New Jersey police officer Robert Melia Jr. will
not face criminal charges for allegedly having sex with five calves
under a perfectly bizarre ruling by Judge James J. Morley. We
previously discussed the case,
here.
Morley dismissed animal cruelty charges on the grounds that
the cows may have enjoyed having sex with
Melia.
Morley ruled that oral sex with
cows cannot constitute animal cruelty since the cows aren’t talking
and may not have been “tormented” or “puzzled” by the
experience.
In a simply amazing exchange with prosecutors,
Morley went into the uncertainties of man-cow relations: “If the
cow had the cognitive ability to form thought and speak, would it
say, ‘Where’s the milk? I’m not getting any milk,’” You are allowed
to drop your coffee in amazement at this point.
Morley went on to explain that children are
comforted by pacifiers and perhaps cows are equally pacified by
police officers in these cases: “They [children] enjoy the act of
suckling,” the judge said. “Cows may be of a different
disposition.” You are allowed to throw up in disgust at this
point.
Morley ignored that one cow head-butted Melia
in the stomach and appeared far from happy. The prosecutor objected
that the cows were “very upset” by Melia’s action and stated “I
think any reasonable juror could infer that a man’s penis in the
mouth of a calf is torment. It’s a crime against nature.” The
problem is that New Jersey does not currently have a ban on
bestiality as opposed to animal cruelty.
Morley did note “I’m not saying it’s OK. This
is a legal question for me. It’s not a questions of morals. It’s
not a question of hygiene. It’s not a question of how people should
conduct themselves.” That is reassuring. However, since the cows
can never complain about sexual abuse, Morley’s view would
effectively end cruelty prosecutions absent physical injury. While
“no means no,” “moo” means nothing in Morley’s court. Any defendant
could use the Morley defense of “the cows enjoyed
it.”