Animal Laws and Rights - Page 3

Kitkat, have you ever visited and seen the conditions in which these dogs were kept, if so when?


$9,900 ends up being about $10 a day per dog, including veterinary care. 

No, I have not, have you sitas mom?
This guy seems to have had a good reputation and well known in the dog circuit. He also is one of the FEW that has extended a helping hand to others.
I felt he was allowed the benefit of the doubt. IF after a fair triaL WAS HAD AND IT WAS FOUND HIS DOGS WERE INDEED MISTREATED AND NEGLECTED, BY ALL MEANS, REMOVE THEM.
I just feel it is wrong to penalize anyone before they are allowed their day in court. And NO, I don't believe dogs or any animals should be left in sub standard conditions for the months it sometimes takes to resolve a matter but I also don t think it is fair to require a several thousand dollar deposit be made prior to any findings of fact.
A person is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty here in this country.
I find it funny coming from you as a big animal rights activists looking out for these dogs interests, it s no wonder you can act as judge and juror , as I have never quite been able to shake your bad vibes after reading how you set the neighbors dogs up for you to shoot them after you got no satisfaction from the owners. It was not the dogs fault they were annoying you, it was their owners, but you chose a sentence of death for them dogs, or is my recollections failing me SM?
[i believe you set them up with chickens]

Yes, I've been there, and Jeanies' too. 

and was there a problem with how the dogs were being kept when you were there SM? if so, what was the problem, ? Just curious

He had fewer dogs at the time, all dogs were outside, other that that, the newspaper article was pretty much accurate.

if you were there and know more of the details, that's all well and good. I don't, and I don't like to make a decision, or slam someone based on what others say, and certainly not from a newspaper article [you know the whole fake news thing]
Randy was always willing to help, he actually went out of his way to help me a while back, which is more than I can say about a lot of people.
it would seem as though someone involved with him and his dogs would have noticed him back sliding and offered assistance to him before it became this big mess, but, can't get much drama out of a situation that way can we now,
seems this the same as what happened to the woman in New York awhile back, everyone see which direction a person is heading, many of which call themselves friends, but sit back and watch , waiting for the disaster. Than they offer help, and people scramble trying to get these expensive dogs out of impound.
How many dogs are co-owned, and don't these co-owners have any idea how their dogs are being housed, and cared for.
why have animals that are not anywhere near you, that a person can at least know if these animals are being cared for.
yes, I know I am of the pet mentality, but I believe 'property dogs' also have the right to be cared for properly, and also 'cared about'.
I do believe you were co something with the NY dogs SM, and now, like than, want to talk smack about the people.
there is so much more to dogs than just money, anyone that don't see that or have never experienced a relationship with their dog, has missed out on a fortune.

SM, question- did I understand you correctly that it was that bad back when you visited? If so, then why did you not say something then? Or did you?

I guess my question in these cases is always why people don't help the dogs when they first become aware. Why wait until it gets so bad that it blows up like this and then say "Oh yeah, his/her dogs have always been in terrible condition." I mean, is it about the welfare of the dogs or is it about gossip and shaming? I have never met Randy or been to his place, for the record. I am disturbed by what I have read, though, and Kitkat, "they" didn't give away his dogs. He refused to pay the fees and chose to forfeit them, unless I misunderstood.

Hey Guys,

First let me thank all those that support Due Process. It's been a very difficult process and I appreciate the support here and those that continue to to keep in touch.

Second let me say one of the dogs involved is a dog I co own with Kim Rall. It's understandable she wants to distance herself from this. This is a very toxic situation.

Third this process becomes a race between costs and reality. You try to get your chance in court before the costs get out of control and that's simply where we were. We were at 35,000 on the 14th with the certainty it would go to 45,000 by the time of my court date a little over a month from now.

I hope my friends understand I retained control of the animals for as long as possible in an effort to still be in a position to recover them once my cases were heard. I feel very sad that I lost my dogs without having presented my case.

It's still early in this process as the case will be heard a little more than a month from now. Please bear in mind the this site is monitored by the State and you may become involved inadvertently. Comments posted here have been brought up in evidence.

Randy, I was not judging you for giving up the dogs so much as simply clarifying that you made the decision to forfeit them. Joni stated (but has apparently deleted or I am simply delirious and can no longer find it, lol) the state just gave them away. I don't know anything about anyone involved in this whole mess but I am very sorry for all the dogs who are caught in the middle of it.

Jenn- have you got that kind of money just sitting around for those unanticipated 20,000 plus expenses.
Did he really have a choice? Really
This the kind of stuff drives me nuts.
That's why I say he was denied due process and basicly had his dogs stolen out from under him.
And SM shame on you, second time your dogs are out of your control waiting on them to send them magical dollars your way
Well, maybe you can get a tax right off, you certainly were not too worried about the dog