Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Depraved Indifference

Just when you think Best Friends Animal Sanctuary can't sink any lower, they trot out LAYLA. LAYLA is a VICK dog. She has lived on the Utah Cult's compound under the court mandated million dollar insurance policy for the last 6 years. That is LAYLA on the left in the photo below. That is as close as LAYLA can safely be around other dogs. LAYLA is available for adoption.

Lovely Layla is a 'Vicktory dog' who adores people, walks, food puzzles and car rides. After being rescued from the property of Michael Vick, Layla has worked very hard to heal from her hard life's journey and pass her Canine Good Citizenship test. And now, she's finally ready to find a forever home!

This social butterfly wiggles with joy whenever anybody comes near and leans in for body strokes and scratches. Layla just can't wait to be a special person's best friend and cuddle buddy. She walks very nicely on a leash and is learning how to wear a muzzle, so she can go on play dates.

Due to her history and pretty strong prey instinct, a home without other pets might be best. She takes medication for arthritis in her shoulder and tests positive for Babesia, a parasite that is easily managed. Although she's made amazing progress, new things and noises still scare her.

Because of her very sad history, before taking her home, her new person will want to come meet her and spend some time to make sure it's a love connection. Please fill out an adoption application today if you'd like to consider giving Layla her first and forever loving home.

After $18,000 and 6 years of rehabilitation, LAYLA is still frightened by new things and noises and requires a muzzle to be near dogs. But SOMEHOW she still managed to acquire the canine good citizen certificate and she is ready for her forever home (with no other pets of course). How in the world can it possibly be legal or ethical to adopt out aggressive contagious fighting dogs? Not only does LAYLA pose a serious threat to neighborhood dogs in terms of a vicious attack but she (as well as the rest of the VICK dogs) is walking around the community like Typhoid Mary.

Most of the VICK dogs have babesia. Last month the owner of HANDSOME DAN was mooching on facebook for the expensive treatment, which only controls, not clears the parasite from the blood. The cost for one vial of the drug: $1400. Hmmm... I wonder, if HANDSOME DAN'S owner can not afford the Babesia treatment, how can they afford the court mandated million dollar liability insurance?

Click HERE to read more about Babesia, the easy to manage parasite.

Click HERE to read about more VICK dogs at the Utah Cult.

Click HERE to read about successfully placed VICK dogs.

Click HERE and HERE to read more about the CGC.

pimping the vick dogs, ssshhh

Narcissism Revealed (LEO)

Francis Battista on Babesia 

Depraved Indifference

Best Friends: Good Deed or Irresponsible Actions?
Best Friends: Good Deed or Irresponsible Actions?
Best Friends: Good Deed or Irresponsible Actions?

Study Conducted by Best Friends Animal Sanctuary Explains Why They Failed to Rehabilitate Vick Dogs and Why Fighting Dogs Will Never Make Good Pets

Monday, February 25, 2013

Best Friends Finds the Pit bull

Pat Dunaway has written a fantastic article about the Utah Cult - Best Friends, over at opposing views. you don't want to miss it.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Pawtucket RI - Come for the not being mauled by pit bulls

Stay for the New England charm, delicious seafood, urban farming movement and the utter awesomeness of still not being mauled by pit bulls.

Population 2011: 71,153
Median Income $39,628 well below RI median income of $55,975 and the US median income of $52,762.
Economic base: textiles, Hasbro toy manufacturer, jewelry, silverware and metals
Supposed cost of just implementing BSL according to BFAS BS calculator: $112,132
Actual 2011 total animal control operating expenses (with 9 year old ban): $124,920

Love Pawtucket.  Run afoul of their pit bull ban three times and like magic we all get our wish - JAIL TIME FOR NUTTER!

This is an excerpt from a radio interview on NightSide with Dan Rea with guests Boston City Councilor Rob Consalvo  and Amy Conrad, an advocate for unidentifiable animals.  They're discussing the Massachusetts ban on BSL that Amy Conrad helped get slipped into law while no one was looking.  Cuz we all know when you ask the people, they like to have both local control of government and pit bull regulation.  John Holmes, the animal control supervisor for the city of Pawtuckett, calls in to share his city's experience with a ban on pit bulls.

Thanks to April29 for sharing this great interview.

Transcribed excerpt:
Dan: Back to the phones we go…let's go to John Holmes in Rhode Island…John how are you tonight?
John: Good, how are you?
Dan: Good, What's up?
John: I just want to say I'm the Animal Control Supervisor in Pawtucket.
Dan: Ooh, great! Thank you for calling in.
John: You're entirely welcome.  We did put the law banning in 2004 banning pit bulls in the city of Pawtucket.  And I just want to say right up front that I do agree with the young lady that, I forgot her name
Dan: Amy
John: Amy, there are good pit bull owners.  What we did was, we were known as the pit bull capital of Rhode Island, the number of bites that were publicized in the late 90s - 2000s.  We looked at this for a number of years…  And let me also say they're wrong, about these people going out and getting another breed - that has not happened in the City of Pawtucket.  But, we're very aggressive with the law.

We put this law in to protect the animal as well as the people.

We were picking them up in the housing projects after they were fought, dead in plastic bags.  We were euthanizing pit bulls on a weekly basis prior to this law.  Last year we had to put down three.  And the numbers are getting shorter and shorter.  Our shelter is not full of pit bulls anymore.

They are a good dog.  We've got one in there now we just had neutered.  We don't believe in euthanasia just because it's a pit bull.  But, the law has to be done and it has to be done right.  Protect the good pit bull owners.

We have 80 pit bulls that are grandfathered in the city and owned by responsible people.  But again, we targeted the drug dealers.  We targeted the idiots that were walking around with big tow chains on 'em.  Those are the people we went after.

And this law has not only worked, it's worked tremendously.  And I welcome anybody to come in and see our numbers.  It's a shame that you have to pick out any breed but it's the dog of the day to the drug dealers and the idiots that make these dogs vicious.

Now you had one caller say, Well target the people.  How do you ban people?  We looked at this.  We went by the Denver Colorado law, but we went one step further.  We put jail time in there.  After the third offense, you go to jail.  And that's the end of it.

And people can walk down the streets of this city and not be afraid of being attacked by ANY dog, let alone a pit bull.  We're very aggressive with our leash law.  Our people are all trained; they've all been to the academy.

So, if you're gonna do this, don't put a law in if you're not going to enforce it.

Rob Consalvo: Hey that's a great point and this was an awesome call.  And I appreciate you, as a trained professional, have shown that breed specific laws can work in specific areas. Your town is different than my town and what you've chosen to do and modify is working for you.  You should have that right and Boston should too.

But you bring up another great point.  We've tried to market this as a pro-pit bull ordinance, actually.  And if you talk to Animal Control, they'll tell you that the ordinance was the tool to go in and rescue pit bulls from dogfighting dens.  They normally would have had to get a warrant in a court but now they have the ordinance as the tool because a neighbor complained.  they've rescued pit bulls as part of the ordinance.  They've used it as an education tool.  They always didn't fine for the muzzle or the beware of dog sign or the other pieces of the ordinance.  They educated people who were disobeying the law into becoming better pit bull owners.

So, yes there was a lot of controversy around muzzles and BSL, but if you talk to the good men and women who go out into the field and respond to the calls, they've used it as a positive pro-pit bull tool to rescue those dogs in an urban area who are in danger and that's an important piece to this.

Dan: John, thank you very much for the call and the background information.
John: Can I just say one more thing, and I'll make it very quick.
Dan: Sure
John: You know animal control are quick to be blamed, you know, looking at these laws.  But you gotta understand that they're sick of euthanizing these dogs.  They're sick of picking them up from the drug dealers and these idiots that don't know how to take care of them and euthanize them.  And the law does work.  Thank you.

Nightside with Dan Rea February 21, 2013 
You can listen to the interview.  It is divided into two parts.  The first part is nutter dominated.  The awesome John Holmes can be heard on the second part.

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

George Herman Ruth Jr aka Babe Ruth aka "the Bambino" aka "the Sultan of Swat"

The Bambino learned the hard way about the danger of
pit bulls and switched to a watered down pit fighter.

February 6, 1895 - August 16, 1948

Babe Ruth is considered by many to be the greatest baseball player of all time but few realize that The Babe is also found among the ranks of famous pit bull owners. The Babe's pit bull hobby didn't last long. He retired from pit bull ownership when he learned the hard way that it was much harder to keep pit bulls safely contained on his property than it was to knock the ball out of the park.

