
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by kamila1412 on 26 November 2011 - 22:11
I have signed and passed it on !!! Hope he will never be able to even look at another dog !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by Blitzen on 27 November 2011 - 01:11
I am sorry to say that the originator of this petition was threatened with a lawsuit so she has decided to delete the petition.

by JRANSOM on 27 November 2011 - 02:11
That's too bad. I've signed.
by hexe on 27 November 2011 - 07:11
?????? A lawsuit on what grounds? The defense against slander and libel is the truth, and as long as the petition and the descriptive text stuck to the facts, then it was the truth--so somebody else needs to start this petition over again.

by Kalibeck on 27 November 2011 - 17:11
I thought petitioning was a part of our basic freedom of speech? As long as no slander is offered you could theorectically petition anything of or from anyone...??? Just simply state, We the signers of this petition would like to petition that John Doe not be allowed the priviledge of animal ownership in the future, especially to apply to any & all previously owned animals now held & cared for by fill in the blank, & allow these animals to be placed in adoptive homes. Can't the reason be implicit? Just sayin'! jackie harris
by Blitzen on 27 November 2011 - 18:11
The gal who started it is a relative newbie and a deeply in debt vet student. This guy is a well known bully. He scared her off.
Stay tuned, he will get his in court.
Stay tuned, he will get his in court.

by Two Moons on 27 November 2011 - 19:11
When I first read this I wondered how can you sign anything without knowing the facts.
Then I wondered, what good could come from an (internet) petition signed by people from the (internet) who do not have the facts or any direct involvement.
Especially when you realize it would not have any power over a judges decision in a court of law.
I imagine the lawyer had enough grounds to threaten litigation or they would not have bothered and who's going to spend the enormous amount of legal fee's to find out.
Everyone's heart is in the right place, but lack common sense.
That's what I think.
Then I wondered, what good could come from an (internet) petition signed by people from the (internet) who do not have the facts or any direct involvement.
Especially when you realize it would not have any power over a judges decision in a court of law.
I imagine the lawyer had enough grounds to threaten litigation or they would not have bothered and who's going to spend the enormous amount of legal fee's to find out.
Everyone's heart is in the right place, but lack common sense.
That's what I think.
by Blitzen on 27 November 2011 - 19:11
Wise as ever, Moonie.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top