One of the many faces behind the unlawful and highly controversial seizure of beloved pets all over Riverside County is running for Mayor in your city. Dr. Allan Drusys is vying for his chance to use his position as the county veterinarian as a booster into politics. I have had a suspicion for a while that animal control was not a favored position for its employees, but a stepping stone to something better as the county prefers to hire from within the family.
So now I pose the question, is an equestrian community such as Yucaipa prepared and/or willing to have this man running their town? The same man that proposed and bullied MANDATORY spay/neuter regulations into effect and created MANDATORY micro chipping for ALL county animals? I think it is also my duty to inform this equestrian community that Dr. Alan Drusys was in the care of a horse named Aragon, who was put to his death by Dr. Alan Drusys because it was suspected that he had cancer when, in fact, Aragon’s owner, Trea, claims he had a sheath infection from a lack of care on behalf of animal control. Trea frequently comments on this blog, and she also has her own blog which can be accessed from this site. Aragon, as well as his stable mates were unfortunate enough to be victims of yet another horse seizure in Riverside County because these officers are running rampant around the county unchecked and obviously unsupervised. In another case, a Great Dane named Nikki aka Ch. Camelot’s Nicholas VRojon, who was suffering from Leukemia was maimed when he was placed in a kennel with other in-tacked male Great Danes. Nikki was allowed to remain in the “care” of Dr. Drusys who did not treat him for his wounds, or his Leukemia. Nikki sadly lost his battle with Leukemia shortly after he was released from the custody of animal control because he went untreated while in their care. Photos of Nikki can be viewed on this blog by typing his name into the search box.
It has come to my attention that Dr. Drusys cannot make himself available to testify for our case because he is “busy” working on his campaign. Im so sorry to hear that we are interfering with your life Mr. Drusys, but you have taken up far too much of mine. It is also my hope that in the near future all of the cases that Dr. Alan Drusys has testified in will come under investigation as I believe he has assisted in the fabrication of false veterinary records being presented in animal cruelty cases such as the case of Riverside County V. Angel White.
At this time I am also encouraging all voters in Yucaipa to look into the candidate that wants control of your city. He who holds the key to your city also controls you and god forbid, your animals.
I also implore doubters to google Dr. Alan Drusys and see what kind of work he is really doing.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Overcome
I began this blog in frustration over what was happening to us, and our friend. As time went on I came to know others that were victims of the same situation. I am now understanding that it is not myself or my mother that is a victim, but our horses. Animal Control is using animals as pawns to hurt those who stand against them. As they once told Angel, "You are either with us, or against us." I only wanted to stand up for a friend because I thought it needed to be said. Never in a million years did I think that I would place myself or my animals in the crosshairs of a vendetta. I feel completely defeated and weak at this moment because I have lost everything and gained nothing. I am devastated at the realization that I will never see my Thor and Freya again, and I know I will unconsciously look at farms and pastures as I pass hoping to catch a glimpse of them. I am empty and feel as if I cannot live without them. So I make my plea, if you have one of our horses PLEASE give us the opportunity to have them back. I do not know what you were told when you adopted them, or what you may think of us personally because of what you read in the papers. We were never asked for our side of the story, so please if you have doubts ask us. We are happy to talk to anyone, show pictures of the life we shared with our horses before our nightmare began.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Animal Nazis Struck On 3/4/2010
For photos and the original posting of this story please visit http://www.ragdoll.com/animal%20nazis.htm I have spoken with the gentleman that owns this cattery and he told me animal control is planning to come back for more of his cats. Keep in mind...his cattery was LEGAL until a new zoning requirement in his area was put into place. I find it appauling that animal control officers continue to remove animals from this clean, loving, and safe home only to place them into small mediocre (at best) kennels while they wait to be destroyed, or with any luck, adopted. My thoughts are with this cattery and I wish them the best of luck with their dealings with animal control.
I've noted the ongoing issue with the Riverside Animal Control people since May, 2008. I obtained a cattery license from them in 1980, and it's been in effect until May, 2008. In that month, I paid for my 2009 cattery license renewal, a cost of $200 per year. They denied the issuance of a license to me, yet failed to give me any reasoning. I had to go to the Riverside County building to figure out what was at issue. I had never had my license removed for any animal related issues, so I had no idea what the issue was. According to a 1987 zoning "modification", all licensed catteries at that time had restrictions put on them, and the cattery would have to either reduce the number of cats allowed per parcel (according to current zoning stipulations), or cease to operate in the next 20 years. Evidently Riverside Animal Control was "clueless" about this ordinance change, as they continued to accept my license fees, and yet NEVER sent me a registered letter, a standard letter, phoned me, or verbally told me on their "surprise visits" of this impending issue. I was one of about 7 people who actually had a legal cattery issue was affected by this. I was licensed to have 25 or more cats--not that I intended on having that many adults all of the time, but technically if a kitten is over 4 months of age, they can count it as an adult. So a few litters and I'm at 25 or more cats, considering that they count kittens. I paid $1500 to an attorney to check into my possibilities of maintaining a license, but that was a waste of money--no results. I found out on my own that any current cattery license in my locale is required to have at least 1 acre of land. You NEED A CATTERY LICENSE if you own 10 or more cats, whether you sell them, or just have them as your pets. I could apply for a variance, but that required $10,000 to be posted with Riverside County (supposedly to pay for paperwork), and then a public hearing would be held. There is no guarantee a license would be granted. And the $10, 000 is a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE.
