Texan Jerry Jermaine Mills was convicted by a jury for one of the most unimaginable things we can think of: torturing his dog. We’ll describe the facts of the incident and cover the legal defenses he tried that failed. Before we do, note that there will be some graphic depictions of an animal getting beaten in various ways. Just know that Mills is currently doing time for his crime. Let’s get into the weeds of the case so that if you ever witness someone doing the same, you can report them to the police.
A Dogged Attacked
Prosecutors presented the following facts in court. The evidence was based on witness testimony as well as security camera footage from a resident who lived next to the motel.
Mills threw his dog off of a balcony on the second floor of a motel. If that weren’t enough, Mills then came down the stairs and ran to the dazed creature, who had a leash coiled around its neck. He yanked the animal by the leash and into the air at shoulder height, then proceeded to spin the dog in the air as it flailed.
Unfortunately, it gets worse. Mills proceeded to use the dog on the leash as a “flail". Essentially, he whipped the dog around in the air by the leash and slammed him repeatedly to the ground. And if all of this didn’t “teach the dog a lesson,” Mills felt the need to end the onslaught by kicking the poor animal in the face.
Charged With Animal Cruelty
If you’re in shock, you’re not alone. Unfortunately for her psyche but fortunately for justice, Mills’ neighbor was there to witness the latter half of the torture with her own eyes. She was alerted when she heard the yelp of a dog in distress, being a dog owner herself. At trial, she later testified that the dog was clearly in pain from what she saw and heard. She recognized both Mills and his dog because she’d seen them both in the motel parking lot recently.
Mills was arrested and charged with a crime formally known as “third-degree felony of cruelty to a non-livestock animal.” The Texas Penal Code describes this crime as when a person “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly ... tortures an animal or in a cruel manner kills or causes serious bodily injury to an animal.” The same law defines “torture” as “any act that causes unjustifiable pain or suffering.”
Identity Crisis
At trial, Mills’ attorneys argued that there was insufficient evidence identifying him as the perpetrator of the attack on the dog, or identifying the dog as his. Mill himself took the stand, denying that he was the man shown on the recording after it was played by the prosecution. In fact, he denied having a dog at the time at all.
But Mills’ neighbor was able to confirm that the man who was assaulting the dog on the security camera footage was indeed Mills. On top of that, the prosecution had obtained the recording of a phone call Mills had made to his girlfriend from jail after he was arrested for the attack on the dog. When his girlfriend asks why he was in jail, Mills is heard answering, “My damn dog. I got an animal cruelty charge.” When she asked, “The dog that died, or the dog that you have with you?”, he responded, “Nah, the dog that I, uh, another dog in Mississippi.” And when she asked how it happened, he said, “Like, uhm, I kicked the dog, right, and I guess someone recorded me kicking the dog.”
A Question of Suffering
Mills’ second main argument was that even if he could be tied to the person and the dog on the footage, what he did not amount to “animal cruelty” as defined by Texas law. He argued that there was not enough evidence as to whether the animal suffered either “serious injury” or “unjustifiable pain,” as required by the statute. He said that the prosecution “failed to present any evidence as to the dog experiencing pain.” On top of that, he also argued that they failed to prove that his actions were “unjustified.”
The jury didn’t buy these arguments, though. And they were pretty convinced the man in the video was Mills. They ultimately convicted him, and he was sentenced to three years in prison and fined a thousand dollars for his crime.
Mills Gets No Sympathy from Appellate Court
Mills appealed his conviction, focusing on the second argument — lack of evidence of the required elements of “torture” — rather than on the question of his identity.
The appellate court found that there was ample evidence on the trial record that showed that Mills had inflicted “unjustifiable pain or suffering” on his dog. That, they said, meets the definition of “torture.” And since the statute allows a conviction on grounds of torture alone, it was unnecessary to prove the “serious bodily injury” element. They also confirmed that there was enough evidence to show that Mills had the required mental state (“intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly”) when he was attacking the animal.
The appellate court upheld Mills’ conviction.
You Can Prevent Animal Cruelty
Hopefully, you aren’t the kind of dog owner who would do anything approaching what Mills did to his dog. But if you’ve been in the shoes of Mills’ neighbor and witnessed what you think is animal torture, you could potentially hold them accountable if your state has similar laws on animal cruelty by reporting the incident to the police. If you’re interested in reading more about dog laws or animal cruelty, you can check out the free legal resources in our pet laws section.
Related Resources:
- How to Get Your Dog Back From Someone (Including Your Ex) (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- Angie Harmon Wants 'Law and Order' After Delivery Man Shoots Her Dog (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
- Is it Legal to Break a Hot Car Window To Rescue an Animal? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