“The farm definitely had become more nuisance than nirvana.  An adventure raising chickens had fallen apart when the chickens died.  A second adventure, raising pit bulls was disbanded when one of the dogs got out of its pen and attacked and killed a neighbor’s cow.”

page195 The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth, Leigh Montville

"Ruth used to tell his wife he was going fishing, then come home tipsy, carrying a store-bought fish still wrapped in paper. The day his neighbor Henry Ford (who wanted to build an industrial village in town) complained that Ruth's pit bulls had killed his chickens, Ruth went to the barn, and "all Dorothy heard was shotgun blasts as he killed every dog."

Young Babe Ruth: His Early Life and Baseball Career from the Memoirs of a Xaverian Brother, Brother Gilbert

Thursday, February 14, 2013

A Kansas Dogfighting Valentine

There’s now an angel, named Savannah,
She was bit by a rescued pit bull: she didn’t survive.
  Had the owner  put that dog away,
The little girl and that dog would still be alive.
Pit Bull Poet Laureate

Savannah Edwards was killed by a "rescued" dog aggressive pit bull
  in Topeka Kansas on December 14, 2012
Game bred pit bulls have been mauling Kansans for over 100 years.  In fact, the people of Topeka hadhad enough with dogfighters, pit bull enthusiasts and their game bred pit bulldogs as early as 1897:

"A boy of 13 was attacked by a vicious bulldog in Topeka and one of his eyelids was torn so that it laid out on his cheek.  The attack was unprovoked and this, as well as other bulldog attacks, has created a strong feeling against that breed of bloodthirsty brutes."
August 26, 1897 The Globe-republican

Kansas has been a producer of game bred pit bulls for over a century. Kansas was one of the last states to pass dogfighting laws in 1982 but until they strengthened them them in 1984, even dogfighters that had been convicted of dogfighting could get their dogs back.

Towns, cities and counties all over Kansas, plagued with pit bulldog maulings, also enacted some of the earliest modern pit bull bans during the 80s as well.  But that did not end the battle because those Kansas dogfighters and game dog lovers are a brazen bunch.

The history of the pit bull ban in Liberal, KS shows just how hard the good people of Kansas have to fight to keep themselves safe from fighting dogs.

This comment from GERRY from Liberal, Kansas appeared on an anti-bsl website about a town near Liberal:

Gerry | June 4, 2010 at 7:33 am |
"I’m from Liberal,ks where they will kill your pitbull if your the type of individual that will allow them to push you over. Pitbulls have been banned here since 1989, not because they were viciouse or because of an attack on someone, but because several older individuals most of whome are no longer around here anymore use to fight them."

GERRY openly admits he breeds pit bulls in defiance of a local ban that has been in place for around 20 years.  GERRY is absolutely correct about the dogfighting, there was a dogfighting problem in Liberal KS in the 1980s.

In 1985, fifteen men were charged with felony and misdemeanor dogfighting just outside of Liberal Kansas.  Fifty pit bulls were found on the property, and seven pit bulls were in such bad condition they had to be put down at the scene.  The humane society said the rest of the dogs were too vicious to be adopted out.  In addition to the dogs, a fighting pit "awash in blood" was found. One humane officer described the sickening smell of blood and beer that hung in the air as they worked and the horrific sight of the mauled and dying dogs.  This bust took place at the farm house of GERALD VALENTINE of Liberal KS.

Yes, GERRY the illegal pit bull breeder who was advocating for an end to the pit bull ban seems to be one of the dogfighters he, himself, described that prompted the Liberal pit bull ban in the first place.

Alleged dogfighter GERRY VALENTINE is wrong about the pit bulls not attacking people, though.  There may not have been any serious attacks in Liberal itself, but all of Kansas was facing a big problem with pit bull attacks in the mid 80's.  In May 1985, a few months before GERRY was arrested and before a boy was seriously mauled, the nearby Hutchinson News published an editorial opinion pushing for a pit bull ban. It began "Kansas once again has been afflicted with the pit bull terrier problem." and went on to enumerate the many recent attacks in Kansas and nearby midwest states including a fatality in Kansas.  Seven months later, three year old Robert Cole Corbridge was severely mauled by two pit bullterriers who escaped from their owner.  His attack was said to leave a legacy of dangerous dog laws.  A year later, 46 Kansas towns had passed vicious dog laws.  Though the first pit bull ban in Kansas was enacted in 1983 in the small town of Little River, and other attacks galvanized the town of Shawnee to pass the "first comprehensive pit bull law in the state" in 1985, months before the  Corbridge attack, it was little Robert Cole's attack that galvanized cities and towns around the state.

Many cities adopted pit bull bans and other regulation during the 80s and almost immediately pit bull owners tried to have BSL overturned.  In 1989, a group of pit bull owners living in Overland Park attempted to overturn that city's ban.  The case went to the Kansas supreme court and the court upheld every provision that was challenged, including the legitimacy of visual identification of pit bulls and the right of local governments to regulate ownership and possession of dogs.  In addition, the court found that pit bulls represent "a unique hazard to the public safety," and rejected an "equal protection" challenge.

In 1991, Seward county (Liberal is the county seat) enacted a pit bull ban in response to the local dogfighting that GERRY VALENTINE participated in and to pit bull violence breaking out across the state.  However, twenty years later, long after the grandfathered pit bulls in Seward county would have died, the Seward County Commission sought to remove the grandfather clause from their pit bull ban.  It seems that one GERALD VALENTINE had been a thorn in their side, insisting that the grandfather clause pertained to him, the pit bull owner, and not to the pit bulls themselves.

GERRY VALENTINE, the alleged dogfighter and illegal pit bull breeder brazenly and openly led the fight against the ban.  He claimed that he'd been breeding pit bulls in Seward county for 41 years, and for the last 20 years his record was spotless - which is not to say he didn't break any laws, it merely means he only got arrested that one time.  VALENTINE says he sells his dogs all over the country, and there is no doubt about that.  Dogfighter Charlie Phaneuf has mentioned that he got dogs from VALENTINE.  VALENTINE had been charged with dogfighting 20 years previous, but when called on that, he played semantics games with the commissioners:
“Do you believe in the judicial system that you’re innocent until proven guilty?” he asked Linenbroker. “I was never proven guilty because I never went to court. It never went to court, and I was never tried because (then Seward County Attorney) Linda Trigg didn’t have a case, and she knew she didn’t have a case. So she pleaded me out. I signed the agreement. I kept to it. I’ve been arrested one time in my entire life. That was in 1985 by Seward County police. I was never convicted of it. It never went to trial because she didn’t have evidence to prove it. If I’m innocent until proven guilty maam, I’m innocent.”
“Whether you pled guilty to it or not, you’re still listed with all these other people that were arrested,” Linenbroker said. “I just have a problem when you standing there acting like you’re this big dog lover, and then you were arrested for having these dog fights.”
“I was accused of that,” Valentine said. “I was never convicted of that. Is that fact or fiction?”
“Did you take a plea to it?” Linenbroker asked.
“Yes maam, I sure did,” Valentine said.
“A plea to me is the same as saying that you’re guilty,” Linenbroker said.
Although VALENTINE could not buffalo Linebroker, he did manage to get the Seward county pit bull ban repealed.  The repeal only lasted for a few weeks before a new pit bull ban was instituted in the town of Liberal and regulations were instituted for Seward county.  But how about them apples?  An alleged dogfighter manages to overturn a breed ban!  And right out in the open, too.

Read more about alleged dogfighter GERRY VALENTINE'S public battle with BSL:

County repeals pit bull ban
Pits bulls or No pit bulls
Pit bull breeder battles ban

Map of BSL in Kansas and adjoining states - Whew, doggie, the good people of the midwest are trying their best to keep from getting mauled:

Click here to see midwest BSL map

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

What the Heck is Wrong with Pit Bull Owners in Gilroy, CA?

And one wonders why Farmers Insurance in California will no longer cover pit bulls, rottweilers, or wolf hybrids...
Can you find the murderous pit bulls and the asshole owners?

Gilroy, CA Santa Clara County
population: 48,821
median income: $67,039 (above state median of $58,931)
estimated median home value $568,777
economy based on garlic and wine production

Feb. 11, 2013  Last Thursday, Gilroy had a twofer - actually three pit bulls involved in two attacks.  Thursday morning, a pit bull was declared a level 1 Dangerous Dog because it attacked.  They neglect to mention who the pit bull attacked, but attack it did.  Less than 6 hours later and 3.5 miles away, an unleashed pit bull attacked a leashed pit bull being walked by its owner.  The attacking pit bull bit the leashed pit bull and, surprisingly, would not let go until it was beaten with a stick.

Nov. 27 2012 Two pit bulls go on killing spree and kill their companion dog, a cat and injure two other dogs in Gilroy
Nov. 15, 2012 Pit bull invades home and kills poodle in front of 11 year old child
July 12, 2012 Bloody and fatal pit bull attack at Starbucks

All of this despite mandatory spay and neuter legislation passed in 2010.