In mid September, 2009, my wife and I were part of a group meeting in the Riverside County building. Present were 2 members of supervisor of my area of Riverside, 3 members of Animal Control, and 2 members of the Zoning Commission. I explained the issues to everyone there to see if any solution could be sought. Part of the arrangement was that Animal Control would only come if they called ahead of time. My wife even stated to call her cell phone, and she would be there too for their visit. Guess what? They said they tried to call. I have caller ID, no evidence of a call. They stated there was no answer. I told them I have call waiting. If I'm on a call trying to place a cat, I'm not going to "click it over" to speak to someone else or hear a "robot call" trying to sell me something. They failed to call my wife's cell number too. They have allowed me to keep cats here, although nowhere near 25+ that was allowed with my license. They gave me until mid February, to get down to "their magic number" of cats. And to make matters worse, my altered pet cats COUNT as part of the number of allowed cats. Well, that day finally arrived today. THE FOLLOWING "VISIT" WAS NOT DUE TO OVERCROWDING OR ANIMAL ABUSE. Their "visit" was in regards to enforcing the current zoning restrictions, which is mandated by Code Enforcement of Riverside County. The CODE ENFORCEMENT vehicles of Riverside County, CA can be seen patrolling my housing area on a regular basis (including weekends), with their agents using binoculars to "spy" over fences, etc. At 10 AM, I arrived home to see the following:
I WAS TOLD they came to remove cats. The indicated 8 was the number they wanted today.
No photos available of the 7 month old blue mitted male, or the 11 month old blue cream bicolor female, or the 11 month old seal bicolor female, or Pasta--the 10 year old seal mitted female. I had to decide which cats I could release to them, not a pleasant task by any means. I was almost in tears, my helper lady was crying, but it was "happy days" for Animal Control. I raised my voice to have my son leave the room, and the female agent said "she felt threatened". I had also closed the door so I didn't have to listed to my son's remarks outside the cattery door. The female agent said she "felt threatened" when I closed the door, and asked me "are you locking me in?" She threatened to call the police, and I told her I had done nothing wrong. This was an unpleasant task, a fact she did not seem to realize. The process begins:
During the meeting in mid September, 2009, the head of Animal Control told me that any cats they removed would NOT be euthanized. A brand new multi million dollar shelter was supposed to be completed, and I was promised than any cats removed would be placed in their new "high tech" viewing room, to assure the cat's got new homes. In regards to the promises from Animal Control, no efforts were made to cat adoption services, as I truly believed any cats removed would be re-homed. This does not appear to be the case. I was verbally told by the larger female agent that the new facilities would NOT be ready until mid April, 2010--so I now know that the cats will be housed in the "less than ideal" OLD current facility, which not the best. SECONDLY, I had to sign a release statement after they removed the cats. I had to initial more than one line that talks about "..may be euthanized", again not what I had agreed to in that September meeting. You can see the release statements in links below.
Stupid me. I thought that the head of a major department within my county would abide by a promise made in an "official meeting". Promises like:
Calling for an appointment to come to my cattery. No call at all.
Putting the cats on display in their new facility. If the facility wasn't done, then why not wait until the building was finished?
Agreeing not the euthanize any cats. I had to initial 2 spots on the "Statement of owner release" where it clearly states they can be put to sleep. One spot states they will only keep the cats for 5 days, after which time, they may be euthanized. Nice, huh? I was too upset to read the "small print" while 3 agents were breathing down my neck. I only noted these notations about 2 hours after they left, and I was finally able to calm down.
During the "raid", I was left in the cattery with one female agent. My son was upset, and I told him to leave the cattery. I told him a second time in a louder voice, and then slammed the door. The female agent said she "felt threatened and thought she should call the police". After I closed the door, her next statement was "are you trying to lock me in this building, I feel even more threatened". Lock her in? I was standing 4 feet from the woman. A couple of hours later, my helper lady told my wife that it definitely appeared that the woman agent was trying to "push my buttons" to make me do something that is against my nature. Speaking to another Ragdoll breeder who keeps abreast of the growing threat by local government to eliminate breeders, I was told that these agents are trained to try to agitate the owner to the point where the agents call the police. Once a police file is generated in the animal case, the animal agency has a greater chance of winning their case.
Refer to the links below to view the 2 signed release statements.
