The man who stabbed a pet dog to death at Weaver Park while its owner played pickleball nearby will be released from state custody after pleading guilty Monday to one felony count of cruelty to animals.
James Wesley Henry has been in custody for 595 days and will be released, perhaps as early as Monday, because he has already served more than the maximum sentence under state law, 19 months. Superior Court Judge Gary Gavenus accepted Henry’s guilty plea, acknowledging the length of Henry’s custody.
In a brief statement in court, after acknowledging he understood what he was pleading to, Henry told the judge that people “were yelling the N-word” at him on the day of the stabbing, June 26, 2023. Henry, who has a lengthy criminal record and history of mental illness, also maintained that he was attacked by two dogs that day, including the one he killed, an 11-year-old, 30-pound mixed breed named Beignet.
“It wasn’t just one dog I was attacked by — it was two dogs,” Henry said.
Henry, 45, was charged with a lower level, class H felony of cruelty to animals, which carries a maximum sentence of 39 months for an offender with multiple convictions. But with his record, the most time he could have received was 19 months.
James Wesley Henry // Photo credit: Asheville Police Department
Buncombe County Assistant District Attorney Josh Harrold summarized the state’s case against Henry, noting that Beignet was lying in the shade near the courts, tied to a bike rack with a leash, when Henry killed the animal. Henry was observed “holding Beignet in the air by the throat and stabbing (the dog) again and again,” Harrold said.
Beignet died of wounds to the throat and chest.
Initially Henry was found incompetent to stand trial, but after being committed to Broughton Hospital, a state psychiatric facility, for treatment, he was found competent to proceed with the sentencing hearing.
“The horrific cruelty inflicted upon Beignet highlights the inadequacy of current animal cruelty laws in North Carolina,” District Attorney Todd Williams said in a statement following the hearing. “I urge lawmakers to enhance these laws without delay to protect vulnerable wildlife and animal companions. My thoughts are with Beignet’s family.”
Beignet’s owners, Tom and Liesbeth Mackie, were notified of the hearing but decided not to attend. Tom Mackie toldAsheville Watchdog last week that he’s concerned about the public’s safety now that Henry will be released, questioning whether someone like him could actually be rehabilitated.
In a statement, Liesbeth Mackie said she’s thankful for the overwhelming community support she and her family received after the incident, and for the pickleball players who followed Henry after the assault and alerted police to his whereabouts.
The Mackies received numerous cards conveying sympathy following the slaying of their dog, Beignet, in June 2023. // Watchdog photo by John Boyle
Defense argues in vain for Alford plea
Henry’s attorney, Public Defender Michael Casterline, argued in court that Henry was eligible for an “Alford plea,” in which the defendant maintains his innocence but admits that the prosecution’s evidence likely would lead to a guilty verdict in a trial. Casterline said case law supports that plea in cases in which the defendant has already served the maximum sentence.
But the judge would not entertain the idea, even though Casterline said he’d presented the Alford plea to the state Friday.
“I will not do it,” Gavenus said. “You got another judge right upstairs.”
After Casterline said case law supports the Alford plea notification to the state, Gavenus still declined to entertain it.
“I’m not going to argue with you,” Gavenus said. “I’m not going to do it.”
After the hearing, Casterline said he still disagreed with the judge’s ruling.
“The law is essentially that if you’ve done your max sentence, you can plead guilty without a deal,” Casterline said. “The state was trying to characterize it like we had made some deal with them — we haven’t made any deal.”
“I think he’s violating the law,” Casterline said of the judge’s refusal. “There’s clear case law.”
“If we don’t have a plea arrangement, if we don’t have some negotiated sentence, he has to take it. It’s a silly skirmish, and I wanted my client to get out of jail.”
Henry is eligible for release, which could occur as early as today, Casterline said.
In court, Henry wore a brown Buncombe County Detention Facility jumpsuit and chains at his waist, hands, and ankles. He answered the judge’s questions quietly and said he was of sound mind and understood the proceedings.
Henry had been at Broughton since Nov. 14, 2024, Casterline said. So he served most of his time in the Buncombe County Detention Facility.
Henry told the judge he takes the antipsychotic medication Zyprexa, which treats schizophrenia and/or bipolar disorder. Casterline said in court that Henry, who served in the military, is eligible for continuing mental health treatment through the Veterans Affairs medical system.
Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. John Boyle has been covering Asheville and surrounding communities since the 20th century. You can reach him at (828) 337-0941, or via email at jboyle@avlwatchdog.org. The Watchdog’s local reporting during this crisis is made possible by donations from the community. To show your support for this vital public service go to avlwatchdog.org/support-our-publication/.
