Blanquita and Jose, two seven-year-old chihuahua dogs, died in Vigo under troubling circumstances tied to a case involving a 19-year-old accused of harming two animals belonging to a roommate last February. The events have stirred concern about animal cruelty and the treatment of pets in shared living spaces.
The court case reached the 2nd High Criminal Court, which scheduled a hearing for Thursday. The defendant did not attend, with the requested sentence reflecting a potential term of less than two years, approximately 18 months of imprisonment, depending on the court’s final ruling.
The dogs’ owner had been living with the defendant and a second room-mate for several months. Initially, one dog appeared to lose teeth, and a visible cut emerged on one of the animals. According to the owner, the person responsible admitted to pulling out teeth with pliers, claiming remorse or confusion about the harm caused. Witnesses noted that one dog showed a cut on its back, and the situation rapidly escalated in concern.
After a veterinary visit revealed stitches to address the injuries, the owner left the accused alone with the dogs the following day. When the owner returned, both dogs were dead. The owner described finding numerous bloody tissues and stained towels in the home, which intensified suspicions about what had happened while the dogs were in the defendant’s care.
so called fight
Veterinarians performing autopsies on the dogs concluded that the injuries could not have resulted from a legitimate fight between the two animals. They reported that the two dogs weighed about three kilograms each and that the bruising observed on their bodies was inconsistent with normal play among pets. The experts stated that the animals had suffered trauma consistent with blows, significant dental injuries, and even a jaw fracture that spanned multiple areas of the bodies.
A second roommate offered testimony about the dogs’ behavior around the accused. The animals appeared to fear him rather than react with aggression, suggesting they did not see him as a threat. The witness also noted that one of the dogs had suffered an eye injury previously, underscoring a pattern of harm that could point toward intentional abuse rather than accidental harm. The overall impression given by these accounts is that the animals did not act aggressively toward the man in question, making the alleged scenario of a mutual fight unlikely.
Across the testimonies and expert findings, a narrative emerges of fear and harm rather than a spontaneous canine confrontation. The case continues to unfold as prosecutors and defense counsel prepare for the next steps in court, with a focus on establishing the exact sequence of events and determining accountability for the injuries and ultimate deaths of Blanquita and Jose.
In this ongoing matter, residents and animal welfare advocates are paying close attention to how the legal system addresses cases of suspected animal cruelty that occur within shared living arrangements. The outcome will likely influence how similar situations are handled in the future, including the responsibilities of roommates and the safeguards available to protect household pets. Observers await the final verdict and the implications it may have for ensuring that vulnerable animals receive protection and that those who harm them are held properly accountable.
Note: The detailed case timeline and court proceedings are reported based on proceedings and testimonies presented in the local court system and corroborated by veterinary autopsy findings. Attribution is provided to official court documents and veterinary experts as the record supports. Further updates will follow as the case progresses and more information becomes available.