Riverside County Release 1 for 3 male Ragdolls
Riverside County Release 2 for 5 female Ragdolls
DID YOU KNOW:
Animal Control will enter your yard unless you have a locked padlock on it? Several months ago, I sat in my office doing some paperwork. I heard a noise, and looked out to see 2 Animal Control agents walking through my gate. I now have a chain and a padlock on both of my property gates. When I thought they were "done with their business" on 3-4-10, I went back in my home to calm down. A few minutes later, I looked outside, and did NOT see the male Animal Control officer. I went outside to check, and he had walked back into my yard, without permission, and was asking questions of my helper. I quickly went to the back, and asked him to leave. I know he left her his business card, and for what reason??
My agreement with Animal Control was for them to call prior to every visit. I do get busy shipping cats, going to the vet, buying supplies, driving to the airport, etc. So a phone call assures them that I will be available for their visit.
Current law, effective July 1, 2009 requires that each kitten or puppy sold in Riverside county be microchipped. IN ADDITION, they want the name, address and phone number of the new owner as well as the specific chip number that was implanted into the sold kitten.
Please read how to respond to Animal Control on this Link: When Animal Control knocks on your door.
At the end of their "visit", they promise to come back in one month. Any other cats here that exceed "their magic number" will probably be taken. BTW, any alters also count as part of this new maximum number of cats I'm allowed. Today has been a horrible day. I phoned my wife at work, and she had to come home. She couldn't stop crying.
I've noted the ongoing issue with the Riverside Animal Control people since May, 2008. I obtained a cattery license from them in 1980, and it's been in effect until May, 2008. In that month, I paid for my 2009 cattery license renewal, a cost of $200 per year. They denied the issuance of a license to me, yet failed to give me any reasoning. I had to go to the Riverside County building to figure out what was at issue. I had never had my license removed for any animal related issues, so I had no idea what the issue was. According to a 1987 zoning "modification", all licensed catteries at that time had restrictions put on them, and the cattery would have to either reduce the number of cats allowed per parcel (according to current zoning stipulations), or cease to operate in the next 20 years. Evidently Riverside Animal Control was "clueless" about this ordinance change, as they continued to accept my license fees, and yet NEVER sent me a registered letter, a standard letter, phoned me, or verbally told me on their "surprise visits" of this impending issue. I was one of about 7 people who actually had a legal cattery issue was affected by this. I was licensed to have 25 or more cats--not that I intended on having that many adults all of the time, but technically if a kitten is over 4 months of age, they can count it as an adult. So a few litters and I'm at 25 or more cats, considering that they count kittens. I paid $1500 to an attorney to check into my possibilities of maintaining a license, but that was a waste of money--no results. I found out on my own that any current cattery license in my locale is required to have at least 1 acre of land. You NEED A CATTERY LICENSE if you own 10 or more cats, whether you sell them, or just have them as your pets. I could apply for a variance, but that required $10,000 to be posted with Riverside County (supposedly to pay for paperwork), and then a public hearing would be held. There is no guarantee a license would be granted. And the $10, 000 is a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE.
In mid September, 2009, my wife and I were part of a group meeting in the Riverside County building. Present were 2 members of supervisor of my area of Riverside, 3 members of Animal Control, and 2 members of the Zoning Commission. I explained the issues to everyone there to see if any solution could be sought. Part of the arrangement was that Animal Control would only come if they called ahead of time. My wife even stated to call her cell phone, and she would be there too for their visit. Guess what? They said they tried to call. I have caller ID, no evidence of a call. They stated there was no answer. I told them I have call waiting. If I'm on a call trying to place a cat, I'm not going to "click it over" to speak to someone else or hear a "robot call" trying to sell me something. They failed to call my wife's cell number too. They have allowed me to keep cats here, although nowhere near 25+ that was allowed with my license. They gave me until mid February, to get down to "their magic number" of cats. And to make matters worse, my altered pet cats COUNT as part of the number of allowed cats. Well, that day finally arrived today. THE FOLLOWING "VISIT" WAS NOT DUE TO OVERCROWDING OR ANIMAL ABUSE. Their "visit" was in regards to enforcing the current zoning restrictions, which is mandated by Code Enforcement of Riverside County. The CODE ENFORCEMENT vehicles of Riverside County, CA can be seen patrolling my housing area on a regular basis (including weekends), with their agents using binoculars to "spy" over fences, etc. At 10 AM, I arrived home to see the following:
I WAS TOLD they came to remove cats. The indicated 8 was the number they wanted today.
