If you are an AKC or UKC judge or delegate or have any position of authority or responsibility with either of these registries, be careful if you are also a breeder. You have a target on your back. Animal Control officers relish in the opportunity to pounce on any location where you may have dogs and confiscate your animals. They will show up just as you are returning from a day at work before you have your crates and dogs cleaned or first thing in the morning before you let them out and clean their pens and crates. They will take pictures of your dogs while they are in a terrified state due to the animal control team’s invasion of their space and claim the dogs are maltreated. Some dogs that have been holding their urine or feces while you were asleep or are at work, will urinate or defecate in their pens or crates because of the stress of the invasion and the description later given to a judge will be, “Some dogs were sitting or standing in their own urine and feces and the odor was overwhelming”. Incriminating photographs will be taken of this without any clarifying commentary that the dogs did this just as the commotion got underway and were reacting to a stressful situation. No, the judge will never hear that part. When your case goes before a judge, the pictures, the testimony of how bad it smelled and testimony about how the poor animals were sitting in their own excrement will be powerful. The spin machine will be in full force and the news outlets clamoring for a great story will swoop down like vultures ready to feast on a down or dying animal after a road kill. They gain sustenance from the misfortune that falls on others and the more horrific they can make their story the better their readership. They prey on the unsuspecting reader all to ready to believe the worst in the world and lack the skills to critically analyze what they read. They never will print the end. Where the prosecutor is forced to cave and dismisses or doesn’t charge because the evidence won’t support criminal abuse or neglect of animals. When they are forced to examine the real evidence and see the real picture. The cases where the prosecutor finds no basis for charges or dismisses charges when pushed to prove the claims made by the glory seekers are never reported. There isn’t any story in that and the vultures have nothing to gain. But the original claims live on in cyberspace. The damage is done. This happened this spring to an AKC judge from Kansas. His dogs were at the home of his mother and her husband in a neighboring state temporarily due to unforeseen circumstances. His mother, who had been taking care of the dogs, became suddenly ill and their care had now fallen on the shoulders of the AKC judge’s step-father. The AKC judge was only days away from retrieving his dogs because of the recent change in circumstances at his parent’s home when a raid there resulted in all of his dogs and his parent’s pets were seized. A tip had been reported by an AKC exhibitor with personal knowledge of the dog’s locations to animal control. This person was familiar enough with the situation to know the dogs were there, that the mother couldn’t care for them and the step-father was overwhelmed. Personal vendetta is believed to be the reason for the tip but it was the “perfect storm” of a situation according to the judge who wished he didn’t have to seize the animals but felt under the statutes as written, had to make the order. The raid had to be timed perfectly and done before the owner could get there to retrieve his award winning animals. They managed to pull it off. They had the training on just how to make it work, how to cleverly inform the press the dogs belonged to an AKC judge and how to inflame the narrative. Months later when the only charge to stick against the AKC judge was failing to obtain the proper permits for the dogs at the parent’s facility probably won’t ever get picked up by the press, but we, here an ALR want to shout it from the rooftops. HEADLINE: AKC JUDGE LOSES DOGS DUE A TECHINCALITY, ANIMAL RIGHTS SMUG. The District Attorney knew there was no case against the owner and all 30 something charges of animal abuse or neglect were dismissed. Little consolation when your reputation has been drug through the feces left by Animal Control and an unhappy AKC exhibitor.
Posted on: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 22:25:59 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015