I’m not sure how many of the murders this year in Philadelphia have been prosecuted. But rest assured, there will be justice served if seagulls are slaughtered (link):
A Municipal Court judge today convicted a longshoreman of killing 189 seagulls at the Packer Marine terminal in February 2006 and fined him the minimum $14,175 – or $75 per bird.
In rejecting the prosecution request that Daniel Gallagher be fined the maximum $47,800, Judge Deborah Shelton Griffin said she believed the bird massacre was the result of an accident.
But Griffin said the law did not allow her any leeway in that the prosecution did not have to prove willfulness or intent to win a conviction.
Defense lawyer S. Philip Steinberg said he would appeal and seek a trial in Common Pleas Court.
Griffin also directed that Gallagher, the president of an International Longshoremen’s Union local, pay $5,000 in restitution for a pickup truck that was totaled when he plowed through the birds and crashed into a trailer chassis.
A week ago, Gallagher took the stand in his own defense after Assistant District Attorney William James mounted a prosecution that featured three dozen photographs, a videotape, and a witness list that included city, state and federal officials and a self-taught seagull expert.
During the trial it was established that Gallagher, of South Philadelphia, had worked more than 12 hours supervising the unloading of a ship, and was returning to the container office at the port in a company-owned Ford Ranger pickup truck when he ran into the birds on a lot where chassis for containers usually were parked.
A total of 183 ring-billed gulls were dead at the scene, and six had to be euthanized.
After hitting the birds, Gallagher slammed on his brakes and skidded about 50 feet into a stacked pair of chassis, pushing the 13,200 pounds of steel 18 or more inches. The air bag deployed before he drove the mangled wreck of a pickup to the office and reported the accident.
I know the whole thing sounds stupid, but if it’s unintentional and an accident, as the judge believed it was, it seems absurd to call it “animal cruelty,” doesn’t it?
Sal
September 21st, 2007
I went to pick up the birds that were left twitching in horror and pain to be euthanized; I saw what a massacre it was. It was evident that it was no accident and it was ill intended, so… IT IS ANIMAL CRUELTY. I do not care how that judge wants to label it, it was a criminal act. By the way check this site, it gives you a better idea of the character of the judge: caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/pennsylvaniastatecases/supreme/J-127-2006mo.pdf –
I guess ignorance is a blessing… for you!!!
Miriam Moyer
September 21st, 2007
If that was an “accident”, the driver is a public menace and his license should be revoked permanently! An “accident” of that kind could have slaughtered people.
Having his lie accepted as truth this time, perhaps next time it will be people he doesn’t happen to like.
MM
Paulina
September 21st, 2007
Unintentional? accident??
Just READ the above ~
“AFTER” he plowed into the birds, THEN he slammed on the brakes.
What a load of crap!
This does not say much for the Judge who ruled in this case.
Where is the justice for this mass murderous crime?
Shame on humanity for this!
I hope someone plows into them both someday (the criminal and the judge)!!!
Michele C
September 21st, 2007
IF it were an accident and the birds were in a flock in the area – there’s NO WAY
that many would have been killed. Birds aren’t stupid – they’d have flown up and away. It seems he kept at it. If he had only killed 10-20 seagulls – his story would make sense. It was a Ford Ranger – not a super sized vehicle. Was he on drugs or under the influence of alcohol? Fired from his job?
Deb Welter
September 21st, 2007
This whole story has my blood boiling. If Gallagher had been honest, he probably would have said “I don’t like seagulls.” Many people don’t. But they don’t go out of their way to massacre them. This was no accident. Although I don’t wish harm to any humans, MAYBE if there had been a person on the dock at the time, and they had been hit by this maniac…..MAYBE then the judge would have taken this case seriously! What if Gallagher decides that he doesn’t like children???? Or people with blond hair????
Unfortunately, I bet this will not be Gallagher’s only crime. Anyone that can kill living creatures in that heinous manner will do it again. We will hear about him again in the future. I only hope that Judge Griffin does not have to regret her decision for the rest of her life.
Pete Wilson
September 21st, 2007
Good touch in trivializing this tragedy by equating it to the criminal maniacs that kill people in Philadelphia. Maybe you could go a little farther by suggesting that obviously Ford Rangers must be controlled. I’m beginning to think that you’re something of a poser, planted by the Professional Victim Nannies of America. Wait, it could be perfect if you just implied that witnesses shouldn’t snitch. Your conversion would then be complete.
The pure facts are that this moron went out of his way to mass murder a bunch of birds. He then tried to lie his way out of his actions by claiming victimhood of 8 degrees. He got off easy and we can just hope that his lawyer buddy does appeal.
Animals depend on people to secure their rights.
You’re a disgrace.