No photos available of the 7 month old blue mitted male, or the 11 month old blue cream bicolor female, or the 11 month old seal bicolor female, or Pasta--the 10 year old seal mitted female. I had to decide which cats I could release to them, not a pleasant task by any means. I was almost in tears, my helper lady was crying, but it was "happy days" for Animal Control. I raised my voice to have my son leave the room, and the female agent said "she felt threatened". I had also closed the door so I didn't have to listed to my son's remarks outside the cattery door. The female agent said she "felt threatened" when I closed the door, and asked me "are you locking me in?" She threatened to call the police, and I told her I had done nothing wrong. This was an unpleasant task, a fact she did not seem to realize. The process begins:
During the meeting in mid September, 2009, the head of Animal Control told me that any cats they removed would NOT be euthanized. A brand new multi million dollar shelter was supposed to be completed, and I was promised than any cats removed would be placed in their new "high tech" viewing room, to assure the cat's got new homes. In regards to the promises from Animal Control, no efforts were made to cat adoption services, as I truly believed any cats removed would be re-homed. This does not appear to be the case. I was verbally told by the larger female agent that the new facilities would NOT be ready until mid April, 2010--so I now know that the cats will be housed in the "less than ideal" OLD current facility, which not the best. SECONDLY, I had to sign a release statement after they removed the cats. I had to initial more than one line that talks about "..may be euthanized", again not what I had agreed to in that September meeting. You can see the release statements in links below.
Stupid me. I thought that the head of a major department within my county would abide by a promise made in an "official meeting". Promises like:
Calling for an appointment to come to my cattery. No call at all.
Putting the cats on display in their new facility. If the facility wasn't done, then why not wait until the building was finished?
Agreeing not the euthanize any cats. I had to initial 2 spots on the "Statement of owner release" where it clearly states they can be put to sleep. One spot states they will only keep the cats for 5 days, after which time, they may be euthanized. Nice, huh? I was too upset to read the "small print" while 3 agents were breathing down my neck. I only noted these notations about 2 hours after they left, and I was finally able to calm down.
During the "raid", I was left in the cattery with one female agent. My son was upset, and I told him to leave the cattery. I told him a second time in a louder voice, and then slammed the door. The female agent said she "felt threatened and thought she should call the police". After I closed the door, her next statement was "are you trying to lock me in this building, I feel even more threatened". Lock her in? I was standing 4 feet from the woman. A couple of hours later, my helper lady told my wife that it definitely appeared that the woman agent was trying to "push my buttons" to make me do something that is against my nature. Speaking to another Ragdoll breeder who keeps abreast of the growing threat by local government to eliminate breeders, I was told that these agents are trained to try to agitate the owner to the point where the agents call the police. Once a police file is generated in the animal case, the animal agency has a greater chance of winning their case.
Refer to the links below to view the 2 signed release statements.
Riverside County Release 1 for 3 male Ragdolls
Riverside County Release 2 for 5 female Ragdolls
DID YOU KNOW:
Animal Control will enter your yard unless you have a locked padlock on it? Several months ago, I sat in my office doing some paperwork. I heard a noise, and looked out to see 2 Animal Control agents walking through my gate. I now have a chain and a padlock on both of my property gates. When I thought they were "done with their business" on 3-4-10, I went back in my home to calm down. A few minutes later, I looked outside, and did NOT see the male Animal Control officer. I went outside to check, and he had walked back into my yard, without permission, and was asking questions of my helper. I quickly went to the back, and asked him to leave. I know he left her his business card, and for what reason??
My agreement with Animal Control was for them to call prior to every visit. I do get busy shipping cats, going to the vet, buying supplies, driving to the airport, etc. So a phone call assures them that I will be available for their visit.
Current law, effective July 1, 2009 requires that each kitten or puppy sold in Riverside county be microchipped. IN ADDITION, they want the name, address and phone number of the new owner as well as the specific chip number that was implanted into the sold kitten.
Please read how to respond to Animal Control on this Link: When Animal Control knocks on your door.
At the end of their "visit", they promise to come back in one month. Any other cats here that exceed "their magic number" will probably be taken. BTW, any alters also count as part of this new maximum number of cats I'm allowed. Today has been a horrible day. I phoned my wife at work, and she had to come home. She couldn't stop crying.
Monday, March 29, 2010
San Jacinto mulls change in animal services provider
Im thinking more seizures will be in order to pay for that big expensive building now that this contract has been lost...or maybe something will happen to the Ramona Shelter. I hope HUMANE SOCIETIES make a comeback because there is a huge difference in animal control and humane societies. Good for you San Jacinto!!! We can only hope other small cities in Riverside County follow suit.
San Jacinto mulls change in animal services provider
10:00 PM PDT on Monday, March 29, 2010
By GAIL WESSON
The Press-Enterprise
San Jacinto is considering contracting with the Ramona Humane Society for animal control services next fiscal year instead of continuing with Riverside County, which is proposing higher rates and sheltering animals at a soon-to-be-completed county shelter in the city.
The Humane Society has sheltered animals from San Jacinto and Hemet and the unincorporated county area for years, but this would be its first venture into providing an animal control officer and vehicle for field services.
