Parrot Detained for Yelling 'Police' to Warn Its Owners About a Drug Raid

> so they turned him over to a nearby zoo

The bird remained silent, but was still jailed. Where's Glenn Greenwald on this?

"Mama, advogado!"

That's also a great line for pointing out how funny the bird's future might be. Maybe it won't be cawing about drug busts, but I imagine some police officer down the line might be in for a shock when they walk into the zoo and a parrot starts yelling warnings.

I was really hoping for something about him not being a canary since he didn't "sing".

the pit bull is put down because it is dangerous to humans, not because it violates a human law. Relatedly, literal mules that carry drugs surely wouldn't be punished

If it is a properly trained attack dog (command words) and not just trained to attack everything, they may take on the task of retraining it. To do this they have to have a high confidence they know the commands to give the dogs to make them attack. This is something frequently not divulged by the owner who is probably claiming the dog "just went off".

Animals are more or less “things” as far as the law is concerned. A dangerous dog will be put down irregardless of intent, just like a dangerous boulder above a house will be removed or secured. Blame, guilt, or morality don’t come into play. Conversely, training an animal brings with itself the same culpability as using any other tool, say building a trap.

In civil law, you are responsible for any damage your animal causes, training or not.

There’s an interesting dissonance here with children: at least in my jurisdiction, Hilden categorically can not commit crimes before age 14, and (contrary to popular belief) their parents are not responsible, either. I’m unsure how this extends to the case where the parents actively encourage the behavior, though.

There are some advocates for some sort of legal personhood for, say, elephants or apes. But this is more in the context of environmental law, not life-or-death.

See also that gorilla that was killed when someone climbed into their enclosure, and the entirely uninformed internet brouhaha that ensued.

> For example, many pit bulls who attack or maim people these days get put down by animal control. If a court could prove that an animal had been trained/conditioned (by a proven guilty defendant) to commit the offending act, would said animal still be facing death?

Yes, putting down a dangerous animal isn't a criminal punishment premised on the animal's culpability (as a matter of law, animals lack the capacity for culpability), but a protective measure equivalent to condemning and demolishing a dangerous building.

So the bird should be incarcerated with its owner?

I agree with you, but what’s the real alternative? The zoo seems like the best thing, given that putting it in jail with its owner is probably unworkable.

While you are technically correct, in this particular case, the warning was to aid someone in committing a crime. And aiding someone in committing a crime is illegal in itself.

1- They're not charging the bird with anything. 2- They were trying to see if the bird would randomly spit out more clues on the owner (imagine the bird repeating "Call sally, call sally"). 3- I'm sure the bird has Charlie Kelly on retainer, and personally respect him for not being a stool pigeon.

There’s a much worse version of this in an episode of Black Mirror.