CASE SUMMARY: On oF about May 3, 2010 Animal Cruelty Investigative Officer Domanick Munoz, Dallas Animal Services (DAS) ‘was notified by employees at DAS that they heard a cat trapped in the wall inside the shelter between the ‘employee break-room and the women’s bathroom, Officer Munoz notified his supervisor and DAS shelter ‘manager Tyrone McGill, defendant, indicating the area in the wall that the cat was heard. (On or about May 4, 2010, DAS shelter employee Kimberly Killebrew discussed the situation with the defendant after she and numerous other shelter employees also heard the cat in the wall trying to free itself to no avail. The defendant told Killebrew he would handle it. Several days went by and the cat could still be heard scratching, clawing, crying and jumping at the bottom of the wall in the same area indicated by Officer Munoz. As time went on and the cat grew weaker and less vocal, Killebrew continued to bring up the issue with the defendant. The defendant repeatedly indicated to her that he was taking care of it (On or about Saturday, May 8, 2010, the cat could no longer be heard erying but continued to jump and scratch in the same area in the wall, Killebrew called the defendant to inquire again as to why nothing was being done to ing tiles had been lifted and that was all that would be done, free the cat, The defendant indicated that the c When Killebrew asked about cutting the wall to free the cat, the defendant indicated that nothing could be done Upset, Killebrew pushed the issue and was told by defendant that Building Services would be notified on Monday, May 10, 2010. On Tuesday, May 11, 2010, Killebrew returned to work and when it appeared nothing had been done, Killebrew again pressed the issue about cutting the cat out: the defendant responded that the wall ‘would not be cut. As the week progressed. the now dead cat was decomposing in the wall and the stench was unbearable to anyone trying to eat in the break-room, which was the official lunch area. ‘The odor of the dead cat permeated the area for up to four days. On or about May 18, 2010, after the day shift employees had left, the defendant along with several others cut the now decomposing cat out of the wall in the exact area that Officer Munoz indicated in an email dated May 3. 2010. A check of Building Services records indicate no calls for service or work orders were pursued until May 18, 2010. after the cat was removed. At that time, the defendant asked Building Services to come to the shelter, and Building Services advised that the wall should not be repaired until the stench aired out. After learning that the cat had been removed from the wall, Officer Munoz took photos of the hole where the cat was removed and the remains of the cat. ‘The defendant was the manager of the DAS shelter at the time of this incident. He accepted responsibility and indicated he would take care of the problem and permitted the cat to die in a cruel manner.