Man in dog killing video faces rap for animal cruelty
NATONIN, MOUNTAIN PROVINCE—The municipal police of Sadanga, after a third try, has secured the indictment of a driver employed by the local government caught on video killing a dog.
On Monday, the provincial prosecutor’s office finally accepted the case against Erwin Faguinney, a local government employee, after two earlier filings were rejected due to insufficient evidence.
The killing of “Axle,” an American bully, on Dec. 4 sparked outrage on social media, with netizens calling for justice after video footage showed the dog being repeatedly struck with a hardwood. Axle sustained multiple head and body injuries and later died from the attack.
Police said Faguinney supposedly flared up and was enraged after the dog urinated on his foot while he was attending a gathering at Barangay Poblacion in Sadanga town for the distribution of relief assistance. Faguinney chased the dog and continued hitting the animal until it collapsed.
Faguinney, as of Wednesday, had yet to surrender to authorities, despite repeated calls for him to do so after the video went viral.
Residents also criticized bystanders for failing to intervene as Faguinney began hitting dog.
In a statement, Police Col. Marcelo Polig, Mountain Province police director, acknowledged the difficulties encountered in filing the case.
Earlier attempts to file charges prompted the Philippine Animal Welfare Society (Paws) to call for witnesses, amid reports that Axle’s owner had supposedly received settlement money from the suspect.
In a Facebook post, Paws emphasized that a settlement between the pet owner and the suspect does not negate criminal liability.
“It does not have to be the owner. It does not matter if a settlement occurred. A crime against a sentient being who suffered and died was committed,” Paws said.
Challenges
The group also urged the owner of the security camera to authenticate the video, noting that unverified footage may not be admissible in court.
“Despite the many challenges, the Sadanga police station exerted relentless effort to gather evidence and comply with all the requirements of the Office of the Prosecutor,” Polig said.
“Rather than giving up, the police strengthened their investigation and remained committed to seeking justice. On the third filing, their perseverance paid off, and the case was finally accepted on Dec. 15,” he added.
“What happened was painful and heartbreaking, but the compassion, courage and unity shown by many remind us that humanity still stands strong,” he said.
The Sadanga police referred the case to the provincial prosecutor’s office in the capital Bontoc for violation of Republic Act No. 8485, or the Animal Welfare Act.
“This marks a significant step toward accountability and justice for animals,” Polig said.
He said the Mountain Province police sought legal guidance from judges, prosecutors, private lawyers and Philippine National Police legal officers to ensure the case was airtight.
Polig also lauded volunteers, animal welfare advocates and organizations who extended support.
“You are warmly invited to the province to conduct information dissemination activities or lectures on the law to help educate communities and prevent similar incidents in the future,” he said.
Late intervention?
According to Polig, the filing of charges “was not just about solving a crime—it was about protecting innocent lives and sending a clear message that cruelty to animals will not be ignored.”
While the police action has been widely praised, some residents criticized certain law enforcers for allegedly failing to immediately intervene during the incident.
“They should have acted right away, but they shrugged it off. Action was taken only because the crime went public. Otherwise, it would have been swept under the rug,” according to a resident, who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisal.
The group Compassion and Responsibility for Animals condemned the killing in a Dec. 9 Facebook post, stating: “He didn’t bite, threaten, or harm anyone. He simply showed normal canine behavior that was met with anger and superstition instead of understanding.”
