Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, March 13, 1990 TAG: 9003133179
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: B-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: VICTORIA RATCLIFF STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
If enough evidence can be found to prove who put the cow on the roof, the information "will be given to a commonwealth's attorney" for prosecution, Kavanaugh said.
But the Roanoke County and Salem commonwealth's attorneys, who both have authority to prosecute offenses on the county property in Salem, say they're not sure with what - if anything - the prankster could be charged.
Roanoke County Commonwealth's Attorney Skip Burkart and Salem prosecutor Fred King said Kavanaugh has not contacted them about prosecuting the case.
"The sheriff, no one from the sheriff's office or anyone from the Salem Police Department has talked to me about prosecuting this case or even the fact they're investigating it," Burkart said.
"But I don't know if we have a case. The issue would be: What would we charge them with?" the prosecutor said.
"What's he going to get them for? Littering? As far as I know, there was no defacing of the property. There has to be some damage to the property for that."
Burkart also said he doubted that a trespassing charge would be right.
King said that, with some stretching, he might be able to charge the prankster with violating the Salem sign ordinance. Unless the building was damaged in some way, that was the only possible charge he could think of, he said.
Kavanaugh disagreed, however. "I think there's a potential there," he said. "It depends on how much damage was done to the building."
When asked if the building was damaged, the sheriff replied, "I haven't been up on the roof. That's what I have investigators for."
But Kavanaugh did not ask detectives in his department who usually investigate crimes to find out who put the cow on his roof.
An evidence technician with the Salem Police Department was asked last week by Kavanaugh's special assistant, Fred Crockett, to examine the plywood cow for fingerprints, Salem authorities said.
Salem Police Chief Harry Haskins said he agreed to let his evidence technician check for fingerprints as a professional courtesy - on the condition that the sheriff was planning to prosecute.
Haskins stressed that his department was not conducting an investigation. Had Kavanaugh wanted the analysis simply for an internal investigation, Haskins said, he would not have allowed his evidence technician to examine the cow.
The fingerprint analysis turned up no identifiable prints.
But that was not the end of the investigation, the sheriff said.
When asked if he had any suspects, he replied, "Everybody who walks by this office is a suspect."
There has been speculation that the cow was placed on the roof by deputies. Deputies still grumble about citizens and police officers in other agencies making fun of them because of problems the sheriff had with keeping his cows on his farm.
In 1988, Kavanaugh was charged with allowing his cows to roam into his neighbor's yard. A judge scolded him, but withheld a verdict on the condition that the cows not wander away for six months.
Burkart said last week that he would disqualify himself from prosecuting any deputy for the prank.
"I know all those deputies and I like them. I couldn't prosecute one of them."
Burkart said Kavanaugh had a right to get a warrant to charge someone for placing the cow on the roof, but he hoped Kavanaugh would obtain the warrant in the city of Salem and let King prosecute.
King, however, said he also would find it difficult to prosecute an officer from a neighboring jurisdiction for such a prank.
"I can't believe that [Kavanaugh] would want to prosecute this," Burkart said.
by CNB