Friday, June 20, 2008

Dillard Arraigned

Mary Ann Grier had a report in this morning's ER that accused Wellsville resident Eric Dillard plead not guilty to murder yesterday in County Common Pleas Court. Next step for this case will be Pre-Trial motions which is set to occur July 7. In the meantime Dillard's bond was kept the same. The judge reportedly remarked he will review the bond issue at that time. Dillard's attorney said the amount of bond is unconstitutional. Does the constitution have set limits on the amount of bond the courts impose? I imagine the judge will be hitting the law books checking on that. The prosecutor wants to keep it at $2 million to insure that the accused sticks around for his trial.

The philosophy of the new gun law that goes into effect in September crossed my mind. I'm wondering if jurors for this trial will be considering that. I know it's a question that won't be answered until post trial but with Dillard claiming self-defense it came to mind. The shooting occurred before the new laws take effect but this particular case seems to be a prime example of parts of the reasoning behind this bill. Personally, I don't think taking it to the street would make it excusable even under the new law.

There's lots of questions concerning the Dillard case that haven't been answered. One in particular that I have in mind is whether Farley was himself armed and maybe his weapon was hidden before the police arrived on the scene. It was reported another weapon was not found but some say there was another. This might be one of those intangibles that will never be answered.

ole nib

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is against the law to trap cats and shoot them. Alley Cat Aid Brigade will pursue all legal avenues that are available to stop "someone" from performing acts of cruelty against stray cats.

You do not have to be inhumane and uneducated. We are living in the year 2008 not 1708. The rest of civilization has advanced to a more enlightened and progressive era. For God's sake and for the sake of a creature who has as much right to this planet as you do...have a little mercy.
C. Carmichael
A.C.A.B.

Anonymous said...

I believe you are mistaken Ms. Carmichael. The law says you are not allowed to poison domestic animals or kill them without the owners consent but I don't believe the law says anything about trapping animals on your property. If I'm wrong then please quote the section of law that states it is illegal to trap cats.

Anonymous said...

You are correct, there is no law against trapping cats. There are cruelty laws though.
Ohio State Law 959.02, INJURING ANIMALS says that, "No person shall maliciously, or willfully, and without the consent of the owner, kill or injure a horse, mare, foal, filly, jack, mule, sheep, goat, cow, steer, bull, heifer, ass, ox, swine, dog, cat, or other domestic animal that is the property of another. This section does not apply to a licensed veterinarian acting in an official capacity."

Ohio law 959.13 defines companion animals as any animal that is kept inside a residential dwelling and any dog or cat regardless of where it is kept.
I stated that it was against the law to trap cats and shoot them. I did not say it was against the law to trap them.
I would think that trapping a cat to shoot it would fall under 959.02

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the clarification.

Anonymous said...

Well, a $2 million bond might not be unconstitutional, Nib, but it sure doesn't seem fair when another Wellsville man, accused of murder (who also is claiming self defense) is running around free after getting a measley $100,000 bond. Tell me how he is any better than this Dillard?
My relative is sitting in jail (nearly a year now) after pleading guilty to assault and abduction and is on $750,000 bond, until he is sentenced, so how is THAT fair? He is no greater flight risk than the man out on $100,000 bond.
This system sucks.

Anonymous said...

One year ago today J C Amato shot his wife to death.

Anonymous said...

The real question is why Dilliard, as a convicted felon, had a firearm in his possession. With regards to bail, I believe the judge mistakenly believes two or more wrongs (in previous bail matters) make a right.

Anonymous said...

Anyone know when the dang trial is for Dillard?