Protest signs in front of Court House (Tiro Ramatlhatse for Star)
Margarita Rusbridge was getting ready to go to Norway from South Africa. She put her dog in the trunk of the car and parked it in the airport parking lot. There was no food or water left with the dog or note on the car that there was a dog inside. No one was there to get the car and take the dog home and apparently no one saw the dog in the car or smelled the dog in the car for the entire 6 months the lady was gone. While gone the lady never once tried to contact authorities about what she had done. Her lawyer claims and files show she was institutionalized for paranoid schizophrenia while in Norway.
The question I want answered is did she know she had left the dog in the car when she left the country and did she know it lacked the food and water and other care necessary. Or was her mental state so far gone that she had no idea and only upon being released from care in Norway and arriving back in South Africa figure out what she had done? The lawyer claims she was institutionalized not by choice so then did her family have her admitted or did she do something while visiting the country that warranted her being locked up? Why did no one ask her if she left behind anyone that might want to know where she was or if there were any animals in South Africa that might need care. How did no one know there was a dog that was missing and locked in the trunk at the airport. Were airport authorities not suspicious that the car was left there for so long? You would think after a few weeks people would be suspicious about the car and run the plate with police or try and contact the owner to see when they would be returning for the car to make sure it wasn’t abandoned.
If she was in fact schizophrenic and under care at the time is she then responsible for her actions? Was she supposed to be on medication and went off them? If her actions were not addressed during the time she was institutionalized should her punishment then be to be re institutionalized until such time as she is able to make sane and rational decisions. What we do know is that an animal lost its life because the person who should have been caring for it either didn’t want to or wasn’t of sane mind to do so. And then seemingly so many others dropped the ball and weren’t doing their jobs thoroughly enough to realize there was an animal suffering.
For more about the court case currently being investigated: http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/woman-left-dog-in-car-for-six-months-1.1097432?showComments=true
I think it would be natural for her neighbors to assume that she had boarded the dog or taken him with her. It wouldn’t have been, in their minds, a “missing” dog. I’m not sure at what point airport police would/should start to question the continued presence of a car in long-term parking.
But early on, you’d expect that the dog would be making some noise, that he would be frightened and crying for help. Someone ought to have heard that. And at some point, sadly, someone should have noticed that the car had begun to stink in a way it hadn’t initially.
As for the woman herself, if she was in bad enough condition that she got involuntarily committed in Norway, it’s quite plausible that she may have had no understanding of what she had done. But the key words are “may have.” Answering the question is not just a matter of what happened when, but a more careful assessment of her mental condition, when she left as well as while she was in Norway.
Did the family in Norway know she had a dog? Did they ask about the dog and get a sensible answer that made them believe the dog was provided for? I hope the authorities pursue this seriously, but doing so is going to be a real mess to get this untangled.
Our customer support and training staff are on hand, ready to help you with any enquiries you may have to ensure your success in Option Adjusted Spread Trading. Thanks for sharing for this post.