The Senate Judiciary Committee is advancing a bill that creates an enhanced penalty for animal abuse.
Testimony on the bill included a graphic report about the killing a horse West River.
Senate Bill 156 is being named after the death of a horse named Cheyenne. The bill stems from an incident in October near Pactola where Cheyenne was found dead. Lacy Wolff owned the horse. She told lawmakers on the committee the scene was “too horrendous to believe.”
“I came across three very large puddles of blood. I kept thinking, ‘How could she have any blood left?’ Once I saw Cheyenne, I knew she was dead. Her eyes were glossed over, and her belly was distended," Wolff told committee members during public testimony. "I just fell to my knees trying to figure out what happened. I could not find any wounds until I came to her backside. I saw a dreadful site.”
Wolff told the committee that the state veterinarian confirmed that the cause of death was "internal bleeding via sodomization and rape." A broken shovel handle was found covered in blood near Cheyenne's body. The killer isn’t caught yet.
In current statute animal cruelty and bestiality are both a Class 6 felony, punishable by a two-year max imprisonment and a $2,000 fine. Sen. Taffy Howard said that’s not justice or "proportionate" for things like the “torture” of an animal. She’s sponsoring SB 156. It makes animal cruelty that’s “depraved, heinous, sadistic or wicked” a Class 4 felony, and with it a 10-year max in prison and $20,000 fine.
Howard pointed to the statistic that animal cruelty is sometimes a precursor to violence against humans, naming notorious individuals like serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer and 1997 Pearl High School shooter Luke Woodham.
"It is dangerous offender behavior. The person or people conducting the kind of sadistic torture of an animal is not just a danger to the animals," Howard said. "They are a danger to everyone in society."
She later remarked that the "evil is here" in South Dakota evidenced by the death of Cheyenne.
Some lobbyists, while empathizing with Wolf’s testimony, opposed the bill. Some argue that 10 years in prison is a hefty crime increase from the current two-year penalty. Others expressed concern that the terms used in the bill are not defined, and thus up to a prosecutor’s or judge’s discretion.
Courts in South Dakota often use "plain meaning" which is the ordinary, or standard definition of a word.
Terra Larson is a registered lobbyist for the SD Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. She explained to the committee why lawyers take issue when you leave definitions up to discretion.
"Technically both sides get to propose their own jury instructions on how they would define that, right? Which then, in the event of a conviction would lead to a huge appellate question that would go before our Supreme Court as to whether a jury instruction was properly set forth, and there's an ability for then a reversal in regard to that," Larson said. "That's why we define these things, so we don't have to deal with these types of reversals."
Some opponents worry the statute could be used by animal activist groups, like PETA, to target South Dakota’s top industry. Matthew Bogue is a registered lobbyist for the South Dakota Farm Bureau.
“You know while most people definitely want to come forward and be supportive of agriculture, there are those individuals that would seek to put them out of business and maybe weaponize the statute to hurt individuals,” Bogue said.
Sen. Howard spoke during rebuttal, saying it wouldn't apply to farmers and ranchers.
"The only people this would apply to are the people that are caught in the animal cruelty statute already," Howard said. "So, the people in the ag community, whoever has this fear of being caught in this, are they currently being caught under the animal cruelty law? No."
Lobbyists asked for summer workgroup on the issue if lawmakers want to change the law rather than passing SB 156. A similar work group in 2013 led to the existing statute.
The bill advances four to three to the Senate floor.
