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?
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.
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.
https://www.futilitycloset.com/2014/10/27/podcast-episode-31...