Ernest Dempsey — Hardly anybody is more compliant than some media sources when it comes to protecting names of important people, like ministers, in cases that otherwise would bring skyscrapers to the ground by their heinous nature. The story of Mijo’s brutal killing in Oriole St Alamo, Texas, which has been presented, or twisted, by a popular news channel in a ministerially correct manner is one such recent case. Mijo was struck repeatedly with a machete when he rambled on to enter a neighbor’s property, or so it has been claimed.
Reporting on the incident, Action 4 News tells that on May 10th, an ex-military employee Luis Ortiz found his dear pet dog Mijo lying in a pool of blood “just inches from his home”. The channel reports that Luis traced the trail of the blood to the “end of the street” and called the county’s sheriff’s office immediately to file a report of the dog’s killing. Obtaining the report’s copy from the police, Action 4 News report states that it wasn’t the first time Mijo ventured into that “neighbor-in-question’s yard”. But this time, as the channel refers to the report, Mijo got aggressive, as claimed by the neighbor, and made him fear for his life. So he hit him with a machete to drive him away from his property and family. Further, since the dog was on the neighbor’s property, the sheriff’s office says no charges will be filed.
Readers may already have noticed how the news protected the name of the dog’s killer, all the while referring to him as “neighbor”. For those who already don’t know, this “neighbor” accused of killing the dog brutally by repeated strokes of a machete, he is in fact Texan minister Jose Salazar who lives near Luis Ortiz. Usually, media reports in detail on people and places involved, unless deliberately holding back names to protect the privacy of people for safety concerns. In this case, the minister’s name already was on blogs and social media as the person who killed the dog. But maybe, Jose Salazar’s name was not to be revealed in so-called “professional” media sources because the time spent in spelling it was needed for including more distortions in the report.
As told on the facebook page and confirmed to the journal of Humanitarian Affairs by the victimized dog’s owner, the blood trail began across the minister’s street. Obviously then, the dog was killed not “on the property” of the “neighbor” but outside on the street. Mijo could not be a threat to the minister on the street and if the police report tells that Mijo was on Jose Salazar’s property, the blood trail should have been traced to there.
The self-contradicting story told in the report and on Action 4 News point well to the owner’s account available to the Journal of Humanitarian Affairs wherein he expressed disappointment at the concerned sheriff’s office playing delaying tactics to let the case die down. By the owner’s account, the first officer that came when he (Luis Ortiz) called the police to report that Mijo was killed didn’t even want to look at the dog’s body, how many wounds he had, or anything.
“He is supposed to do this to make sure that the story lines up with the guy who killed him,” said Luis Ortiz. “Every time I call, it’s like they don’t even care. I believe that they want to sweep this under the rug.”
What was reported on Action 4 News seems to confirm that Luis’s suspicion is not unfounded. The police will not frame charges because of a concocted report heavily inclined on the minister’s side. And media won’t give the minister’s name; in fact, as told by Luis Ortiz, KNVO 48 and other news sources also came over to interview him but none has so far presented his complete story in his own words or named the minister as the accused.
Both police and media in the case of Mijo’s killing are playing partners in crime, covering up the horror that was inflicted on an innocent dog and his family. Only the animal rights advocates are asking for justice and a petition has been launched in this regard asking the Alamo Sheriff Department to take action against Jose Salazar; for if this person can do such a brutal thing to an innocent dog, “what could this man do to another person, or child?”