GSD breeder arrested in CT - Page 6

This event took place on Oct 26th.

I wonder if she has already been to court?

Does anyone know if the dogs were all owned by DM? Where are they now?

If she is convicted, these dogs are going to be looking for homes. They will probably be neutered before they are released. Normally other owners of the same breed or breed-specific rescues get together and help rehome dogs that are involved in abuse cases. Right now some of us  (another breed) are peripheraly involved with a bust of over 170 dogs. These dogs are currently in the possession of the local humane society. They have received a lot of donations, but it costs 11K per month to feed and care for them and it could continue for many months. Some of the dogs have been relinquished by the owner, so the immediate issue is finding homes for around 70.

GSD people in CT might want to talk about what they can do if these dogs are not returned to DM which may well happened.  This is certainly not the same volume as the rescue I mentioned above, but there will be a need for donations for food, treats, toys,  and qualified people ready to rehome these dogs if it becomes necessary. I imagine most of DM's dogs are related to other breeders' dogs  in the area so they may want to get involved.

I live in CT, am not active anymore in the GSD scene here , but I'm sure the word went out the minute she was arrested. 

I have lived here my entire life, am pretty close with my local AC, let me tell you, it takes ALOT for AC in most towns to even go  and check out a complaint.  And it seems to take a REAL LOT for them to go in and do something, so when they do, I am one who believes they have really good reasons for doing what they do.  Now I don't know about other states, and do know that there are probably AC's out there that jump the gun, their status gives them an ego but I have found here, the AC's are more than willing to work with a person , the last thing they want is more animals in shelters which also here most are in dire need of everything you can think of.. More space, more help, donations.

I don't know DM personally, I know she's had problems in the past, she breeds/bred AM show lines, and now is President of a Schutzhund club here.

I am one who doesn't care about anyones civil rights if their animals need help they need help. Just MHO

The reason I mentioned a violation of civil rights is because, if proven, it will get the case thrown out of court and the perp will walk and get the dogs back to do more of the same. I don't give a damn about DM's civil rights. 

That is exactly what we are dealing with right now with the above mentioned confiscation of 170+ dogs. Some dog people are actually trying to get the evidence thrown out saying his civil rights were violated by an illegal search and seizure. They have retained an expert witness. Why? Because the HSUS was involved and they detest those people. I am not an HSUS lover either, but I'll be damned if I want to see this guy get out of felony charges of dog abuse, get his dogs back, and do it all over again which he will.

I truly hope AC and the PD did it right.



 

OK, We have a consensus. She's been arrested before and that makes her guilty. She's simply guilty now as she was before and there's no need to discuss it anymore. Once guilty, always guilty.  Consider the matter done.

Let's move on to how the situation was handled. To copy some justification posted above;

he may issue such orders as he deems necessary for the correction of such conditions

OK, so the Commissioner can do whatever they feel is necessary and confiscate your personal property. Is that what you think it says?

Just copying a small portion of the code does not necessarily convey the meaning of the code. Here's what it says.

'...such kennel is not being maintained in good repair and in a sanitary and humane manner or if the commissioner finds that communicable or infectious disease or other unsatisfactory conditions exist in the kennel, he may issue such orders as he deems necessary for the correction of such conditions and may quarantine the premises and animals. If the owner or keeper of such kennel fails to comply with such orders, the commissioner shall revoke or suspend the kennel license of such owner or keeper.'

So, the commissioner has the authority to correct the conditions, not take your dogs. If the commissioner is not satisfied with the conditions, the Commissioner can quarantine the premises or animals. Quarantine is isolate not Confiscate. If the owner does not comply The Commissioner shall Revoke the license. Revoke the license is not Confiscate.

So my question is; and what this discussion is now about. Did Animal Control have the right to do what it did? Is AC overstepping their authority? I think if you held them accountable to the letter of the law,,,unless someone can show me where the code gives AC the authority to confiscate someone's personal property, whether you think what they did was morally right or not, they were clearly outside the law.

That's what is scary about this situation.

I love these heated discussions, (being facetious), What I see a lot of times, and I'm not siding up for the DM person, or the AC Officers, or even the majority of commentors, one side or the other. It's nice to sit back and scrutinize or dissect a person's career or duty or the decisions one made in that career or doing that duty. Abuse/over stepping.......Not saying it doesn't happen.......somewhere. One moment we have a ? topic, situation or incident then the next it's breaking off here then there and then we are on something else. AC "overstepping" their authority? Maybe it's just me but some individuals truly enjoy the line of work they are in and aspire to do the best that they can doing that job. When I hear things along this line I ask people what they do for a living? Then I ask for how long? Then I ask if they would like/love if numerous people questioned their work ethics? Or how they do their job? Or questioned their decisions?

