GALVESTON, Tex., Nov. 13 — Jurors heard opening arguments on
Tuesday in the trial of a bird-watching enthusiast
who fatally shot a cat that he said was stalking endangered shorebirds.
James M. Stevenson says he was protecting piping plovers.
The defendant, James M. Stevenson, is the founder of the Galveston Ornithological
Society and leads bird-watching tours on this Gulf Coast island 60 miles
southeast of Houston. If convicted on animal cruelty charges in the
shooting last November, he faces up to two years in jail and a $10,000 fine.
Mr. Stevenson, 54, does not deny using a .22-caliber rifle fitted
with a scope to kill the cat, which lived under the San Luis Pass
toll bridge, linking Galveston to the mainland. He also admits
killing many other cats on his own property, where he operates
a bed and breakfast for some of the estimated 500,000 birders
who come to the island every year.
In her opening statement, Paige L. Santell, a Galveston County assistant
district attorney, told the jury of eight women and four men that
Mr. Stevenson “shot that animal in cold blood” and that the
cat died a slow and painful death “gurgling on its own blood.”
She said that the cat had a name, Mama Cat, and that though
the cat lived under a toll bridge, she was fed and cared for
by a toll collector, John Newland. He is expected to testify.
Whether the cat was feral is the crucial point in this case.
Mr. Stevenson was indicted under a state law that
prohibited killing a cat “belonging to another.
” Prompted by this case, the law was changed on
Sept. 1 to include all cats, regardless of ownership.
Ms. Santell argued that because Mr. Newland had
named, fed and given the cat bedding and toys,
the cat belonged to him and was not feral.
Mr. Stevenson’s lawyer, Tad Nelson,
admitted in his opening statement that his
client went to the San Luis Pass toll bridge
with “an intent to kill.” but that he had planned
to kill a wild animal that was preying on endangered
piping plovers. “This man has dedicated his whole
life to birds,” Mr. Nelson said, pointing at
Mr. Stevenson.
The case has prompted emotional commentary on the Internet.
Cat enthusiast blogs have called Mr. Stevenson a
“murderous fascist” and a “diabolical monster.”
Birding blogs have defended his right to dispense
with a “terrible menace” and have set up funds
to help pay for his defense.
In an interview in a courthouse elevator during a
break in the trial, Mr. Stevenson said heatedly
that cat fanciers who have condemned him and sent him
hateful correspondence “think birds are nothing but sticks.”
“This is about wild species disappearing from your planet
,” he said, adding, “I did what I had to do.”
Testimony followed from police officers and the veterinarian
who performed the autopsy on Mama Cat, a white and gray
tabby mix. The jurors were shown several photographs
of the bloodied cat, reminiscent of an episode of “CSI: Miami.”
Pictures of the crime scene showed trays of cat food,
blankets and cat toys hanging from strings under the
bridge. The .22-caliber rifle Mr. Stevenson used
to kill the cat along with his magazine full of Remington
hollow-point bullets were also on display.
The prosecution and defense wrangled repeatedly
about whether witnesses could accurately assess
the cat’s state of mind.
“He’s not qualified to know what the cat was feeling,”
said Mr. Nelson, when a police officer, John P. Bertolino Sr.,
testified that the cat was in terrible pain when he arrived at
the crime scene. The cat died en route to a Humane
Society facility.
The trial, which is expected to take a week, had few
spectators save a handful of bird lovers and cat lovers
who sat on opposite sides of the courtroom. One side
nodded emphatically at Ms. Santell’s arguments, and
the other nodded whenever Mr. Nelson objected.
“How people feel about the trial depends on who you talk to,”
said Victor Lang, a local historian, adding that bird-watchers
and cat fanciers obviously had the strongest views.
Though others may argue passionately about whether
Mr. Stevenson should be punished, Mr. Lang said he
did not have strong feelings about the case.
“But you see, I’m a dog person,” he said.
“If he had shot a dog, then I’d be more upset.”
watch video
browse videos
help 