SUMMARY: Jim Jenkins, a North Carolina baseball trailblazer and Negro Leagues player, exemplified resilience and excellence both on and off the field. His sons recall his superior skills—hitting, running, and catching—and how he faced challenges due to his skin color. Beyond baseball, Jenkins was a community father, teaching youths fundamentals and helping those in need. He shared a friendship with legend Hank Aaron, often attending Braves games with his family. His legacy endures through his children, who honor not just his athletic achievements but his kindness and humanity, inspiring future generations to carry on his impact.
James “Jim” Jenkins had a profound impact on the game of baseball as a trailblazer known in the Carolinas.
SUMMARY: A scientist reflecting on the politicization of science warns that ideological influence undermines objectivity, breeds mistrust, and hampers public understanding. The FY2026 budget proposal cut NIH funding by about 40%, saving taxpayers $18 billion, but only 1.5% of the total federal budget, while increasing defense spending by 13%. These cuts severely impact states like North Carolina, where science drives $2.4 billion in tax revenue and thousands of jobs. The cuts target indirect costs vital for research infrastructure and diversity efforts, mistakenly seen as ideological rather than essential scientific practices. The author calls for unity to prioritize facts over politics and protect scientific progress for societal and economic health.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-06-15 02:01:00
North Carolina’s U.S. House members voted along party lines on two Republican-backed bills: the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (H.R. 1), which cuts \$1.6 trillion in government spending, and the “Rescissions Act of 2025” (H.R. 4), which eliminates \$9.4 billion from entities like USAID and public broadcasting. Republicans called it a purge of waste, citing spending on drag shows and foreign projects. Democrats criticized the cuts as harmful and symbolic, calling the effort fiscally irresponsible. H.R. 1 passed 215-214; H.R. 4 passed 214-212. No Democrats supported either. A few Republicans broke ranks and voted against their party on each bill.
(The Center Square) – North Carolinians in the U.S. House of Representatives were unwavering of party preference for two bills now awaiting finalization in the Senate.
Republicans who favored them say the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, known also as House Resolution 1, slashed $1.6 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse of government systems. The Rescissions Act of 2025, known also as House Resolution 4, did away with $9.4 billion – less than six-tenths of 1% of the other legislation – in spending by the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Corp. for Public Broadcasting (PBS, NPR), and other entities.
Democrats against them say the Department of Government Efficiency made “heartless budget cuts” and was an “attack on the resources that North Carolinians were promised and that Congress has already appropriated.”
Republicans from North Carolina in favor of both were Reps. Dr. Greg Murphy, Virginia Foxx, Addison McDowell, David Rouzer, Rev. Mark Harris, Richard Hudson, Pat Harrigan, Chuck Edwards, Brad Knott and Tim Moore.
Democrats against were Reps. Don Davis, Deborah Ross, Valerie Foushee and Alma Adams.
Foxx said the surface was barely skimmed with cuts of “$14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at our southern border; $24,000 for a national spelling bee in Bosnia; $1.5 million to mobilize elderly, lesbian, transgender, nonbinary and intersex people to be involved in the Costa Rica political process; $20,000 for a drag show in Ecuador; and $32,000 for an LGBTQ comic book in Peru.”
Adams said, “While Elon Musk claimed he would cut $1 trillion from the federal government, the recissions package amounts to less than 1% of that. Meanwhile, House Republicans voted just last month to balloon the national debt by $3 trillion in their One Big Ugly Bill. It’s fiscal malpractice, not fiscal responsibility.”
House Resolution 1 passed 215-214 and House Resolution 4 went forward 214-212. Republican Reps. Warren Davidson of Ohio and Thomas Massie of Kentucky were against the One Big Beautiful Bill and Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Nicole Malliotakis of New York and Michael Turner of Ohio were against the Rescissions Act.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
The article presents a straightforward report on the partisan positions and voting outcomes related to two specific bills, highlighting the contrasting views of Republicans and Democrats without using loaded or emotionally charged language. It neutrally conveys the Republicans’ framing of the bills as efforts to cut waste and reduce spending, alongside Democrats’ critique of those cuts as harmful and insufficient fiscal discipline. By providing direct quotes from representatives of both parties and clearly stating voting results, the content maintains factual reporting without promoting a particular ideological stance. The balanced presentation of arguments and absence of editorializing indicate a commitment to neutrality rather than an intentional partisan perspective.
