Ridiculous Cases

Where Animals Were

Put On Trial



Justice system allows for a lot of great things. It can
ensure that a crooked CEO gets his comeuppance. It can
ensure that everyone (mostly) gets the same treatment
when charged with a crime.
It also permits morons to sue cats. That's less inspiring.

"A Monkey Charged with Assault"
This is particularly true when it comes
to an archived New York Times story
from November 29, 1877, regarding an
altercation between a woman named
Mary, a monkey named Jimmy and their
ensuing court case.
Bottle-Alley, a place the New York Times described as an area where "personal
misunderstandings" between "Italian noblemen" are "settled" with "their favorite
weapon, the stiletto," was home to a street minstrel named Cassio Dillio, an organ
grinder with a "large specimen of the monkey tribe" named Jimmy by his side. One
day, as Cassio grinded his crank and Jimmy danced a jig, a "Robust daughter of the
Emerald isle," Mary Shea, decided to give little Jimmy a piece of candy as a token of
appreciation. Once Jimmy began to chow-down on some sweet nectar, Mary tried
to have a little fun with him by snatching the candy from Jimmy's mouth. Jimmy
"thereupon assumed a decidedly aggressive attitude" and bit Mary's finger. Cassio
and Jimmy were arrested and to court the case went.



Upon hearing the case the judge
stated, "If Mr. Darwin were
prosecutor in this case, he might
succeed in convincing me that the
statues authorize the holding of
criminal monkeys, but I do not
think I can legally commit him."
Miss Shea protested, but to no
avail. Jimmy removed his velvet
hat, climbed atop the judge's desk
and attempted to shake his hand.



Leeches Go to Ecclesiastical Court
In 1451, some leeches were in a pond near
Lausanne, Switzerland. Some guy thought there
were too many leeches in this pond. The local
Bishop took the pond leeches to court on the
count of there being too many leeches in the
pond.
The leeches were gathered in a pile before the
court and were told they had three days to leave
the area. We can only hope that after said ruling
was announced, the leeches simply slithered
stupidly in place in fierce defiance of the law like a
bunch of invertebrate James Deans, effectively
enraging the court. In truth, the leeches did not
respond, nor comply with the court's demand
because leeches, from any region of the world,
always and only speak leech. We're not even sure
if they have ears.
The initial threat in the case of God v. Leeches, for
some reason, didn't work. The court responded in
kind by taking another course of logical legal
action: they performed an exorcism on the leeches

German Shepherd Gets Old
Sparky:
In January 1926, a stray
German Shepherd in
Kentucky was charged with
the attempted murder of a
small child. it was
sentenced to death and
executed in the electric
chair.

Shortly after a cock from Basel laid a yolkless egg, legal
proceedings were put in to motion that would charge the cock
"for the heinous and unnatural crime of laying an egg" that if
hatched could yield a basilisk. In line with the law of the time,
the cock was appointed an attorney. They pled not guilty.

The prosecutor argued that such eggs were much sought after
by those in league with Satan due to how well they mixed with
other magic potion ingredients such as "eye of newt and toe of
frog, wool of bat and tongue of dog." Also stating that one of
magical persuasion would much rather prefer a yolkless egg laid
by a demon cock over a philosopher's stone, and that Satan
would employ such witches to create such eggs for the sole
purpose of causing injury to those of the Christian faith. The
cock's lawyer, like most modern court appointed attorneys,
proved himself utterly useless by pretty much agreeing to
everything stated by the prosecutor. His argument, though, was
that laying an egg was an involuntary act. Therefore, if the cock
was possessed by Satan and did lay an evil egg, it was through
no fault of his own. None of the law books of the time contained
a record of Satan making such a compact with one of brute
creation; he felt good about his case. So, what does a prosecutor
do if such a case has never been recorded within a book of law?
Reference the other book of law, the Bible.



Satan's Cock

In Augusta, Georgia in 1981, local resident Carl Miles
took to the streets to show off his incredible talking cat,
Blackie. Carl and his wife Elaine made a pretty good
living off of Blackie and her two catchphrases, "I love
you" and "I want my momma." They made such a good
living, in fact, that the state informed them that they
needed to file for a business license in order to continue
or face jail time. The Mileses eventually caved, but
appealed the case in an effort to challenge the
constitutional validity of the Augusta city ordinance as
they believed it infringed on Blackie's 1st Amendment
rights.
However, a three-judge panel of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the
lower-court decision, adding the following in a footnote:
This Court will not hear a claim that Blackie's right to
free speech has been infringed. First, although Blackie
arguably possesses a very unusual ability, he cannot be
considered a "person" and is therefore not protected by
the Bill of Rights. Second, even if Blackie had such a
right, we see no need for appellants to assert his right jus
tertii. Blackie can clearly speak for himself.
Do Cats Have the Right to
Free Speech?