On June 23, 2010 two low life sons of bitches, Eric Skowron and Alisha King, went over to Josh Luck's house and stole Josh's dog Tyson out of Josh's back yard, then took Tyson down the street to Skowron's home where Skowron shot Tyson twice with a .45 pistol. Tyson survived the shooting and returned to Luck's house before collapsing in Luck's front yard. When Josh Luck found his dog Tyson in the front yard he took Tyson to the veterinarian. Josh thought Tyson had been hit by a car. Not so, the vet told Josh. Tyson had been shot. Fortunately Josh's neighbor has a surveillance video camera set up outside and caught the theft on tape. Watch the
Surveilance Video and see for yourself.
Right after he shot the dog, Skowron decided he'd better call nine one one and report the shooting before anyone else did. Here's a link to a story from ABC, which has the
9-1-1 Tapes From Tyson Dog Shooting and a transcript. The police responded, but they didn't believe Skowron's story.
Eventually Josh Luck saw his neighbor's surveillance video and called the police. Now, at this point I'd think that it's only a matter of time before these two scum buckets are sitting in the hoosegow for a few years. The prosecutor has a video showing a crime being committed, a confession by
scum bucket Skowron the alleged perpetrator, a severely wounded dog and a pissed off owner. What more is needed? Turns out that, as usual, I'm wrong. We've got to have hearings and plea bargains.
Plea Rejected In Dog Shooting Case From the article:
Mr. Skowron is charged with animal torture, killing or injuring animals, firearms discharge, making a false police report, petty theft, endangering, and criminal trespass. Ms. King is charged with animal torture, killing or injuring animals, petty theft, and criminal trespass.
Judge [Michael] Goulding rejected an agreement reached by prosecutors and defense attorney Don Cameron that would have dropped the weapons charge against Mr. Skowron in exchange for his plea on two first-degree misdemeanors and a fourth-degree misdemeanor, attorneys said.
Good for Judge Goulding, right? Why let these two off easy when the prosecutor has a winning case. Why indeed - here's why:
"It's alleged that he discharged a large-caliber handgun and fired more than one shot," the judge after the hearing. "If those allegations were true, that's a serious offense to community safety."
There you have it. The judge is anti-gun, so rather than give the prosecutor a good going over and telling him to get to work, the easy way out is rejected, as it should be, but for the wrong reasons. The judge could have rejected this because Eric Skowron is a real son of a bitch and scofflaw into the bargain, and he's unfit for the community. Consider that at the first hearing, Judge Goulding told both scum buckets to stay away from the Luck home, which includes driving past it. They refused to do so.
Suspect In Dog'S Shooting Rearrested From the article:
Eric Skowron appeared in court yesterday after a complaint was filed against him by Kelly Luck. Ms. Luck alerted the court that Mr. Skowron had been seen driving past her home in violation of the judge's orders.
After a brief hearing, Judge Michael Goulding revoked Mr. Skowron's recognizance bonds and ordered that he be held in the Lucas County jail in lieu of a $3,000 surety bond. Yesterday he was released from the jail after bond was paid.
So he's out again after covering a three grand bond. All this does is demonstrate that Skowron doesn't care about the Judge's order, which seems to be as effective as any other restraining order. Meanwhile, we're back at the negotiating table for reasons I cannot comprehend, and here's the latest from The Toledo Blade:
Pair Plead No Contest In Shooting Of Pet Dog. From the article:
As part of the agreement, prosecutors dropped charges against Mr. Skowron of theft, endangering, and filing a false police report. And they dropped a trespass charge against Ms. King.
That's right. Charges get dropped, and these were likely the easiest charges to prove. The scum buckets enter pleas of no contest to all the other charges. Why? Well, according to The Blade, who quotes the assistant prosecutor:
Assistant Prosecutor Michelle Albert-Turvey said after Wednesday's pre-trial that despite strong evidence against the couple, she preferred to seek a partial conviction now rather than wait for the outcome of the jury trial formerly scheduled for next week.
She preferred to flush any work that was done in preparation for the trial down the crapper in favor of less work, and she doesn't want to wait. I'm not surprised, but I'm angry.
We pay taxes. Most of our tax money vanishes into
The Anointed One's happy time machine in Washington D.C. A smaller amount gets hoovered up by
Our Beloved Dictator in Columbus, Ohio. A still smaller amount pays to support our system of (In) Justice at the county level. We pay to have prosecutors go to trial and put scum buckets like these two away in the hoosegow. We do not pay, or at least should not be paying, for Michelle Albert-Turvey with her pretentious hyphenated name to add another plea bargain to her resume, especially when she could have won this case if she'd been willing to work at it.
I suppose her case load is too large or the case isn't important enough.
Plea bargain? Plea bargain my ass. This was a winnable case and the prosecutor bitched it. Let's fire her and get someone who's willing to work. Now I know how the police feel when they pass a case to the prosecutor and the whole thing gets flushed because of a plea bargain.
