The big issue (beyond the horses’ well-being, of course) in the NY slaughter-truck case is the lack of charges against Bruce Rotz (and/or his company, Rotz Livestock). After all, these were his horses; he is the killer-buyer who was sending them to what would have been their bloody, gruesome ends at a Canadian abattoir. Alas, the only one charged was the driver, Robert Seitz. In an article in the Sunday Times Union, Gary Pasqua, the DA in St. Lawrence County (where the stop was made), says:
“The other issue is the section that he’s charged under specifically says that the person has to be the owner or the person taking ownership of the horses, and in this case we’re dealing with someone who was just driving the horses to their destination, so that’s another difficulty.”
This is true. But what Pasqua left out is the owner need not be present to be charged. NYS Ag and Markets, Article 26, Section 385 (emphasis mine):
“It shall be unlawful for any person, corporation, association, or other entity who owns or is in the process of taking ownership of a horse to import, export, sell, offer to sell or barter, transfer, purchase, possess, transport, deliver, receive, give away, hold, or accept a horse, or direct another person to [do any of that], with the intent of slaughtering or having another person, corporation, association, or other entity slaughter such horse for the purpose of human or animal consumption.”
Rotz clearly directed Seitz to transport these horses through NY for the purpose of slaughter, and thus to break NY law. Rotz (Rotz Livestock) is the one who should have been charged. And if he (his company) had been – note: he still could be – being that the owner is technically a corporation, the fine would have been $2,500 per horse – $62,500 in total. While jail would be far, far better (something this law does not allow for), that amount of money would act as a significant deterrent for him and others going forward.
The second point of contention I have with the DA stems from this: “On a global scale…the law itself may be unconstitutional because it’s affecting interstate commerce. My understanding is…the USDA approved of these horses being transported to Canada.”
While true that the shipping document clearly states the “Border Crossing” as “NY – Champlain,” this should not be taken as any kind of federal approval of violating NYS law. More likely, this is simple incompetence and/or indifference. But more to the point, DA Pasqua, as he well knows, is a member of the executive branch of government; it is not his place to rule on the relative constitutionality of laws. (Quick civics lesson: the legislative makes; the executive enforces; the judicial reviews.) And, needless to say, USDA paperwork does not constitute a judicial decision.
All this is to say, DA Pasqua, do the job you were elected to do: enforce – to the fullest extent – the laws of New York State, and charge/prosecute Bruce Rotz.
I was wondering about how this law is going to be enforced because I read some stuff that I didn’t really fully understand about the New York State law as it is written and that it will need amendments to make it more effective.
It sounds like the different organizations involved in stopping the slaughter bound truck and rescuing the horses will need some high powered attorneys to get the killbuyer prosecuted for breaking the New York law.
This reminds me of the higher level drug dealers who send people they refer to as “mules” across borders from Mexico, for example, to the United States carrying illegal drugs.
It sounds like the prosecutor just wants to go after “the mule” (the truck driver) and let “the pusher” (the horse dealer) get away with his crime of sending horses including sick horses through New York State to slaughter in Canada.