New features are coming soon. Login with Facebook to get an early start and help us test them out!
For more information about the Interactive Animal Cruelty Maps, see the map notes.
Monday, Mar 3, 2008County: Dekalb
Person of Interest: Dario Harris
Case Updates: 1 update(s) available
DeKalb County Solicitor Robert James said he intends to aggressively prosecute a contractor, hired to mark gas lines, who allegedly sprayed florescent orange paint on a barking black lab mix that was in a fenced backyard.
“To spray paint a dog in the eye makes no sense,” James said Wednesday, a day after Dario Harris was in DeKalb County State Court on two counts of animal cruelty, a charge that could mean as much as 12 months in jail.
“It was gratuitous. The animal was behind a fence. Its really something we take serious and were going to try to make this thing right,” said James, who prosecutes misdemeanors in DeKalb. “We’re going to take this very seriously.”
Harris was dispatched last March to mark gas lines in preparation for scheduled digging along the residential street in Stone Mountain.
Jeffrey Tompkins, who was working at home, heard his dog, Bear, barking about 8:30 or 9 a.m. and then saw a truck driving away. A few minutes later, he found his dog rubbing her eyes with her front paws.
Tompkins said there were “seven individual spray marks” low on the fence about the height of the dog’s eyes.
“It wasn’t like he just sprayed one time across [ the fence],” Tompkins said in an interview Wednesday. “He [Harris] went up to the fence. He had no reason to go in the backyard.”
The area along the road where Harris was working was 80-120 feet from the fence that encircled Tompkins’ backyard. The gas meter from the house was about 12 feet from the fence, but the work that day should not have included the meter, according to Tompkins.
During an interview, Harris said he “reacted to the dog coming to the gate and scaring me. It wasn’t anything intentional. I wasn’t out to do any harm. I was just doing my job.”
Harris said he feared the dog.
“The dog was tall enough to jump the fence. It was a 50-50 chance he would,” Harris said. “I love dogs… I was just trying to protect myself.”
James said that argument didn’t make sense.
“He would have to go over to the dog, and if one was afraid of a dog he wouldn’t have gone over. It’s a senseless act … without any level of empathy or feelings for another being,” the solicitor said.
Tompkins said Bear, a stray he found with five other new-born puppies four years ago, was not a threat, especially since the dog was behind a fence.
“I admit the dog was barking at him real good,” Tompkins said. “She’s not dangerous but she’s going to bark… To me, it [spraying paint] was malicious.”
A vet flushed Bear’s eyes and provided antibiotics, and Harris said he would repay Tompkins for those expenses.
“This is making me out to be a criminal,” Harris said. “I’m not.”
|A contractor who spray-painted a dog was found not guilty of animal cruelty by a DeKalb County State Court jury Thursday [Sept 17, 2009].|
Dario Harris maintained he was afraid of the barking black lab mix, Bear. Harris said even though the dog was in a fenced backyard, it could have jumped the fence and attacked him.
Harris was marking utility lines with fluorescent orange paint outside Jeffrey Tompkins' Stone Mountain home. Tompkins said Bear was a stray he found with five other newborn puppies four years ago, and that Bear was no threat.
In an interview before the trial, Harris said he loves dogs and "was just trying to protect myself."
Solicitor Robert James said he was disappointed in the verdict but respects the jury's decision.
He added: "This is not going to change the way we do things in DeKalb County. We take animal abuse very seriously, it's wrong, and we're going to continue to stand up for pet owners and animals, continue to hold people accountable."
|Source: Atlanta Journal Constitution - Sept 17, 2009|
Update posted on Sep 17, 2009 - 12:04PM
- Atlanta Journal Constitution - July 8, 2009
Note: Classifications and other fields should not be used to determine what specific charges the suspect is facing or was convicted of - they are for research and statistical purposes only. The case report and subsequent updates outline the specific charges. Charges referenced in the original case report may be modified throughout the course of the investigation or trial, so case updates, when available, should always be considered the most accurate reflection of charges.
For more information regarding classifications and usage of this database, please visit the database notes and disclaimer.