Case Snapshot
Case ID: 17125
Classification: Neglect / Abandonment
Animal: dog (non pit-bull)
More cases in Franklin County, VA
More cases in VA
« Back to Search Results
Login to Watch this Case

New features are coming soon. Login with Facebook to get an early start and help us test them out!


Attorneys/Judges
Judge(s): George Jones


Images for this Case

For more information about the Interactive Animal Cruelty Maps, see the map notes.



Tuesday, Dec 7, 2010

County: Franklin

Charges: Misdemeanor
Disposition: Acquitted
Case Images: 2 files available

Person of Interest: Kathleen B. Miles

Case Updates: 1 update(s) available

A Rocky Mount woman has been charged with animal cruelty for allegedly failing to provide adequate food, shelter and medical care for her dog.

Kathleen B. Miles, 49, was charged Dec. 7 when Animal Control Capt. Marvin Woods responded to a complaint at her residence on East Street, he said.

Upon arrival, Woods said he observed Miles on the front porch with Karen Teralz with the Franklin County Humane Society. Miles was signing papers to relinquish the animal to Teralz.

When the small, female dog was removed from the dog house, its left rear foot was severely swollen with open sores, Woods said. The dog was lethargic and in poor body condition, he added.

Teralz transported the dog immediately to The Pet Clinic in Rocky Mount, where it was examined by Dr. Eric Lorens, who recommended euthanasia due to the severity of the infection and the animal's poor overall condition, Woods said. The dog was euthanized at that time.


Case Updates

A Rocky Mount woman was found "not guilty" of animal cruelty by Judge George Jones in Franklin County General District Court Wednesday afternoon.

Kathleen B. Miles, 49, had been charged with failing to provide adequate care for her dog by Animal Control Capt. Marvin Woods on Dec. 7, 2010, when the dog was relinquished to the Franklin County Humane Society.

The animal was immediately transported to the Pet Clinic of Rocky Mount, where it was euthanized later that day, according to Dr. Eric Lorens, veterinarian.

The 12-year-old dog, Jezebel, was suffering from a "large ulcerated tumor" on her left rear leg, Lorens said, and the animal was beyond the point of being saved by amputation. Given the size of the tumor and muscle atrophy in the leg, Lorens said the tumor would have been present for at least six months.

Lorens also testified that the dog was in poor overall body condition -- weak, anemic and 10 to 15 pounds underweight.

However, Miles submitted documentation, showing that she had taken the dog to Pell Animal Clinic on Nov. 1, 2010, and she testified that she had given the animal two weeks worth of antibiotics. But she did not see any improvement in the dog's condition after the two weeks of medicine.

Miles testified that she decided to have the animal euthanized and called the Pell Animal Clinic for information on Dec. 6, 2010.

Franklin County Humane Society Director Karin Perala contacted Miles that evening to see "how we could help," she testified. Miles agreed to sign over the animal the next morning.

Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Tim Allen asked the judge to focus on the three weeks between the time the animal finished the antibiotics and when Miles called the animal clinic to inquire of pricing to euthanize the animal.

"It was incumbent upon her (Miles) to do something to end the suffering of the dog, and she did nothing," Allen said. "It is against the law to withhold necessary care. She was required by law to take care of the dog."

Miles told the judge she waited the three weeks because she only gets paid once a month and did not have the money. Miles also said she was waiting for her daughter to get home from college because Jezebel was her dog.

Before announcing his verdict, Jones said he did not think the three-week period was "unreasonable."
Source: thefranklinnewspost.com - Apr 1, 2011
Update posted on Apr 1, 2011 - 9:42AM 

References

« Back to Search Results
« VA State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Franklin County, VA

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.