Of the Starbucks massacre:
"The dachshund laid in a pool of its own blood. Dazed and nearly passed out from an injury to her arm, Luann watched the pit bull’s owner strut away minutes before police arrived. Two weeks after the July 22 pit bull attack on the sidewalk in front of Starbucks on First Street, the victim’s arm is healing - but seeing 4-year-old Sam, her “little man,” torn up right in front of her eyes stirred something in her that day. Luann is ready to fight."

Let's hope Luann has the courage and support to prevail but, I fear nothing short of a pitchfork and torch wielding angry mob will get through to these epically asinine nutters.

Previously, on Craven Desires:

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 5 The miscreants, science whores, dirty hippies, kidults and philanthropic robber barons

Pitbull Has Neighbors Worried

What's a pittie party without the po-po?

SUSAN ACKERMAN - "the Mutant's" second owner
records show that TOMTOM'S good friend, SUSAN ACKERMAN adopted GRACIE from the Monterey County SPCA on 8.6.09. ACKERMAN was "the Mutant's" second owner, that we know of. ACKERMAN passed her off to TOMTOM one month later.
On May 9, 2011 9:45 p.m., the police cited 33 yr old Susan Ackerman, for suspicion of battery.

I haven't found the specifics yet, but TOMTOM'S good buddy and tenant has some legal troubles. I'm working on it.

The science whore is willing to twist real scientific facts and findings in order to protect the pit bull. The science whore can be motivated by greed. Wanting to keep making money on the very lucrative dog-talk circuit, s/he sells both soul and credibility for a few dollars. Some might be motivated by fear, since all who speak or publish the truth about the pit bull is subject to an organized smear and bullying campaign.

TRISH KING, Dog Trainer
Although she does not meet the definition of Animal Behaviorist, she does appear to be a nationally recognized dog expert. There is not much left to say about KING that I haven't already said in part 3, except that I am extremely disappointed in her. She has proven that she lacks honesty and integrity. She follows the herd for safety. She lacks the inner strength to stand up for what she believes in when the pit nutters start their harassment campaign. I actually had respect for TRISH KING prior to her involvement in BRUCE WAGMAN'S court mockery, but the white washing of GRACIE'S prey drive and aggressive behavior and the misrepresentation of all dog behavior coupled with the personal attacks on a victim are unforgettable and unforgivable. Like DODMAN, DONALDSON and many more before her, TRISH KING'S fragile ego could not withstand the onslaught of pit nutters.
See the language of dogs, normal and psychopathic

Oh, remember that "Dear Bruce" letter in Part 3? Well, it seems that their paths crossed at the Marin County Humane Society. BRUCE WAGMAN is on the Marin County Human Society Board of directors.TRISH KING was the director of training and behavior at the Marin County Humane Society from 1994 - 2012.
It sure does give the appearance to outsiders that a favor was called in. Why else would you hire someone 40+ miles away to evaluate a dog when JEAN DONALDSON could have been bought for half the distance?

Veterinarian's Oath
Being admitted to the profession of veterinary medicine, I solemnly swear to use my scientific knowledge and skills for the benefit of society through the protection of animal health, the relief of animal suffering, the conservation of livestock resources, the promotion of public health and the advancement of medical knowledge. 
I will practice my profession conscientiously, with dignity and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics. 
I accept as a lifelong obligation the continual improvement of my professional knowledge and competence.

JANOWITZ is a disgrace to her profession. JANOWITZ shamelessly violated this oath. She has no dignity, no ethics. Her behavior in the case of Hercules is deplorable. She should be fired from PHS and sanctioned by AVMA. She has no business touching animals and no business serving the public interest. I hope her tie die business takes off so she can do no further harm.

I find it interesting that so many of the GRACIE supporters fit the peacenik mold. These people are obsessed with peace but only at the most superficial level. Peace to them is an abstract concept only, they possess not the slightest notion of its real world applications. Peace to these people is nothing more than an emotional pacifier that allows them to stick their fingers in their ears and feel good about themselves in an uncomfortable world. Then there are the animal rights activists who also wear the pit bull advocate hat. It is baffling how this demographic can champion the cause of the pit bull which is responsible for more gratuitous violence against animals than any other animal except for man. Only man surpasses their savagery in quantity and quality. You can not care about the welfare of animals and fight to put these mutants back in the community.

JANOWITZ wears two hats in this mess. She is uniquely qualified to serve not only as a Science Whore but also a Hippie. JANOWITZ' dream job is creating hippy dippy tie die clothing. I hope she succeeds so she can get the hell out of animal care. The sooner the better.
A youtube video of JANOWITZ peddling her wares.


GRACIE, CHU and her very dirty hands

Tie dyed shirts with peace signs don't make a bold enough statement for this little girl. Only conspicuously placed permanent ink will do. This little animal rights activist proudly proclaims her tutelage under TRISH KING. I am not a dog trainer but there is nothing in this video dated 8.21.11 that even remotely demonstrates that CHU is a sensitive, intelligent, experienced dog savvy person. In fact, I won't hesitate to call her out. She is cruel and ignorant. I should be used to it by now but I am always astonished (and embarrassed) at the insensitivity that AR activists demonstrate towards companion animals. (like everyone of these fucktards has demonstrated against Hercules) I think the AR crowd views animals the same way they view the peace sign, it's an abstract concept to them, without the slightest notion of real world applications, hence their attraction to dogs bred for mortal combat. Enough of my book of whines, BILODEAU, let's see some of TRISH'S fine handiwork:
That looks like something that CESAR MILAN would do. Maybe some experienced dog people would like to chime in here. This is just fucking cruel in my unprofessional and inexperienced opinion. It would be difficult to refrain from punching her if this golden was mine.

The hearing officer and "The Decider" of the fate of GRACIE and her victims writes on her twitter page "As a self-proclaimed geographer extraordinaire with love for GIS, llamas, and being outside, I am hoping to connect with others that share similar passions"
How about a similar passion for malfeasance? BILODEAU'S day job is Registered Environmental Health Specialist.
What duties does a Registered Environmental Health Specialist (REHS) perform?
A REHS works to improve the quality of life and health through environmental education, consultation, and protection. Although a majority of REHS’s work for government, many are also employed by the private sector. Some typical program responsibilities include food protection, land use, recreational swimming areas, onsite septic systems, drinking water quality, housing, vector control, disaster sanitation, and solid, liquid, and hazardous materials management. Typical duties of a REHS in local government include inspections of various facilities such as food establishments, public swimming pools, community drinking water systems, landfills, and underground storage tanks in order to determine compliance with federal, state, and local statutes, regulations, and ordinances.
I fail to see how BILODEAU qualifies to oversee Vicious Dog hearings, well other than the fact that she is qualified because her boss Pam Machado says so. Sitting in a room listening to "The Shyster's" False Pleadings was quite a departure from her illustrious career of testing sewer water. BILODEAU, make that mbillygoat, must have thought this job was the dream of a lifetime since she just had to sit in a conference room and not put dipsticks in toilets or raw sewage. Anyway, even with the perks of her new job and not having to deal with radioactive waste, she still managed to fuck it up, so looks like it's back to the sewer, which is ironic because I doubt that any of her regular REHS duties smell as bad as the GRACIEPOO JORGENSEN FILES.

Seriously. This hearing officer needs to be investigated. San Mateo must look into the way she conducted Jorgensen case. They need to determine whether she is corrupt or incompetent (or both) and take the appropriate action.

I wonder if BILODEAU has seen what pit bulls do to her beloved goats and llamas?

Medical Geography anyone?

BRUCE WAGMAN "The Shyster"
Like JANOWITZ, CHU and BILODEAU, "The Shyster" looks like he emerged from a 1960 Haight Ashbury time capsule and in need of a good soak in the tub. "I was a nurse for seven years and switched species." And I'm sure the medical community breathed a huge sigh of relief. We certainly don't want nurses who have no respect for or understanding of the human condition, actually working on humans.
The next two paragraphs in the SF Gate interview are about the animal hoarding epidemic. (btw, I agree. It is a huge problem.) A couple paragraphs later, WAGMAN tells the interviewer that he has 3 dogs and five cats and the reason he has only 3 dogs is because of county limitations. IDIOT! These people have no clue how they contradict themselves and how stupid they appear to the rest of us.
I've got eight animals at home, in Stinson Beach, so I do have rescue animals, but none of them are from the cases I've handled. They've all come from local animal shelters. I have three dogs and five cats, currently, and one wife. The limit in Marin County is three dogs and that's why I have three dogs. There is no limit on the number of cats.
I'd say WAGMAN has a tendency toward hoarding.

As I watched and re-watched the news story and then read and re-read his brief, all I could think about is, how can lawyers get away with this? Anyone else would be charged with perjury but for lawyers, this is an art form. I despise this little man. I hate all of these people.