Cindy A
September 21st, 2007
Any individual who harms innocent living beings is an absolute disgrace, and this whole story makes me sick to think that I share the earth with such heartless creatures. I just don’t buy the “accident” excuse in this case after reviewing the facts regarding this incident, and the judge should be ashamed for not taking the case seriously. This was intentional and Gallagher should be placed in a mental institution for psychiatric evaluation before he kills another living thing. People who inflict harm on those who are weaker than themselves are crying out for help because there is something seriously wrong with their mental ability and they are a danger to themselves and society.
BadIdeaGuy
September 21st, 2007
You know how if you have to explain something ironic, it’s not really ironic anymore? But when a judge makes a legal decision, that finding becomes fact, so sorry folks, must’ve been an accident, that’s a fact! (unless appealed) That’s just the way it is- we’re in a humanist socialist society and a duly appointed human declared it a fact!
Sal, I’m sorry you had to pick up dying birds, that must have really been traumatic. Get well soon, mmkay?
LOL at the comment by “Pete Wilson”! If I compared the murder of seagulls to the murder of humans, how would that be trivializing it? Are seagulls above humans? Is that a moral judgement? Excellent “stop snitchin” reference, btw.
Anyway, since it seems you need clarification, my theory is that it was not an accident. Gallagher is just a member of PETA/AnimalLiberationFront/Earth First and he realized that the gulls had been tamed by mankind leaving scraps of food about, and they were dependent on mankind, making them an interference with nature, and seeing them in such distress, he euthanized them, as good PETA/ALF/Earthfirst! members do in such situations. Then he prayed to Mother Gaia that the human parasites would one day be removed from her biosphere, and while lighting incense, he crashed into a trailer.
Where did you all swoop in from by the way?
Pete Wilson
September 24th, 2007
I suppose, “B.I.G.”, that I gave you too much credit for being clever. Let me explain. When you say, “I’m not sure how many of the murders this year in Philadelphia have been prosecuted. But rest assured, there will be justice served if seagulls are slaughtered.”, that’s called satire because you’re equating the daily human tragedy in Philadelphia with the massacre of the birds. The satirical reference “trivializes” the bird murders. Now that you know what you did, you can use it again.
Now, before you break into a “for the children” argument, why don’t think about what you’re doing? You’re defending some creep that for fun killed hundreds of… anything. This time it was birds. The coward then told a bunch of lies (Oh yeah, that’s the ticket, the coffee was hot. It was that time of the month. That’s the ticket, the month…) to try to save his miserable neck. A judge partially bought it and he got off easy. A jury won’t buy his cumulative lies.
You’re position is indefensible, yet you continue to saw. Why don’t you stick to what you know and someday, maybe, you’ll learn how to swoop.
BadIdeaGuy
September 24th, 2007
Putting aside flighty arguments over the definition of satire vs irony (“in satire, irony is militant”?), what position have I taken that’s indefensible? I haven’t defended the guy, and your condescension is irritating me.
I don’t know what value one would put on a seagull’s life, but a $14000 fine is some level of justice, if even only a third of the maximum allowable fine, and still a bigger punishment than most Philly murderers seem to be receiving. Isn’t that ironic? I think he did a rotten thing, but I wouldn’t call it a cardinal sin.
You then swoop in here (perilously close to having your comments deleted) and call me a “disgrace”? The funny thing is, we probably agree that the guy is a liar and it was not accidental, but because whatever flock you belong to assumed that I meant that he was being tried erroneously, you got your feathers all ruffled.
I originally wrote:
“I know the whole thing sounds stupid, but if it’s unintentional and an accident, as the judge believed it was, it seems absurd to call it “animal cruelty,” doesn’t it?”
Maybe my position was not clear: it sounds like that turkey Gallagher lied copiously about what he did, thinking everyone was GULLible, and the judge chickened out: willfully accepting his lie that it was unintentional, with kind of a wink and nod, and a failure to hold someone who seems to hold contempt for the court, accountable in contempt of the court and push for the maximum penalty. Gallagher got favorable treatment that some of us who aren’t politically connected (head of a union) wouldn’t get if we did something so bird-brained.
If it really was an accident (which I don’t believe it to be), that the judge said she believed it was, then it’s not cruel to animals. If what the judge said is true, anyone who hits a deer or squirrel unintentionally is then guilty of animal cruelty, correct? Is that not stupid? Isn’t stupidity on this level setting a precedent that “endangers our children”- perhaps you’d even call it an albatross around their necks?
Pete Wilson
September 25th, 2007
First of all, it’s too bad that you think that only you can be a smart ass. I guess that’s your privilege of being the site god. Secondly, if you want to delete my comments, just do it. Threatening me (without standing next to me to back up your threats) is petty and unlikely to modify my behavior. Finally, your stance TRIVIALIZES this heinous act by comparing it to the region’s greatest tragedy of human waste entirely created by politicians from the great society onward. It minimizes the asshole’s killing of hundreds of defenseless living things.
