We are horrified by the shocking failure of justice in the case of Franklin Scott Smith. Despite facing a felony animal cruelty charge after a stray dog was sadistically nailed to a board, Smith was acquitted of the felony animal cruelty charge.

On January 8, 2026, during a bench trial, Judge Mark Pate sentenced Smith to 30 days in county jail for a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge. He was acquitted of the Class D felony aggravated cruelty charge, and a misdemeanor public display of obscenity charge was dismissed.

The charges, filed by the White County Sheriff’s Department on March 6, 2024, stemmed from a horrific incident in November 2023. It is alleged that Smith shot and wounded a homeless dog, then nailed him to a plywood board spray-painted to read, “THIS WHAT HAPPENS TO DOG DROP HERE.” Attached to this board was another, sprayed with the words “STOP DROP DOG.”

Evidence presented, including a necropsy, determined that the gunshot wounds were not lethal. The massive blood loss on the board suggested the dog was sadistically tortured and likely alive when spikes were driven through his feet. Smith claimed he painlessly killed the dog for showing aggression to his family and animals.

We had submitted a letter to District Prosecutor Rebecca Reed McCoy, signed by 14,336 dedicated In Defense of Animals supporters, demanding that Smith be convicted and handed the six-year maximum sentence for a Class D felony, a $10,000 fine, and a mandatory psychiatric evaluation and treatment. We asked for the letter to be presented to the presiding judge during the sentencing phase of his trial.

Smith’s sadistically violent killing of an innocent dog who strayed near his property displays his psychotic tendency to inflict harm on anyone who angers him. Statistics have long supported the fact that the “cycle of violence” doesn’t differentiate between victims. Perpetrators of violence must be dealt with in both the criminal and mental health systems to protect all members of society.

In this case, we’re not certain what happened in court, including how hard the prosecution fought on behalf of the dog. Smith did not rely on a public defender, so it is possible that he had excellent representation. Alternatively, the judge may not care about animal abuse. Unfortunately, we just do not know.

Justice does not end with one ruling. Cases like this are exactly why In Defense of Animals continues to investigate cruelty, mobilize thousands of supporters, and demand meaningful consequences for those who harm animals. If you believe dogs deserve real protection under the law, please consider making a donation to support ongoing Justice for Animals investigations and advocacy. You can also learn more about this work and how it protects animals and communities nationwide.