UPDATE: Woman Charged With Freeing Dog Gets Delay in Trial

There’s been a delay in the trial until the complaining party can be located, after leaving the courthouse without testifying or telling anyone he was leaving.



Back on 2-22-2016, we told you about a woman that was facing up to a decade in prison for freeing a chained up and totally neglected dog from someone’s yard.  Now, we’re seeing reports of the trial being delayed, due to the property owner leaving court without testifying.  In fact, at this time, no one seems to know where they’ve gone, or why they left.

There was a five week delay put on the trial by the judge hearing the case.  According to the prosecution, Daniel Melendez (also known as Fernando Marin), the owner of the property where the dog was kept, fled the courthouse without telling anyone anything at all.

The hearing was proceeding without him, as other witnesses in the case were there to testify. The court officers did conduct a search for him, but by the time everyone else had testified, his whereabouts were still unknown.

The defense hen made a motion to dismiss the charges against Cuce-Rodiguez.  The judge wouldn’t allow the motion, stating that it would be unfair to the commonwealth for him to do so.  That’s when the judge put a delay on the trial until March 25th.

Stay tuned to Life with Dogs for more information as it’s released.  To see our first post, click here.

110 thoughts on “UPDATE: Woman Charged With Freeing Dog Gets Delay in Trial

  1. DO NOT PROSECUTE THIS WOMAN!! I support her decision 200%. No dog should ever be tethered by chain or rope and neglected thereof. Glad she rescued the doggie. She must stay out of jail…. 🙂

  2. Incredible. For one thing, if the complaining party left the court with no explanation, he should immediately lose his case. For another, why isn’t the owner on trial for mistreatment of the dog, rather than the person who went in to help?

  3. Maybe it had to do with so many people standing up for her. Any prosecutor with half a heart for animals wouldn’t take on this case against her. This was an absolute act of kindness on behalf of her.

  4. He is probably afraid of being charged with animal abuse. God knows he is guilty of it. Bless her for freeing this poor animal!!!!!!!!!

  5. It’s obvious why the property owners left the courthouse. They know they’re guilty of neglecting their pet. If they don’t testify, throw the damn case out. There is no reason the woman that freed the dog should be charged with anything except for caring; something the owners obviously didn’t do. I hope the judge sees how corrupt this all is and let’s her go and demands that the owners give up the dog to someone that actually gives a shit.

  6. It’s despicable she’s even in this position!!!! She did the same thing I would have done! She’s an amazing women and Shame on this fucked to justice system for even considering prosecution this women. She should be rewarded NOT punished!

  7. Need to put the joke of the d.a. and the moron of a judge who would even consider hearing such a stupid case. Another example of the judicial system throwing smoke screens to distract as many people as possible! !!!!

  8. Maybe because he was scared he would be accused and found guilty of animal abuse and that this womans actions would be completely vinidicated.

  9. Amazing how far behind our animal laws are… they say due process but what about the rights of the abused animals??? Oh yah, they’re just property… said no animal lover ever!!!

  10. If those dogs meant anythig to that owner, they wouldn’t have been tethered & maintained likke that. I don’t think they want the ‘trouble’ of a trial… wouldn’t surprise me if they don’t folllow thru/drop the case & just ‘surrender’ the dogs. That wouldn make the most sense for every one.

  11. I don’t see how a judge or jury could find her guilty of doing the right thing. Being humane. Since when do we prosecute this? Why? I wonder if the owner finally realized their terrible judgment and left. I sure hope so. Karma can be good for kind acts.


  13. HE SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH ANIMAL ABUSE!!!SOOOOO there gonna let him be on his merry way because he didnt stay to stick charges on her…. WHY DIDNT THEY ARREST HIM WHEN HE IT WALKED OUT???????????/

  14. Gets a delay…How about a cancel of the trial !!!! Especially when others are a no show in court. Sounds like they are enforcing a trial in order to make $$$$$ off people. Plus how about prosecutors perusing animal cruelty charges against the owners !!!! Isn’t that the real crime here. But maybe I’m more intelligent than others to see this …

  15. Trial for what? Saving an abused dog. What in the hell is wrong here? The person doing the abusing should be in jail not the person with a big heart who saved the dog. The abuser should be on a abuse list for animals and never allowed to own ANY animal.

  16. What a waste of this lady’s time. She should get a medal for rescuing an abused dog and the asshole that abused him should be in court

  17. Hi everyone, I am rosenhan. A widowed military man of a 3yrs old boy. Looking for a serious woman for a serious relationship. Add me if you are interested.

  18. Omg. See I would do the same in a heartbeat. That’s so awful she would be charged. So wrong. Charge the dogs owner who neglected the dog. Wow.

  19. Are you kidding me this women is an Angel for setting this dog free our court system is so broken this women who abused this dog should be sent to prison somebody needs to wake up here!!!!

  20. So throw the case out of court. Not only did the owners mistreat the dog, they have now abandoned it. And are clearly not interested in proceeding with the prosecution of the lady who did the humanly right thing and saved this animal. Give permanent custody!!

  21. Judge is an idiot clearly / the owner of the dog on the chain should be on freaking trail no the person who saved the poor dog wtf?! So irrational – then takes off and that’s ok to top it off? Unreal…

  22. I don’t understand how animal abusers often get away with a slap on the wrist, if that, and yet a person with good intent and action is held to such strict and high penalty.

  23. It makes no sense at all!!! She gets in trouble for stepping up for the welfare of neglected dog…they should be charging the irresponsible owner….grrrrr!!!What’s the world coming to, eh? Double thumbs down to this stupid law!!!

  24. What state is this trial being held? Laws there are ass backward. Dog rescuer should be hailed a hero. Dog owner charged with animal abuse. And the plaintiff leaves the court willy nilly…just to inconvenience everyone and have the trial delayed…BS!

  25. with no one pressing charges (which is a smart move on their part), the case should be tossed… and the dogs given to her (as ‘unclaimed property’, which is probably the legal term for ‘finders keepers’).

  26. Were people threatening the owner? I’ve seen many do it & even ask for photos of dog owners kids. She stole an animal that was not hers, no one is above the law. Next people will be kidnapping kids, or stealing cars because they don’t wash it every day.

  27. This woman needs to be gotten a reward and also an apology for being brought up on charges and then being brought to court for doing the right thing for dogs!

  28. Oh, it seems like the property owner made the decision to drop the case. That’s a good sign that the woman who save those dogs would be acquitted of those charges soon.

  29. The legal system seems to have lost all grasp of common sense (and is wasting everyones time and money) if cases like this are even allowed to go anywhere near the courts!! It should be the owners in trouble NOT the rescuer!! If this was a child in trouble, would the parents be allowed to walk free and the rescuer in trouble?? Come on!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.