That prospect caught the county Department of Animal Services by surprise, and a county representative will be at Thursday's council meeting, said John Welsh, a department spokesman, by phone.
The county's shelter on Grand Avenue, around the corner from the nonprofit society's shelter off Seventh Street, is expected to open in July.
The cost savings is the primary motivating factor but another is that the society is local, Tim Hults, interim city manager, said by phone. "We have a direct link to the executive director of the local Humane Society."
The council meets at 7 p.m. at the San Jacinto Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave.
The society proposes a field services cost of $106,438 a year for three years, while the county is proposing a one-year rate of $343,140, or if the city agrees to a three-year term, a starting rate of $213,819 that would more than double by the third year to $515,264, according to a staff report by Hults.
The society proposes a sheltering services cost of an estimated $88,400 a year based on 2,220 animals taken in a year plus a two percent spay/neuter subsidy. The actual amount would vary based on the number of animals.
Based on the city's current service usage and what Hults called a "substantial increase" in county field services costs, the city estimates the county services would cost about $166,775.
Humane Society Executive Director Jeff Sheppard said of the group's proposal: "We've been requested to make a bid and we did." He declined to talk in detail before the council meeting.
County animal control officers are based at an office in southwest Hemet to serve the region.
Reach Gail Wesson at 951-763-3455 or gwesson@PE.com
San Jacinto mulls change in animal services provider
10:00 PM PDT on Monday, March 29, 2010
By GAIL WESSON
The Press-Enterprise
San Jacinto is considering contracting with the Ramona Humane Society for animal control services next fiscal year instead of continuing with Riverside County, which is proposing higher rates and sheltering animals at a soon-to-be-completed county shelter in the city.
The Humane Society has sheltered animals from San Jacinto and Hemet and the unincorporated county area for years, but this would be its first venture into providing an animal control officer and vehicle for field services.
That prospect caught the county Department of Animal Services by surprise, and a county representative will be at Thursday's council meeting, said John Welsh, a department spokesman, by phone.
The county's shelter on Grand Avenue, around the corner from the nonprofit society's shelter off Seventh Street, is expected to open in July.
The cost savings is the primary motivating factor but another is that the society is local, Tim Hults, interim city manager, said by phone. "We have a direct link to the executive director of the local Humane Society."
The council meets at 7 p.m. at the San Jacinto Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave.
The society proposes a field services cost of $106,438 a year for three years, while the county is proposing a one-year rate of $343,140, or if the city agrees to a three-year term, a starting rate of $213,819 that would more than double by the third year to $515,264, according to a staff report by Hults.
The society proposes a sheltering services cost of an estimated $88,400 a year based on 2,220 animals taken in a year plus a two percent spay/neuter subsidy. The actual amount would vary based on the number of animals.
Based on the city's current service usage and what Hults called a "substantial increase" in county field services costs, the city estimates the county services would cost about $166,775.
Humane Society Executive Director Jeff Sheppard said of the group's proposal: "We've been requested to make a bid and we did." He declined to talk in detail before the council meeting.
County animal control officers are based at an office in southwest Hemet to serve the region.
Reach Gail Wesson at 951-763-3455 or gwesson@PE.com
Friday, January 22, 2010
Riverside County Code Re: Animals
So here it is...everything animal owners need to know regarding what animal control in Riverside County can do and what EXACTLY they can charge for fees in the way of impounded animals. I found this particularly interesting being as the first bill for our horses was just over $14,000! Page 3 of this document clearly states the fee of $5.00 (five dollars) per horse per day plus a $20.00 impound fee, I am aware that an equine group hauled the horses for next to nothing but the interesting figure was $8,000 in OVERTIME to these officers...im sorry but they arrived on the property in the early morning hours, therefore, it should not have taken them anny overtime to move the horses. I think they were "milking" the job, but then when you make sure the media gets thier interview I guess that would take up a lot of time when you could have been working? As animal owners it is your duty to know your rights not only to protect yourself, but your animals as well http://www.theanimalcouncil.com/files/Riverside_County_Animal_Ord_2006.pdf I also have this document saved, so if for some reason it comes up missing or the link is broken, email me and I will send it to you in a pdf file.
Friday, January 15, 2010
What's New
I have added a new feature that will allow viewers to search the blog for what they are looking for without having to read everything. For example, if you type in Angel White's name...only my blogs with reference to her will appear. I am doing all I can to make the blog easier for the D.A's office to read LOL! There are so many new features alvailable... the book option is excellent. Also, I am looking for a counter to keep track of how many readers I have here....Happy Reading updates will be posted soon!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Is A New Director In Order?
