Posts: 2,477
Threads: 109
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
28
"But Justice David Harris said there was no evidence that the liquid was anything but water, and asked repeatedly whether it counted as interfering if there was no harm to the pigs, which were still taken to slaughter."
That sounds hopeful.
Posts: 5,150
Threads: 419
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
33
Quoted from the article:
" A Toronto woman who gave water to pigs on a truck headed to slaughter committed an act of kindness similar to when people gave water to Jews transported on cattle trains during the Holocaust"
Yes. Those thoughts went through my mind too. That woman's actions will not be forgotten by those animals. There is another reality much greater than this apparent one.
Posts: 17,171
Threads: 5,935
Joined: Jan 1970
Reputation:
78
I think they went after her so strongly because she showed an act of kindness to pigs bound for slaughter. Her action did not endanger anyone physically. What it did was endanger the way we pretend that we don't see live animals being trucked to slaughterhouses. She forced people to see the pigs as animals in need, suffering because of what we choose to do to them.
They responded to her act of kindness. People can't forget their faces. People want to eat neatly processed pork, they do not want to eat an animal that looks to them for help.
However, it is sounding like the crown doesn't have much of a case.
I think there will be a good outcome.
If Anita is sent to jail she will generate even more publicity. I don't think they want that.
Catherine