He's a professor of Biology. Do you think that has changed the way he looks at animals?
Here's a link to the George Anne article, it has a little more info that than the Herald one.
Why would he do this? It was on campus, surely other people were around. Also, what was the officer who arrested him doing while this happened? I love the feral cats on campus. Many college campuses that I have worked at have feral cat colonies living at them.
Sloopjohnb, that you for the line to the George Anne Artice. The Hearald also said something to the effect about Durden kicking his dog in the head/face about 5 times!
Where is the article with more? I didn't see it on the college paper. He needs a butt kicking for sure.
Sloop, can you check your link? The Herald paper had lots more info but I want to know more if there is more.
Something just doesn't add up in this story. A man of such education, high praise and adwards in the field of biology and research associated with the care and disease prevention of animals - would encourage his dog to attack a cat. I just don't think we have heard the whole story. I wonder if the officer was quick to make an assumption...one that was wrong?
There is more to the story , according to the Herald article, than the cat issue.
It seems his dog was "encouraged" to attack an elderly dog , who was walking along side the owner( did not have lease ), and also the professor was seen kicking his dog very hard in the head/face , at least 5 times.
Dixie2 - if you can find the original article...the other dog was not on a leash and the two dogs (while walking their neighborhood)apparently did get into a scuffle...and the incident report that Hollie Deal found stated that Mr. Durden was kicking and using his foot/legs to separate the dogs. It also stated that the other family didn't pursue any charges or compensation for vet bills and that most likely would be because they were at fault for not having their dog on a leash. I have no patience for animal abuse or violent animals but I just have a nagging feeling that Hollie Deal has over sensationalized this incident...she tends to do that very often. The prior incident report (again that Hollie Deal found it necessary to seek out) did not say ANYTHING about Mr. Durden encouraging the attack. Just stating the facts as they are in the incident report...both incident reports. I would just hate to think HOllie Deal has single handedly ruined the personal and professional life of someone if it turns out to be something more to the story than we've been told. Just saying...
I despise animal cruelty. But I do not believe everything I read. And I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. And the comments I have heard and read about how this professor should be shot, horsewhipped, hung up by his thumbs, and all other sorts of cruel and unusual punishment sicken me.
People have already judged and condemned an individual based on news articles when they have no knowledge of the truth. And most of them probably go to church and proclaim themselves Christians.
Amen Bryant! That is all I'm saying too. If he was going to seek out a cat for his dog to attack...do you really think he'd be walking the dog on the walking trail around the GSU Library and Health Center?? Come on...he's obviously smart...just look at his credtials. Just doesn't add up...just wonder how much the officer truly heard and saw...without making assumptions. I honestly can't believe the GSU Police Chief didn't have a little anxiety when he read the part about the "baying of the dog and the officer knew what that was and what that meant from all of his years of deer hunting with dogs!!! I mean come on...really? You are going to put that in your police report?? AND, in my opinion deer hunting with dogs is animal cruelty...both the dogs and the deer!!
Oh yeah animal lover. The paper has it in for that poor old professor an just made up the cop's report. You ain't no animal lover. You're a blind sheep. What about what his neighbor said? I think Holly Deal has enough crime to report she don't need to make nothing up. It's all in the cops report anyway. I think ya ought to be glad somebody tries to find out the whole story instead of covering things up like the college wants to do.
Yeah like Ms. Bragg ruined the life of the teacher who texted and had sex with a teenager. Like she ruined the lives of the dope dealers she writes about. Or the people who killed somebody. Yeah, she must have been bored and made up all that about the cat killer. You reckon he gave her a bad grade in biology? Reckon her boss knows about her sensationalizing stuff? I agree that you, animal lover, are not what you say. Maybe you are Durden's wife. I don't know him but I do know one of his neighbors and somebody needs to ask about his spraying some kind of crap on a woman. They called the law. Maybe Ms. Bragg should look into that incident. He ain't the saint you prissy butts think he is and why would the cop lie in a report? You and your version of things stink like week old fish.
Oh - and people with high degrees, intelligence and award NEVER rape, molest, steal, cheat or lie, do they? Yeah this man deserves his day in court and people wanting him to die are wrong, but evidence and the cop's story are pretty strong and to think just because he is a professor and won awards, he is a good person, is ignorant. Why wouldn't he talk to the paper?
I couldn't read the Herald story because I don't have a subscription, but I was curious if it said for sure if the dog was on a leash? Seems like if the dog was on a leash it would have been harder for him to go after the cat without Dr. Durden's influence. I know several faculty/staff members that help feed and even vet those cats on campus, so there are people that care about them, it's so sad one had to die that way, so unnecessary.
Yes, the dog was on a leash the whole time, according to police reports. The story in the Herald only reported what the police report said, or what someone else who was quoted said. Nothing in the article was sensationalized. The report is public record and anyone should be able to get a copy from GSU Police. Mr. Durden did not answer phone calls or return multiple calls seeking comment. Had he done so, he would have had equal opportunity to share his version of the incident.
I'm going to hazard a guess that when someone, especially someone with a clean record, is charged with a crime, their lawyer is going to strongly recommend not talking to the press. Why?
One may pretend otherwise, but the newspaper's job is first and foremost to sell papers.
Reporters have very little time to research and write up papers, so their error rate is rather high.
Both of these factors make it highly likely that someone not used to being caught up in the justice system is going to have their conversations inaccurately presented by the press. And not all of us have the luxury of being paid to write a newspaper column in which we can present our own side of the story in a legal proceeding.
The paper reports what it finds to be the facts at the time; my only complaint is that we almost never hear of what the final outcome is. This cat killing case may be different but most of the time when you read about a big drug bust or a robber being caught you never find out what happened to them. Were they found guilty or innocent?
The article written clearly stated " according to reports," "he said," etc. Every detail was attributed to either a report or a person's statement. Nowhere did the article state Durden is guilty; only that he was charged, and that the officer stated he observed certain things. wwwhunter, when we have the resources and staff, we do follow up on more serious crimes and incidents. With a limited staff it is impossible to follow up on each and every charge.
looks like scindapsus should change that name to SOURPUSS.....
always complaining about the newspaper and thier writting folks.
looks like old sourpuss would get off that lazy griping @$$ and get a job at the herald and do the writting...since scindapsussourpuss is so smart and all that..........
Scindy got a burr up her booty. Anybody wid a lick o sense kin see dat man evil. Why the cop make stuff up like dat? He don't. He call it like he see it.
wild and frustrated turkeymonkey,
It looks like y'all are the ones with the problem (reading? comprehension?). All I pointed out was that there are perfectly good reasons why someone in this situation might be advised, and well advised, not to talk to the press. If you disagree with those reasons, how about explaining why instead of ... wait, who am I talking to here??! Okay, never mind.