His resume looks impressive. Asst Bank VP, Bank VP (possibly favors for daddy?) and a 2 year stint as the VP for the Katun Corp (his daddy's business), before launching his own self employed schtick involving investments and non-profits (whatever that means). His resume states he left Katun in 2003. It seems that around the time TOMTOM was playing VP, Katun was being investigated by the Department of Justice. The indictments for fraud against his father, his father's partner and several high ranking Katun officials were served one year after TOMTOM left. The fraud had been going on for years, at least a decade. All of the defendants plead guilty. Some went to prison. The company was fined $11,000,000.
In addition to his close connection to corporate criminals and his soft spot for cat killers, this 44 yr old man has some strange and creepy youtube activities.
But hey, he can't be all bad. He donates 30 minutes a week to the family business. Or could this be just a resume builder?

I would love to see the neighbors file a civil suit, depose JORGENSEN and force him to cough up the identity of the "senile" mystery meat responsible for the OOPS moment. MY psychic tells me the man is TOMTOM'S father. MY psychic tells me perjury charges might follow.


Before I bring this mess to a close, I think it is important to review a couple of terms so we are all on the same page.
philanthropic adj seeking to promote the welfare of others, esp. by donating money to good causes; generous and benevolent. welfare of OTHERS  
robber baron noun an unscrupulous business owner or executive who acquires wealth through ethically questionable tactics  
on Wednesday, David Jorgensen, 65, another founder and former Katun board member, was indicted by a federal grand jury on three counts of mail fraud and three counts of wire fraud. Among the charges against Jorgensen are that he used Katun funds to buy five luxury vehicles, including a $139,000 Ferrari, and manipulated the transactions so that he avoided paying sales taxes in California where he lives.
Jorgensen faces a potential five years in prison and/or a $250,000 fine on each of the six counts of the indictment.
In February this year, three other former executives agreed to pay fines and restitution in connection with this case. In January, the company itself agreed to pay $11 million.
My all time favorite robber baron is David Rockefeller. His philanthropic interests were education, public health, medical training, and the arts. Thanks to Rockefeller and his $80 million donation, we have the University of Chicago.

Not only do I have a favorite robber baron, I have a favorite 990 form. Let's compare Rockefeller's philanthropic interests to DAVID G JORGENSEN'S. In 2008, The DAVID and ANNETTE JORGENSEN Foundation donated ~$410,000 to libertarian think tanks. That same year, less than $3,000 was donated to the arts. But my favorite 2008 donation is way down towards the bottom, Assistance League of Los Altos. The JORGENSENS gave them a WHOPPING $38!! Of course, I HAD to explore this org further. The recipient of that $38 provides teddy bears to kids in the hospital, housing for family members of patients of on ongoing medical treatments, and powdered milk, glasses, backpacks and shoes and socks for needy kids. Thanks to this corporate criminal, some kid dying of cancer got to hug a teddy bear. I am all choked up.
Well, NOBODY can claim the JORGENSENS didn't give back to the community!

Let's take a closer look at those more deserving charities, the libertarian think tanks.
What sorts of projects does The Pacific Legal Foundation (David JORGENSEN is a board member btw) fund? Well, for one, they are working to delist the polar bear from the Endangered Species Act. Drill Baby Drill! The now defunct PR Chitester Fund appears to have been spun off into Free to Choose Media (where DAVID is the vice chairman) and is propaganda at its finest. It targets children. They offer up the libertarian philosophy in fun easy to digest training videos for all grade levels. Some of the more popular titles: Eminent Domain, Freedom's Sound, The Foundations of Wealth and Pups of Liberty. They also have Teacher of the Year awards presented by none other than... DAVID and ANNETTE! The awards party is chock full of fun! MILTON FRIEDMAN puzzles and cakes and speakers from all of the other libertarian pet projects the JORGENSENS fund: Pacific Research Institute, the Hoover Institution, CATO institute, Free to Choose Network, John Stossel and Fox News Nutters. This looks like a way for libertarians to host parties for themselves, pat themselves and a few willing dupes on the back while they write it off of their taxes. GOOD JOB, SEE YOU NEXT YEAR BOB!  RICO has never been easier.
And the education grants are questionable. They seem to be primarily directed at libertarian leaning students, teachers and schools.

It is even more offensive when they thump their chests for some of these "generous" donations.
After hanging up his business spurs, the Katun entrepreneur and executive established the David and Annette Jorgensen Foundation, which focuses on educational, cultural, and community efforts. Recipients of the organization’s generosity include the American Education Reform Foundation, Stanford University, the California Academy of Sciences, and Summit Preparatory Charter High School. The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, and the San Jose Museum of Art also have received foundation contributions, as have medical research projects at The University of California, San Francisco, and other institutions.
"After stinging from his federal convictions for tax and wire fraud, DAVID and ANNETTE found a safer, easier way to stiff Uncle Sam and fuck over Mother Earth..."

Funny, no mention of their libertarian pet projects in that blurb, you know, the $410,000 spent on those national libertarian think tanks set up to cripple regulations, make it easy to exploit the earth's resources and relieve the tax burden of the wealthy. But here is how well some of their cherry picked arts and education orgs fared in 2008.
  • The SF Museum of Modern Art $250
  • Fine Arts Museums of SF $150
  • California Academy of Sciences $250
Pass the kleenex. I'm all fucking choked up again.

Question: Do you think the JORGENSEN foundation meets the definition of philanthropy? Are the JORGENSENS helping others or themselves? Is this foundation legitimate or has DAVID JORGENSEN found a legal way to avoid paying taxes?

economic research institute (990's available)
DOJ Katun Indictment (Jorgensen was added later)

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 1, "the Incident" 

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 2, The Appeal

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified:Part 3, "The Professionals"

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 4, The Brief - Lies, Exaggerations, Illogical Conclusions, Inconsistencies and Speculations 

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 5, The miscreants, science whores, dirty hippies, kidults and philanthropic robber barons

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 4, The Brief - Lies, Exaggerations, Illogical Conclusions, Inconsistencies and Speculations

"There she is relaxing in the sun in her bed, like any dog should be doing." BRUCE WAGMAN
Those are the words of a vegan animal rights lawyer, defending a pit bull that killed a cat relaxing in the sun. Apparently dogs, even killer dogs, are entitled to that luxury but not cats.

Why doesn't this vegan animal rights lawyer have any concern for the cat? How can anyone claiming to be a defender of animals, take the case of a killer pit bull? Wouldn't that be the equivalent to a feminist lawyer defending rapists and wife beaters and the pigs who sexually harass their employees?

The following is "the Shyster's" verbatim description of the savage death of Hercules "Gracie was deemed "vicious" by the Department of Animal Rescue and Control based on the events of November 14, 2012 ("the Incident")." WAGMAN refers to the savage mauling as "the Incident" over 20 times in his brief. There are many psychological defense mechanisms utilized throughout this freak show but this one I find especially disturbing. Maybe that's the only way this vegan animal rights lawyer can defend these savages.

"The Shyster's" brief is not terribly dazzling for such a heavy hitter who plays with big boys like the HSUS.

"Gracie is well socialized, friendly, good with children and other animals, and never has been known to show anything close to aggression. Aside from the sad event which has brought her to this hearing, she has had a perfect quality of character and longstanding good behavior record."
GRACIE'S 30+ fans all provided anecdotes to how good she was with people and dogs, "The Shyster" transformed good with people and dogs into good with people and animals. The fact is there is no mention of GRACIE'S behavior with cats, birds, wildlife or livestock. And he completely ignores GRACIE'S aggressive behavior towards humans just seconds before she locked and loaded on poor Hercules.

"Tom Jorgensen presents to this tribunal as a dog owner of the highest caliber, who has endeavored above and beyond the normal call of duty to ensure that Gracie was well-trained, safe with respect to all members of the community, and that she was no threat or danger to any of his neighbors."
A dog owner of the HIGHEST caliber would not have at least three escapes, at least one dangerous menacing of humans and at least one kill under his belt.

"Mr. Jorgensen had informed this man, and all his visitors, of the importance of keeping the front doors closed so that Gracie was contained in the house."
IF GRACIE was in fact "well-trained, safe with respect to all members of the community" why impose such a strict protocol about the importance of ensuring that she remain contained in the house? I don't practice that protocol at my house and I know of no owners of normal dogs that do.

"At no time did Gracie ever escape while being watched by Mr. Jorgensen. At no time has he let her run free in the neighborhood."
I feel like I am watching a rerun of Slick Willy pick apart the meaning of "is". JORGENSEN was home when she escaped and menaced Ms Meyers and then killed Hercules. She escaped under his watch, although he obviously wasn't watching her at the split second that she crossed the threshold of an open door. And JORGENSEN was never accused of purposely allowing her roam the neighborhood, any of the THREE times GRACIE roamed the neighborhood looking for "companionship".

