Legal case in Zurich Woman refuses to put terminally ill terrier to sleep - convicted

She refused to have her terminally ill dog euthanized: A dog owner from the Zurich Unterland region has now stood trial for the second time. The court did not find her guilty of cruelty to animals, but imposed a higher fine.

She had allowed her terminally ill dog to suffer "unnecessarily long" and ignored veterinary advice to have him euthanized: this was the accusation against a dog owner from the Zurich lowlands, who now had to stand trial for a second time.

After the public prosecutor's office and the veterinary office appealed against the verdict of the Dielsdorf District Court, the case was now heard by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich.

What had happened?

In December 2021, the 47-year-old natural healer and trained interpreter took her eleven-year-old Yorkshire terrier Cara to the vet. The examination revealed a shocking diagnosis: the animal was paralyzed down the hip, emaciated and had a damaged spinal cord. A kidney tumor had already spread with metastases. The vet urgently recommended that the dog be put to sleep. Even when a second vet repeated this recommendation a few days later, the woman refused.

Finally, the cantonal veterinary office intervened. In January 2022, the dog was officially euthanized to put her out of her misery. A second Yorkshire terrier belonging to the woman was also taken away and examined. The 14-year-old male dog had also shown considerable health problems and also had to be put down months later.

Appeal against the judgment of the lower court

In November 2023, the Dielsdorf District Court sentenced the dog owner to a conditional fine of 50 daily rates of CHF 30 each and a fine of CHF 500 for cruelty to animals. It considered her behavior to be a violation of the Animal Welfare Act. Both the public prosecutor's office and the veterinary office lodged an appeal as they felt the sentence was too lenient.

On Wednesday, the woman confessed before the High Court, as reported by "20 Minuten" and others. She was aware that her dog was in a very poor condition. "I wanted a diagnosis first", the woman is quoted as saying. She admitted that it had been a mistake not to have the animal put down immediately. Due to a ban, she is no longer allowed to keep animals.

"The dog was in a very bad way"

The public prosecutor demanded a harsher sentence: a conditional prison sentence of eight months and an increase in the fine to 1,000 francs. They accused the woman of acting out of selfish motives and neglecting the animal's dignity. "The dog was in a very bad way, she had a kidney tumor with metastases, was emaciated and unable to move," the prosecutor was quoted as saying.

The dog owner's defense lawyer, on the other hand, argued that his client had acted out of love for her animals and not out of criminal energy. She had a close bond with her dogs and was unable to part with them: "She simply didn't have the heart to put them to sleep". The public prosecutor, he is quoted as saying, "is shooting sparrows with cannons and wants to set an example".

Fine increased to 1000 francs

The High Court largely agreed with the verdict of the lower court. It increased the fine to 1,000 francs, but confirmed the conditional fine. It did not see any cruelty to animals in the woman's behaviour: "The accused did not torture Cara, it was merely neglect," said the judge, who emphasized the psychological and physical overload of the accused: "The woman had no bad intentions and loved the animals."

In the case of the second dog, which was euthanized months later, the court also saw no grounds for a conviction for cruelty to animals. However, this part of the verdict was not the subject of the appeal and was therefore already legally binding.