Shore Animal Control Defends Actions in Seagull Case

To the Editor: 
In response to a recent letter to the editor about the seagull cruelty case in Sea Isle City, the writer is misinformed as to how the legal justice system and the fines from prosecution in New Jersey court cases work. No private company or animal control officer writing charges on behalf of the state of New Jersey profit from fines.
In response to the false allegations that Shore Animal Control (SAC) would benefit from filing such cruelty charges, state statute Title 4:22-55 describes how fines are distributed from animal cruelty cases. There is no profit for filing charges in the state of New Jersey for any municipally appointed animal cruelty investigator or company they work for.
They file charges, not for profit, but because they feel there is probable cause for doing such based on the evidence the police or witnesses provide. Contractually, they are obligated to investigate all charges from residents or police of animal cruelty as the appointed cruelty investigator.
Every municipality has the right to appoint a New Jersey certified animal cruelty investigator in order to investigate and file charges of animal cruelty or neglect. Sea Isle City’s designated animal cruelty investigator who works for SAC is Officer Holly Gavrilow. She is the officer who represented the state in the filing of the charges against the suspect.
SAC, as well as any independent animal control company or its officers, do not benefit financially in any way from filing charges on behalf of the state. To the contrary, the officer filing charges spends numerous volunteer hours in court and in preparation for trials. The municipality does not compensate any officer for filing any charges. It is a voluntary service to pursue charges which they feel are warranted in their duties to protect animals in the municipalities they service.
Gavrilow chose to file cruelty charges based on the original police investigation and the reports from eyewitnesses which appeared to show intent to harm a seagull which is a federally protected migratory bird. This is not the first case we have investigated pertaining to seagull cruelty. SAC provided the evidence which led to a fine of $1,500 for a man from Corbin City who admitted to intentionally running over a flock of birds resulting in death in Upper Township. New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NJSPCA) prosecuted this case using our evidence and they retained the fines pursuant to state law mentioned above.
A donation to a charity is not a legal remedy to animal cruelty charges in any court case and would be rejected by the court system as such. SAC hires both animal control officers and animal cruelty investigators who take their job and animal cruelty seriously. How a resident feels about seagulls is irrelevant as there are state laws that protect them. In any case, the suspect is innocent until proven guilty.
Fortunately, there is a legal system and process to allow justice to prevail. There are strong laws in New Jersey to protect animals from cruelty. SAC is fortunate to be affiliated with dedicated and certified cruelty investigators who are committed to protecting animals in the municipalities they serve.
ED. NOTE: Gentille is the manager of Shore Animal Control.