Currently, the discipline of Forensic Osteology is minimally used in the investigation of animal cruelty crimes. The forensic examination of deceased animals is performed by veterinarians who typically rely on radiographs or CT’s to visualize the skeleton. Many veterinarians do not have the time, personnel, equipment or training to process deceased remains down to just skeletal elements. Similarly, veterinarians are not generally trained in the analysis of skeletal trauma as it applies to cause of death. This lapse in analysis is occurring despite the results of a survey which was conducted of prosecutors and showed that “bones” ranked higher than DNA when survey participants were asked what types of evidence from the scene influenced their decision(s) to prosecute animal cruelty crimes. Unfortunately, it is not possible to glean all the information from animal bones that would be equivalent to the biological profile gathered with a Forensic Anthropological analysis of human skeletal remains (e.g., ancestry/breed and sex). Despite morphological differences, however, “bone is bone”. Meaning, regardless of human or non-human, bones react the same way to injury. It is this fact that allows the discipline of Forensic Osteology to be applied to non-human cases involving trauma. This presentation will briefly discuss the analytical similarities and differences between human and non-human skeletal remains and the analysis of two specific animal cruelty cases for which Forensic Osteology was utilized. In both cases, the osteological analyses were able to offer additional and more specific information than the radiographs, and in one case this resulted in an additional cruelty charge being charged.