I recently received a comment that suggested the current director of Riverside County Animal Services, Robert Miller, be fired and Angel White should be appointed to replace him. I think this is a good idea...let's think about this for a moment because I completely agree with the commenter. If Angel can keep a large amount of dogs WITHOUT costing the taxpayers millions of dollars and without euthanizing mass numbers of dogs then YES maybe the public needs to make their voices heard. The people of Riverside County can no longer allow our pets to be in harms way so the social climbers of animal control can make their political statements. If you agree, to release Riverside County from the corruption and bullying of animal control then post a comment here. The DA has read and printed this blog so please make your voice heard! We need all the help we can get because this situation will only get worse as I asked for help before and our county officials did absolutely NOTHING to help the situation. How many animals need to be seized from their homes because Animal Services wants to expand their facilities? I think we all know the kennels aren't expanded, but don't lobby and employee areas look nice?
Thursday, January 7, 2010
County Workers Or Horse Thieves?
A while back I began reciving emails from a woman with a case eriely similar to mine, so with her permission I am posting her story. This story gave me chills because it shows how arrogant some of the officials in Riverside County have become. As the saying "if you give a mouse a cookie" goes look what happens when you give some people a little bit of power.
DEAR, DEAR Sarah,
I am so glad to hear fromyou. I am so paranoid that I thought Animal Control, et al was sucking my messages off.
Since I have so much stuff and am not too computor savvy, could we possibly meet in person.
I know that our story should be a world wide scandal.
One of the first and worst things that happened is that Scott Walker - owner of the Walker Team Coldwell Banker _ had the Water turned off to his ranch - thus depriving our horses of water (March 2008) lesly heunnekens is the bully racist agent who worked with walker to torture our horses. This is well documented. I have to subpoena the records from the water district. But they confirmed that scott walker had the water turned off before they got paranoid. walker lied to our investigators about this.
Another big problem that I haveis that my Husband, Franklin, has SEVERE PTSD (POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER) FROM VIETNAM. He also has brain damage and is paralyzed. The horses and dogs are our LIFE!!! But Franklin cannot handle any of this. He will not tell anyone about it. Franklin is VERY WELL KNOWN IN THE THOROUGHBRED RACING INDUSTRY. HIS INJURIES AND EGO PREVENT HIM FROM GETTING HELP AND REPORTING THESE MONSTERS.
Franklin is also Black. We are both oblivious to this fact. But every where we have gone in the l;ast 14 yrs. the minute group of racist bullies have used false complaints to animal control (in San Diego from '96 to '06) to harass us. The year preceeding the starvation there were at least 3 complaints that Riverside Animal control responded to. One of the agents even told our groom that our horses were "the best lookoing horses in Riverside County."
But since we were displaced by the fire (Nov. 9, 2007 is when we moved our horses to Scott Walkers ranch. Jason lopez claimed to be the owner. We never saw our horses in daylight until our only boarder called us on March 7, 2008 and said jason was moving out with his horses. This boarder assured us that Jason was taking excellent care of our horses. There's more about him - tom smith. Smith's percheron mare, Dora was stolen at this time. heunnekens left doorhanger (3/12/08)citing animal cruelty and under comments "horses will be impounded in 5 days if they are not removed by 17th) Walker had water turned off and Tom's horse was stolen by Bob LUcas. lucas is a friend of animal control. tom is an attorney (and unfortunately a back stabber who has a vendetta against me) Tom got his horse back through robert miller about 5 days after the theft.
I'll send this email and also forward photos taken on march 12, 2008 at walkers ranch. I don't know how much I am repeating. I did file a writ in civil court to get our horses back and charge the real torturers with the crimes. but the courts are sooo corrupt.
I know we can turn this around if we get together to fight these monsters. I have evidence eye witnesses credibility. but the can of worms is so disgusting that i am sure riverside is working really hard to keep it covered up. If we can just get our story our there. google scott walker's coldwell banker add. and look at the photos of our horses. he is a criminal monster. turning the water off is an OVERT ACT OF CRUELTY. It IS DOCUMENTED> HE IS ALSO WHO CALLED HEUNNEKENS. Animal control refused to help us with the water and refused to take action against jason for starving our horses. Franklin's 6 yr. old Thoroughbred Race Horse Stallion was stolen 1 month later. Heunnekens showed up where we moved the horses. She was in military fatigues driving her own mini truck. she left the engine running. I went out to see who was parked by the horses. she mumbled a name, said ahe had no id cards. she was very hostile. i asked her why she didn't go after jason. she
said no one knows where he is. she photographed all 8 of our horses. the next morning at 5 am a new chevy silverado duelly diesel pulling a new large white gooseneck trailer (had dark stripe around it) STOLE BUDDY. BUDDY IS THE SPITTING IMAGE OF HIS SIRE MATTY G. ANIMAL CONTROL SAID THEY HAD NO ONE MATCHING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE WOMAN, NO COMPLAINTS AGAINST US AND NO ONE FROM ANIMAL CONTROL WAS AT COWBOY COUNTRY. THE NEXT TIME I SAW THIS WOMAN WAS AT THE POST SIEZURE HEARING. IT WAS AGENT HEUNNEKENS. SHE WAGED THIS WAR SOLELY. I AM POSITIVE THE THIEF IS BOB LUCAS. HE WAS SEEN VERY WELL BY A CHAPLIN WHO LIVED AT COWBOY COUNTRY. HE THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING BUDDY.
