Litigation over the ownership of a cat has just ended because a key witness who was supposed to give evidence, a dog called Hamish, has died.
Della Macdonald, in a dispute with another woman about who owned the cat, had planned to call her pet dog Hamish as a witness at Stornoway Sheriff Court on the Isle of Lewis.
Ms Macdonald claimed that when the court saw the affection the cat showed to Hamish in court, by snuggling up to him, it would be clear that the fought-over feline was hers.
The story began in 2010 when Nicola Dempster, a 19-year old hotel chef from the Western Isles off Scotland, purchased a kitten. She named him Smudge and cared affectionately for him but after six months he got lost and disappeared.
Ms Dempster searched all Smudge’s favourite haunts, posted a Facebook appeal and reported him missing to the Cats Protection Society. All of that was, though, to no avail.
Meanwhile, Smudge had turned up in a pitiful state outside the door of Della Macdonald. She nourished the black and white stray back to health and named him Oscar.
Later, Ms Dempster was euphoric to spot ‘Smudge’ at a roundabout and took him home.
Police were summoned to an explosive altercation when Ms Macdonald discovered where ‘Oscar’ had been taken.
Ms Macdonald’s legal action to reclaim ‘Oscar’ has now been discontinued as her star witness, Hamish the dog, has died and Ms Macdonald has become ill. The judge, Sheriff David Sutherland, decreed that the cat should remain with the original owner, Miss Dempster.
There are odd precedents of cases in which people have disputed the ownership of pets. In 2009 in Florida, two women fought a civil case over a 13-year old African Grey parrot.
For ten years, Angela Colicheski from Florida had loved her parrot Tequila. Then, one day he flew away over her garden fence. Three years later, she was sitting in a local Dunkin Donuts chatting to Sarita Lytell, whom she’d just met, when they started to talk about parrots. Lytell said she had one called Lucky that she had found three years earlier.
It became evident that he was the one Colicheski had lost but Lytell refused to return him. Tequila didn’t give sworn testimony but he did give squawk testimony. As soon as he was brought into court and saw his previous owner he emitted what witnesses said was a loud call of recognition. The court ruled he was the personal property of Ms Colicheski.
In 2006 in Argentina, in litigation between Jorge Machado and Rio Vega, the court ruled that a parrot called Pepo, which each man claimed was his, should be imprisoned until it uttered the name of its owner. Five days later, it squawked “Jorge” and sang the anthem of his owner’s favourite football team – San Lorenzo. Game over. Mr Vega lost.
Dogs have given testimony in earlier cases. In 1987, a border collie called Tetter appeared in a constructive dismissal case in Hampshire. It became relevant to know whether Tetter, who had been the subject of wrathful outbursts of the employer in the case, was well behaved. Tetter was called to give evidence and responded correctly when given such instructions as “sit” and “up”. His evidence assisted the claimant’s case.
In 1994, a robbery conviction of two men was secured with the assistance of Ben, an Alsatian tracker dog. On appeal, the Lord Chief Justice said that evidence about a dog’s behaviour was admissible provided jurors were warned that “the dog may not always be reliable and cannot be cross-examined.”
Professor Gary Slapper was Head of Law at The Open University 1997-2011. He is now Global Professor at New York University, and Director of New York University in London. He is also Visiting Professor of Law at the Open University. His latest book More Weird Cases is published by Wildy, Simmonds & Hill
You can follow him on Twitter @garyslapper
