Those perverts are disgusting and despicable.Best Friends is a wonderful organization that has saved thousands of animals lives.

Thank goodness Best Friends stepped in! When I first read about this sickening situation, I couldn't understand why it was deemed that the only solution for these dogs, who were already victimized, was to kill them. I hope that sick SOB Seigfried does NOT get custody of Merlin. You'd think that would be a no-brainer but the law is so senseless sometimes when it comes to animals. Seigfried and Whalen, in addition to jail time, should be permanently banned from having animals of any kind. At least Lucky and Buddy will get proper care and proper love at Best Friends.

Look, I think this is disgusting and perverted, but were the dogs really harmed here?

Teaching a male dog to engage in sexual intercourse is hardly "abusive" to the animal. The dog is consenting by engaging in the sexual act. If the dog is being forced or harmed, then that is a different story, but the story as presented is not abuse, just perversion.

No one made the dogs do that and they were not trained to rape its natural for them to have sex with wjo ever will let them! They were having a great time leave them alone!

As much as you may find it disqusting and can't believe anyone would defend these folks, think about this. This is a moral issue but it shouldn't be a legal issue. Why? Because based on the facts presented, these animals were not hurt or mistreated in any way. They were shown a different way to do something they freely do naturally, they weren't forced to do it. They can't be mentally harmed because they don't have morals like humans do. We tend to treat animals like they're human, but they are animals and animals act on instinct. That said, you may be disqusted and think it's the grossest thing ever, but morals are a personal choice.

You know, it's never a good idea to attribute human feelings and emotions to other creatures. Some poet somewhere calls that "the pathetic fallacy," and that's exactly what it is; it's a fallacy and it's pathetic. (Was that Ruskin??)

Dogs engage in sexual behavior when Nature tells them it's time to make more dogs. They occasionally and instinctively use sexual gestures to express dominance. Nobody knows--and I defy anyone who says they do--whether dogs actually enjoy their mating behavior or not. Actually, if you take a look at the females, they often appear NOT to be enjoying the experience, while the males appear to be intent on getting the work done. To imply that the dogs involved in this perverted practice "enjoyed" the behavior is beyond ignorant.

Now, here's where this sort of ignorance *really* gets in the way: It gets in the way when people refuse to spay or neuter their dogs because they feel they'll be depriving them of an enjoyable sex life. Dogs don't think about sex until it's actually time for them to mate--for the female when she comes into heat twice a year or for the male when he encounters a female (dog, not some other species) who's giving off chemical signals that she's receptive to mating. Aside from that, they don't give a rat's ass. Still, you run into one idiotic human after another who believe that they're depriving their pet of something precious by not allowing him to sire unwanted and doomed puppies wherever and whenever Nature dictates.

The dogs in question had to be trained, somehow or other, to engage in these behaviors, just as dogs have to be trained to tear each other apart in fighting pits. It's not a natural or instinctive behavior for them--far from it. I predict that with loving homes and the right training, they'll put this behind them and make excellent pets.

I agree with Ann's comments, with the exception of the bit about dogs only wanting to have sex with other dogs. The facts are, a dog will have sex with anything that is releasing sexual pheromones, including humans-including teenage girls going through puberty, and probably males as well.

If you don't believe that, fine, just make sure your leg is covered if you start to get excited around certain people and your dog is around.

I agree with many here about dogs lacking morals. Just because it's dispicable in human terms, if the dog wasn't harmed, there's no mistreatment. Anne has a valid point about neutering possibly being in the dog's best interest (I'm not a vet nor a dog owner, so I dont know) but she's wrong about them being trained. Male dogs don't have to be trained to have sex - they hump anything they feel like. Everyone I know has had their leg humped by a male dog. I can't imagine it'd take much besides a willing woman to let it get to this scenario.

neone know where i can get copies of the tapes

While I agree with most of Anne's comment and that people should definitely spay/neuter their pets, I disagree that nonhuman animals don't have some of the same emotions humans have. Afterall, humans are animals, too. I'm not saying, by any means, that these dogs saw these sexual acts the way people do and I certainly do believe they were victims, like I said before, but I believe that animals of all kinds can feel emotions like we do-I believe my animals loved me as I loved them-and a myriad of other "human" emotions. Those of us who have shared our lives with animals have seen them happy and seen them unhappy or silly, playful, guilty, etc. Elephants have been shown to bury and mourn their dead. Lots of animals have shown depression after losing a loved one, human or nonhuman. Nonhuman animals do seem to lack the perversion and greed many humans are too often capable of, though.

When dogs bite and taste blood, no matter what the circumstances, they are killed.

These dogs have been trained to rape and have sex with humans, and they now see it as normal? Sorry, its sad that those revolting people have done this but the dogs need to be put down.

What will you people be posting in 6 months when the article is about one of these dogs who raped a 4 year old child.

Micheal's comments are factually untrue, a dog biting or drawing blood does not equate to instant euthanasia, its a totally case by case issue and also varies on how much the state/authorities/pet owners in the particular case are willing to work with the animals.

These dogs are ABSOLUTELY INNOCENT AND NOT RAPISTS, both police and animal handlers who specialize in traumatized dogs have evaluated their behavior and condition, its not like these are rabid wild man eating beasts.

These dogs were the objects of a womans sexual perversion and forced to do unnatural things, that hardly make the dogs "rapists" as Micheal seems to think they are.

Had these dogs been female, and the offender a man rather than a woman, I doubt anyone would be so quick to call them "perverted" as though they were willing participants.

Leave the dogs alone. Men having sex with female animals is very wrong, but a willing male animal is not abuse.

You would probably all fall off of your computer chairs and moral high horses once you searched the net enough to find out that there is an ASTONISHING number of women having sex with willing male dogs.

As far as a 4 year old being raped by one of these dogs, regular male dogs already hump crawling babies. There's nothing new there, and these dogs shouldn't have to lose thier lives due to your irrational fear. I think Micheal should be put down.

Rubbish.

This attitude that men using female animals for sex is abusive while women who use male animals same thing are “just having a little fun” is dangerously stupid and directly feeds into the very misconception that nearly cost these three dogs their lives.

The thinking goes that since the male animal had an erection and penetrated the woman that the animal must have enjoyed or consented to the activity, but this couldn’t be further from the truth.

An erection is a reflex, not a green flag for unwanted sexual attention. Male dogs can have (or be made to have) reflex erections when they have absolutely no interest in sexual activity.

Male dogs most certainly are abused by women in cases like this, and whether or not the dog plays an “active” or supposedly "willing" role in the sex, the conditioning and expectation for the dog to perform or submit on demand (possibly under threat of punishment) can be stressful on the animal, especially in this case since the dogs were being used for commercial pornography, not to mention that the coupling itself can seriously harm both the woman and the dog.

A woman making a male dog have an erection and holding him in place while forcing intercourse or felatio on him is just as offensive and abusive as anything a man can do to a female animal.

Abuse is abuse, be the subject male or female.

I think that animal sex is just sick. I mean.... were is the pleasure in that?
And also, what about disease? It is nasty and it is wrong. That is all i have to say.....for now. sick bastards.
~shakes head~ tsk, tsk, tsk.

Treating a DOG like a HUMAN "individual" is as SICK as preforming sexual acts on it.
Where is Humanity going?!

You people are really hateful.

So apparently, now they're gonna kill the dogs and put the perverts in jail. While I agree that the ones who trained them should be punished (house arrest maybe being banned from having pets again), I don't see why jailtime is necessary. And I find it ironic that the dogs are going to be KILLED because they "suffered from abuse".

Pathetic. Some people are really...stupid. I guess that's the kinda thing that happens in places like Oklahoma. Thank god I live in NY.

Actually the dogs are already in a no kill sanctuary, this was resolved long ago.