I just love the anachronistic phraseology used here, "...Defiling a she-goat..." LOL... But seriously, ten years for screwing a goat? That seems a bit excessive, IMHO.
That was a classic Kangaroo Court. I don't know how the law stands in this one but one could only work within the framework of law. There is some shortcoming of the law. Within the law one can eat a goat, farm a goat, slaughter a goat, force a goat to work on the land, starve a goat, neglect a goat, beat a goat, chop up a goat, chain a goat but it is breaking the law to make love to a goat? Does any one even know how a goat has a choice in this, giving a choice I wondered if a goat prefers to be eaten, chopped up, tied to rope, worked to death or being made love to and cared for by its owner? May a goat can have feelings too in bestiality and the subject is a man! Even now the law says (70 out of 195 countries globally) sodomy is illegal. Death penalty was lifted in Britain in 1861. It was crazy then you could enslave a man, abuse a man, slaughter a man (as Empire grew overseas), treat a man badly but you could not have consenting love between two men and women! All in all a good post OP, does trigger some thoughts in the acceptance of unusual behaviour. Excessive application of the law here, in the West a man (lonely but not always) can screw a sex toy, and these sex toys are on display in sex shop, mail order.., but out in Kenya there are no such sex toys. The man's wife was severely disabled and could not have sex. There is no social security. Very sad in that to sum up , no wonder it is said that the law is an ass and this was in a Kangaroo court.
See, the thing is that the goat's interests and rights were never the topic at hand. The harsh punishment served more as a deterrent for others not to screw goats, rather than to provide justice for the goat. That goat will end up being dinner quite soon.
Indeed, this wasn't an argument of jurisprudence (animal, er... "husbandry" not withstanding, LOL...); rather it was exemplar of the communal repugnance towards the act of moral depravity and licentiousness. I found it interesting that the jurist was a woman; her gender no doubt had an effect on the punishment.