I HOPE THIS MAKES SENSE. I WILL DO ANYTHING I CAN TO HELP YOU AS WELL.
THANKS,
TREA
DEAR, DEAR Sarah,
I am so glad to hear fromyou. I am so paranoid that I thought Animal Control, et al was sucking my messages off.
Since I have so much stuff and am not too computor savvy, could we possibly meet in person.
I know that our story should be a world wide scandal.
One of the first and worst things that happened is that Scott Walker - owner of the Walker Team Coldwell Banker _ had the Water turned off to his ranch - thus depriving our horses of water (March 2008) lesly heunnekens is the bully racist agent who worked with walker to torture our horses. This is well documented. I have to subpoena the records from the water district. But they confirmed that scott walker had the water turned off before they got paranoid. walker lied to our investigators about this.
Another big problem that I haveis that my Husband, Franklin, has SEVERE PTSD (POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER) FROM VIETNAM. He also has brain damage and is paralyzed. The horses and dogs are our LIFE!!! But Franklin cannot handle any of this. He will not tell anyone about it. Franklin is VERY WELL KNOWN IN THE THOROUGHBRED RACING INDUSTRY. HIS INJURIES AND EGO PREVENT HIM FROM GETTING HELP AND REPORTING THESE MONSTERS.
Franklin is also Black. We are both oblivious to this fact. But every where we have gone in the l;ast 14 yrs. the minute group of racist bullies have used false complaints to animal control (in San Diego from '96 to '06) to harass us. The year preceeding the starvation there were at least 3 complaints that Riverside Animal control responded to. One of the agents even told our groom that our horses were "the best lookoing horses in Riverside County."
But since we were displaced by the fire (Nov. 9, 2007 is when we moved our horses to Scott Walkers ranch. Jason lopez claimed to be the owner. We never saw our horses in daylight until our only boarder called us on March 7, 2008 and said jason was moving out with his horses. This boarder assured us that Jason was taking excellent care of our horses. There's more about him - tom smith. Smith's percheron mare, Dora was stolen at this time. heunnekens left doorhanger (3/12/08)citing animal cruelty and under comments "horses will be impounded in 5 days if they are not removed by 17th) Walker had water turned off and Tom's horse was stolen by Bob LUcas. lucas is a friend of animal control. tom is an attorney (and unfortunately a back stabber who has a vendetta against me) Tom got his horse back through robert miller about 5 days after the theft.
I'll send this email and also forward photos taken on march 12, 2008 at walkers ranch. I don't know how much I am repeating. I did file a writ in civil court to get our horses back and charge the real torturers with the crimes. but the courts are sooo corrupt.
I know we can turn this around if we get together to fight these monsters. I have evidence eye witnesses credibility. but the can of worms is so disgusting that i am sure riverside is working really hard to keep it covered up. If we can just get our story our there. google scott walker's coldwell banker add. and look at the photos of our horses. he is a criminal monster. turning the water off is an OVERT ACT OF CRUELTY. It IS DOCUMENTED> HE IS ALSO WHO CALLED HEUNNEKENS. Animal control refused to help us with the water and refused to take action against jason for starving our horses. Franklin's 6 yr. old Thoroughbred Race Horse Stallion was stolen 1 month later. Heunnekens showed up where we moved the horses. She was in military fatigues driving her own mini truck. she left the engine running. I went out to see who was parked by the horses. she mumbled a name, said ahe had no id cards. she was very hostile. i asked her why she didn't go after jason. she
said no one knows where he is. she photographed all 8 of our horses. the next morning at 5 am a new chevy silverado duelly diesel pulling a new large white gooseneck trailer (had dark stripe around it) STOLE BUDDY. BUDDY IS THE SPITTING IMAGE OF HIS SIRE MATTY G. ANIMAL CONTROL SAID THEY HAD NO ONE MATCHING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE WOMAN, NO COMPLAINTS AGAINST US AND NO ONE FROM ANIMAL CONTROL WAS AT COWBOY COUNTRY. THE NEXT TIME I SAW THIS WOMAN WAS AT THE POST SIEZURE HEARING. IT WAS AGENT HEUNNEKENS. SHE WAGED THIS WAR SOLELY. I AM POSITIVE THE THIEF IS BOB LUCAS. HE WAS SEEN VERY WELL BY A CHAPLIN WHO LIVED AT COWBOY COUNTRY. HE THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING BUDDY.
I HOPE THIS MAKES SENSE. I WILL DO ANYTHING I CAN TO HELP YOU AS WELL.
