Quote of the Day

My girlfriend is in law school, so I’ve been trying to keep an open mind about lawyers. But when a defense attorney defends a drugged out mother who cut her son’s genitals off by saying that a dog, who had no blood on his fur at all, might have done it…well, it’s a bit indefensible.

Prosecutors told jurors Monday that a Texas woman accused of cutting off her infant son’s genitals two years ago was a drug abuser who showed no remorse or concern for her child as he was on the verge of death.

Katherine Nadal’s defense attorneys, however, said an expert will back up the 28-year-old woman’s claim it could have been the family dog, a 6-to-7 pound dachshund, that mutilated her son in their suburban Houston apartment in March 2007.

Camden Gothia, Holden’s father, testified that when Nadal came back, she was “not sober.” Nadal, who authorities say has a history of drug abuse and has prior drug arrests, later tested positive for cocaine, methadone and another drug.

Doctors who examined Holden will testify the genitals were cut in a perfect square by a sharp instrument, [prosecutor] Oncken told jurors. An animal control officer who examined the dog found no blood in its mouth, on its fur or on its paws, she said. Camden Gothia said the dog was not aggressive.

Allen Isbell, another attorney for Nadal, told jurors investigators did not find DNA or blood evidence on any instrument or sharp object they tested or in the sink or the garbage disposal.

“There is another reasonable explanation for the injuries to this child,” Isbell said. “An expert on dog behavior … will testify that in her opinion it is possible a dog could have made those injuries.”

[via]

--- Did you like this article? And you probably like contests, exclusive content, and smug commentary right? Then why aren't you liking Guyism on Facebook? Show some pride and click the "Like" button below right now: