By Nikki Tait, Law Courts Correspondent
Published: January 25 2005 02:00 | Last updated: January 25 2005 02:00
(Columbia-AP) Jan. 25, 2005 - House Speaker David Wilkins proposed a bill on Tuesday that would make cockfighting a felony.
The bill was introduced nearly a week after former Agriculture Commissioner Charlie Sharpe pleaded guilty to taking bribes to protect a cockfighting organization from legal trouble.
Cockfighting is a misdemeanor now and punishable up to 30 days in jail or a $100 fine. Wilkins wants to increase the penalty to $5000 or five years in prison.
Wilkins says he wants to send a message that cockfighting will not be tolerated in South Carolina. The games are banned in every state except Louisiana and New Mexico. It's a felony in 31 states and a misdemeanor in 17, including South Carolina.
posted 2:13pm by Chris Rees
The group has bought a number of ads in the Sundance Film Festival's daily program pressing for the New Mexico boycott.
New Mexico and Louisiana are the only two states where cockfighting is legal.
Governor Richardson, who has been trying to lure more moviemakers to New Mexico, says the Humane Society's tactic is immature.
He says the ads won't affect the state's strong standing with the film industry.
New Mexico's film office is hosting a party for filmmakers on Friday at the festival in Park City, Utah.
The party is aimed at recruiting more film production to New Mexico.
Source: http://www.krqe.com/expandedtop.asp?RECORD_KEY%5bnewsc%5d=ID&ID%5Bnewsc%5D=8328
BLACKFOOT, Idaho Authorities say an Idaho cockfight was intended to raise money to lobby against legislation that would outlaw the practice in New Mexico.
By Ray Calma
For Northern Weekly
The village of Yigo is preparing for its annual fiesta to honor Our Lady of Lourdes, also known as the mother of Jesus Christ and the patron saint of bodily ills.
As part of the festivities, the Sports Association of Yigo Group (SAYG) and the Yigo Mayor's Office is organizing the 8th annual Yigo Fiesta, scheduled to kick off on the weekend of Feb. 5 and 6.
The Our Lady of Lourdes Church will hold its special festal Masses. On Feb. 4, there will be a Mass for the sick at 6:30 p.m. The festal Mass and procession will be held at 4 p.m. Feb. 5.
The highlight of the fiesta will be the carnival, which is set to kick off on Feb. 3 and continue through Feb. 26. The carnival schedule has been set: From 6 p.m. to midnight on Thursday through Sunday at the Yigo Gymnasium parking lot.
Yigo Mayor Robert Lizama said attendees can expect food and game vendors and carnival rides for the children. There will also be a variety of entertainment on the weekends, from bands to school groups to cultural performances.
The mayor's office is still inviting all schools from the villages of Yigo and Dededo, bands, singers and cultural dancers to sign up and show off their talent.
There will also be the traditional cockfighting tournaments on the weekends of the fiesta. For those interested in fighting their roosters, contact the mayors office for more information.
<snip>
Source: http://www.guampdn.com/communities/news/stories/20050126/northern/1912574.html
The move, attacked by animal rights campaigners as a sign of desperation, comes as both lobbies gear up for a separate legal challenge to the new legislation, to be heard at the High Court today and tomorrow.
In today's case, lawyers for three individual petitioners, backed by the Countryside Alliance, will claim that the 1949 Parliament Act - used to force through the controversial anti-hunting measures - is invalid. Accordingly, they will say, the Hunting Act has no legal effect.
This challenge will be led by Sir Sydney Kentridge QC, who has led a number of prominent civil liberties and commercial cases. The government will be represented by Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, while the League against Cruel Sports is using David Pannick, QC, a public and human rights law specialist.
The arguments, which will be far removed from baying hounds and fleeing foxes, will focus on whether it was permissible to amend the 1911 Parliament Act, and so reduce the delaying powers of the House of Lords, by the 1949 legislation. Lawyers for the claimants will argue that, on its proper construction, the 1911 Act did not empower the monarch and House of Commons acting alone to make such an amendment.
The Countryside Alliance claims to have a variety of academics and commentators on its side. But its lawyers acknowledge that the provisions of the 1949 Act have been used by governments on previous occasions, making it a significant step for the courts to set it aside at this stage.
The High Court is likely to give its decision by the end of the week. This would allow any appeals to be heard, and the issue of any injunctions considered, by the Court of Appeal before the hunting ban is due to come into force on February 18.
The human rights challenge, meanwhile, will continue on a separate, and potentially lengthy legal path. The claimants are arguing that the hunting legislation trespasses on seven rights, including peaceful enjoyment of possessions, respect for private life, and the right to associate and assemble for a common purpose. This case could ultimately end up in the European Court of Human Rights.
Anti-hunt protestors dismissed the second challenge as a sign of desperation. John Cooper, chairman of the League Against Cruel Sports, said: "The Countryside Alliance is already admitting defeat in its chairman's forthcoming challenge to the Parliament Act and is making another desperate attempt to override the wishes of parliament. I'm sure many of its members would rather they spent their money on preventing schools or post offices from closing."
Source: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/9e361aec-6e76-11d9-a60a-00000e2511c8.html