"Once Gracie was let out, she went first to Mr. Jorgensen's immediate neighbor's house, who completely misunderstood and misinterpreted Gracie's actions, and therefore became fearful of Gracie's behavior."
There were no eyewitnesses supporting "the Shyster's" speculation. There were however, two eyewitnesses supporting the neighbor's interpretation of GRACIE'S behavior.

"It is important to note that Gracie did not at any time exhibit any signs of aggression towards any people or any other animals, and that the experts who have evaluated her (discussed below) have unanimously concluded that she was exhibiting a normal (but not strong) prey drive which almost all dogs possess. In fact, when the owners of the cat saw what was happening, one member of the family was able to rapidly approach Gracie, take the cat from her mouth, and then lead Gracie away from the scene, tying her to a nearby tree. In other words, even while she was in the heat of the Incident, Gracie was responsive to a strange human's intervention, in a strange environment with undoubtedly significant noise and distraction. Yet she was easily stopped, and there was no effort on her part to resist being moved away from the cat or to act in any way aggressive to the stranger who was interceding."
Does anyone remember that cult classic movie "Guide for the Married Man"? Robert Morse advises Walter Matthau on how to cheat on his wife and get away with it. The advice comes in the form of vignettes featuring various big name movie stars from the 1960's. Deny, Deny, Deny perfectly encapsulates WAGMAN'S approach to the menacing of Ms Meyers. "The Shyster" also exaggerates the ease at which the "strangers" intervened and broke GRACIE off from her prey in a strange environment. First, the son of Vicky Wesendunk is a big burly former HS wrestler and he struggled to free the cat from GRACIE'S gaping maw of doom. Second, neither people nor the environment were strange to GRACIE. She had been there BEFORE. Recall from the news clip that she had even been in the house. Normal but not strong prey drive? Well thank goodness that! Should the reader conclude that a STRONG prey drive would have resulted in more death and injury? Significant noise and distraction? Mostly just the sickening screams of Hercules.

"And it is a foremost fact that Mr. Jorgensen takes absolute and full responsibility for what happened. He is heartbroken over the Incident, especially for the Wesendunk family. And he terribly regrets letting down Gracie, who never should have escaped in the first place. He knows that the fault, if any, is all his. He had created a protocol to keep Gracie in, and he knows that he was not as vigilant as he could and should have been about ensuring that even if a forgetful guest came by, that Gracie could not escape. He is willing to do anything and everything to make things right- for the cat's human family, for Mr. Jorgensen's neighbors and neighborhood, and for Gracie. And he has already made moves in that direction."
ESPECIALLY the Wesendunk family? WTF does that mean? Is this yet another jab at Ms Meyers? And I thought JORGENSEN was a responsible pit bull owner of the HIGHEST CALIBER? That is quite a leap from highest caliber owning nutter to it's all my fault, sorry. How do you make it right for the victim's? How do you erase that tape loop of your cat being savaged from your head? The only way to even come close to making this right is to dirt nap the culprit.

"Mr. Jorgensen moved in to 30 Terrier Place on April 17, 2012. Although the property seemed to have a solid fence in its backyard, shortly after he moved in, Gracie managed to slip under the back fence, and she made her way to the same house where the Incident later occurred. At that time, Gracie actually went into the house, undoubtedly looking for companionship, as she is very much a "people dog." When she was found in the house, she was easily brought outside by the occupants, where she tried to play with a tethered dog at the house, and was then taken home by Mr. Jorgensen who had discovered her absence and come out to retrieve her."
GRACIE was living there for a whole 7 months and she had at least three escapes and at least one other time, GRACIE was at the WESENDUNKS, she was familiar with it and the people. A "people dog" in search of a cat snack. And WHY on earth would GRACIE be looking for companionship IF her owner was of the HIGHEST CALIBER? Wouldn't that indicate that she was not having her needs met by TOMTOM?

After that escape, JORGENSEN made the following improvements:
I. Added pressure-treated 2x 12 kick boards to entire bottom perimeter of the chain link fence.
2. Buried all kick boards 6" into soil.
3. Attached barrier kick boards to the inside of the entire fence.
4. Filled in the gate spaces where chain link met wood fence.
6. Extended the entire chain link fence height by 12" (even though Gracie almost surely could not jump over the fence).
7. Added 45 degree barbed "arms" so that the extended height tilts inward.
8. Ran 5 strands of 9 gauge tension wire through the barbed am1s for extra reinforcement.
9. Extended the end posts with 15" of 2 3/8" coated black tube.
10. Modified the three existing chain link gates so that they are self closing.
11. Added 12" gate springs to the gates.
12. Added new self-locking latches to the gates
13. Closed gap on latch side of lower rear gate.
"Mr. Jorgensen also installed self-closing spring hinges into the entryway door of his home that leads to the non-fenced front yard, and also put self-closing spring hinges on the door to the garage."
These improvements were made in May and STILL "the Mutant" managed to escape, menace Ms Meyers and kill Hercules.

"Mr. Jorgensen cares very much about being a good neighbor and ensuring both the safety of the neighborhood and the approval of his neighbors with respect to his efforts."
The previous escapes that didn't result in the death of a pet were not sufficient enough to motivate JORGENSEN to be a good neighbor. JORGENSEN'S promise to further fortify his containment if the killer is returned is self serving. Too little, too late. Three strikes your out in my book TOMTOM.

"As discussed in Footnote 1, on the same day as the Incident, Ms. Meyers called the police
because Gracie was unattended in her yard, but there was at that time no danger to any persons or animals. No attack, bite, or any harm occurred there."
"No bite or any harm occurred." This is the aspect of the law that enrages me the most. The police, animal control, prosecutors, judges all seem to feel that if no harm was done by the dog, then no foul was done and everyone should go home happy.  FEAR IS HARM.  Threatening behavior is harmful and illegal. Waving a gun, a knife, a club, a fist or just threatening words at someone is ILLEGAL and there is a name for it: ASSAULT.
From a legal on-line dictionary
"Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another."
Standing outside someone's house and threatening harm will lead to arrest. Attempting to gain entry into someone's home, will lead to arrest. I don't see any difference between dogs and people.

"Mr. Jorgensen is very sorry that Ms. Meyers is so upset. He is very sorry that she thinks Gracie was acting aggressively or viciously towards her on November 14 because, as established above, nothing could be further from the truth and nothing could be more inconsistent with Gracie's temperament. And he can guarantee that Gracie will never again leave his home unleashed and unattended. But nothing in Ms. Meyer's statement establishes anything except the sole fact that Gracie did get out of her house unattended on November 14, and her fantasy fears that represent most of her statement should be ignored."
"Nothing in Ms Meyers' statement establishes anything except...." grrrrr. Nothing except that she was PRESENT during "the Incident" unlike GRACIE'S owner of the highest caliber or anyone of his hired guns or misfit friends. Ms Meyers' eyewitness account of the "the Incident" was corroborated by TWO contractors. So, to recap, ignore the testimony of EYEWITNESS statements aka FANTASY FEARS but please pay close attention to what the barrista who relies on TOMTOM'S business and tips and the Whole Foods cashier have to say about GRACIE.

Gracie's History is Otherwise Clear of Offense  San Mateo Code section 6.04.060 defines a "Vicious Animal." The definition requires evidence to support the designation; and according to the ordinance, the definition of "Vicious Animal" is based on a finding of "any or all" of the criteria. While this does suggest that just one of the criteria will trigger, it also implies that a hearing officer should look at just how many of the qualifying acts occurred in a given situation. So despite qualifying based on the Incident, Gracie's prior "record" is completely clean, which should be an important consideration for the County in making its determination.
Gracie's History is Otherwise Clear of DOCUMENTED Offense  Actually, I don't read anything in 6.04.060 that implies the hearing officer must or should consider GRACIE'S history of DOCUMENTED offenses. And I am not convinced that GRACIE'S record is clean. The facts don't add up. Here's what we know besides the fact that GRACIE savaged a cat that was sunning on its own property:
  • GRACIE'S first owner, SUSAN ACKERMAN mother of 3 small children, gave her to JORGENSEN after only one month of ownership.
  • Since JORGENSEN has owned her, GRACIE has been in a perpetual state of training.
  • The dog trainers JORGENSEN sought out specialized in aggression and problem behaviors.
  • The people who care for GRACIE when JORGENSEN travels admit that she is "a bit off" when he is away.
  • JORGENSEN has a strict protocol in his house regarding GRACIE and access to the world. 
  • JORGENSEN told the Wesendunks and ACO BAGGETTA that "Gracie has a high prey drive". This is info he would only know if GRACIE had previously attacked another living creature.
  • Three people were eyewitnesses to GRACIE menacing behavior just prior to killing Hercules.
"The Shyster's" entire argument hinges on JUST the death of Hercules. THIS is why it is so important for "The Shyster" to discredit Ms Meyers and why "The Shyster" completely ignores the statement of the other two eyewitnesses who corroborate Ms Meyers statement. Succeeding at impugning her character and ignoring the other eyewitnesses allows "The Shyster" to cite some old dog fighter San Mateo county case law to help save GRACIE.

