San Francisco v. Dormie the Dog: The Cat Murder Trials
In the United States, even if you’re caught red-handed murdering someone, you still have a right to a trial. This is true for anyone who is charged with a crime and usually, this is thought to just apply to humans but in 1921, the nation found out it also applies to dogs.
Is it just me or is that dog smiling?
The Crime
Towards the end of 1921, people in one San Francisco community stumbled across another dead cat in their neighborhood. This was strange as it was the 10th cat they found and cats typically don’t just trip over and die, especially with bite marks on their necks.
Someone was targeting and killing the cats. Instead of acting like this is a mystery, I’m assuming you read the title so you know they’re going to suspect it was Dormie, an Airedale dog belonging to local car dealer Eaton McMillan. On December 2nd, 1921, the community would get confirmation… sort of.
That morning a Persian cat named Sunbeam and her three kittens were outside of their home enjoying the sun or maybe, they were talking shit about the neighbors; I’ve seen how cats look at people.
“Can you believe a human tried to pet me? I feel dirty.”
Moments later, from inside the home, Sunbeam’s owner Marjorie Ingalls heard a loud commotion. She ran outside in time to see Dormie latching down on Sunbeam’s neck and shaking her until she was dead. As Dormie ran off, Marjorie noticed Dormie had done the same to the three kittens because apparently, Dormie doesn’t like leaving witnesses.
The neighborhood now had a snout to put to the killings and they demanded Eaton put down Dormie. Naturally, Eaton refused possibly while shouting “what are you going to, arrest me and my dog? HA!”
Eaton and his dog were then arrested. See, San Francisco had a local ordinance that said if a dog commits aggressive behavior then the dog and its owner are liable. Under the ordinance, Eaton would be charged with a misdemeanor and fined while Dormie would need to be put down.
Assistant District Attorney John Orcutt charged both as he had with others who violated any ordinance and usually, that was the end of it, but this isn’t a usual case. Even back then, the law was pay-to-play and Eaton McMillan had the funds to play.
He hired defense attorney James Brennan to defend himself and Dormie and, to the shock of everyone, Brennan requested a jury trial.
Pre-Trial Antics
The newspapers had a field day with this latest development, many ran the story with awful use of puns and jokes, and one paper even printed an article from the point-of-view of Dormie. Pre-trial was taken as a bit of a joke as well. Brennan appeared in the paper posing for pictures of himself showing his client what approach they would take for his defense.
“Tell me who ratted Brennan! I don’t leave no witnesses!”
But once pretrial started, Brennan took the case seriously. He requested the court provide a jury of 12 Airedale dogs since the law says the accused must be convicted by a jury of their peers but, this was struck down.
When selecting the jury, Brennan requested an all-male jury as he felt women were cat people and would have a bias against Dormie. This was also struck down but the final jury ended up being 8 men and 4 women.
Dormie Goes on Trial
Just a few weeks after Sunbeam’s murder, on December 21st, 1921, trial began with Dormie facing 14 counts of cat murder. Brennan’s argument was that no one could prove that it was actually Dormie who committed the murders. While 14 cats were dead, only Majorie Ingalls said she saw Dormie do it, but Brennan suggested she mistook Dormie for another dog.
Even if Marjorie was 100% sure that Dormie was the dog, Eaton had a license that allowed Dormie to wander free in the neighborhood, therefore, he could not be held accountable for Dormie’s actions. Since he could not be held accountable then Dormie wasn’t tied to the law.
Once that is accepted and if Dormie was actually the murderer, the jury must look at Dormie’s actions as an undomesticated dog and a dog’s natural instinct is to hunt. If that is taken as fact, then you can’t convict a dog for its natural behavior.
Dogs: Nature’s Murderers
It was a pretty strong case that hinged on whether Majorie could identify Dormie in a lineup. Meanwhile, Prosecutor Orcutt’s argument was along the lines of “Nah, it was definitely Dormie”.
To settle this, Marjorie was brought to the stand and several dogs that looked like Dormie along with Dormie were brought in. All Marjorie had to do was pick Dormie out of the lineup… and she did, easily.
But, Brennan objected because Dormie was the only dog that was brought in with a police escort and if you have to pick a killer out of a lineup, it’s usually the one with the cop standing nearby for everyone’s safety. Judge Lile T. Jacks agreed that it was some bullshit and ordered the jury to ignore what just happened.
Both sides ended up relying on statements written by other Airedale and Persian owners that testified to the behavior of each species. Unsurprisingly the dog people threw doubt that Dormie could have been responsible while the cat people argued that Dormie must be an uncontrollable monster to attack peaceful Persian cats.
After both sides rested their cases, the jury went into deliberations and, 20 minutes later, they returned, deadlocked. Eleven of the jury wanted to let Dormie free but one wanted to convict. It was declared a mistrial and the whole thing had to start again.
Dormie’s Second Walk
The second trial started almost immediately and the papers kept running the articles. It became national news, appearing in newspapers in Massachusetts, Washington, New York, and California. People were enthralled by Dormie’s trial and whether he would be put to sleep. That’s a better pun in Spanish.
One paper even interviewed the pound superintendent Matthew McCurrie, the man who would be gassing Dormie if Dormie was convicted. Matthew was quoted as saying “I’ve put hundreds of dogs quickly away… like humans who go to the gallows, they seldom whimper, though they seem to sense impending death.”
Which is just a creepy statement that raises multiple questions about Matthew’s hobbies like, how does he know so much about human executions if he only kills dogs?
…Only dogs… right?
During this second trial there was another dog lineup and this time Dormie wasn’t brought in with a cop. Marjorie Ingalls was unable to correctly identify Dormie. Both sides once again also relied on statements by other pet owners and clubs.
On December 28th, 1921, both sides rested their cases and the jury went back to deliberate. Two hours later they returned, deadlocked once again. This time it was 5 for conviction and 7 for acquittal. Probably because this was getting ridiculous, Brennan asked the court to dismiss the charges and Judge Jacks agreed.
Dormie the dog was free of all charges and sent home.
Aftermath and Law Change
Interestingly, Judge Jacks not only dismissed the charges but also ruled the local ordinance that created this whole fiasco was unconstitutional, declaring it infringed on the rights of a dog. This set a precedent that domesticated dogs with a license have more rights than domesticated cats.
Of course, this wasn’t the intention of Judge Jacks. It was just a by-product of the judge wanting to get rid of the ordinance but, you never know when another dog murder case against cats might rise up again.
No one really knows what happened to Dormie after the trial. He was last seen running up to Eaton’s son who embraced him happily. Despite the newspaper's infatuation with the trial, I couldn’t find any newspaper articles giving us updates in the following years.
Maybe Dormie wrote a book called “If I Did It: Confessions of a Cat Killer”, maybe he moved to Argentina to live out the rest of his life, or maybe he’s still out there stalking cats in the dead of night as a cat boogeyman. It is, of course, no longer against the law.
Quick Facts
One witness in Dormie’s case testified that they wish they would have seen Dormie so they could run it over.
Some sources report that Dormie was acquitted but that’s not exactly true since the jury was deadlocked and the charges were dropped. Other sources only mention either the 11-1 deadlock or the 7-5 deadlock but not both which causes some confusion. According to newspaper articles, the 11-1 deadlock occurred first followed by the 7-5 a week later.
