Dogs euthanized during a bitter divorce leads to a shocking stabbing case, as a jury rules the wife had no intent to kill.
There is a long running joke on the Chinese internet.
It says that in movies, villains can destroy cities and betray anyone.
But there is one thing they should never touch.
That thing is Keanu Reeves’ dog. 
In the action film series John Wick, Reeves plays a character who responds to the death of his dog with extreme violence.
The message is simple and brutal.
Touch the dog, and everything ends.
Many people treat this as pure fiction.
After all, movies are movies.
Surely no one would really attack another person over a dog.
But in real life, a woman living in Norfolk proved that such emotions can be terrifyingly real.
A Marriage of Decades Suddenly Falls Apart
Claire and her husband Keith had been together for thirty seven years.
They had been married for three decades.
On April 27 last year, they sat down for breakfast with their two daughters.
That morning, they shocked their family by announcing they were getting divorced.
After discussions, Keith moved out of the family home.
He rented an apartment about twenty kilometers away.
The house remained with Claire.
Claire continued living there with the family’s two dogs.
They had adopted both animals before and during the COVID pandemic.
For Claire, the dogs were deeply loved companions.
A Short Trip That Changed Everything
Following the collapse of her marriage, Claire wanted to clear her head.
She asked Keith to look after the dogs.
She then went to London to stay with her sister and niece for a week.
At first, the plan seemed simple.
But only two days later, Claire realized she could not cope emotionally.
She took time off work and stayed longer with relatives.
During this period, her daughters began urging her to return home.
One daughter called and warned her that if she did not come back soon, the dogs might be put to sleep.
Claire felt hurt by the call.
She did not believe anyone would actually euthanize the dogs.
To her, it felt like her daughter was taking her father’s side.
The Night Claire Returned Home
In July, about three months after the separation, Claire drank two glasses of wine one evening.
She decided to return home and sort out her daughter’s belongings.
She also planned to sell the house.
When she arrived, the house was empty.
Neither Keith nor the daughters were there.
Claire then drove to Keith’s new apartment.
By coincidence, Keith was arriving home on his motorcycle.
Claire parked nearby and stayed inside her car.
They spoke briefly.
She asked whether he would help cover mediation fees she could not afford.
Keith agreed.
Then Claire noticed something strange.
She later said that she suddenly realized she could not hear the dogs.
The animals were usually noisy and barked often.
The Moment Everything Collapsed
Claire shouted and asked where the dogs were.
Keith removed his helmet but did not answer.
She asked again.
Still no response.
When she asked a third time, Keith turned and said that she already knew.
He said he had texted her.
He then told her he had taken the dogs to a veterinarian and had them euthanized.
Later in court, Claire described the moment as her mind exploding.
She said she remembered stepping out of the car.
After that, everything went blank.
Her next memory was neighbors trying to pull her away.
She realized she was holding a knife.
What Witnesses Saw
According to Keith and several witnesses, Claire exited the car holding a knife.
Keith attempted to calm her down.
She then stabbed him in the chest and abdomen.
She also bit his arm.
Keith collapsed on the ground and began screaming for help.
Neighbors rushed over and separated them.
Someone called the police.
In the emergency call recording, Claire could be heard shouting that Keith had killed her dogs.
One neighbor was a doctor.
He provided immediate medical assistance.
Keith was then rushed to hospital with life threatening injuries.
Claire’s Explanation of the Knife
Claire later explained where the knife came from.
She said it was an old kitchen knife that had already bent and become useless.
She had planned to throw it away.
While driving, it fell out of a garbage bag.
She picked it up and placed it on the passenger seat.
She insisted she never intended to hurt Keith.
She said killing him had never crossed her mind.
Charges and Psychiatric Evaluation
Prosecutors charged Claire with intentional wounding and attempted murder.
She admitted she had attacked her husband.
She acknowledged that she intended to seriously injure him.
However, her defense team presented psychiatric evaluations.
Doctors concluded that the combination of alcohol and extreme emotional shock may have caused a dissociative episode.
They suggested she may have experienced temporary amnesia.
As a result, her capacity to fully control her actions may have been impaired.
Claire also told the court she never imagined the dogs would be euthanized.
She said the dogs came from a charitable rescue organization.
That organization had a policy of taking dogs back if owners could no longer care for them.
Conflicting Accounts Between Husband and Wife
Keith admitted he did not clearly tell his wife that he had already euthanized the dogs.
However, he maintained that after failing to rehome them, he believed Claire already understood what would happen.
This disagreement became a central issue during the trial.
The Verdict and Public Reaction
After five days of trial, the jury reached a unanimous verdict in just two hours.
They ruled that Claire did not intend to kill Keith.
The charge of attempted murder was dismissed.
Sentencing for intentional wounding was postponed until March 20.
The judge requested a probation report to assess Claire’s potential risk before issuing a final sentence.
Public reaction quickly split into two camps.
Supporters Who Understood Her Rage
Some people believed Keith’s actions were cruel and provocative.
They said euthanizing the dogs was an act of revenge.
Many expressed sympathy for Claire.
They argued her emotional collapse was understandable.
To them, the verdict felt fair.
Critics Who Questioned the Judgment
Others strongly disagreed.
They argued that temporary amnesia was a weak excuse.
Some claimed the jury was biased.
They questioned whether a man would receive the same treatment under similar circumstances.
The Only Innocent Victims
Disagreement over the ruling is inevitable.
Speculation about alternative outcomes will never have clear answers.
But one fact is undeniable.
The two dogs were completely innocent.
They had no voice and no choice.
In the end, they paid the highest price.
