Was Cat Shooting Self-Defense or Crime?

When is it acceptable to shoot your neighbor’s cat in the head? That’s the legal question that has forced the trial of a man charged with animal cruelty to come to a grinding halt on Maryland’s Eastern Shore.

The cat, a pet tabby named Babe, miraculously survived the Aug. 3 attack that ignited public fury in the Salisbury area.

But John Drendall, who shot Babe with a .22-caliber rifle, now says he acted in self-defense after being badly scratched by one of several neighborhood felines that he said were wreaking havoc at his elderly parents’ home.

On Jan. 6, Wicomico County District Court Judge Scott Davis postponed his verdict in Drendall’s case to seek advice from lawyers on whether shooting an animal with the intent to kill--not torture--constitutes animal cruelty.

It was unclear when the judge would resume Drendall’s case.

According to his attorney, Drendall, 47, of Houston, Texas, and his brother Michael, 51, tried to clean up their parents’ yard, where almost a dozen cats frequently left footprints on their cars and feces in the garden.

The plan, said attorney Kenneth Gaudreau, was to lure them into the garage with a can of tuna, then shove them into a beer cooler and release them a few miles away.

But Babe resisted. She scratched Drendall, drawing blood. When he let her go, “the cat started spinning around,” Gaudreau said. “It didn’t leave. He didn’t know if it was going to jump on him again.”

Frightened, Drendall grabbed his father’s .22 rifle and shot her, the lawyer said. Babe dropped to the ground, and Drendall put her body in a sack and left her for dead.

But when Babe’s owner, who witnessed the shooting, showed up with police, they were all surprised to see the cat walk out of the bag. The bullet, it turned out, had passed virtually harmlessly between the cat’s ear and the base of her skull.

John and Michael Drendall were charged with animal cruelty. But charges against Michael Drendall were dismissed since he wasn’t involved in the shooting.

Prosecutors aren’t buying Drendall’s self-defense claims; if convicted, he faces a fine of up to $1,000 and up to 90 days in jail.

“This 200-plus-pound man claimed he was afraid of the cat,” Assistant State’s Atty. Paul Montemuro said.

Gaudreau said, “Some of these were feral cats. He didn’t do it to be mean. They were trying to kill it in a proper way.”

Still, Drendall has reaped little sympathy in a community where headlines summarized the incident as “Men Ambush Hapless Kitty.”