WAGMAN'S Grand Finale: "Gracie's Breed Is Irrelevant to this Determination."
It's not about pit bulls for the people who live near GRACIE the frankenmauler and her half witted owner. It certainly didn't help that GRACIE is a pit bull but their outrage would be the same if the dog was a rottweiler, malamute or a german shepherd. (Any of these large powerful dogs is capable of killing the cat, although I have yet to hear about a rottweiler, malamute or GSD menacing the occupants of a home and attempting to get in.) It's about feeling safe in your home. It's about the enforcement of existing laws when that safety is violated. "The Shyster" is projecting this onto the victims because this is really what it's all about for WAGMAN and all of pit nutter america. Whenever a pit bull gets the opportunity to flex their DNA and reinforce that hideous reputation they earned, nutters swoop in to mitigate the damages.

Hillsborough  6.04.010

"Vicious animal" means any animal, except a trained dog assisting a peace officer engaged in law enforcement duties, which meets any or all of the following criteria:
1. Any animal previously designated as "dangerous," that after investigation by an animal control officer and/or peace officer is found under conditions which constitute a violation of this title or applicable dangerous animal permit and which demonstrates a significant danger to the public health or safety;
2. Any animal seized under Section 599aa of the Penal Code and/or upon the sustaining of a conviction of the owner or caretaker under subdivision (a) of Section 597.5 of the Penal Code;
3. Any animal which inflicts severe injury on or kills a human being or another animal;
4. Any animal which has engaged in any aggressive behavior which demonstrates that the animal represents a clear and present substantial danger to the public health and safety and that due to substantial risk to the public health or safety, it is unlikely that the animals could be safely maintained under a dangerous animal permit.

"Dangerous animal" means any animal, except a trained dog assisting a peace officer engaged in law enforcement duties, which because of its disposition, behavior, training or other characteristic, constitutes a danger to persons or property, or which demonstrates any or all of the following behavior:
1. Any attack or other behavior which require a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury or property damage or that results in an injury to a person or property;
2. Any aggressive attack or other behavior that constitutes a substantial threat of bodily harm to a person or animal, where such attack, injury or behavior occurs in a place where such person or animal is conducting himself or herself peaceably and lawfully;
3. An attack on another animal or livestock which occurs off of the property of the owner of the attacking animal;
4. Any animal that has been deemed by another governmental jurisdiction as "potentially dangerous," "dangerous,: "vicious," or any similar designation.

Attorney Deceit Statutes: Promoting Professionalism Through Criminal Prosecutions and Treble Damages

False Pleading

A lawyer will be suspended for submitting a false pleading even though there is no evidence of malice, intentional deception, or motivation for personal gain. Giovanazzi v. State Bar (1980) 28 Cal.3d 465, 169 Cal.Rptr. 581, 619 P.2d 1005. Also, there is no requirement that actual harm must result in order to impose discipline. Garlow v. State Bar (1988) 44 Cal.3d 689, 244 Cal.Rptr. 452, 749 P.2d 1307.

See also: Dixon v. State Bar (1985) 39 Cal.3d 335, 216 Cal.Rptr. 432, 702 P.2d 590 (false declarations filed with the court); Young v. Rosenthal (2nd Dist. 1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 96, 260 Cal.Rptr. 369 (misrepresentation of a client's financial condition in a debt collection matter); Woodard v. State Bar (1940) 16 Cal.2d 755, 108 P.2d 407 (use of a false default judgment against a defendant); Weir v. State Bar (1979) 23 Cal.3d 564, 152 Cal.Rptr. 921, 591 P.2d 19 (lawyer's repeated custom of filing fraudulent applications with the Immigration and Naturalization Service justified disbarment based upon a finding that the conduct constituted moral turpitude); Snyder v. State Bar (1976) 18 Cal.3d 286, 133 Cal.Rptr. 864, 555 P.2d 1104 (in addition to a multiplicity of other violations, false allegations contained in involuntary bankruptcy petitions designed to harass and delay proceedings); Garlow v. State Bar (1982) 30 Cal.3d 912, 180 Cal.Rptr. 831, 749 P.2d 1307 (forged client signature on documents signed under penalty of perjury, coupled with a subsequent representation to the court that the signature was genuine).

Lawyer disciplined & sanctioned for half-truths, speculative allegations in brief

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 3, "The Professionals"

Pitbull Has Neighbors Worried

Before delving into the "professionals" and their evaluations/opinions of GRACIE, a few issues need to be addressed.

First, WAGMAN exaggerated the qualifications of the professionals who evaluated GRACIE in his brief and in the news story. Not a single one of the "professionals" that evaluated GRACIE qualify as BEHAVIORISTS. To qualify as an animal behaviorist requires an advanced degree; masters, doctorate or doctor of veterinary medicine. You can view the very short list of behaviorists in the U.S. HERE.

A Note About Animal Behaviorists: Many persons employed in the dog training field use the title "behaviorist" incorrectly. A Behaviorist is someone who has a doctorate level graduate degree. A Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist is a Behaviorist who is certified through the The Animal Behavior Society. Persons who do not meet these qualifications should not be using the term "behaviorist" to describe themselves - in this case, the terms behavior consultant, behavior counselor or behavior specialist are acceptable.

Second, Dogs tend to shut down when housed in the shelter. Can any useful data about a dog's temperament be acquired from an evaluation that has been performed on a dog that has been housed in a strange and stressful kennel for 2 weeks?

Third, Who hired and foot the bill for the King and Filson evaluations? And should opinions of friends and employees of the owner be admissible as professional in a legal proceeding?

Fourth, It is not possible to test a dog's reaction to every conceivable stimulus that it might encounter. A dog might interact well with 50 unfamiliar people or animals during an evaluation or during the course of its life, but that does not mean it will be okay with every person or animal that it encounters. Behavioral evaluations can not predict how a dog will behave in every scenario. That's why TRISH KING explicitly states on her evaluation that she can not guarantee a dog's behavior and she is not liable for future aggression.

Fifth, It is absurd to extrapolate the data collected testing a dog in an artificially controlled environment with a confident experienced handler to the real world where unforeseen variables are left to chance with people who are not well versed in dog behavior. I believe these tests performed by KING and FILSON are essentially worthless. GRACIE failed the only test that matters. Her real world temperament test. Once on her own and outside the reach and supervision of the artificial and controlled environments - the shelter, the "behaviorists", her home, her owner - all bets are off and as we know from DULCE REYES, GRACIE is a "bit off" when she is estranged from her loving TOMTOM.

TRISH KING CPDT (Certified Pet Dog Trainer), CDBC (Certified Dog Behavior Consultant)
KING is the only one in this lineup of "professionals" who even comes close to resembling a "behaviorist". I was so outraged by her report, that I entered all three pages. My comments are in italics.
Trish King, CPDT CDBC

Evaluation of Gracie Jorgensen

Gracie is a young Pit Bull Terrier, evaluated following the killing of a neighborhood cat.

During the evaluation, I evaluated Gracie for human sociability, handling, impulse control and arousal issues, and predatory instinct The evaluation was conducted in an outside yard, next to a chicken coop, and close to wildlife, including a feral cat that walked outside the yard.

During this test, the dog is allowed to roam in an enclosed area; the number and quality of interactions is analyzed. Gracie was moderately social, engaging with me when l initiated play.
Handling: During this test, the dog is handled extensively, from feet and head to a full hug. Grade tested out as extremely tolerant to handling, allowing me to manipulate any part of her body for extended periods of time (up to 2 minutes)
Note the use of adjectives "tolerant" for later commentary.
Impulse Control/ Arousal: During this test, the handler actively engages the dog in play, checking to see whether the dog tends to go out of control, to behave roughly, or engages in mouthy behavior. Grade's energy appears to be generally calm and relaxed. She engaged in play at a fairly high level of excitement, but calmed quickly when I stopped playing.
Note the use of adjectives "calm" and "relaxed" for later commentary.
Predatory instinct: During this test, the dog is exposed to other animals that commonly arouse the predatory drive. In this case, the animals included chickens and a cat. Gracie tested out as moderately predatory. Her attention was attracted by the animals, but she did not have a strong lock and was relatively easily distracted with obedience commands.
Exposure to chickens and cats in the presence of an experienced dog trainer vs a dog with a taste of freedom and away from her owner are simply apples and oranges.

