Spoiler Alert-GOOD-HSUS Possibly Screwed Themselves

I know this case WELL-I don’t believe there was any animal cruelty there and hoping that it does get this wonderful man out of jail!!! He doesn’t deserve to be there in the first place thus less for 30 years based on a non violent crime against no one…Think about it even not knowing the case!!! Those animals should never have been seized!!! The real crime is that they were!!! I hate Humaniacs that don’t have a clue!!!

Furthermore, I hate when state judges don’t do the right thing as Judge Rolston did in releasing media defendants for BROADCASTING on our property without permission fro the judge who issued the warrant or us to come onto the property!!! Calling it public concern and using the anti-SLAPP law to do it…They were forced on us by the sheriff deputy (now sheriff for the county) under threat- Judge Rolstom is a member of my wall of shame!!!

The anti-SLAPP law can NOT be used in the course of a crime…trespass is a crime and Private Farm Property is a fourth amendment right-Go Mike!!!

Will 91 Counts of Animal Cruelty Be Tossed Thanks to HSUS?

In 2011 in Montana, local law enforcement seized 150-plus malamutes that were neglected and charged the owner with 91 counts of animal cruelty. Following a trial, he was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in prison, with 25 suspended.

That conviction could be overturned—courtesy of the alleged selfishness of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

The defendant is appealing his conviction on the grounds that his 4th Amendment rights under the Constitution were violated. Why? Because the sheriff’s deputy allowed HSUS to help execute the warrant, and HSUS, while on the man’s property, used the occasion for private benefit. HSUS allegedly took photos and video that it used for promotional purposes.

We’re not lawyers, so we don’t know how strong his case is. But if it is true, it wouldn’t be the first time HSUS has put its own publicity interests ahead of the animals it claims to represent.

In Arizona, Tennessee, and other states, HSUS has lobbied against bills that would require evidence of animal cruelty to be turned over to law enforcement. Why would HSUS oppose helping law enforcement stop animal cruelty? HSUS and other groups have actually sat on footage for weeks or months because it allows them to prepare media/fundraising campaigns. Even The New York Times was critical of this.

In other words, animals aren’t necessarily the top priority at HSUS.

Now, before HSUS flaks make some claim that we’re “defending animal abusers,” that’s not the case here. A trial was held and he was found guilty in court. If anyone is helping him get off, it’s HSUS.

HSUS likes to say that animals can’t speak for themselves. That’s true. But if they could, they might tell HSUS “thanks, but no thanks.”


HumaneWatch might be trying to say they don’t support animal cruelty but they sure did pick the wrong case!!! I know the case inside out and Mike personally…These cases are complete BULLSHIT!!!

But then again, no one realizes just yet that these groups PROMOTE anima cruelty, they know it whether you do or not…

Disclaimer connected to this blog…Things said are of my opinion and the opinion of others…Stay tuned -B

~ by topcatsroar on March 26, 2014.

One Response to “Spoiler Alert-GOOD-HSUS Possibly Screwed Themselves”

  1. Now hold on a sec… This says the dogs WERE neglected, as if it’s a given. But then it mentions the ALLEGED selfishness of HSUS, as if that’s something nobody ever knew. -Should be the other way around! Charges are supposed to be “alleged” until proven in court. Selfishness doesn’t have to be alleged -at least not on HSUS’s part. That’s common knowledge!

    This case is not that different from news reporters coming on the property during a warrant service, trampling the scene ahead of the cops, taping a “special report” right there in the middle of the private property with cops standing around watching, and then another news service actually getting and using pics that were taken by the cops themselves. That gets the news station off the hook for taking pics on the property, but it implicates the cops for providing those pics to the news peeps instead of using them as some sort of evidence in court. The cops, on public salary supported by taxpayers, are providing a commercial news agency with pics for their stories… So yeah, it should be a RICO violation too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: