an employee at Washington Animal Clinic in Brenham, Texas. Kristen–whose full name was not disclosed–posted the following picture on Facebook, which shows her holding up a stray cat that she supposedly killed by shooting a bow and arrow straight through its skull.

The Texas veterinarian who bragged about killing a stray cat with an arrow won’t face charges. http://t.co/YomiNCX8NG pic.twitter.com/Pj6HPYAjDm

— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) June 25, 2015

The 31-year-old vet, whose full name was never released since she was not formally charged for this vicious act, originally made headlines back in April when the picture was first posted. Now she is infamously known throughout the world as an animal abuser. She quickly deleted the disturbing photo from her profile, although not before many saw it and screen-shotted the post–those screenshots ended up going viral. It was then brought to the attention of her place of employment. Kristen’s position was immediately terminated, although it does not seem that she will lose her license. The clinic also stated how sickened and shocked they were by their former employee’s actions, and begged customers not to let this one incident define their center.

It seems as if everyone was shocked by Kristen’s actions, given that her former workplace, the Texas Veterinary Medical Association, and other institutions she was affiliated with all expressed how upset they were with her. The deans of Colorado State University, where Kristen earned her veterinary degree, also announced how disgusted and disappointed they were with their former student’s actions. There were also multiple petitions created proposing that the vet’s license should be revoked, each with thousands of signatures.

This incident definitely appeared to be an act of animal cruelty and was being investigated as one, although it could not be proven that a crime even occurred. Animal rights advocates were outraged when this picture surfaced, and many urged authorities to arrest Kristen. Since investigators couldn’t tell when or where the supposed crime took place, they did not have enough evidence for probable cause. If sufficient evidence had been found, then a search warrant would have likely been issued, which then might have led to an arrest.

After an exhaustive court battle, the grand jury decided to rule the case as “no bill,” which means that there was insufficient evidence to charge Kristen with an actual crime. Much to many people’s chagrin, Kristen will get off with merely a slap on the wrist and a damaged reputation. After the ruling, many people gathered in front of the courthouse to protest this decision, although it can’t be turned around.

Reports state that Kristen later claimed that she only killed the suspected wild cat to protect her own pet from it, which would have made this incident legal,  although the post makes it seem as if she was hunting for fun and sport. Kristen appears to be quite proud of her kill, as she brags about her precise marksmanship and jokes about how she deserves a “vet of the year award” for her actions.

In what appears to be a blog created by Kristen when she was a student in veterinary school, she disturbingly describes herself as someone who likes to kill animals as a hobby. What’s also shocking is despite how grotesque and sad many people find this killing, the American Veterinary Society actually sees a bolt to the head as a humane way to kill a cat.

A resident of the town has come forward, claiming that the murdered cat is actually Tiger, a domestic cat who went missing from a local farm around the same time the image was posted and who distinctly resembles the slain cat. Despite there being many claims of the cat’s true identity, there is no confirmation of this since the feline’s corpse was never found.

However, this incident and Kristen’s pride in her actions don’t seem just in the slightest. Animal cruelty is a heinous crime, and people who commit this act should not go unpunished, particularly those who are trusted to take care of our pets.

Toni Keddell

Toni Keddell is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Toni at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Texas Veterinarian Accused of Animal Cruelty After “Hunting” Cat appeared first on Law Street.