Gracie was somewhat distracted during the sociability portion of the evaluation, and tolerated rather than sought handling. There appeared to be an element of owner searching" in her behavior. This is a behavior fairly common in shelter dogs recently separated from their owners. They tend to approach strange people and investigate them. Their body language changes from excitedly anticipatory to dejected when they discover they don't know the human. At no time did she appear to offer any threat, and was very friendly when a volunteer who had apparently interacted with her appeared.
Note the use of adjectives "anticipatory" and "dejected" and "friendly" for later commentary.

With regard to impulse control/arousal, Gracie scored very high. Her energy level was moderate, which is very unusual in a dog housed in a shelter environment Most dogs become highly energized, and are often out of control. The fact that Gracie was not was excellent.

Gracie's predatory drive would appear to be moderate. However, if she were to remember the location of a particular small animal. it would likely escalate with each sighting, much as a dog remembers other dogs in particular locations. This escalation could increase the predatory instinct.

It is very important to note that dogs are predators, and may tend to kill small animals, unless they are raised with them, much as cats will kill animals smaller than themselves. Humans should understand that these instincts are very strong, as they are connected with survival, and must be monitored.
First, dogs are SCAVENGERS and second, this dog lives right next door to small dogs. Pit bulls can live amicably for years with dogs and cats that they were raised with and then one day, the owner comes home to a blood bath. Survival in this case is the self rewarding flexing of her DNA.

Management: Gracie needs to be managed around small animals, particularly cats. She would benefit from a well fenced in yard, as well as walks that are always on leash. Obedience courses, wherein she learns to follow the instructions of her owner, would be invaluable.
Managed around cats? duh! Gracie already has 3 years of obedience training and a well fenced yard! The problem is not so much that she does not follow the instructions of her owner, the problem is she can not be safely contained.

Conclusion: I do not believe that Gracie is a threat to humans. Although people tend to think of dogs as "aggressive" or "not aggressive," that is no truer of them than it is of humans. Dogs may behave aggressively or not. In any case, predatory behavior is not true aggression - there are no emotions associated with the behavior. It is an instinct, and not one that transfers from one type of animal to a human being.
Well, we finally agree on something. Aggression is INSTINCTUAL with pit bulls!
Trish A King, CPDT, CDBC

Okay, remember when I told you that the perversity of this case would get better? Well, here it is.
After TRISH KING finished whitewashing GRACIEPOO'S evaluation, either on her own initiative or at the request of "the Shyster", she "evaluated" a witness statement! Yes, that's right. A former news reporter turned DOG TRAINER, not only assesses GRACIE'S aggression towards a human nearly one month after "the Incident", TRISH KING evaluates the witness via her written statement to AC!

Dear Bruce: (ooh they are on first name basis, this ought to be good!)

I reviewed the statement from Kellie Meyers regarding Gracie Jorgensen. I am very sorry Ms. Meyers was frightened, and can understand why the sight of a stray dog in her immediate vicinity might have made her think the worst. However, there was nothing remotely like the "raging pit bull" in the dog that I evaluated. Gracie allowed me handle her extensively and intrusively, and showed no signs of any aggression at any time during the session.

Gracie's behavior on Nov. 14 as described by Ms Meyers appears to have been more excited and curious than threatening and angry. The rather hasty and hysterical behavior of Ms Meyers would likely make the dog even more excited. From a behavioral point of view, a hunting dog does not behave in the way Ms. Meyers described - rather, the dog would be focused and quiet. Nothing Ms. Meyers describes would be interpreted as aggressive or threatening to humans. It would appear that Ms. Meyers was anthropomorphizing - that is, attributing motives to a dog based on human emotions.

In addition, it is extremely important to realize that dog behavior is actually relatively consistent. Aggression does not jump from species to species, and predatory behavior is aimed at prey, and not random human beings. Gracie's prey drive that day was focused solely on the cat, as evidenced by the fact that she did not bother any of the people at the she went to. I am sure Gracie would not have attacked Ms. Meyers or her mother in this situation.

~Trish (aka Carnac the Magnificent)

The fact that this evaluation was addressed to "the Shyster" answers one of my questions, Who paid for these evaluations. Btw, defense attorneys ONLY hire "experts" that will support their client's case. But I digress... let's take this second evaluation apart.

1) Anyone who sees a loose pit bull and doesn't "think the worst" and prepare for it, is an idiot.

2) KING states GRACIE is "Nothing remotely like a raging pit bull", yet TRISH KING recommends "a well fenced yard" and EVEN MORE obedience training for GRACIE who has been in a perpetual state of obedience training for the last 3 years.

3) Why is Ms. Meyers anthropomorphizing when she described "the Mutant" as aggressive and trying to get into her home but TRISH KING is not anthropomorphizing when she uses words like calm, relaxed, anticipatory, tolerant, dejected, and friendly to describe "the Mutant"?

3) TRISH KING blames Ms. Meyers for creating a potentially dangerous situation or at least escalating it by referring to Meyers' behavior as "hasty" and "hysterical". Part of the problem with these lion tamers is they expect everyone to not only love all dogs, but trust all dogs and be an expert at reading their behavior. But the issue here is that any attempt for any so called "professional" to explain or assess the behavior of GRACIE or Ms Meyers at 2:00 pm on Nov. 14th is PURE SPECULATION and should not be admissible in any legal proceeding.

4) Aggression is not consistent. Pit Bulls are just fine right up until the moment that they aren't. And often after "the Incident" when AC or the police arrive, pit bulls are once again "just fine". How many times have the owners of attacking pit bulls expressed their shock and horror with "they've never shown any aggression before."

5) Aggression does jump from species to species. Often after a devastating pit bull attack, the investigation reveals that the pit bull previously killed another animal. Prior to the family pit bulls killing Jacob Bisbee, they killed a chihuahua, an akita and a parrot.

6) Pit bulls regularly prey on random human beings. Kelly Caldwell was randomly killed by 3 pit bulls as she walked to the store. One of those pit bulls was touted by the owner as being a loving nanny dog. I could go on, but this blog post is already running long.

6) Just because GRACIE was solely focused on the cat at the time of the mauling, does not mean she wasn't solely focused on Ms. Meyers or her home at the time she was menacing her and attempting to get inside.

7) "Nationally recognized behaviorist" TRISH KING misinterpreted and criticized Ms Meyers eye witness description of GRACIE'S quiet frenzied behavior. Apparently KING is not familiar with dog behavior in fox hunting or hog hunting or deer hunting. That's not too surprising. KING is not familiar with the content of the witnesses' statement either which has NO mention of barking or growling. TRISH KING, the only "heavy weight" in this sham is a FUCKING JOKE. Her ignorance and arrogance are truly astonishing.

And I just LOVE the disclaimer at the bottom of KING'S official evaluation.
The analysis and recommendations contained herein were made based on a verbal history and brief observation of the dog, and in no way should be construed as a guarantee of future behavior.  The client will not hold Trish King or her associates liable for any behavior which occurs prior to, during, or following any training, tutoring or consultation. The dog owner assumes all responsibility for the behavior of their dog.
Well, I guess Ms King, the Clairvoyant Diva is NOT so sure that Gracie would not have attacked Ms Meyers or her mother after all.

The pro-Gracie camp is targeting Ms Meyers because she puts another ugly blemish on the "the Mutant's" fictitious impeccable record. They have attacked Meyers at every opportunity and they have   completely ignored the fact that Ms Meyers was not alone that day and her witness corroborated her statement. " about 1:50pm I witnessed a dog (Pit Bull) pacing along the front of the house from one end to the other, over and over again. The dog was lunging and jumping at the front door and the kitchen and bedroom windows, clearly looking for a way into the house. When I got out of my truck I yelled "Hey" at the dog several times trying to get its attention. At one point the dog actually circled the whole house, jumping/lunging at every window and door along the way. After 20+ minutes of yelling and trying to distract the dog, it left the Meyers residence and went to the neighbor's house. Immediately after the dog left it attached and killed the neighbor's cat. The noise/screaming from the attack (the dog, cat and cats owner) was unbelievable and something I surely will not forget. In 33 years of going to people's houses to provide estimates I have NEVER witnessed anything like this before. I have encountered my fair share of scared and/or mean dogs (and owners), but I have never seen a dog so obsessed with getting into a house.
In my opinion this dog is clearly vicious and needs to be dealt with accordingly."

