Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 2 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
saw some dogs running around on the other side of the river. They made an awful lot of racket and it sounded like something was being hurt,” said Mr. Baldwin.
Testifying about the telephone call from Mrs. Baldwin, Mr. Costello said, “Mrs. Baldwin called. I understood her to say the dogs were killing the cattle. I had a lot of young calves. I told my wife to get my gun.”
Mr. Costello further testified, “I saw the dog about 20 feet from the creek. The dog was running. I hollered, pulled the trigger and shot the dog.” Mr. Costello said that he then called the Rappahannock County Sheriffs Department because he knew Ray Pullen, the dog warden. He said that he wanted someone to be a witness after he had shot the dog.
None of the witnesses who testified, including Mr. Costello, said that they had seen any of the cattle in the field that night. Mr. Costello admitted that he had a conversation with Ray Pullen a few weeks before the shooting about under what circumstances a dog could be shot. Mr. Pullen told him that a dog could be shot if it was seen to be chasing someone’s animals.
Mr. Luke’s closing argument began with the question “Was the dog shot with malice? The only thing that led this defendant to believe that this dog was in his cattle was one telephone call. The dog was doing what it was bred to do: chase a coon. He knew under what circumstances he could take this dogs life. There was no provocation in this
90.9%