The poster that said it could happen to any of us. True. But if your T's are crossed, your I's are dotted and your ducks all in order than the chance of this happening is less likely. I stated in a different thread, these individuals with authority are just like anyone else. Go talk to them, get answers first hand. It's not against the law to go down to the station or office and just talk to these people! I have no clue who this DM is? Being guilty in a previous case doesn't automatically make her guilty in this one. And I'm not saying she is innocent! Let the individuals do their jobs. It falls on them. If someone screws up the case then it's on that person. And if anyone has helpful or hurtful information then do your duty and step forward. Just think if you, your parents, your sons or daughters do a job and all you hear from whoever/the public is that they abuse their authority, overstep their boundaries or race into the unknown person's house and take their animals.................... Come on! We all know some people work the loop holes, work the system. That's life! For someone ? complaining of the Commissioner's power/authority? The residents put him there. They definitely should know his powers and authority. 

Court is Dec. 14

Dog 1,
haven't you been in breeding dealings with this person?  Questions that come to my mind that you failed to mention in your post was: Was this breeder a registered Kennel within her town? Were her dogs lisenced in her town? Did she adhere to the local zoning regulations? And were the dogs vaccinated, fed and maintained? And might I add that any vet should be able to determin the difference between "healthy" and sickly. I personally would not attack the people assigned to "protect" the dogs when the human aspect of it fails. The dogs cannot dial 911 but this seems to be a case that needed someone to respond to look out for them. 

Momma,

I don't think the licensing part was mentioned. Who knows? It does not appear to be a factor. The article went into enough detail to mention nail length. I would think if the kennel was unlicensed, that would have been mentioned too. Let's assume for the sake of this discussion the license was in place. I think we can all agree no one wants to see animals mistreated. Let's get that behind us too. Take out the owner, the prior history, the license and take a look at the situation as reported and the actions that were taken.

Let's consider this some unknown person, maybe you, me, or anyone reading this and examine the information as it appears. The information is a news report with police statements and the state code. No more, no less for the sake of discussion.

Here are the facts as presented. Accurate or inaccurate let's just roll with them for sake of discussion leaving out all the other details that may relate but obscure the issue.

In this country we have elected officials that are empowered to make the laws. Many good people have sacrificed and died to allow this process to continue. We see everyday rights being taken away for various reasons. Maybe that's just the way it is but it isn't that way by design is it? That's the acid test here. Are the rights of individuals being overtaken by others overstepping their authority?

Those that enforce the law are not elected officials. They are hired to perform a public service.

Here are the details:

complaint 10/26
Investigation 12/2

Police statement:

more than 12 dogs in the house
12 in crates
1 loose in the house
House smelled of feces and urine
Crates had no bedding
Crates had water pails and dishes but there was no water in them
One dog appeared very thin
One dog had thinning hair and long nails
Police reported all in poor condition

This is all the evidence provided. If anyone can add to the list of what the police statement was, please do.

Here's what the law says:

(b) The commissioner, the Chief Animal Control Officer or any state animal control officer may at any time inspect any kennel including all facilities of any kennel in which dogs are bred or housed or cause it to be inspected by a Connecticut licensed veterinarian appointed by the commissioner. If, in the judgment of the commissioner, such kennel is not being maintained in good repair and in a sanitary and humane manner or if the commissioner finds that communicable or infectious disease or other unsatisfactory conditions exist in the kennel, he may issue such orders as he deems necessary for the correction of such conditions and may quarantine the premises and animals. If the owner or keeper of such kennel fails to comply with such orders, the commissioner shall revoke or suspend the kennel license of such owner or keeper.

(e) Any owner or keeper of a kennel who breeds more than two litters of dogs annually and (1) fails to apply for a kennel license as required in subsection (a) of this section, or (2) fails to allow an inspection of such facility as required in subsection (b) of this section shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year or both.

If there are any other laws someone please add them in.

Here's what animal control has the authority by law to do:

Inspect the kennel or have a licensed vet inspect the kennel
Issue an order to correct unsatisfactory conditions
Quarantine the premises and animals
Suspend the license
Fine
Imprisonment
Both Fine and Imprisonment

These are the facts as reported and a summary of the law as it applies to the situation. Now tell me whether you agree in principal or not, just where does it say AC has a right to confiscate these animals? Take this persons property without issuing an order to correct the conditions? Impose the penality as the law allows?

Did AC comply with the law in this set of circumstances? Yes or no?

Remember Nitro the Rottie? Remember Hessel?  Who spoke for them, when they were in the hands of 'experienced' dog owners, before they were dead?  Which is why I firmly believe that of the two options--operating on the premise that the [owner/parent/caretaker/coach/priest] certainly *must* be doing right by the [animal/child/disabled/elder] in their care, because most people DO exactly that, versus coming from a place of suspicion as soon as there's an allegation/complaint against them--we *must* err on the side that protects the party with the lesser power in the relationship.

Yes, that does mean that there will be people who are falsely accused, and some of those may not be able to mount a defense that's sufficient to remove the taint that the charges placed upon them...which is tragic, of that there is no doubt.  But it remains far less tragic than animals starving to death in kennels, or children being raped by 'mentors', or neglected senior citizens dying in their own bodily wastes, malnourished and hypo- or hyper-thermic as befits the time of year.