Town of Friday Harbor Mayor Raymont Jackson was found not guilty of the crime of animal cruelty in the second degree in San Juan County District Court on Friday, October 24 after a trial by jury.
He was arraigned on August 20, 2025 in San Juan County District Court. His attorney entered a not guilty plea for Jackson. The charge is a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to 365 days in jail and/or a $5000 fine.
On August 9, Sasha, Jackson’s small terrier dog went to a neighbor’s house. According to the probable cause statement, the dog “appeared in distress visibly shaking.” According to the woman, the collar was extremely tight and when she looked at the dog closer, she smelled a foul smell and observed a “blackish ooze around [the] collar.” According to her, the collar was so tight on Sasha that she could not get a finger between the collar and her fur.
The neighbor called the sheriff’s office. On August 11, a veterinarian examined Sasha. According tothe probable cause statement, Sasha had a “single moist puncture wound with granulation around it and adherence of skin to underlaying tissues consistent with chronic inflammation, surrounded by approximately 4cm of inflamed tissue.” During the examination, the Veterinarian also noted that Sasha’s “nails [were] all very long, most curling sideways.” Medications were prescribed to Sasha for infection.
The veterinarian informed the deputy that the neck wound would have been painful for Sasha and the long nails could have caused discomfort. More details can be read in this article which includes the Probable Cause statement.
In their closing statements, Deputy Prosecutor and Attorney Bullock summed up their theories of the case.
Excerpts from the prosecutor’s closing arguments:
“The state is not alleging that Sasha was beaten, starved, or unsheltered. Mr. Jackson probably did think Sasha was part of the family at some point, and Mrs. Jackson clearly loved Sasha. But on or about August 9, 2025, and perhaps even the time leading up to that, Sasha was ignored and probably had been for days or weeks leading up to that day… that a wound that likely took weeks to develop should have been noticed. …the tightness of her collar, the fact it had never been adjusted and rarely if ever removed – unnecessarily caused Sasha unjustifiable pain. …We are here because Sasha’s injuries could have been prevented.
“Given all the testimony you’ve heard about what was noticeable before the collar was off, the overwhelming smell, you can use your common sense and experience to determine how risky it would have been not to explore further and discover the underlying reason for the stuff caked around the collar, the neck, the shock portion, and that smell.
Defense Attorney Bullock said, “Sasha is a member of the Jackson family, a loved, full, loved dog for 12 years. She’s got a couple issues. She likes mud, dirt and smelly things and wanders off. She wandered off on August 9. And there’s no evidence that before that she was injured or that there was anything to indicate that she was hurt from walking or that she had this neck injury.
“We have offered you Exhibit 1 [a photo]. The State didn’t want you to see that because it’s dated July 27, 13 days before this incident. In this particular case, do you see Sasha having any injuries on her? Do you see a dog that’s being neglected? Do you see a dog that’s not part of that family? No”, he asked the jury.
“What’s reasonable to interpret from that? That at least 13 days before this incident Sasha didn’t exhibit the oozing tarry substance around her neck, was not exhibiting any prolonged toenails that was endangering her health. There’s nothing that you can gather from that photograph that suggests that or otherwise.”
“They’re trying to bootstrap some kind of argument about a smell.”
“…The reasonable interpretation of this evidence is that the dog was let out twice on August 9th, first by Tina, then by Ray, and then she got out and she was gone indisputably for nine to 12 hours before [a neighbor] found her. What happened during that nine to 12 hours?”
Attorney Bullock, whose arguments were often interrupted by objections from the deputy prosecutor that were sustained by District Court Judge Carolyn Jewett, hoped his behavior would not be used against his client.
“Now, ladies and gentlemen, I obviously feel strongly about this and I get into arguments with counsel, with officers. You may even be offended by some of the things that I say. I’m afraid that some of you are going to say, I don’t like that guy. He’s a jerk, arrogant jerk. And they’re going to hold it against Mr. Jackson. And if you hold it against Mr. Jackson, I haven’t done my job. Please be conscious of the fact that if I’ve done something to offend you, don’t hold it against that man because he didn’t do anything wrong. And the state has not met their burden of evidence.”
The Jacksons lost custody of Sasha last month after they failed to renew the bond that covered her care while awaiting the trial.