Teenager in Class Project Is Accused of Animal Cruelty

LANCASTER — A 17-year-old boy has been charged with animal cruelty for allegedly preparing for a class debate by killing a baby chicken to illustrate his opposition to abortion, prosecutors said.

The attorney for the Lancaster high school student said he plans to research whether the boy’s conduct is protected by free speech rights under the Constitution. “I want to see whether or not the act that has been alleged might have any constitutional protection, mainly under the 1st Amendment,” attorney Clifford Nichols said Thursday.

The case could be dismissed on such grounds, Nichols said, but failing that, “We intend to go to trial. We do not believe that society will tolerate a situation of singling out a young man because of his position on abortion, when similar acts are condoned by hatcheries or chicken producers.”

The boy opposes abortions, especially late-term abortions, Nichols said. If he had been allowed to make his presentation, the boy would have said if people find a dead chick offensive, they should find human abortions equally so, Nichols said.

The boy’s arraignment was postponed for five weeks so Nichols could complete his research.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Andy Reynolds said the chick was either stomped to death or had its neck snapped March 27 outside a Lancaster pet shop where the boy bought it.

Nichols said there is nothing inherently illegal about killing chickens. The facts of the case will not support allegations that the chick was treated cruelly, he said.

“I believe, if it was killed at all, it was killed instantaneously so that there was no torture, maiming or cruelty,” Nichols said.

But Reynolds said the animal should be considered in a different light than chickens raised on giant poultry farms.

“Our contention is that the baby chick is not your standard Zacky chicken,” Reynolds said. “The chick is a pet, like a bunny or baby hamster. We see it more as a pet rather than a poultry item.”