Cat Killer Wins Over Post Columnist

Why, oh why, are so many women drawn to psychopaths?!

"He killed a cat! Can't this guy get a break?"

in a word? no.

This shit wouldn't raise an eyebrow in Xenia, OH.

(how is this the first Gummo joke??)

Sociopaths are highly manipulative.

I am not sure how and why we put so little emphasis and care on animal life, like it's secondary to our own. The popular comeback when defending people who abuse animals is always, "Well, it's just a cat!" (Dog, horse, whatever)

This retort totally and completely fails on me. I don't agree with torturing and beating any living being. Period.

So, no. I don't think we should cut him a break. Instead, cut the Post out entirely.

Peyser inadvertently sorta makes a point that she wasn't trying to make: think of all the HUMAN murders that get NO media coverage. He shouldn't get a break, but there are people who we've never heard of who are far more deserving of the city's collective wrath than this idiot. Of course Peyser writing yet another article about him doesn't help.

Longacre: Even if she was trying to make that point (even if anyone is trying to make that point) it's a straw man argument.

"I am not sure how and why we put so little emphasis and care on animal life, like it's secondary to our own."

Are you serious? I completely get your POV, but to say that you don't understand why some people do not equate humans and animals is pretty silly. Aside from the religious aspect, which for many people is a big part of the equation, there is the fundamental fact that we have civilization and animals do not.

I think he was trying to have sex with the cat and he does not handle rejection well.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. I hold that, the more helpless a creature, the more entitled it is to protection by man from the cruelty of man" - Mahatma Gandhi

It's not okay that anyone gets off for beating or killing or abusing their loved one. I'd feel just as strongly as one of those cases. He shouldn't get any less attention for this than someone who beat his girlfriend. He killed a defenseless animal in anger. I'm not sure if locking him up is the answer, but he not only needs to be punished-- he needs to work through some major issues and be rehabilitated as a human being.

Politburo: Sorry if I surprise you. I am consistently surprised by how humans treat all living things. This civilization that you speak of lacks compassion. It's often filled with greed. I MIGHT get behind your comment if I thought we were actually civilized. But I find mankind rather hideous a lot of the time.

I am constantly amazed at how indifferent people are toward something that is not only alive and has every right to be, but that feels pain in the same way we do. Who are we to decide on the value of another's life?

I agree with the post quoting Gandhi. It says a lot about a society by the way its individuals treat its animals.

This guy wasn't angry or pissed off at the cat. The freak was INTIMIDATED by the cat. He wrote in a diary!! He is a grown man and he is not embedded with an infantry company in Iraq or Afghanistan. He spent his days(5 weeks) writing in a diary about a cat he thought didn't like him!!!
How many of us would be in trouble if we confused a cat's temperament with personal dislike? People would be punting cats left and right. It's a cat! That's how it acts, dumbass.
And this dude has a new girlfriend? Some broads just don't get it.

"But IF the guy is telling the truth -- that the cat bit him and he kicked it -- I don't think 2 years in jail makes any sense. "

Ahh, you fucked it up there, ecs. Nobody believes that stupid story. Your argument should just be about whether 2 years is appropriate in any case.

Here's an argument that 2 years could be an appropriate sentence. First, there are two victims here, the cat and the owner. Obviously in killing her cat in a vicious way he inflicted intense emotional distress on the woman.

And, secondly, 2 years is a disincentive against doing something that may seem easy to get away with and relatively "victimless." Punishment is not necessarily on a direct line based on some absolute values system. It's a "stick" that it supposed to prevent you from doing something.

While it is true that you can get little jail time for injuring (but usually not killing) a human, there are lots of property offenses that you'll get jail time for. Armed robbery? Hey, you just stole inanimate stuff, it's not even alive, are you saying that stuff is more important than a living thing? Or how 'bout selling drugs, a consensual exchange, you are saying that that is more serious than this unconsensual assault on cat/owner? We could play this game all day.

MC made the Gandhi quote. :] He/She deserves the call out.

Andrea Peyser... pathetic. There is so much hate & frustration & anger in her writing.

This kind of thing has been going on since time immemorial. That this shithead is a white, attractive, yuppie male just makes it more Grand Guignol.

Yes, don't comment directly on Andrea Peyser's column. She's looking for attention. However, sub-par intelligence aside (common amongst NY ComPOST writers,) sociopaths can initially easily manipulate most people. That, along w/Petcka's "red eyes" that he couldn't quite bring to tear...probably touched on whatever womanly compassion she actually has.

The whole stupid story is summed up in this segment of the article:

"But the progress he thought he'd made with the cat ended early on the morning of March 27, 2007. Petcka now thinks Norman reacted badly to a tedious, drunken argument he had with Lisa about whether their relationship was getting serious. Lisa resisted it, though she told Petcka she loved him.

Hours later, he fell asleep. That's when, he said, Norman clamped his jaws on his hand.

Altobelli refused the guy a bandage. She tried to throw him out, but soon left her apartment. Then, Petcka said, the animal attacked again. So he kicked him."

So the cat attacked him while he's asleep, hours later, in response to a drunken arguement? Ok that may be possible, but it's more likely the cat would be freaking WHILE he was screaming @ her. And in the earlier "drunken argument" how much harm could she really have done to him? She said she loved him for chrissake. So Altobelli then wanted him to LEAVE her apartment and he wouldn't go! So she's so upset that SHE actually leaves her own apartment to get away from him! That's when he kills the cat, saying "it attacked again." Bullshit. She wanted him to leave, and he could of easily left. But no, instead he stays to bear another attack from this so-called relentless cat that's always had it out for him??

He's a fucking animal regardless and deserves jail time. He makes me sick.

I work at the animal hospital the pet owner brought Norman to when he died. When we looked in the trash bag Norman arrived in our first thought was he had been hit by a car. My friend called the ASPCA and initiated the investigation when we found out that was not the case. I think it safe to assume that anyone who beats a cat into a broken, bloody pulp like that is not a "normal" person. There is a valid argument that crimes against people are under prosecuted and under punished. I would never advocate arresting and prosecuting someone who accidentally ran over an animal in a car, or defended themselves from an aggressive animal capable of inflicting serious injury, I even understand that some people just don't like cats. If you were the one to see this tiny cat with his limbs bent at unnatural angles, blood matted on his fur and his chest crushed, you might understand the magnitude of cruelty displayed here. This person committed a crime of violence not just against Norman, but against Norman's owner. Two years, of which he MAY serve 6 months, is not an arbitrary or extreme punishment.

"He has a girlfriend with an awesome dog"
Hope it's a pitbull.