Case Details
Share:

Case Snapshot
Case ID: 417
Classification: Neglect / Abandonment
Animal: dog (non pit-bull)
More cases in Prince William County, VA
More cases in VA
Login to Watch this Case


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


CONVICTED: Was justice served?

Please vote on whether or not you feel the sentence in this case was appropriate for the crime. (Be sure to read the entire case and sentencing before voting.)

weak sentence = one star
strong sentence = 5 stars

more information on voting

When you vote, you are voting on whether or not the punishment fit the crime, NOT on the severity of the case itself. If you feel the sentence was very weak, you would vote 1 star. If you feel the sentence was very strong, you would vote 5 stars.

Please vote honestly and realistically. These ratings will be used a a tool for many future programs, including a "People’s Choice" of best and worst sentencing, DA and judge "report cards", and more. Try to resist the temptation to vote 1 star on every case, even if you feel that 100 years in prison isn’t enough.

Case #417 Rating: 3.0 out of 5



Pet Store neglect and abuse
Woodbridge, VA (US)

Incident Date: Friday, Aug 23, 2002
County: Prince William

Disposition: Convicted

Defendants/Suspects:
» Martha F. Petrizza
» Mark Anthony Petrizza

Case Updates: 1 update(s) available

Stafford County grand jury indicted the owners of a pet store on nearly 90 counts of animal cruelty and related offenses. The indictments accuse Martha F. Petrizza, 42, and Mark Anthony Petrizza, 38, of selling sick and dying puppies and keeping dogs in rodent-infested facilities at Puppy Love Pets and Grooming.

According to an affidavit filed in Stafford Circuit Court, search warrants were obtained after Mike Null, Stafford's chief animal control officer, received numerous complaints about the Petrizzas.

One woman told Null that she bought a Chihuahua in April from the business that the Petrizzas operated out of their home and other property. The dog soon became sick and died. The woman said she had responded to a newspaper ad that guaranteed the health of the Chihuahuas.

Another man told Null that he found the facilities "smelly and dirty" when he went there in March. The man said he was so concerned about the health of a puppy that he paid $600 for it and immediately took it to get medical care.

In June, according to the affidavit, a veterinarian contacted Null and informed him that dogs were being mistreated and neglected. The veterinarian reported severe rodent infestation, including dead mice in the dogs' water bowls. He said some dogs had died of canine parvovirus and mange due to a lack of medical treatment.

Null reported in the affidavit that he saw dead mice in the water bowls and more than 20 mice running around the premises.

Along with animal cruelty, the Petrizzas are charged with failure to provide adequate care, misrepresenting an animal's condition and obtaining money by false pretenses. No trial date has been set.


Case Updates

After two days of jury trial, both Mark and Martha pleaded guilty to animal cruelty: Martha to 11 counts and Mark to 10 counts. Martha was sentenced to two 12 month sentences to be served concurrently, and Mark was sentenced to two nine month sentences to serve concurrently. They both received 10 years probation on the suspended sentences, were ordered to pay fines and restitution and are forbidden by the court to operate any type of animal business.
Source: Stafford Animal Control
Update posted on Jul 9, 2005 - 6:56AM 

References

  • The Virginia Pilot

« VA State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Prince William 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.



Send this page to a friend
© Copyright 2001-2011 Pet-Abuse.Com. All rights reserved. Site Map ¤ Disclaimer ¤ Privacy Policy