WARNING: Graphic Image - Teens Arrested After Setting Chicken on Fire

 

ABILENE, TX -- Three suspects were arrested in Abilene after posting a disturbing video on social media of setting a chicken on fire. 

Jaden Blake, 18, Kallan Christopher, 17, and another suspect who is 16-years-old were charged with State Jail Felony Animal Cruelty charges.

"The three are accused of animal cruelty after a video surfaced on social media depicting the suspects lighting a fowl on fire on a rural county road and watching it burn to death." said the Abilene Police Department on Facebook. 

The investigation started on January 22 after the video was sent to the APD

Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily

The LIVE! Daily is the "newspaper to your email" for San Angelo. Each content-packed edition has weather, the popular Top of the Email opinion and rumor mill column, news around the state of Texas, news around west Texas, the latest news stories from San Angelo LIVE!, events, and the most recent obituaries. The bottom of the email contains the most recent rants and comments. The LIVE! daily is emailed 5 days per week. On Sundays, subscribers receive the West Texas Real Estate LIVE! email.

Required

Most Recent Videos

Comments

There are far too many "passes" people get, whether they're women who believe they're beyond reproach, due to their sex, or minorities who play race cards, in attempts to skirt responsibility and any possible consequences from their criminal behavior.

In this case, these three low-rent sob's will latch unto the "youth card", and expect leniency because their balls haven't dropped yet, and well.....everybody just adores children, or at least we're all expected to, and the smirk on the faces of every juvenile/teenaged mugshot reminds us: "You have to go easy on me, I'm just a kid!"

This is why things like this will never end, due to our love affair with criminal's seemingly inexhaustible lists of extenuating bullshit circumstances, which regardless of the guaranteed chance of recidivism, almost always sway the morons peppered within jury pools.

These three should be rounded up, doused with accelerant, in a public exhibition and experiment to see how long shit burns. This impending fate would certainly treat the public to much more interesting and humorous mugshots.

"This is why things like this will never end, due to our love affair with criminal's seemingly inexhaustible lists of extenuating bullshit circumstances, which regardless of the guaranteed chance of recidivism, almost always sway the morons peppered within jury pools."

I don't know the people involved in this incident, but something about your comment had me burst out laughing. Reminds me of this:

https://youtu.be/OcZFpHO6bPo

..is these two most likely see themselves as adorably mischievous as the kitty, and will someday meet someone with a strong enough constitution to remind them that they certainly aren't.

Inevitably, the effects of harming the innocent, and of a cruel disposition, will hunt us down. Sad.

MjNS, Sun, 02/03/2019 - 02:27

Not only do we have juvenile delinquints that do this to animals, but you put the f***ing picture there ...with a warning of graphic images. Gee thanks for that. Hope it grabbed your readers attention, which was, I am sure the point of putting it there. Violence involving animals is on the rise and there are some that will use for publicity, not naming names. I hope those two little b*****ds get what they deserve. Animal abuse is an early sign of serial killers. I say light em up.

It's said that, these days, it seems like the police have to protect criminals from the rest of the population rather than the reverse being true. It makes me think when I read these comments on this site condemning people death for traffic incidents and then rushing to the defense of animals—which seems like an indication of psychopathy among the commentariat. I suppose the police just do what they can!

(Just kidding. Mostly. Lol. :3 )

Animal cruelty is a precursor to violence against people, almost always. If we were all left to our predatory instincts and their devices, I suppose killing for the sake of killing would consequently, and subjectively be seen as "good" or "bad", depending on where you fell within the pecking order, and it's challenges. We're not, however, left to our own devices and discretion, when it comes to personally disposing of useless and dangerous individuals. In this country, "Enemies" are things which are assigned to credulous, recruitable young people, not real-life, sentient dilemmas that average private citizens are entrusted to deal with themselves, on a personal level. Suspect? Undoubtedly. Questioned? Hardly ever.

Oddly, those who give their victims no consideration or say in their well-being, are given just that, by a justice system which is obliged to protect the vile and innocent alike.

Under such a system, victims of violence, animals included, deserve a reasonable expectation of personal safety, and when this expectation becomes an exception, rather than the rule, the innocent suffer, and we're forced to question the validity and practicality of such a system, and possibly seek out other options.

Those who steal away reasonable expectations of safety from others, deserve absolutely none themselves.

This is presumptuous of you. How certain can you be that others don't see you, yourself, as vile, dangerous, useless, or even parasitic? We can make assumptions about what others think of us, but even being "well liked" may be less a reality than our own interpretation of it. Mind you, I'm not questioning your conclusions here, but the way you've arrived at them. I agree that cruelty to animals is disgusting and, ultimately, a dangerous pattern if left unchecked.

Your issues with the system... I don't want to accuse you of "whining"... After all, open discussion and raising issues is how a putative democracy supposedly works and intended to be a means to prevent various, well, acts of politics by other means, (which is a predictable result of stifled speech).

Perhaps I'm an overprotective person in general, even to society at large in the sense of civic duty, but I'm wary of the slippery slope your call for "other options" presents and it's implications. It's often the case that those who imagine themselves least likely to suffer from these kind of pronouncements advocate them the strongest. Reality, however, always offers us unexpected consequences, sometimes costly insights, into the holes of the models we build.

You're probably the safest of all in the system as it is, Lares. Without a well managed system around them, many, many people are helpless. Why not err on the side of investing in the better natures of others instead of viciously attacking those who do things we find personally threatening—a tactic that so often opens up a can of worms that ensures protracted repercussions to all involved, which is to say, to society at large? Deeming these guys as irredeemable... Will you stand the test if judged by similarly strict standards?

An idea to consider.

Post a comment to this article here:

X Close