If you can’t see that, we’re just wasting time.
BadIdeaGuy
September 25th, 2007
Looks like we’re going to have to agree to disagree.
I’m trying to find where I threatened you? Did you mean when I said I almost deleted your comment? If so, that’s certainly not a threat of harm. But if you wanna meet on the playground after school- kidding.
Sal
September 26th, 2007
“Sal, I’m sorry you had to pick up dying birds, that must have really been traumatic. Get well soon, mmkay?”
What is really traumatic is that there are morons like you that cannot use common sense and see the true and reality in their acts or other acts. I will never recover from this!!!
You words trivializing this issue and threatening to delete comments plus talking down to all in this block … is just a perfect explanation of how pathetic you are.
Yes, you are right you are a bad idea guy… and a bad living being, a bad ignorant, a bad retarded hypocritical (“If it really was an accident (which I don’t believe it to be), … Maybe my position was not clear: it sounds like that turkey Gallagher lied copiously about what he did, thinking everyone was GULLible, and the judge chickened out: willfully accepting his lie that it was unintentional, with kind of a wink and nod, and a failure to hold someone who seems to hold contempt for the court, accountable in contempt of the court and push for the maximum penalty. Gallagher got favorable treatment that some of us who aren’t politically connected (head of a union) wouldn’t get if we did something so bird-brained” Here is some evidence of your own words!
A final note for you dead brain…. you were the one who started this, you put yourself up to this scrutiny, so bear with it. mmkay?
BadIdeaGuy
September 26th, 2007
“morons like you..you are a bad idea guy… and a bad living being, a bad ignorant, a bad retarded hypocritical … dead brain”
Should I take this to mean I’m not getting a Christmas card this year?
There’s nothing hypocritical about my position or your quote-if you can’t comprehend my words you shouldn’t be reading here. I explained it in my last post You clicked into this site under your own free will. For reading comprehension: “F”. No merit in that last post whatsoever. As a policy, I delete meritless, profane, and spammy comments. The only reason it remains is as an edifice to your inability to put a cogent thought together.
“I will never recover from this!!!”
It sounds like you need some help. Help that you can’t get from reading this blog and posting outlandish comments like this. Re-read that post, and tell me: is that the way Sal usually treats complete strangers?
I wish I could help you but I’m really not qualified to do that. Doesn’t L.A.W.L. have an employee assistance program? It’s not your fault the birds died, Sal. Time heals all wounds, and this too shall pass.
Don Gattleone, are you catching any of this flap-poor choice of words-debacle? As TRE editorial board chairman, I’d like your thoughts on this: have I been hypocritical?
G.I.N. President and CEO
September 28th, 2007
B.I.G.:
You sir have absolutely been hypocritical! (I’m sorry, I’m just going by what Sal said – he’s obviously a mental giant and therefore I’m just believing whatever he says).
In my opinion, Dan Gallagher should have been awarded a prize for eliminating so many “rodents.” While vacationing in OC, NJ a few weeks ago, you could barely walk on the boardwalk without stepping in seagull excrement. As I walked with my family, I found myself looking up most of the trip and dodging their air-to-ground missiles. These seagulls are the cockroach of this century!
Another situation of a “bad” seagull was on our first day on the beach – a seagull swooped down and robbed my wife of a turkey, provolone, and cheese hoagie. RIGHT OUT OF HER HANDS! I immediately called 911 to report the crime, but the police just laughed at me.
So, these seagulls got what was coming to them.
G.I.N. President and CEO
September 28th, 2007
I love liberals. To quote the GIN Chaplain, “Most of you must be atheists.” How you put a seagull on the same pedastel as a human is beyond me. Perhaps this is what happens when you take God out of our culture and cater to the “Religion of Peace.”
BadIdeaGuy
September 28th, 2007
I’m surprised that one of the younger members of the G fam didn’t put a glaser safety slug into that monstrous gull. Gallagher would’ve done it in a sussex county second.
G.I.N. President and CEO
September 28th, 2007
My eldest son did consider it – he is, afterall, a Momma’s boy. And when someone messes with Momma, he’s not at all too happy. I had to talk him down, as there would be too many witnesses. I told him once he turns 16, I’ll buy him a Ford Ranger and he could get revenge on all of those criminal seagulls!!!
G.I.N. President and CEO
September 28th, 2007
Had I not been working ridiculous hours at the hospital over the past few weeks, I would have LOVED to have chimed in on this when it was current.
I’m sure all the atheists like Sal and Pete and Cindy won’t check back to see what we think of their PETA ideas.