THANKS,
TREA
Monday, December 21, 2009
The Aftermath: The Lies Continue
You know Riverside County wasn't happy when a report showed that they had the poorest quality of drinking water. In fact, they are now out to prove the report was completely flawed. So what makes them different from me as far as a truth seeking mission goes? Nothing. As you can see by their newly redone(is that where the donation money goes?)web page animal control wasted no time revealing the pending case against Angel White. I can say that I am disgusted by this article by The Press Enterprise the facts are no accurate at all. First of all, the property was NOT in Woodcrest it was in Mead Valley which I am sure the residents of Woodcrest would be happy to point out to Mr. Barrie! Next, the temperature was 140?! Really??? 140 degrees? I don't think so, how about 114 at least that is what animal control said. Next, no running water... let me get this right the dogs were there for 2 years without water? Wow! Those must be some hardy dogs. I tip my hat to them! Being as there was a flourishing nursery next door I doubt that there was a lack of water on the property. And WTF exactly will she be counseled for? How to deal with getting railroaded because she wasn't interested in "being with animal control" and lying? I called Steven Barrie and left a message, but I have not gotten a return phone call. I think anyone reading this story should also call him or his editor and ask for a retraction of this highly exaggerated story. I don't mind if you want to print the truth...but this is NOT the truth. 140 degrees....lol does it get that hot on the plains of Africa?
Woman with 92 dogs on Woodcrest property is convicted of animal cruelty
10:00 PM PST on Monday, December 14, 2009
By STEVEN BARRIE
The Press-Enterprise
A Woodcrest woman who was arrested in 2007 and had 92 dogs impounded from her property, including about 40 Great Danes, was convicted Monday of a dozen misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty.
The conviction of Antonia Angel White, 51, in Riverside County Superior Court came after a five-day trial, court records show.
White was arrested July 26, 2007, after two years of effort by the county Department of Animal Services to get her to treat in a humane manner scores of dogs she claimed were rescues, said John Welsh, spokesman for Animal Services.
Animal control officers discovered White's makeshift -- and unlicensed -- kennel on April 26, 2007, when they went to answer an unrelated call at a bordering property in the Woodcrest area south of Riverside, said Tammy Bellmonte, the Animal Services Department's captain of field operations.
They found 83 dogs living in unsanitary conditions, Bellmonte said. There was no house or running water on the property, and the ground temperature at the kennel was measured at 140 degrees.
"Most of the smaller-breed dogs were in various stages of heat distress, and most had no water," Bellmonte said.
On that and subsequent visits, White was ordered to improve the situation, get the dogs vaccinated and not take in any more.
After officers determined White had not complied, they impounded 92 dogs. Sheriff's deputies arrested White and she was cited, booked and released.
White's sentencing date has not been set, but Welsh said it's rare for people to get jail time in these cases.
"Normally what we get is three years probation, an order that she can't own animals, an order that she get psychological counseling and that she pay restitution costs," Welsh said.
Reach Steven Barrie at 951-368-9466 or sbarrie@PE.com
Woman with 92 dogs on Woodcrest property is convicted of animal cruelty
10:00 PM PST on Monday, December 14, 2009
By STEVEN BARRIE
The Press-Enterprise
A Woodcrest woman who was arrested in 2007 and had 92 dogs impounded from her property, including about 40 Great Danes, was convicted Monday of a dozen misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty.
The conviction of Antonia Angel White, 51, in Riverside County Superior Court came after a five-day trial, court records show.
White was arrested July 26, 2007, after two years of effort by the county Department of Animal Services to get her to treat in a humane manner scores of dogs she claimed were rescues, said John Welsh, spokesman for Animal Services.
Animal control officers discovered White's makeshift -- and unlicensed -- kennel on April 26, 2007, when they went to answer an unrelated call at a bordering property in the Woodcrest area south of Riverside, said Tammy Bellmonte, the Animal Services Department's captain of field operations.
They found 83 dogs living in unsanitary conditions, Bellmonte said. There was no house or running water on the property, and the ground temperature at the kennel was measured at 140 degrees.
"Most of the smaller-breed dogs were in various stages of heat distress, and most had no water," Bellmonte said.
On that and subsequent visits, White was ordered to improve the situation, get the dogs vaccinated and not take in any more.
After officers determined White had not complied, they impounded 92 dogs. Sheriff's deputies arrested White and she was cited, booked and released.
White's sentencing date has not been set, but Welsh said it's rare for people to get jail time in these cases.
"Normally what we get is three years probation, an order that she can't own animals, an order that she get psychological counseling and that she pay restitution costs," Welsh said.
Reach Steven Barrie at 951-368-9466 or sbarrie@PE.com
Happy Holidays
I would like to wish all of the readers a Merry Christmas & a Happy New Year from all of us(Left to right) Itty Bitty, Remmington, Layla, Bode, and Lilith. I also hope that next year will bring resolution and redemption to all pending issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)