KELLEY A FILSON CPDT (Certified Pet Dog Trainer)
Another artificial test in an artificially controlled environment conducted by a biased hired gun to rubber stamp a dog that should have been euthanized for failing her Nov 14th real world temperament test.
FILSON evaluated GRACIE at the animal shelter on Nov 30th, 16 days into her quarantine. FILSON leashed GRACIE in the kennel, walked her through the shelter and out into the yard. yadda yadda yadda... But I will give FILSON credit for conducting the most absurd test ever. "I requested a towel from a cat cage and presented it to GRACIE. GRACIE sniffed it briefly, but showed no interest." At least we know that GRACIE is not mentally retarded, as she knows the difference between animate and inanimate objects. Seriously, how do these people get away with this shit? Oh, wait, BILODEAU, never mind I answered my own question.

ERIC DORFMAN (no titles but claims he has certificates in dog behavior counseling and dog aggression)
"My name is ERIC J. DORFMAN of Dorfman Canine. I am a canine behaviorist and trainer who specializes in problem behavior. I am Certified in Dog Aggression towards both humans and other animals." Woops, there's that incorrect usage of the behaviorist title again. ERIC DORFMAN was GRACIE'S first trainer. DORFMAN stated that he met JORGENSEN in October 2009, approximately one month after he adopted GRACIE. JORGENSEN wanted to make sure GRACIE was carefully evaluated for a safe, smooth transition into her new environment which included a pug. Hmmm, JORGENSEN already had GRACIE for one month, shouldn't that that kind of extensive evaluation occur BEFORE you bring a new dog into the home? And GRACIE'S previous owner had a pug. Smells fishy."The initial meeting consisted of an overall evaluation including: temperament, disposition, separation anxiety, reaction to human hand, resource guarding, territorial behavior, reactivity to noise, quick movements, sight stimuli and other dogs." My gut tells me that GRACIE was exhibiting behaviors that caused JORGENSEN concern. Why else would you take your dog to someone who is certified in dog aggression and specializes in problem behavior???

This bio has just left me dumbfounded. Can someone please help me to understand how a young woman in her mid 20's graduated as a dog trainer in the spring of 2011, currently has 400+ hours towards her certification as a dog trainer, has worked for over a decade with pets and has met "thousands" of dogs, (is it appropriate to include dogs you have met during your tumultuous teen years with all of those raging hormones? can we trust the judgement of a 15 yr old who states two of her interests are "crying" and "fighting"? and is a young woman who leaves a 7 yr old tantrum on a public forum to shame her drunkard mother capable of critical thinking skills?) PLUS, CHU admits that she is friends with JORGENSEN and "the Mutant", how can she be considered a PROFESSIONAL in this very serious legal proceeding? How is it that not only JORGENSEN'S bottom feeder lawyer saw fit to include her in his line-up but BILODEAU didn't immediately kick her ass to the curb? I did a little digging and found STERLING TURNER CHU sitting on her ass with a video camera at a dog day care center giggling. On her video uploads, she occasionally types out a description of dog behavior to impress her viewers, for example, "extreme piloerection".

"I met THOMAS JORGENSEN at the end of 2009. He had rescued GRACIE from Montery County, and we began working together training GRACIE. Tom wanted ongoing instruction to further his knowledge of basic dog obedience training and his understanding of intra dog play and socialization." First, JORGENSEN AND GRACIE had just supposedly successfully completed a 6 week BASIC OBEDIENCE class with ERIC DORFMAN, the aggression/problem behavior expert. There are really only two explanations here. GRACIE already forgot everything that she had literally just learned in her first basic obedience class OR she shouldn't have graduated (or possibly didn't). Second, JORGENSEN did NOT rescue GRACIE from the shelter, his good friend SUSAN ACKERMAN (the pug owner) adopted her in August 2009 and quickly realized that GRACIE was too much for her so she pawned her off on TOMTOM. Third, my translation of CHU'S double speak sounds more like obedience classes with DORFMAN did not address the subtle and dangerous body language of pit bulls that JORGENSEN needed to master in order to be a responsible pit bull owner.

CHU worked with JORGENSEN from 2010 - 2012, trying to channel GRACIE'S energy and prey drive. I suspect CHU does not offer money back guarantees for her pit bull clients as GRACIE failed her real world temperament test on November 14, 2012. "GRACIE was moved to a secluded, big, empty space with hardwood floors, (oh my god, did CHU just identify a new pit trigger - flooring?) far different from her comfortable petite carpet condo with bustling people and friends, dog and human. He no longer lived on the 3rd story up the elevator and down the long hallway. Now outside their door call nature and the Hillsborough neighborhood full of critters like deer, skunk, squirrels, and outdoor cats. All of which would appeal to a dog's natural predatory drive. Tom consulted with me after moving, and he installed the deep and high fence completely around the back yard to ensure her enclosure when off leash. Tom took extra effort in working on GRACIE'S recall in this new environment (often dogs needs to relearn under new context), making sure she could leave the new and exciting distractions the world has to offer when called." It is stunning, the number of references to GRACIE'S prey drive from the pro-GRACIE camp and yet BILODEAU ignores them. This letter of reference is a joke. STERLING TURNER CHU tries to play the pity card with a big empty house with hardwood floors and nature provoking her. Poor, poor GRACIE, taunted by wicked squirrels and spooky cats. What's a frankenmauler to do?!

GRACIE'S personal vet provided a written statement attesting to her wonderful temperament based on the FIVE times she has seen GRACIE in her practice since March 2010. It is important to note that veterinarians do not possess any expertise in the area of animal behavior by default of their DVM degree and there is nothing that I can find on the internet to indicate that WALSH is any kind of behavioral expert. "She has never once shown any fear of humans or any aggression towards humans or animals in our hospital whatsoever. She has sat in our waiting room with other dogs while awaiting her appointments." I will go out on a limb here and assume that THOMAS JORGENSEN was accompanying GRACIE during these vet visits and therefore GRACIE was on her best behavior, per DULCE REYES. Also notice that WALSH does not specifically mention cats, only humans and dogs. And it probably doesn't hurt that there are separate waiting rooms for dogs and cats. Additionally, any knowledge that WALSH possessed about GRACIE'S behavior in the waiting room would be via the people who work at the front desk, making much of her testimony based on hearsay. "She has allowed us to do full exams, injections, blood collections, rectal exams and radiographs without struggle, resistance or growling..." Neither has my dog but I never needed to ask my vet to testify about my dog's behavior in a legal proceeding but seriously, the only thing missing here is the classic pit bull platitude "pit bulls are great with people because the dogmen needed to be able to handle them in the pit and sew them up afterwards". WALSH wraps up her plea stating that GRACIE was just exhibiting "natural predatory behavior" and she feels that GRACIE should not lose her life over this "one unfortunate" event. (note the sanitized language again - EVENT) Again, according to Hillsborough 6.04.010, "the severe injury or killing of an animal" requires just ONE victim, not a slew of them.
* Cat owning clients of Dr WALSH would be wise to seek veterinary care with a clinic that does not devalue their pet of choice.
QUESTION: WTF was BILODEAU doing during this legal proceeding? A crossword puzzle?

Hillsborough  6.04.010

"Vicious animal" means any animal, except a trained dog assisting a peace officer engaged in law enforcement duties, which meets any or all of the following criteria:
1. Any animal previously designated as "dangerous," that after investigation by an animal control officer and/or peace officer is found under conditions which constitute a violation of this title or applicable dangerous animal permit and which demonstrates a significant danger to the public health or safety;
2. Any animal seized under Section 599aa of the Penal Code and/or upon the sustaining of a conviction of the owner or caretaker under subdivision (a) of Section 597.5 of the Penal Code;
3. Any animal which inflicts severe injury on or kills a human being or another animal;
4. Any animal which has engaged in any aggressive behavior which demonstrates that the animal represents a clear and present substantial danger to the public health and safety and that due to substantial risk to the public health or safety, it is unlikely that the animals could be safely maintained under a dangerous animal permit.

"Dangerous animal" means any animal, except a trained dog assisting a peace officer engaged in law enforcement duties, which because of its disposition, behavior, training or other characteristic, constitutes a danger to persons or property, or which demonstrates any or all of the following behavior:
1. Any attack or other behavior which require a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury or property damage or that results in an injury to a person or property;
2. Any aggressive attack or other behavior that constitutes a substantial threat of bodily harm to a person or animal, where such attack, injury or behavior occurs in a place where such person or animal is conducting himself or herself peaceably and lawfully;
3. An attack on another animal or livestock which occurs off of the property of the owner of the attacking animal;
4. Any animal that has been deemed by another governmental jurisdiction as "potentially dangerous," "dangerous,: "vicious," or any similar designation.

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 1, "the Incident" 

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 2, The Appeal

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified:Part 3, "The Professionals"

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 4, The Brief - Lies, Exaggerations, Illogical Conclusions, Inconsistencies and Speculations 

Lifestyles of the Rich and Terrified: Part 5, The miscreants, science whores, dirty hippies, kidults and philanthropic robber barons