Radford writes that it's possible the thirteen year old Carter Pope may face felony charges for killing the creature. We all know it's not a chupacabra, as Radford correctly points out (*my god, I'm agreeing with a skeptic! fancy that) this animal will turn out to be a canine. Why the boy, and others who've killed such animals misidentified with chupacabras feel the need to blast away when they see one is beyond me, except that some of us humans shoot first, ask later, when confronted with an unknown. Pope's shooting is considered animal cruelty under Texas law, as Radford comments:
Carter Pope may end up getting in trouble with animal rights advocates — or even the law. Pope, a minor, presumably had his parents' written permission to carry the rifle he used as required by Texas law. But just because a person sees an animal he or she doesn't recognize doesn't necessarily mean they have the right to shoot and kill it on a whim. The animal was not attacking anyone or anything, nor being a nuisance. And while the creature was probably a feral dog or coyote, it could be a neighbor's missing, sick pet. If the animal turns out to be a dog, Pope could potentially be charged with a felony. Texas Penal Code 42.09 on animal cruelty states a person who "kills, seriously injures, or administers poison to an animal, other than cattle, horses, sheep, swine, or goats, belonging to another without legal authority or the owner's effective consent," could be charged with a felony offense.*Actually, I don't agree with him; Radford, while making good points about shooting an animal just because you don't know what it is, and that it is a canine, cannot resist going the skeptoid route and making snarky comments about UFOs, etc.