P.S. I predict a verdict of "not guilty." I didn't hear or read any testimony except the summary in the above article, but wouldn't the prosecution have to prove there was intent to cause harm to the animal? Or that the guy knew or should have known that his actions would cause harm and he did it anyway? That sounds like it would be pretty tough to prove. What do you think?

I think - well, I know - this type of thing has happened in Knoxville in the past without criminal charges being placed. In Bearden several years ago an elderly woman dragged her little dog to death, but she didn't get arrested b/c it was clear, based on her reaction (horror and grief), that she had no idea what she'd done. AND people were honking and yelling at her, too. When drivers are yelling and screaming at you, the first thought that comes to mind might be something other than, "My dog is dragging behind my vehicle."

What I've heard about this defendant is that he is mentally slow and from an impoverished and undereducated background. His response to the people who stopped him may have a lot to do with his limitations and background. We'll see what the jury thinks.

News reports: hung jury, mistrial

Hm. We'll see about that new trial. I'm not sure it's the assistant's call to make. That's an awful lot of money and time for a Class E felony they couldn't make when the lynch mob was standing outside the gates. With more public understanding of how awful things like this can just happen, I'll be surprised if they push this to a second round.

Word around the campfire is it was 10 to 2 for acquittal.